Do you think WWE should takeover TNA?

Question

I think it will become a threat later so vince should buy them out now

Answer 1

NO, WWE is going to buy its superstars when their contracts expire, We'll see Umaga Vs Samoa Joe in Raw. etc...Wait and see.

Answer 2

No he shouldn't. Because then we will have 4 crappy WWE programs on instead of just 3. So what if TNA becomes a bigger promotion and poses a threat. Whats wrong with some competition. What this means is that you know that the WWE is slipping hard and may not be able to step up when they have to. I think it's good to have competition.

Answer 3

I don't think that TNA is a threat to the WWE because TNA's main attraction is Sting. Really I think that Vinc will buy TNA.

Answer 4

HAHA HAHA HAHA that is the most hilarious question i have seen. TNA is lightyears better than WWE WWE couldn't take over Wrestling society X if they wanted. I think the reason y ppl dont like tna (stupid ppl) is because youve spent the last 6 years enjoying crap. If you ppl actually realize that wrestling is kayfabe then u wouldnt be the dunces u r. WWE is for rappers who r white turned marines and crap. TNa is doesnt just raid WWE the wrestlers in WWE come to Tna. TNA can care less if you work for WWE cuz with all the people they got they dont need them. All the 12 years olds and dunces need to realize this, WWE is stupid and unrealistic and the storylines are not there real life.

Answer 5

No, I don't think WWE should takeover TNA. It is nice to see WWE have some competition. Its also nice for us fans to have something else to watch than WWE. I miss the days of the Monday night wars between WWE and WCW.

Answer 6

No. Monopoly is never a good thing in business. Good business needs competitions. TNA will never beat WWE in the next 20 years or forever. But as long as they keep their business alive and produce a good pro wrestling, WWE will have to take a small fight, which should bring WWE's production up a bit.

Answer 7

No, because the WWE needs some competition to make things more interesting, plus there are too many people for the WWE to have anyways if there are 3 shows. Anyways like most of those wrestlers wouldn't even go to the WWE, most of them got fired from there.

Answer 8

No, having competition makes a promotion better. That's essentially how such ideas as nWo and DX came about, they were competing. Writers step up their a game if they have competition, bookers book better matches, and wrestling gets interesting. If WWE took over TNA, we'd have another brand extension where originals would be fired, and crappy midcarders and jobbers would be pushed into main event title matches...kind of like ECW. Don't sell TNA short yet, a new generation of wrestling fans are coming up and appreciating talent and fresh ideas, and promotions like RoH, TNA, and WSX appeal to them WWE could go out of business. God knows WCW did, and no one saw it coming, except for maybe Ted Turner...

Answer 9

NO, NO, NO! I'm a huge WWE fan and I've gotta say that that could, and would, be the absolutely WORST thing the McMahons could ever do. That's the solution that lead to the infamous "invasion storyline". I WANT TNA to be competition. After all, the "Attitude Era" would have never happened without RAW is WAR. RAW is WAR wouldn't have happened without competition, so please don't tell me you want them to buy out the NWA for IMPACT.

Answer 10

if they took over TNA rating all together would probably be 50/50 cuz its like if McMahon took over TNA many TNA fans would probably jst not like it anymore and call Vince selfish for trying to take over so many things

Answer 11

agree and i would like to see LAX vs the hardy boys vs the dudleys vs london and kendrick in a fatal-four way TLC match..
imagine the cool matches that all of the tna and wwe superstar can have.