Post by Death Bear on Jul 8, 2008 22:01:37 GMT -5
One thing I never understood about the WWE is their tendancy to try and blot out the past or ignore facts. Something TNA has always done right that WWE seems to miss is, if they make an acquisition, they promote them.
Now, it doesn't usually do anything for TNA on the whole, but it is beneficial to the individual superstar. Tomko, for example, would not be as over in TNA as he is if they had renamed him and repackaged him. Tomko may not have been a huge name, but nonetheless he was a name, and that helped him out. And if a gimmick works, there is no need to change it either.
Now, I can understand not wanting to draw attention to their competition. Let's take the most recent example, Chris Harris. They didn't neccessarily have to say "former NWA tag team champion, half of America's Most Wanted". But what was wrong with him being Wildcat Chris Harris? That was a gimmick that worked, with a good look. Hell, they could have thrown in a generic line. How he is a seasoned tag wrestler, how he's had some decent success elsewhere without naming names, etcetera. What was the need for putting him in a generic singlet, giving him a generic name, and having him walk out to generic music?
This isn't the first time this has happened, either. Harris, Sydal, Monty Brown, Punk (to a lesser extent, at least he kept his gimmick and name), Burchill, Yang, Haas, and countless others (who I can't think of at the moment because they became genericized) all have had ether their gimmick stripped, or their name changed, or their credibility forgotten.
The point I'm getting to is, do you guys think that it's better to start a wrestler from scratch with a new name and gimmick, or to let them come in with an established name and gimmick, possibly mentioning past credentials? My opinion is obvious... discuss.
Now, it doesn't usually do anything for TNA on the whole, but it is beneficial to the individual superstar. Tomko, for example, would not be as over in TNA as he is if they had renamed him and repackaged him. Tomko may not have been a huge name, but nonetheless he was a name, and that helped him out. And if a gimmick works, there is no need to change it either.
Now, I can understand not wanting to draw attention to their competition. Let's take the most recent example, Chris Harris. They didn't neccessarily have to say "former NWA tag team champion, half of America's Most Wanted". But what was wrong with him being Wildcat Chris Harris? That was a gimmick that worked, with a good look. Hell, they could have thrown in a generic line. How he is a seasoned tag wrestler, how he's had some decent success elsewhere without naming names, etcetera. What was the need for putting him in a generic singlet, giving him a generic name, and having him walk out to generic music?
This isn't the first time this has happened, either. Harris, Sydal, Monty Brown, Punk (to a lesser extent, at least he kept his gimmick and name), Burchill, Yang, Haas, and countless others (who I can't think of at the moment because they became genericized) all have had ether their gimmick stripped, or their name changed, or their credibility forgotten.
The point I'm getting to is, do you guys think that it's better to start a wrestler from scratch with a new name and gimmick, or to let them come in with an established name and gimmick, possibly mentioning past credentials? My opinion is obvious... discuss.
