Will Hardy Wrestle at Genesis?

[Rasha]

With TNA's website already advertising Morgan vs. Anderson for the Genesis PPV, the question arises as to whether or not Jeff Hardy will wrestle at the PPV. More important than Hardy himself, at least to me, whether or not the TNA Heavyweight Champion will appear.

I absolutely HATE IT when a company's World Champion does not appear on a PPV. And in TNA's case, I think it's pretty bad business for him to not be in the Main Event. This isn't Bash at the Beach '96, where WCW could get away with having their champ (The Giant) involved in a mid-card tag match because they had the star-studded main event of Sting, Savage, and Luger vs. The Outsiders.

TNA doesn't have that luxury. You could MAYBE (BIG risk) get away with Kurt Angle vs. Jeff Jarrett as a Main Event due to Kurt's stardom and Jeff being the founder of TNA, but Morgan vs. Anderson isn't enough to give Hardy a pass. If you're going to do this number-one contender angle with these two guys then I think they should have gone ahead and given RVD his rematch and gotten that of the way.

 

[closet_fan]

i still think that when your heavyweight champion could be serving time, they should have taken the belt off of him for awhile. if he goes, then you have your new champion at the ppv. if he doesn't go to jail, then work a program where he tries to get it back.

 

[MrHashasheen]

I doubt he's going to wrestle. This No.1 contendership match illustrates a few things:

1. How screwed the anti-Immortal resistance is and will be without Dixie coming through.
2. How untouchable Jeff Hardy is. Notice how he wasn't reprimanded at all by Ric and Eric while the rest were?

Plus with the court issues and him going around the world promoting TNA, he might get Genesis off to recuperate. If he doesn't just show up at the end of the show to do a run-in.

 

[wrestlemaniac]

it wouldn't be the 1st time tna hasn't had a title match at a ppv. it didn't hurt too much when they didn't do it the 1st time and I don't think it'll hurt them this time. really it was hardly noticable and added more build. So I am okay with this. Hardy had a court dat this past week and...it was delayed again so eh....if they do use him then it's okay and if not then there'll be more build so good

 

[ABMorales787]

I fail to see the problem if he doesn't show. It's not the first time a TNA PPV is headlined by a #1 Contenders match. It's a suitable replacement that still directly influences the TNA World Championship. The thing here is, there is a better chance of the match being fair as opposed to the 3 past PPV's where the main event ends with run-in's and such. Or would you rather have Immortal suffocate another TNA PPV main event?

 

[ramblinroy682]

I wouldn't be surprised to seem him named special referee before then. Somehow he screws both of them out of winning and we wind up with Hardy vs RVD vs Anderson vs Morgan at the next ppv.

 

[Rasha]

The thing here is, there is a better chance of the match being fair as opposed to the 3 past PPV's where the main event ends with run-in's and such. Or would you rather have Immortal suffocate another TNA PPV main event?

How much you wanna bet that there's a clean finish to Morgan/Anderson with no involvement from Hardy or any other part of Immortal? I doubt you're really that naive.

I'm not saying every PPV has to have a World Title match, but I think the guy should at least be involved in some wrestling capacity. What if he and Abyss took on RVD and Dreamer with a "Title Shot vs. Loser Leaves" stipulation? If Hardy or Abyss get a pinfall, then the guy they pin is fired. If RVD or Tommy get a pin, then that guy gets a title shot. Everyone would assume either RVD's getting the win or Dreamer gets pinned and fired, so you could throw a curve ball and have RVD hits the Five-Star, get the three-count, but then get told he's not the legal man. While he argues with the ref, Dreamer slides in and hits a Spicoli Driver and get the win and title shot.

I like this because it would keep Hardy involved and continue his story with RVD. It would involve Abyss in a way where he's more Hardy's enforcer than running his own program. Plus, with that ending, it's another way of RVD getting "screwed" without having it come intentionally at the hands of Immortal. You could easily have a Hardy v. Dreamer match on some Impact to get the title shot out of the way. You could even have Dreamer try to give RVD the title shot but have Hardy and Bischoff come out and shut that down. Dreamer could have one last moment as he takes the World Champion to the limit (like Lawler against Miz the other week) but ultimately falls when Hardy does something dirty.

