"TNA needs to stop taking WWE rejects!" is a comment I read on these boards far too often -- and one which irritates me every time. When people within the IWC refer to certain TNA performers as "WWE rejects" simply because they worked but didn't remain with WWE, it shows a general lack of knowledge about how pro wrestling -- or, to be honest, any industry -- operates.
Let me start out by stating the abundantly obvious. Some of TNA's current roster are admittedly former "WWE superstars." These men include a mixture of young performers who barely got a start with WWE and others in the twilight of their career, seeking a diminished travel and performance schedule. What those performers bring to the table, though, differs greatly depending on the individual.
Some veterans bring household name recognition. Others are still able to put on great matches. Many bring an opportunity to help mold and shape younger stars through their interactions. The younger people offer huge amounts of untapped talent, charisma and potential.
The fact that these people have performed and achieved the bulk of their (existing) success in WWE is not necessarily a bad thing. Only if TNA were to build their programming entirely around these performers while foregoing existing talent rather than blending the two for an integrated, original product would it present a problem. Simply put, though, that's not and, generally speaking, never has been the case.
The reality of pro wrestling has always been that performers move from one company to another, usually building their title resume as well as character, in-ring acumen and promo ability along the way. While some consider this "being a reject" or "becoming old," other more knowledgeable people who can see the bigger picture call it "seasoning."
In my eyes, the people with this mindset that anyone who leaves WWE is a "reject" most often tend to be WWE fanatics who feel Stamford is the only place any performer should want to wrestle. Therefore, anyone who might not feel the company is the best fit for them and moves on -- whether by WWE creative's choice or their own -- is automatically a "reject." I simply don't see it that way.
Professional wrestlers are journeymen contract employees by nature. Like any journeyman employee (which could mean a carpenter, a plumber, a professional wrestler), some remain with a single company for long periods of time, others move from company to company, playing storylines out to completion and then, when their contracts expire, move on.
Some of the greatest wrestlers in history have worked this nomadic style, without ever settling down in a single region/company for too long. Look at The Shiek, Abdullah the Butcher and Bruiser Brody, for example. Even Stan Hanson has elements of this. In the "good old days," even performers with WWF and NWA got the best parts of this lifestyle, because they could defend their titles in regional promotions around the country, never being tied to any one place for too long.
As a result, just because a professional wrestler made a stop in WWE en-route to TNA doesn't mean he should forever be a "WWE wrestler/reject." Largely, an in-ring performer should be defined by what organization is best able to tap into his potential, get him over with the crowd and utilize him most appropriately. In other words, if WWE couldn't find a use for or misuses a talent but TNA is better able to present that performer, then he is, techically, TNA-grown talent.
To see this in context of the WWE, let's look at a few examples. Who among us would consider Kevin Nash an "NWA reject"? Very few. But he was! Don't you remember Vinnie Vegas and Oz? Of course not, because WWF properly utilized him, turning him into Diesel. Was Scott Hall an "AWA reject"...or was he a WWF superstar? Well, he held a World Tag title in AWA about 5 years before he became Razor Ramon and found household recognition among pro wrestling fans, so you decide. Of course, we all know Bret Hart as an NWA reject, right? No? You don't remember him jobbing left and right on the old Georgia Championship Wrestling broadcasts (the precursor to NWA's World Championship Wrestling telecast)? Obviously not. He's "The Hitman," "the best there is, the best there was, and the best there ever will be."
Honestly, I could go on-and-on, because the WWF made it daily business to poach the most promising talent from its competitors and properly tap those wrestlers' potential. It's entirely possible for TNA to do the same thing, turning yesterday's "WWE reject" into tomorrow's "TNA superstar."
So what if AJ Styles didn't work out with WWE. He's a multiple-time TNA World Champion, and very over among die-hard fans, so obviously something is working for him today. Matt Morgan floundered in WWE, but that's perfectly fine. TNA has invested time, effort and development into him, and he's really blossoming as a superstar for tomorrow. Even Team 3D -- who only built on their existing legend and were still dominating in WWE when they moved on -- have been an outstanding addition and brought much-needed name recognition to TNA's tag division.
People need to stop being so myopic in their views about pro wrestling. These guys are employees of a company, just like the dude working in the next cubicle over to yours at the office. If he loses that job crunching numbers, he's probably going to find another one like it at another company doing something similar. It's his career. Wrestling is these guys' careers. So when one company can't use their services any more, they'll find another that can. Just because you're let go doesn't mean you don't have value to anyone anymore. Most of these wrestlers still have plenty of steam left in them, and if TNA's the place that makes the most of that, then more power to 'em.
