My opinion was stated and I voted how I wanted not sure anyone's choices can be wrong in an opinion based poll.
My opinion was stated and I voted how I wanted not sure anyone's choices can be wrong in an opinion based poll.
Who else would you rather have had as champ back in TNA's infancy? Someone you couldn't trust to stick around or flake out? Jarrett kept the belt on himself because he was the only guy who could be trusted 100% not to leave in the middle of the night. It was more of a business decision than an ego thing (at least in my mind) and besides, it makes sense given the heat he was getting while also further establishing the title's (and therefore the promotion's) credibility. Also, if a champ is around to help make new stars, its hard to argue against Jarrett, who is partially responsible for helping AJ Styles get over the hump. I'm sure one can argue Roode did the same for Aries, but lets face it, he was going to get there with or without Roode's endorsement.How can someone booking themselves as champ be any better?
How can someone booking themselves as champ be any better? Cyrus you should vote in your own tourney as should [MENTION=59]Horrorfan_1986[/MENTION] and [MENTION=288]Halfbreed[/MENTION]
Who cares if he booked himself as champ, it has to do with how good the reign(s) were. Jeff had six freakin reigns totaling over 3 years and he did wonders with his promos while champ making people want to watch. Roode may have been a good champ but one reign doesn't compare to 6 reigns where he represented TNA
Inferno why do you bother even getting involved in these debates you add nothing to them...ever...
Jarrett didn't need to have reigns as long as he did and as many as he did...he could have used to establish other guys in the federation...yeah he helped build AJ but also was booked to have a 347 day title reign when AJ was proving that he was deserving of longer reigns...guys like Daniels, Kazarian, & Monty Brown could have also been built up and used properly..
I am sorry but when your dad starts a company and you run it and give yourself the title because you burned your other bridges it really doesn't hold much water imo...yeah he had the title for a long time but I can start a fed and make myself the champion too if I wanted...
Jarrett didn't need to have reigns as long as he did and as many as he did...he could have used to establish other guys in the federation...yeah he helped build AJ but also was booked to have a 347 day title reign when AJ was proving that he was deserving of longer reigns...guys like Daniels, Kazarian, & Monty Brown could have also been built up and used properly..
I am sorry but when your dad starts a company and you run it and give yourself the title because you burned your other bridges it really doesn't hold much water imo...yeah he had the title for a long time but I can start a fed and make myself the champion too if I wanted...
Nope, there's no right and wrong, and given the Anderson comment I'm at least willing to look at it from your perspective. As far as re-establishing the belt, I think Roode was definitely the right and stable choice. After the revolving door of idiotic champs, he was not only a breath of fresh air but a homegrown one at that. I can see why that's a compelling enough argument to consider him a great champ, so at the very least I can see your side of things.Maybe it is because I am not a JJ guy and never have been, I vote for these things with how I feel and in my opinion Roode did more to establish himself and give prestige to a title that hadn't had it in quite sometime with has beens and Andersons and such...that is really all I got and I am sure I have lost this debate and you are probably right...doesn't mean I am wrong though
Only grandslam champion? Angle held every title at once. Lol