Sorry, didn't mean to make this an "imagination running wild" thread. I just think TNA is really screwing themselves by not using their biggest stars as much as possible. I don't know what the hell Angle's doing, but they need to get him back in the spotlight fast. And RVD, for all his promos annoy us, was putting on some great matches when he first got to TNA and now they've just left him in the dark to focus on crap like Jarrett's MMA career and Abyss' need to put black people in caskets.

 

[wrestlemaniac]

How much you wanna bet that there's a clean finish to Morgan/Anderson with no involvement from Hardy or any other part of Immortal? I doubt you're really that naive.

I'm not saying every PPV has to have a World Title match, but I think the guy should at least be involved in some wrestling capacity. What if he and Abyss took on RVD and Dreamer with a "Title Shot vs. Loser Leaves" stipulation? If Hardy or Abyss get a pinfall, then the guy they pin is fired. If RVD or Tommy get a pin, then that guy gets a title shot. Everyone would assume either RVD's getting the win or Dreamer gets pinned and fired, so you could throw a curve ball and have RVD hits the Five-Star, get the three-count, but then get told he's not the legal man. While he argues with the ref, Dreamer slides in and hits a Spicoli Driver and get the win and title shot.

I like this because it would keep Hardy involved and continue his story with RVD. It would involve Abyss in a way where he's more Hardy's enforcer than running his own program. Plus, with that ending, it's another way of RVD getting "screwed" without having it come intentionally at the hands of Immortal. You could easily have a Hardy v. Dreamer match on some Impact to get the title shot out of the way. You could even have Dreamer try to give RVD the title shot but have Hardy and Bischoff come out and shut that down. Dreamer could have one last moment as he takes the World Champion to the limit (like Lawler against Miz the other week) but ultimately falls when Hardy does something dirty.

Sorry, didn't mean to make this an "imagination running wild" thread. I just think TNA is really screwing themselves by not using their biggest stars as much as possible. I don't know what the hell Angle's doing, but they need to get him back in the spotlight fast. And RVD, for all his promos annoy us, was putting on some great matches when he first got to TNA and now they've just left him in the dark to focus on crap like Jarrett's MMA career and Abyss' need to put black people in caskets.

psst...they've pretty much used all of rvd's dates this year and are trying not to overuse him as he would get 10 grand per appearance once he goes over his number of dates. Angle is on genesis poster....no that isn't a spoiler because the poster has been out, so I'd expect an angle appearance before or after genesis

 

[ABMorales787]

How much you wanna bet that there's a clean finish to Morgan/Anderson with no involvement from Hardy or any other part of Immortal? I doubt you're really that naive.

About as naive as you thinking every PPV ends in a screwjob.

I'm not saying every PPV has to have a World Title match, but I think the guy should at least be involved in some wrestling capacity. What if he and Abyss took on RVD and Dreamer with a "Title Shot vs. Loser Leaves" stipulation? If Hardy or Abyss get a pinfall, then the guy they pin is fired. If RVD or Tommy get a pin, then that guy gets a title shot. Everyone would assume either RVD's getting the win or Dreamer gets pinned and fired, so you could throw a curve ball and have RVD hits the Five-Star, get the three-count, but then get told he's not the legal man. While he argues with the ref, Dreamer slides in and hits a Spicoli Driver and get the win and title shot.

What?

I like this because it would keep Hardy involved and continue his story with RVD. It would involve Abyss in a way where he's more Hardy's enforcer than running his own program. Plus, with that ending, it's another way of RVD getting "screwed" without having it come intentionally at the hands of Immortal. You could easily have a Hardy v. Dreamer match on some Impact to get the title shot out of the way. You could even have Dreamer try to give RVD the title shot but have Hardy and Bischoff come out and shut that down. Dreamer could have one last moment as he takes the World Champion to the limit (like Lawler against Miz the other week) but ultimately falls when Hardy does something dirty.

Again, what?

