The Mass Transit incident

This month marks the 20th anniversary of one of the most infamous incidents in pro wrestling history, "The Mass Transit incident" at an ECW house show in Revere, MA in 1996. At the time, the firestorm of negative press prompted the cancellation of the company's debut on pay-per-view the following year before owner Paul Heyman persuaded providers to distribute the event. Two decades later, retrospect provides a much clearer picture of what actually happened and what the results could've been if the stunt wasn't recorded.

Eric Kulas, a 17-year-old attired in a bus driver outfit, showed up at the non-televised event in hopes he could get a spot on the card that night. Axl Rotten, who was scheduled to team with D-Von Dudley in a match with The Gangstas, had a family emergency and couldn't work the show so Kulas took his place. Kulas used a fake ID that said he was 23 and claimed to be a student of Killer Kowalski, the  legendary grappler that ran a school in the area for years. The aspiring wrestler also claimed that he had wrestled previously as "Mass Transit," but it was later revealed that he had no wrestling experience.

Where the controversy starts is that when planning the match, Kulas stated that he wanted to bleed during the bout, but didn't know how to blade, or cut himself in a safe manner, a common practice in the business for decades. He asked New Jack, one of the most notorious figures in the history of the business, if he would make the cut for him. New Jack agreed, and it was determined that the contest would be one-sided since The Gangstas were an established team.

According to The Blue Meanie in the "Forever Hardcore" documentary, Kulas was extremely arrogant backstage and even tried to light a cigarette while sitting next to Taz, one of the veterans on the roster. When Mass Transit climbed in the ring, he taunted the crowd in typical heel fashion, but there was nothing typical about what happened after The Gangstas stormed the ring with a collection of weapons for their trademark entrance. Given that Kulas hadn't endeared himself to the rest of the crew, The Gangstas made a point to keep D-Von outside of the ring and focused on not letting Mass Transit get any offense. When the time came for New Jack to blade Kulas as he requested, the ECW tag champion sliced deeply into the teenager's forehead, opening a geyser  that squirted a continuous stream of blood onto the canvas.

Realizing that his son was injured, Kulas' father, who vouched for him prior to the show,  can be heard on the video tape yelling that Mass Transit was only 17. Soon after the incident, Kulas and his family filed a lawsuit against ECW and New Jack. As mentioned, the negative press almost costs ECW their chance on pay-per-view, and New Jack, the real-life Jerome Young, was eventually charged with assault and battery.

In hindsight, the spin that the press put on the story is almost comical, considering that it made no mention of the fact that Kulas lied about his age to get work on the card that night. Ultimately, Kulas, a naive fan that wanted to play wrestler, couldn't keep his story together and the inconsistencies led to Jerome Young being acquitted and nobody was found to be liable for the injuries. The key to determining this was at the trial when the video tape was played that showed Kulas waiting for and then allowing Young to cut him. After that Kulas can been seen compressing his forehead, a common way to attempt to produce more blood from a blade job. What the court case came down to was Kulas asked to be cut and then knowing what was going to happen, waited to get bladed. Weather it was morally right or not is a completely different matter, as far as legally, Kulas wasn't "attacked" as he originally claimed.

At the time, the incident enhanced the view that New Jack actually was the violent "gangsta" that he portrayed in the ring. The former bounty hunter claimed to have four justifiable homicides during his time pursing bail jumpers, but it was later revealed during Kayfabe Commentaries' "Breaking Kayfabe" series that it was one justifiable homicide and the numbers were exaggerated as a part of Young's wrestling persona. On the flip side, while it might've added to the perception of New Jack's character, it could've done major damage to ECW as a promotion. If the Barely Legal pay-per-view had remained cancelled, who knows if Extreme Championship Wrestling would've made it off the ground to revolutionize the business in the United States?

In the years that followed, Eric Kulas passed away in 2002 after complications from gastric bypass surgery. The incident was discussed in a variety of documentaries and interviews, with seemingly everyone expressing varying opinions about the validity of the responsibility of what happened to Kulas. While Jerome Young is a very complex individual that hasn't always made the best decisions and he undoubtedly decided to cut Kulas deeper than he probably should've, he wasn't legally responsible for Mass Transit's injuries. Kulas lied about his age, his experience, the details of the events, and got himself into a situation that he wasn't prepared for at the event. Eric Kulas asked to be cut, waited to be cut, and he was cut. Again, it doesn't make it morally right, but Kulas had no right to file a lawsuit when he lied to ECW to get a chance to play wrestler. It's tragic that Eric Kulas passed away at a young age, but he clearly had no business attempting to be a wrestler in 1996.

