TNA > ECW

Think about this; ECW is beloved by most fans and it ran less than 8 years from August 94 through March 2001. ECW produced ONE 5-star match by your account, and the only guy who came straight out of ECW to find major WWE success was RVD. Everyone else used ECW as a stepping stone (Austin, Foley) or a place to recharge (Sid, Rude). Based on talent, quality, probably overall money made while in business, and longevity, shouldn't we remember TNA as being better than ECW?

TNA had over a decade of amazing matches. Their talent level was NEVER the issue. Starting from Day 1, the X-Division was fresh and different and was near 4-star match every week. The Cruiserweight/Extreme style had been seen in a while. Guys like AJ, Daniels, Lynn, Low-Ki, Petey Williams, Doug Williams, etc. busting their asses. The Tag team division also was always quality especially compared to WWE over that period. XXX, AMW, Team Canada, the Naturals, and then eventually the Dudleys, LAX, Beer Money, MCMG. They even created fun gimmick matches and didn't water them down like WWE. Lockdown was a great idea. 6-sided ring, made them unique. Ultimate X, Monster's Ball, and King of the Mountain were original match concepts that worked. Sure they took on WWE wrestlers (Christian, Angle, Dudleys, Jeff Hardy, etc) but doesn't WWE do the exact same thing (Hello, Samoa Joe, Sting, etc.) I can list 3 DVDs worth of great matches right now and I wasn't even watching regularly! They released a Best of Samoa Joe in TNA DVD and Ultimate Matches set which covered their gimmick matches. Mostly great stuff and those were from 2005-6.

I guess my general question is: Once we get past the bashing of TNA's booking debacles and money issues can we give them any credits as a 13 year wrestling promotion?