Sorry, didn't mean to make this an "imagination running wild" thread. I just think TNA is really screwing themselves by not using their biggest stars as much as possible. I don't know what the hell Angle's doing, but they need to get him back in the spotlight fast. And RVD, for all his promos annoy us, was putting on some great matches when he first got to TNA and now they've just left him in the dark to focus on crap like Jarrett's MMA career and Abyss' need to put black people in caskets.

TNA is screwing themselves. But your convoluted ideas are perfectly fine, right? There is no problem with the World Champion missing one PPV, because that just makes the title mean that much more. It's not even an obligation to be featured on PPV, but people are gonna fight to get to you anyway. The fact that Morgan and Anderson may headline Genesis just shows how bad they want it and how controlling Immortal is to actually skip one PPV defense. It makes it more worthwhile for the guys fighting to earn their shot.

 

[Joe's Gonna Kill You]

If Jeff Hardy doesn't wrestle its not big deal, this is not the first time TNA has done this and it makes sense for Morgan and Anderson have to compete for the #1 contendership to face Hardy at the next PPV. I have no problem with Hardy not wrestling because we will hopefully get a Clean match between Anderson & Morgan.

 

[Rasha]

About as naive as you thinking every PPV ends in a screwjob.

Pretty sure I never said that. The circumstances behind this specific match, Morgan vs. Anderson, have all the warning signs of a screwjob ending. You have the way the match was booked to begin with (Bischoff's orders), the fact that its two faces and one of them is a big-time tweener (Anderson), plus you have Bischoff and Russo's track record for how they end their Main Events. I'd love a clean finish, but experience tell me otherwise.

What?

Again, what?

TNA is screwing themselves. But your convoluted ideas are perfectly fine, right?

It wasn't that convoluted at all; one tag match followed by a title shot. But whatever... sorry to make your head hurt.

There is no problem with the World Champion missing one PPV, because that just makes the title mean that much more. It's not even an obligation to be featured on PPV, but people are gonna fight to get to you anyway. The fact that Morgan and Anderson may headline Genesis just shows how bad they want it and how controlling Immortal is to actually skip one PPV defense. It makes it more worthwhile for the guys fighting to earn their shot.

I agree with you in most cases, but I just don't like it based on where TNA is right now and what Hardy's reign has been so far. He's been very quiet and almost absent at times in the build-ups to the two matches with Morgan. If you're going to trot him out on the first Impact after a PPV as the crown jewel of Immortal, then the guy needs more of a presence. If he's not going to be a dominant player in the promos, then I feel like he has to stay credible by going out there on the PPVs and putting on good matches.

I'm not saying you're wrong and I'm right; just my opinion about how TNA's handling their Main Event right now. I've been a supporter of Hardy's heel turn and push but have always been skeptical of how he'd do as a World Champion considering his lack of mic skills and the legal issues hanging overhead. Seeing TNA basically protect him with this style of booking just feels weak for a company trying to push itself to the next level.

 

[hatehabsforever]

I personally believe it's a terrible idea to not have the major title in your organization not defended on every single PPV. PPV's only happen once a month, so it shouldn't be too big of a deal to put the top guy in your company, the current major title holder, in some sort of a match to be defended on PPV. I think it cheapens the significance of your top hardware if you don't think it is significant enough or relevant enough to feature in a show that you expect your fanbase to pay for. I'm not suggesting that the title need be defended on every single episode of iMPACT or anything, but it should be featured as a prominent part of every single PPV. If you cannot come up with an idea for your champion to appear on your monthly PPV, perhaps the wrong guy is holding the strap.

It doesn't even necessarily have to be the main event of the evening, but he's got to be there to put the title on the line. And I don't buy the notion that it's somehow OK because it's been done before with no repercussions, that's irrelevant. If it happened before, that's wrong too, and it's not OK to make a mistake just because it's been made before. It's also not OK to suggest that Hardy need not appear because of his real-life challenges, again it's irrelevant. If such matters as impending court charges or alleged concerns about his welfare (whether they're legitimate concerns or dirt sheet fabrications) preclude him from appearing on the PPV, again, he shouldn't be holding the title until he is able to defend it regularly and show it the respect that it deserves, or at least should deserve.

