By James Caldwell, PWTorch assistant editor

It seems like at the end of every year, TNA finds itself at a cross-roads. The question isn't so much "Where is TNA going in the new year?" but rather, "What is TNA?"

Earlier this year, in declaring a refurbished Impact product to counter WWE's "RawActive" and Tout initiatives, TNA president Dixie Carter said the "wrestling TV show model" had become "stale." So, TNA tried "inner working" backstage bits that felt like a performer evaluating the performance within the performance. It did zero to enhance the product.

Next, TNA went the ol' invasion angle route with Aces & Eights. Somehow, the angle has continued for months despite contributing zero ratings growth. The idea - similar to the Bound for Glory Series over a three-week stretch - was to provide a weekly, you-know-it-will-be-part-of-the-show story that could provide consistency to the feel and tone of the show. (And to set up second-generation talent Garett Bischoff and Wes Brisco with a landing spot, but that's besides the point.)

The problem is - and TNA has somehow missed this part - the wrestling business is a star-driven business. Numerous masked men running around with modulated voices delivering indy-level beat downs are not stars to attract an audience. Okay, how about Devon? Problem is Devon does not have the "Bobby Roode" "it factor" or history of a strong singles run to move the needle as the leader of a rebel faction. Okay, how about a guy who played a mentally-deranged individual and bodyguard to C.M. Punk pre-pipebomb promo in WWE? Nope.

Aces & Eights aside, TNA continues to try to find an identity drawing from other TV shows. Jeff Hardy is a charismatic guy with a mysterious side that is part of his charm. So, they decided to slow down the video and deliver his inner thoughts on a show that is set up to be happening in real-time. It's an example of TNA trying too hard and trying to make the show seem "edgier" and "cool" to appease to the power-brokers who control the TV and money. The result for Average Joe sitting at home is laughing and turning the channel.

Up and down the roster, there are the Mr. Andersons, Rob Van Dams, Matt Morgans, and Popes of the world who find themselves going up and down the Ladder of Focus that the audience is sitting back waiting to see if the latest story is worth buying into or if it is just another fleeting moment of attention.

Meanwhile, there are the soap-opera elements involving the Hogans, Bully Ray, and Austin Aries that seem like a page from WWE's "gotta have comedy, action, drama, and suspense" variety-show playbook.

It's a reminder of something that Nigel McGuinness said on Wednesday's PWTorch Livecast with Pat McNeill and Sean Radican. Nigel noted that WWE has defined - for better or worse - what pro wrestling looks and feels like to the average U.S. viewer. Alternative promotions that have been successful over the past ten years have defined themselves as the opposite of what WWE represents.

Somewhere in the middle is TNA.

At various points during its ten-year existence, TNA has tried to define itself as an alternative to WWE, but ultimately settled on being WWE-Lite. TNA's X Division once thrived, but it has since been reduced to a stepping-stone to the Heavyweights. TNA's BFG Series is a unique concept to make wrestling matches actually count over a three-month stretch, but during the other nine months of the year, TNA does not make matches count, like WWE. Telling the audience that matches suddenly count over a three-month stretch does not erase the other nine months worth of interchangeable matches that the announcers quickly forget in a frenzied approach to wrestling storytelling. My goodness, someone could lose an eye in the second match of an Orlando TNA PPV and it would be forgotten five minutes later.

PWTorch editor Wade Keller summed up TNA's self-created predicament in his PWTorch Newsletter-exclusive Roundtable Review of the Final Resolution PPV, which fittingly received 4.0 and 5.0 scores from the Torch Staff, to cap off a not good, not bad, just mediocre year for TNA.

Keller Wrote: "TNA cannot afford to be mediocre. They just can’t. They’re no. 2. They need to provide their fans with bragging points compared to what WWE fans experience. What is that? On a show like this, there’s nothing. It wasn’t horrible, but it was necessary, either.

"There was nothing about this show that felt Final or Resolved. I suppose I give TNA credit for featuring the 'final' Styles-Daniels match on a PPV titled 'Final Resolution.' I don’t think the PPV even needs to match the title, but TNA chose this title, and it does plant the seed in fans’s minds
that 'this is where the top feuds of the year or season get resolved. What did they do with that? End the PPV with a World Title match finish involving a run in from a heel faction, a run-in that created more questions rather than resolving issues." (Keller's full Roundtable Review is available for VIP Members in this week's Torch Newsletter.)

So, again, the question going into 2013 is "What is TNA?" Perhaps there are too many former WWE and WCW minds involved in this company to assess the product with a fresh set of eyes. Or, it's a matter of not wanting to take risks; it's easier to keep Spike, Panda, and the Carters happy by continuing on the path of least resistance.

As Nigel said, WWE has defined what pro wrestling looks and feels like, so TNA is simply following the model, but trying to sell it as an alternative by adding a few "tweaks" such as Jeff Hardy's inner thoughts, "out-of-character" backstage interviews, the BFG Series, and shaky cameras "eavesdropping" on conversations.

The problem is the net gain of these "tweaks" is either zero or minimal in the long-term. Unless there is true added value - such as the BFG Series needing matches to count the other nine months of the year - it is merely new paint on an old house.

