Editor's Note: At PWTorch.com we strive for our content whenever possible and practical to be original and unique (i .e. not published on other sites), therefore Guest Editorials submitted to PWTorch. com should be submitted only to PWTorch. com. If you submit a Guest Editorial for consideration, please state at the top of your editorial that you submitted it only to PWTorch. com. For more details on submitting Guest Editorials, check out a detailed submissions guide following today's Guest Editorial below.

GUEST EDITORIAL
By Shane McKinley
PWTorch.com Reader

The latest TNA PPV is probably a prime example of why I don't buy their PPVs: You don't know what to expect. Everything is backwards in TNA. The opening match featuring the Motor City Machine Guns was the match of the night but received minor background hype (and if anybody could explain to me the World X Cup point system, I would be happy) while the main event featuring Booker T vs. Samoa Joe received plenty of hype but by far was a dud. TNA PPVs: There is a "spot fest" match that has no background and really no future for the wrestlers, a lot of inconsequential matches in the middle, one or two solid matches, an overblown but entertaining gimmick match, and usually a poorly hyped main event that's action is lessened by outside interference. TNA can have all the Full Metal Mayhem BirdCage SkyDiving Extreme Fire Table Wacky Matches all they want, it doesn't motivate me one bit to buy the PPV given that these matches are shown ALL THE TIME ON TNA PROGRAMMING.
 
It's not to say that TNA PPVs can't be good. I was blown away on one PPV seeing MCMG vs. Team 3D (last year) and thinking to myself, "Man, the WWE tag team division wishes they were this good." I thought that I had found a new home. I also bought the PPV where the main event was "Joe vs. Angle" because not only was I intrigued by the MMA style incorporation, but by TNA standards the feud received excellent attention. Every segment towards Joe vs. Angle had a purpose and was quality; it wasn't just killing time towards the PPV by throwing "gimmick matches" or "lame unfunny skits." What I have come to find out that exicting fast paced matches are not what TNA focuses on, it's "gimmick matches" and "outside interference" and "weak storylines and feuds." Quality matches in TNA come once every full moon it seems. 
 
I didn't order the latest TNA PPV because the same thought ran across my mind: "Well, there's going to be a spot-fest match. It will be cool but it won't mean anything really. I don't care about the feuds or any of the other matches. There seems to be no real consequence in whoever wins and loses storyline and character wise. And the main event is going to involve outside distraction possibly ending with ref incompetence."  They keep trying to goad the new fans while all the time frustrating those who stick with the product and roll their eyes over such desperation. It's not a issue of money, it's a issue of reliability, and frankly, TNA is just not very reliable.
 
I read the review and I'm confused. Who won the main event? Did Booker T won? Did Joe? Wasn't the ref knocked out? Shouldn't the ref have DQ'd Joe when he started attacking refs, because don't TNA rules state that titles can't change hands on disqualifications? Or do they? And if Booker "won", why did his music play? Your ref are imcomptent in ref incomptence. Maybe it's because nearly every third match on TNA Programming has ref incomptence. This finish was planned out and executed in this manner, and I'm not sure what intended effect it was supposed to bring. I'm guessing that Booker is the champion (?!?), and if he was, this is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard. Who is Sting? According to what I have seen in TNA lately he's this guy who did these interviews and then somehow he's involved with Joe. Right. TNA has this star complex, but seemingly doesn't do anything for its stars to build them up. It seems that just the name and the look is good enough for them. I like Sting, but did any TNA fan really want him in the main event? The answer is a resounding no. He was just thrown in there to string TNA fans along to the next show, to the next PPV, to the next weak-ass feud that receive spotty buildup.
 
Wrestling is built on stringing fans along, but you don't have to be so blunt and desperate about it. TNA fans should not have to groan during the last ten minutes of a main event match, fearing that something stupid is going to happen. I am not even sure you need to have your wrestlers wrestle matches anymore, since weak storylines with often little fan excitement are the focus. You should just have sock puppets in the middle of the ring to tell your storylines and feuds and you'll save your company a bundle. How often have TNA fans wondered if the writing/booking team knows what they are doing? Can they offer a fulfilling and emotionally rewarding main event match that doesn't beg them to watch next Thursday night? "Send the paying customers home happy"? Isn't that one of the first rules wrestling companies learn?
 
You are invited to submit a "Torch Guest Editorial" for possible publishing on this site in future days. For submission guidelines and the current email, click here.

We suggest these recent related articles...

VALLEY: The story behind the 1980s wrestler who is suing WWE for egregious mistreatment of its wrestlers over the years

GUEST REVIEWS: Lucha Underground - perspective from TV taping, editorial on strengths & weaknesses of first episode

GUEST EDITORIAL: TNA's Legacy - Helping Future Wrestling Promotions Avoid The Same Mistakes