I don't want this to degrade into a TNA bash or a WWE/TNA comparison, but I would simply suggest that at WWE PPV's the 2 major belts are always defended. Some of these defences have been lacklustre and predictable, but ultimately, the champ still does appear and puts his title on the line, even if it is in a match where the outcome is not at all in doubt.

If TNA doesn't have enough respect for the significance of their top prize, or enough confidence in their top prize holder, to feature the TNA World Heavyweight Championship in some manner, why should the fans feel otherwise?

 

[MisterRob]

Since when is it okay that your company's World heavyweight championship, carried by supposedly your top draw, isn't being defended on your PPV? That's just bad business. People saying that's okay, TNA's done it before, are crazy. Instead of selling a PPV around a face trying to dethrone a hated heel that people would pay money to see lose in normal circumstances, you think it's okay for the company to revolve their PPV around two FACES fighting each other for that shot? In no scenario, especially this one, is it okay for your monthly PPV NOT to have a title defense from your top, main championship. That's what the championships for.. it's suppose to be the biggest selling point of your entire company. This is wrestling. That's not a good way to sell a PPV. No wonder TNA has so many issues.

And clearly this just makes it that more suspect that Hardy's having serious issues and just CAN'T defend his title on the PPV, so TNA is trying to protect their asset. What a load of crap. This just further drags down the HUGE Immortal angle, which is really turning into an utter failure.

 

[Stunner=RKO]

How much wanna bet that There WILL be a run in at the Anderson bs Morgan main event??? Lol.. After all this time haven't u realized how TNA thinks? It's one to think outside the box.. Another to think in it.. But TNA HAS IT'S OWN box it thinks out of how do we expect anything to change

 

[wrestlemaniac]

I personally believe it's a terrible idea to not have the major title in your organization not defended on every single PPV. PPV's only happen once a month, so it shouldn't be too big of a deal to put the top guy in your company, the current major title holder, in some sort of a match to be defended on PPV. I think it cheapens the significance of your top hardware if you don't think it is significant enough or relevant enough to feature in a show that you expect your fanbase to pay for. I'm not suggesting that the title need be defended on every single episode of iMPACT or anything, but it should be featured as a prominent part of every single PPV. If you cannot come up with an idea for your champion to appear on your monthly PPV, perhaps the wrong guy is holding the strap.

It doesn't even necessarily have to be the main event of the evening, but he's got to be there to put the title on the line. And I don't buy the notion that it's somehow OK because it's been done before with no repercussions, that's irrelevant. If it happened before, that's wrong too, and it's not OK to make a mistake just because it's been made before. It's also not OK to suggest that Hardy need not appear because of his real-life challenges, again it's irrelevant. If such matters as impending court charges or alleged concerns about his welfare (whether they're legitimate concerns or dirt sheet fabrications) preclude him from appearing on the PPV, again, he shouldn't be holding the title until he is able to defend it regularly and show it the respect that it deserves, or at least should deserve.

I don't want this to degrade into a TNA bash or a WWE/TNA comparison, but I would simply suggest that at WWE PPV's the 2 major belts are always defended. Some of these defences have been lacklustre and predictable, but ultimately, the champ still does appear and puts his title on the line, even if it is in a match where the outcome is not at all in doubt.

If TNA doesn't have enough respect for the significance of their top prize, or enough confidence in their top prize holder, to feature the TNA World Heavyweight Championship in some manner, why should the fans feel otherwise?

god, I disagree with this so much. Respectively of coarse. IMO WWE in fact does cheapen it's title just because of the fact that it is defended so much. I won't argue a whole lot seein as I rarely watch a wwe show. I did however watch a the full ep of raw where miz defended against king in a tlc. This isn't about that so let me get back on topic. In my view, wwe actually devalues itself by actually having the brand split. at first I didn't mind but then it just got to me when one brand's wrestler would appear on the other and vice versa. There's 2 head champs to a company....obviously one belt is a lesser value than the other. TNA as WWE, is a weekly show w 12 PPVs. If a champ is part of a good chunk of the weekly shows then I see no need for him to appear at every ppv as long as a story is being built in his absence

 

[Mitch Henessey]

The past two World Title matches on TNA's pay per views haven't been memorable at all, but I would want to see Hardy defend the TNA World Heavyweight Championship at Genesis. As of right now, it doesn't seem like this is going to happen.