What could TNA do? Could they get radical by dropping the ring, turn wrestlers into paid actors, and film a dramatic series "TNA: Orlando" that sets up PPVs - where the matches occur? Do they completely move away from a wrestling set-up and just have a 14-week TV season built around the established names on the roster engaging in conflict, story, dialogue, and action? Or, they simply re-focus on the basic wrestling storytelling principles of established stars competing for titles and glory in matches that count while surrounded by compelling issues?

At the moment, TNA is stuck in a world called "not-the-NFL." As default #2 pro football leagues have popped up through the years, they've always been able to draw mild interest in the beginning by building around a former NFL star whose skill level has slipped. "Hey, remember that guy?" Or, "Man, I remember when he helped me win my fantasy league." But then, the initial interest fades away, home viewers realize why the star player is not playing in the NFL anymore, and the overall product looks and feels secondary to what people know - the NFL product.

TNA is that default #2 pro football league. They have Hulk Hogan and Sting. "Hey, remember when Hogan dropped the leg and Sting was up in the rafters?" Well, years have passed, times have changed, memories have faded, and all that's left is the stars of yester-year trying to hang on to past glory.

Recently, TNA has tried to counter the "retirement home" perception by pushing A.J. Styles, James Storm, Bobby Roode, Daniels, Austin Aries, etc. to be the "stars of the future." Unfortunately for the default #2 league, none of those guys carry the name-brand value to move the needle with the average audience member whose view of pro wrestling is defined by WWE. How many times has Styles, Storm, Roode, Daniels, or Aries appeared in a major angle in WWE? Zero times. It's like watching the #2 football league for a former NFL star, hearing the announcers hype a young star taking the league by storm, and feeling completely disconnected because you have no idea who the person is. And, unless the announcers can really, really engage you as a home viewer, the product on the field is not enough. (The announcing problems in TNA is another topic.)

For the average WWE viewer who hears about Hulk Hogan in TNA and checks out the show once or twice, a guy like A.J. Styles is going to remind them of Justin Gabriel or Tyson Kidd. And, what have Gabriel and Kidd done in WWE? Not much, individually.

To you and me, putting Styles on the same level as Gabriel is ludicrous. Styles is one of the top athletes and pro wrestlers in the business, has won everything in TNA, and has been the face of TNA. We all know the level of awesomeness that Styles is capable of. The problem is the average viewer doesn't know that. And, as TNA has driven away average viewers month after month and year after year since Hogan arrived on January 4, 2010 (yes, it's been three full years), all that's left is the same 1.3 million viewers who have seen Styles involved in multiple turns, multiple feuds with Daniels, and an awful Claire Lynch story, and wrestled the same matches over and over again.

So, what does TNA do? Do they re-heat the same storylines and face/heel turns from years past? Do they re-mix stars who have been under-utilized, such as Mr. Anderson? Do they try to find the discipline to take a guy like Styles through a 10-month journey from the depths of despair to the heights of glory (excuse the Bound for Glory pun) and have him come out the other side as a star who will suddenly move the needle and attract average stars?

For TNA, the thinking could be none of this matters. Just draw the 1.0 rounded rating and 1.3 million viewers to keep everyone happy, mix in the occasional hot-shot angle to spike the rating for a week or two, and keep rotating talent into semi-spotlight angles to keep them happy under contract.

If so, TNA is destined to be exactly where they are year after year. And, year after year, we'll continue to ask the question, "What is TNA?"

Super Bowl-winning NFL head coach Bill Parcells famously said once, "You are what your record says you are." For TNA, that's a 1.0 rating and 1.3 million viewers, which is lower than what TNA was doing when Hogan arrived.

The idea behind Parcells's statement is that explanations and excuses do not lead to results; in other words, don't tell me that you’re a good team, show me.

This month on Impact, Hulk Hogan will come out for another "tell me" speech talking about TNA's so-called success. It's the quarterly speech aimed at the people who make the decisions not to worry and just trust. But, the reason why Hogan has to continue to make the speech is because there are no results to back up his claims. TNA is merely trotting out the most visible and recognizable star to deliver the ear-tickling message to the people who matter most. To this point, it has worked. But, TNA's record has not changed. They're a 1.0 with 1.3 million viewers.

For TNA to break through and eliminate the need for Hogan to deliver the quarterly speech, their record has to improve. It starts with answering the biggest question of all, and doing a lot more showing and a lot less telling.

James Caldwell's TNA Reporting Resume:

- Covered TNA since 2004 during Friday Afternoon Era on FSN.
- Covered every Sunday night TNA PPV.
- Interviewed and developed relationships with numerous TNA talents since 2004.
- Will attend in-person TNA's 2013 Lockdown PPV at the Alamodome for first-hand perspective and news.

We suggest these recent related articles...

CALDWELL'S WWE "NXT: HOUSTON" LIVE RESULTS 9/17: Complete "virtual-time" coverage of Balor, Joe, Bayley, more from debut show in Texas

CALDWELL'S LIVE REPORT - 7/12 Lone Star in Houston, Tex.: Alberto El Patron no-shows, Dreamer vs. Hoyt new main event; plus Duggan, Snitsky, Cabana vs. Mahal, Joey Ryan, Rowe vs. Hernandez, Ivellise, Catrina, Houston Carson, one title change, more

CALDWELL: A Top 10 for 10 Years - Hall of Fame, George, Sweet Tea, Studio B, Duke, Three-Pack, and you!