ShareThis Page
Will WWE ever buy TNA Wrestling? |

Will WWE ever buy TNA Wrestling?

Justin Labar
| Friday, July 12, 2013 12:01 a.m

When it comes to professional wrestling, everyone has an opinion. That’s the best thing about the industry. It’s also the worst.

So to address some your own opinions and questions, I’ll be dishing out some reality at the end of each work week.

You can submit questions on Twitter by using the hashtag #TribWrestling or email me during my radio show Tuesdays at 3 p.m. on TribLIVE sports radio.

Let’s get started.

@ItsAugust: Would/could WWE ever purchase and take over TNA? Is TNA in enough $ trouble? Possible? Buy their history like WCW #TribWrestling

Could WWE ever purchase TNA? Of course they COULD. But I don’t think they ever WOULD.

Why would they?

WWE purchased WCW in March 2001, and there was a rich list of assets to gain: an extensive video library of matches to use for DVDs, WWE Classics On Demand channel and potentially the WWE Network if and when it launches. Plus, WCW had credible talent, many of whom WWE couldn’t wait to sign and use to expand their roster/programming.

With its past as part of the National Wrestling Alliance, WCW offered so much history that Vince McMahon and WWE now own. There was profit to be made in historical acquisition and preservation of property like WCW Monday Nitro.

Let’s also not forget that WCW challenged WWE and beat them for a year and a half in the ratings. WWE was down and almost out. It makes sense to want to take ownership over something you know can beat you.

TNA has never beaten WWE in anything measurable, except maybe “major announcements” as they tend to have one every month, making the term “major” open for interpretation. TNA also has nothing to offer WWE. There is no value to WWE in the TNA tape library of their decade long history.

The only person in TNA whom WWE might want more video of is Sting, solely for his inevitable induction into WWE’s Hall of Fame and subsequent DVDs. But, really, WWE has all of the significant Sting video it needs in the WCW/NWA video files.

I don’t know whether TNA is in enough financial trouble to likely to go out of business or be bought out. I’m not aware of specifics pertaining to the company finances.

You also have to remember that WWE doesn’t look at TNA as direct competition. Individuals in the company might, but the company policy doesn’t. The company looks at its competition to be all forms of entertainment: sporting events, sitcoms and anything else fighting for ratings. When WWE was competing with WCW, WWE considered it a wrestling company competing against another wrestling company.

Every talent in TNA would want to work for WWE if the opportunity was there. It means bigger audience and better money. That doesn’t mean everything in WWE is better for every individual and his preferences, but money and exposure is clearly supreme working for McMahon over Dixie Carter. If WWE wants someone, it will get him. No need to buy the whole farm to get a few special cows.

@vincemcministry: #TribWrestling Is Matt Morgan really, honestly good enough to be a major player in WWE’s roster?

Yes, Matt Morgan has all of the pieces needed to be a major player on WWE’s roster.

This past week, both TNA and Morgan confirmed they had parted ways. Morgan reportedly requested his release, and it was granted.

Morgan already had one stint in WWE. It wasn’t great. Since then, he’s matured personally and learned a lot professionally. I don’t think he was ready for his first run in WWE.

Since leaving and learning around the world, Morgan’s become one of the best big men performers in wrestling. His abilities stretch far beyond what most guys his size can do.

I believe we will see Morgan back in WWE eventually. He’s a reliable big man who has remained healthy at 36. Morgan is marketable with his size, which WWE loves. Morgan is experienced in the ring and locker room, which WWE can always use. Morgan has a history with doing other media such a television and movies―WWE craves the mainstream.

Makes too much sense not to happen.

@DemetriusThorn: What’s your take on the “Husky Harris” chant during the Wyatt Family debut Monday? Could it lead to some issues? #TribWrestling

The sections of people in Baltimore — I’m calling them “Baltimarks” — who chanted “Husky Harris” at the end of the Wyatt Family debut are too smart in their own minds for their own good.

The guy who is portraying the character Bray Wyatt once was known as Husky Harris for a few months on WWE television a couple of years ago. The end.

Kane, who was attacked by the Wyatt Family in their impressive debut Monday night, was once known for a few months in 1995 as Dr. Issac Yankem DDS, portraying an evil dentist. You’re hard pressed to find a character in wrestling who wasn’t a different gimmick in the past.

Fans pay a ticket and have the right to say whatever they want. I don’t understand the point of doing this chant after nothing but a successful hype surrounding Bray Wyatt and a successful debut segment on national television. The fans chanting “Husky Harris” are the same ones who complain about everything in wrestling and can never be satisfied.

Is it to prove to the guy sitting behind you that you remember more wrestling trivia than he does? If a character has fallen flat or the presentation has been handled poorly, I understand when fans break out unusual chants. They are restless, and I take their chants as a sign they aren’t believing what’s being given to them.

Well, if the “Baltimarks” got restless watching that segment, stop watching all together because it was a terrific segment.

Trib Total Media staffer Justin LaBar has a wrestling column every Monday and Friday. He also hosts Wrestling Reality at every Tuesday from 3 to 5 p.m.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.