The World Title is supposed to be the most prestigious prize in any promotion, and it should be defended at a pay per view. If Hardy doesn't wrestle, then there's a good chance we'll see an Immortal beat down issued to the winner of the #1 Contender's match. But we always see Hardy and Immortal beat down potential challengers on Impact, so why would anyone(especially paying customers) want to see the same thing on a pay per view? I hope Hardy does wrestle at Genesis, because the entire pay per view will feel very odd if he doesn't.

 

[hatehabsforever]

god, I disagree with this so much. Respectively of coarse. IMO WWE in fact does cheapen it's title just because of the fact that it is defended so much. I won't argue a whole lot seein as I rarely watch a wwe show. I did however watch a the full ep of raw where miz defended against king in a tlc. This isn't about that so let me get back on topic. In my view, wwe actually devalues itself by actually having the brand split. at first I didn't mind but then it just got to me when one brand's wrestler would appear on the other and vice versa. There's 2 head champs to a company....obviously one belt is a lesser value than the other. TNA as WWE, is a weekly show w 12 PPVs. If a champ is part of a good chunk of the weekly shows then I see no need for him to appear at every ppv as long as a story is being built in his absence

So what you are saying is that you would rather see a major title, THE biggest title in your organization, not get defended at all, rather than have it be defended too often? Rather than have a guy be a fighting champion and defend the title on a regular basis because it is significant enough to warrant such activity, you would rather have your top dog not appear at all, or if he does appear, do so in a run-in fashion, more reminiscent of a role player rather than your main guy? If you have a face champion, and he defends his title against various heels on a regular basis, you don't think this elevates the prestige of the title? Or if you have a heel champion who cheats to retain his title, or attempts in vain to weasel out of having to defend the title, you think this is worse than not appearing at all, or worse still, appearing on camera only in a non-wrestling capacity, mumbling incoherently to try to make yourself look like a heel?

Your reference to that episode of RAW is irrelevant. I said I don't see a need to have the belt defended on every show, but it does need to be defended on the shows that fans are expected to pay good money for. Granted the Miz versus the King was hardly a 5-star match (although it wasn't terrible). The outcome was never in doubt. But the fact that Lawler wanted the title so badly adds to the prestige of the title. The fact that the Miz tried to escape having to defend it, and only won it because of interference from Cole, only added to the Miz's heat. Two good outcomes from a throwaway match. Certainly better than having the show happen and the Miz not even appear at all. And that's the regular televised show, not even a PPV.

The discussions of the brand split is not even applicable here. This is a totally different topic for a totally different thread. But as long as the brand split exists (which it will for the forseeable future), both of the belts should continue to be defended on PPV. As opposed to acting like they're not even important enough to feature on your monthly PPV's.

 

[MB1025]

I don't get it really. People scream about wanting wrestling to be more like UFC. Well this is very old school wrestling and UFC like. You have 2 guys and you have them fight for title and have a reason for it. Well UFC doesn't defend their top title every month. They have fights leading up to it from their mid and under cards and also find number one contenders. Well now Anderson and Morgan will fight to be the number 1 contender and fight in 2 months against the champion. Now you have a 2 month build to the next world title match.

 

[ABMorales787]

Pretty sure I never said that. The circumstances behind this specific match, Morgan vs. Anderson, have all the warning signs of a screwjob ending. You have the way the match was booked to begin with (Bischoff's orders), the fact that its two faces and one of them is a big-time tweener (Anderson), plus you have Bischoff and Russo's track record for how they end their Main Events. I'd love a clean finish, but experience tell me otherwise.

So Anderson is a face and a tweener at once?

It wasn't that convoluted at all; one tag match followed by a title shot. But whatever... sorry to make your head hurt.

As opposed to just simply booking a #1 contenders match like it actually happened.

