WWE vs TNA: Which company is more talented as far as in-ring ability?

Discussion in 'International Wrestling' started by PSachkovsky, Feb 11, 2013.

  1. Firstly, to be fair some of the former WWE talents drifted to TNA thus weakening the WWE roster like Bully Ray, Chavo Guerrero, Gail Lim, Hulk Hogan, Jeff Hardy, Kurt Angle, Mickie James, RVD, Mr Anderson, Tazz and Christy Hemme. Some of them even come from former promotions like WCW and ECW. Some people on the IWC are pretty much biased and defensive about which promotion they support. I myself belong from the WWE bandwagon, but for few months now I've been noticing (actually it was always embedded in my head but never thought about it so deeply) that TNA is "more" about "pro wrestling" matches and "displaying skills on mat" rather than a soap opera type show which WWE has been feeding us for past few years. The WWE roster is currently at one of its "lowest". There are not few real "pro wrestling" type wrestlers on the show, and it will only benefit the WWE to get more talented in-ring competitors...
  2. This is as you also pointed out very subjective. I myself would not say that the current wwe roster is at a low point. I'd instead say that it is mismatched. WWE sits on some prime in ring talent, CM Punk (admittedly I am not shy of clanking down on him when something goes wrong or when I feel it necessary) is a very talented ring worker. Tyson Kidd is damn near stellar and as far as I know have only botched enough times to count them on one hand during his entire WWE tenure. Daniel Bryan is someone I don't even need to mention. Antonio Cesaro, Alberto Del Rio, Epico, Primo, Rollins, Orton, Ambrose, Barrett, Rhodes, Jericho, Swagger, McIntyre etc etc. From an in ring standpoint the roster is really packed. The problem is that they are so hit and miss on how to make characters connect with the fans, this I credit to every character being fully controlled by backstage. Creative freedom is needed to a certain extent to be a success. The wrestlers need to be allowed to try new things, trial and error and what not. WWE has up until recently been very promo driven and that is understandable. Story is what drives wrestling forward and keeps the majority crowds coming back. Only a select few sit on the ability to make people come back just to watch them wrestle. With Triple H more in charge we have seen an increase in ring time though and matches are longer and in general better.

    Not to sell TNA short either, their roster is also very jampacked with talent and they do seem to focus a fair bit on in ring. Maybe not on length but they make matches high quality in general. If Only guys like RVD or Hardy could cut down on following the same damn script every match everything would be peachy from an in ring viewpoint. TNA's flaw in my mind lies instead on their tendency to either draw stories out for too long and risking dropping the ball. But with 2012 as an example they seem to be learning.
  3. My opinion on this subject is far too obvious, so all I'm gonna say is this: Austin Aries, Bobby Roode, Bully Ray, Samoa Joe and Christopher Daniels. ENOUGH SAID

  4. I disagree with the lack of talent, WWE's roster is loaded atm, but TNA gives more freedom to the wrestlers than WWE does and doesn't restrict their movesets, so I'll go TNA