Let me start out by stating the abundantly obvious. Some of TNA's current roster are admittedly former "WWE superstars." These men include a mixture of young performers who barely got a start with WWE and others in the twilight of their career, seeking a diminished travel and performance schedule. What those performers bring to the table, though, differs greatly depending on the individual.
Some veterans bring household name recognition. Others are still able to put on great matches. Many bring an opportunity to help mold and shape younger stars through their interactions. The younger people offer huge amounts of untapped talent, charisma and potential.
The fact that these people have performed and achieved the bulk of their (existing) success in WWE is not necessarily a bad thing. Only if TNA were to build their programming entirely around these performers while foregoing existing talent rather than blending the two for an integrated, original product would it present a problem. Simply put, though, that's not and, generally speaking, never has been the case.
The reality of pro wrestling has always been that performers move from one company to another, usually building their title resume as well as character, in-ring acumen and promo ability along the way. While some consider this "being a reject" or "becoming old," other more knowledgeable people who can see the bigger picture call it "seasoning."
In my eyes, the people with this mindset that anyone who leaves WWE is a "reject" most often tend to be WWE fanatics who feel Stamford is the only place any performer should want to wrestle. Therefore, anyone who might not feel the company is the best fit for them and moves on -- whether by WWE creative's choice or their own -- is automatically a "reject." I simply don't see it that way.
Professional wrestlers are journeymen contract employees by nature. Like any journeyman employee (which could mean a carpenter, a plumber, a professional wrestler), some remain with a single company for long periods of time, others move from company to company, playing storylines out to completion and then, when their contracts expire, move on.
Some of the greatest wrestlers in history have worked this nomadic style, without ever settling down in a single region/company for too long. Look at The Shiek, Abdullah the Butcher and Bruiser Brody, for example. Even Stan Hanson has elements of this. In the "good old days," even performers with WWF and NWA got the best parts of this lifestyle, because they could defend their titles in regional promotions around the country, never being tied to any one place for too long.
As a result, just because a professional wrestler made a stop in WWE en-route to TNA doesn't mean he should forever be a "WWE wrestler/reject." Largely, an in-ring performer should be defined by what organization is best able to tap into his potential, get him over with the crowd and utilize him most appropriately. In other words, if WWE couldn't find a use for or misuses a talent but TNA is better able to present that performer, then he is, techically, TNA-grown talent.
To see this in context of the WWE, let's look at a few examples. Who among us would consider Kevin Nash an "NWA reject"? Very few. But he was! Don't you remember Vinnie Vegas and Oz? Of course not, because WWF properly utilized him, turning him into Diesel. Was Scott Hall an "AWA reject"...or was he a WWF superstar? Well, he held a World Tag title in AWA about 5 years before he became Razor Ramon and found household recognition among pro wrestling fans, so you decide. Of course, we all know Bret Hart as an NWA reject, right? No? You don't remember him jobbing left and right on the old Georgia Championship Wrestling broadcasts (the precursor to NWA's World Championship Wrestling telecast)? Obviously not. He's "The Hitman," "the best there is, the best there was, and the best there ever will be."
Honestly, I could go on-and-on, because the WWF made it daily business to poach the most promising talent from its competitors and properly tap those wrestlers' potential. It's entirely possible for TNA to do the same thing, turning yesterday's "WWE reject" into tomorrow's "TNA superstar."
So what if AJ Styles didn't work out with WWE. He's a multiple-time TNA World Champion, and very over among die-hard fans, so obviously something is working for him today. Matt Morgan floundered in WWE, but that's perfectly fine. TNA has invested time, effort and development into him, and he's really blossoming as a superstar for tomorrow. Even Team 3D -- who only built on their existing legend and were still dominating in WWE when they moved on -- have been an outstanding addition and brought much-needed name recognition to TNA's tag division.
People need to stop being so myopic in their views about pro wrestling. These guys are employees of a company, just like the dude working in the next cubicle over to yours at the office. If he loses that job crunching numbers, he's probably going to find another one like it at another company doing something similar. It's his career. Wrestling is these guys' careers. So when one company can't use their services any more, they'll find another that can. Just because you're let go doesn't mean you don't have value to anyone anymore. Most of these wrestlers still have plenty of steam left in them, and if TNA's the place that makes the most of that, then more power to 'em.