I agree with you in most cases, but I just don't like it based on where TNA is right now and what Hardy's reign has been so far. He's been very quiet and almost absent at times in the build-ups to the two matches with Morgan. If you're going to trot him out on the first Impact after a PPV as the crown jewel of Immortal, then the guy needs more of a presence. If he's not going to be a dominant player in the promos, then I feel like he has to stay credible by going out there on the PPVs and putting on good matches.

It's called build up to a major story. The reason he may not wrestle at the PPV. There is a bigger picture to the story and it's Anderson getting retribution for the concussion. Why go throwing random title defenses just because a title has to be defended on PPV? I would rather have a good story for a main event than a cheap title match.

I'm not saying you're wrong and I'm right; just my opinion about how TNA's handling their Main Event right now. I've been a supporter of Hardy's heel turn and push but have always been skeptical of how he'd do as a World Champion considering his lack of mic skills and the legal issues hanging overhead. Seeing TNA basically protect him with this style of booking just feels weak for a company trying to push itself to the next level.

They are giving the spotlight to two other guys without abandoning their current direction. I don't call that bad, I call it a dynamic. You don't every UFC PPV headlined with a title match. TNA is adding diversity to it's main events and PPV's by doing this.

I personally believe it's a terrible idea to not have the major title in your organization not defended on every single PPV. PPV's only happen once a month, so it shouldn't be too big of a deal to put the top guy in your company, the current major title holder, in some sort of a match to be defended on PPV. I think it cheapens the significance of your top hardware if you don't think it is significant enough or relevant enough to feature in a show that you expect your fanbase to pay for. I'm not suggesting that the title need be defended on every single episode of iMPACT or anything, but it should be featured as a prominent part of every single PPV. If you cannot come up with an idea for your champion to appear on your monthly PPV, perhaps the wrong guy is holding the strap.

I think it strengthens the belt to have two guys going into personal issues in order to get that opportunity. Why is it a complaint in pro wrestling alone? Why not MMA? There was a time in Boxing where not every major card wasn't headlined by a title match. Why is this such an issue now in pro wrestling? Is it because WWE has done it that way for so long? There were times when WCW and ECW headlined their events with other matches. Hell I prefer this over TNA's old bad practice of Tag Team main events.

It doesn't even necessarily have to be the main event of the evening, but he's got to be there to put the title on the line. And I don't buy the notion that it's somehow OK because it's been done before with no repercussions, that's irrelevant.

I say you are wrong. I would rather have a story featuring two guys fighting for a title shot, with the champion looking in the distance, than two guys fighting for a title shot while the champion has to face a random challenger for the sheer fact that it's on PPV.

If it happened before, that's wrong too, and it's not OK to make a mistake just because it's been made before. It's also not OK to suggest that Hardy need not appear because of his real-life challenges, again it's irrelevant.

I never said that, but whoever did was pretty dumb. That hasn't stopped him before, why now?

If such matters as impending court charges or alleged concerns about his welfare (whether they're legitimate concerns or dirt sheet fabrications) preclude him from appearing on the PPV, again, he shouldn't be holding the title until he is able to defend it regularly and show it the respect that it deserves, or at least should deserve.

Somehow, i doubt those reports have anything to do with it and it's just a way to prolong his reign and strengthen the feud with Anderson.

I don't want this to degrade into a TNA bash or a WWE/TNA comparison, but I would simply suggest that at WWE PPV's the 2 major belts are always defended. Some of these defences have been lacklustre and predictable, but ultimately, the champ still does appear and puts his title on the line, even if it is in a match where the outcome is not at all in doubt.

You wouldn't have that problem if you had other people fight for a shot at the title. I'd rather a well built feud for a PPV headline than a shortcoming title match.

If TNA doesn't have enough respect for the significance of their top prize, or enough confidence in their top prize holder, to feature the TNA World Heavyweight Championship in some manner, why should the fans feel otherwise?

It's still a fight for the World Heavyweight Championship. The difference is that the champion is awaiting his challenger. On WWE, #1 Contender matches just get thrown together one night on Raw for the sake of sorting out a challenger. TNA is trying to expand that in the sense that there is a story leading to that #1 Contenders Match.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

Well at the moment it does look like Jeff Hardy will not be defending his title as Genesis. And I do not have much of a problem with that. As Killjoy mentioned its storyline developement. Immortal will look even more awesome that way because a wrestler will have to wrestle a match on a PPV in order to get his hands on Jeff Hardy. I just feel that TNA would do well if they do not give away the title match on TV but save it for the PPV after Genesis.

And I do feel that TNA has enough starpower to book a PPV even without putting their champion in a match. And I do expect Hardy to be present at the PPV even if he is not wrestling.

 

[hatehabsforever]

I think it strengthens the belt to have two guys going into personal issues in order to get that opportunity. Why is it a complaint in pro wrestling alone? Why not MMA? There was a time in Boxing where not every major card wasn't headlined by a title match. Why is this such an issue now in pro wrestling? Is it because WWE has done it that way for so long? There were times when WCW and ECW headlined their events with other matches. Hell I prefer this over TNA's old bad practice of Tag Team main events.

I have no problem with having a number one contender's match and making it a big part of the upcoming PPV. This does make it seem like a match to determine who gets a title shot has some significance. I find no fault with Morgan versus Anderson. I just think that this match can happen, be promoted as important, hell even made the main event of the evening, and still have the champion make a token appearance on the show, just to keep the champion and his title visible. Have him come out, for example, and issue an open challenge. Have someone like Stevie Richards or Dreamer respond. Have Hardy cheat to win, and that's that. The casual fans get to see the champion and the main championship, he gains some more heel heat, yet the imminent match between Anderson/Morgan and Hardy is not affected.

It's not a valid analogy to compare the kayfabe world of professional wrestling top the real world of MMA or Boxing. They are totally separate and distinct entities. It would be crazy to try to implement MMA into wrestling in some manner, because they aren't the same thing, so you really cannot make this comparison. After all, no one would be short-sighted enough to try to bring a MMA-style storyline into wrestling, now would they?

I say you are wrong. I would rather have a story featuring two guys fighting for a title shot, with the champion looking in the distance, than two guys fighting for a title shot while the champion has to face a random challenger for the sheer fact that it's on PPV.

I disagree. The champion and his title should be there and be featured prominently. After all, that's the reason why they're all there in the first place. What about all of the casual fans they should be trying to draw in? Guys who want to see the champ defend his belt, but don't get to do so?

It's still a fight for the World Heavyweight Championship. The difference is that the champion is awaiting his challenger. On WWE, #1 Contender matches just get thrown together one night on Raw for the sake of sorting out a challenger. TNA is trying to expand that in the sense that there is a story leading to that #1 Contenders Match.

The champion should await his challenger between PPV's, not on them. It's not the same thing at all to suggest that it's still a fight for the WHC if the champ is not there. I agree that it's a good idea to have more of a storyline around the #1 contender's match. But that doesn't necessarily preclude a less significant title defence at the same time. I know this much. If hypothetically I was going to bring my son to Orlando to watch Genesis, and we arrived there and Jeff Hardy wasn't on the show, and the title wasn't up for grabs, he'd be both disappointed and confused. You have to have the champ be there to defend the pinnacle of the company. Anything less than this cheapens it's significance.

 

[a0161613]

Hardy has to appear on the PPV and not in a screwy ending that leads nowhere. I do not want a repeat of the No Surrender/Impact fiasco that led to the BFG ME match. But I fear that is exactly what will happen.

Habs has a good idea but it falls down under one point.

I just think that this match can happen, be promoted as important, hell even made the main event of the evening, and still have the champion make a token appearance on the show, just to keep the champion and his title visible. Have him come out, for example, and issue an open challenge. Have someone like Stevie Richards or Dreamer respond. Have Hardy cheat to win, and that's that. The casual fans get to see the champion and the main championship, he gains some more heel heat.

Hardy is enough of a mainstream draw, that TNA should be forced to make him appear and work a match But not against Dreamer or Richards.

I disagree. The champion and his title should be there and be featured prominently. After all, that's the reason why they're all there in the first place. What about all of the casual fans they should be trying to draw in? Guys who want to see the champ defend his belt, but don't get to do so?

Agreed, like I said, Hardy is a mainstream draw, like Angle. Too big a name to leave off the card entirely.

The champion should await his challenger between PPV's, not on them. It's not the same thing at all to suggest that it's still a fight for the WHC if the champ is not there. I agree that it's a good idea to have more of a storyline around the #1 contender's match. But that doesn't necessarily preclude a less significant title defence at the same time. I know this much. If hypothetically I was going to bring my son to Orlando to watch Genesis, and we arrived there and Jeff Hardy wasn't on the show, and the title wasn't up for grabs, he'd be both disappointed and confused. You have to have the champ be there to defend the pinnacle of the company. Anything less than this cheapens it's significance.

Agreed. I expect to see the champ when I go to the next UK show for exactly the same reason. It's a big event and they constantly push the significance of the UK market, so as the figurehead and face of the company, the champion has to be there. It's the same for PPVs.

 

[hatehabsforever]

Numbers is exactly right here as usual. I think he is understanding what I am saying and agreeing with me. And my suggestions of having Dreamer or Richards be involved in a throwaway match just to get Hardy and his title on the PPV was probably a bad example but hey, it's still pretty early on a Monday morning and while my hypothetical suggestions were definitely flawed, the point is still valid.

Hardy is enough of a mainstream draw, at least he should be. If it turns out that he isn't, he shouldn't be their top guy. I was just grasping at straws to make the point that no matter what it takes, you have to get him on there somehow, somewhere.

Again, I don't want to be accused of TNA bashing, but I do feel that this is an area where TNA is consistently deficient. They don't appear to think things through in terms of future directions. Rather than Genesis being right around the corner, and Hardy not slated to appear because they have no idea what to do with him, there should have been some such planning done for him ever since he became the champ at BFG. There should be a logical opponent for him which has been set up over the last several weeks, but that has not been the case, leaving TNA to focus on the contenders for the title rather than on the title itself. Jeff Hardy should be appearing at Genesis in a meaningful match against someone with whom there's been some planning, and he should be successful and left to face the winner of Morgan/Anderson next time.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

Well honestly I'd rather not see Jeff Hardy wrestle at all than watch him wrestle some inconsequental match. It all depends though as to what type of story you would like to see. Do you want to see Jeff Hardy vs challenger for the month as the main event of Genesis or do you want to see Morgan vs Anderson for the number 1 contender to the heavyweight title with the added intrigue as to whether Jeff will interfere in the match and if he does whose side will he take? I know that I would like to see the second of the two scenarios.

Also who said that Jeff will not be at the PPV. He could be there in a non wrestling capacity by all means. He could be the guest commentator for the main event. The possibilities are endless here. Just because he isn't wrestling does not mean he will not be at Genesis.

 

[Rasha]

Also who said that Jeff will not be at the PPV. He could be there in a non wrestling capacity by all means. He could be the guest commentator for the main event. The possibilities are endless here. Just because he isn't wrestling does not mean he will not be at Genesis.

Fair point, but "non-wrestling capacity" and "Jeff Hardy" don't seem like they belong in the same sentence to me. Whatever level of fame Hardy has reached is due to one thing; his wrestling. Any "charisma" that he has is in his ring work and has nothing to do with his mic skills. He may be better now with these heel promos, but I think most of us would agree that it's still a poor standard compared to most other Main Event talents.

I'm glad this thread has sparked a good debate about overall concepts and booking techniques, but I want to go back to my original point. I feel that in THIS SITUATION, with THIS CHAMPION, in THIS COMPANY, it's bad business to not have him wrestling on a PPV. I know I said it's a pet peeve of mine in general, but I can let it go depending on the circumstances. In this case I don't see any excuses. Hardy has been a borderline presence since becoming champ and a PPV without him further weakens his status and the title he carries (IMO).

Further, Morgan v. Anderson is the type of match that should be bolstering the strength of the undercard and not headlining the event. Just because you book the two guys in a Main Event doesn't mean they're worthy. Anderson has been out with injuries and wasn't exactly a headliner when he left. Morgan's done well with his improvised push but it was only two months ago that he was silently following Flair around. I find their angle interesting, but is it worth $40? Nah.