As for New Jack, he had a very complicated career, as some speak about his generosity as a person and a performer, while others claim he was dangerous in the ring. Despite displaying a limited range of skills during most of his career, New Jack is actually an underrated performer, mostly because he presented a believable character and he cut promos that could sell an event. Plus, he could actually wrestle technically matches earlier in his career when The Gangstas had an extensive feud with the Rock n' Roll Express in Smokey Mountain Wrestling in 1994.

Despite an undeniable charisma, in many ways, New Jack couldn't get out of his own way when it came to opportunities during his post-ECW career. Considering his promo skills, New Jack could've landed work with either TNA or ROH on an extended basis, but some of his choices in the years after ECW closed made it difficult for those companies to invest into the character. In 2003, Jack worked a match with veteran Gypsy Joe, who had a reputation for carelessly stiffing opponents. At 68, Gypsy Joe decided to legitimately punch New Jack during the contest and he responded with real punches to the senior citizen. The very real situation continued when New Jack pummeled Joe with various objects until the promoter stopped the match. The following year when wrestling in Florida, New Jack legitimately stabbed an William Lane nine times after the independent wrestler tried to actually fight him during the bout. If New Jack was provoked during this incidents is irrelevant, the point is, main stream promotions wouldn't want the negative press involved.

In some respects, the controversy that surrounded New Jack outside of the ring overshadowed a notable career in the ring. From insane dives from the balcony that were staples of the opening of the ECW TV show to falling twenty feet from a scaffold, New Jack would probably receive more notoriety if he wasn't involved in various infamous events. However, it's interesting to consider how serious the consequences of The Mass Transit incident could've been at the time and the ripple effect it would've had if Barely Legal remained cancelled. Regardless, two decades later, the incident is still talked about as one of the most controversial events in pro wrestling history.

Will there be a Pacquiao/Mayweather rematch?

Earlier this month, boxing legend Manny Pacquiao returned to the ring and defeated Jesse Vargas, sending him tumbling to the canvas in the second round en route to a dominate unanimous decision. Despite the lukewarm reaction when the bout was announced, over 16,000 fans packed into the Thomas & Mack Arena to witness the bout live, including former pound-for-pound king pin Floyd Mayweather, who defeated Manny in 2015 in a bout that became the sport's most lucrative fight of all time.

Floyd's attendance prompted speculation about a potential rematch with the Filipino superstar, but would the general public  pay to see the two square off again?

The story of the "super fight" is well documented, after years of political jousting between the two sides, a contract was signed and despite taking place nearly five years too late, the mainstream public was in a frenzy to witness the clash between boxing's top two stars of the modern era. At a $99.99 price tag, the event generated nearly 4.5 million pay-per-view buys, which translated to $400 million in revenue. Pacquiao and Mayweather were paid $120 million and $180 million respectively.

As financially successful as it was for the promoters, it became equally as disappointing for the paying customers, as the anticipated contest flopped. Floyd, known for his masterful defense, danced and dodged his way to an easily victory on the score cards, while Manny didn't show the speed necessary to push the pace. Controversy swirled after the final bell when it was revealed that Pacquiao fought with a shoulder injury that he didn't disclose, which is a requirement for the Nevada State Athletic Commission. Fans thought they were swindled into buying the event, and there's no doubt if word of his injury was public that it would've affected the buyrate. Adding to the circus was the news that was revealed after the contest that Floyd used an unapproved IV to rehydrate before the fight.

The Pacquiao/Vargas pay-per-view, an event promoted by Top Rank exclusively after HBO dropped Manny from his contract and passed the rights to distribute the fight, garnered 300,000 buys, the lowest Pacquiao offering in eight years. As I penned in an article a few months ago, the "super fight" with Floyd and the disappointment that followed unquestionably damaged the drawing power of both stars, which was proven by the dismal numbers their subsequent bouts generated.

Boxing's top stars are in quite a unique predicament, fans aren't willing to pay for glorified exhibition fights against lesser known opponents because of the disappointment of the super fight and at the same time, a rematch also doesn't guarantee a major draw because of the same disappointment.

But, will there actually be a rematch?

Longtime promoter Bob Arum, one of the godfathers of the promotional business, recently said he thinks there's a 75% chance that Manny and Mayweather square off again. I'd say that realistically it's more of a 50/50 chance that another contract is signed. Similar to the original contest, I would guess that the deciding factor will be the guaranteed offered for the deal. The bottom line is, if the figure will be what "Money" Mayweather wants to fight again. Floyd is all business and a rematch with Manny has nothing to do with a legacy or an attempt to "write the wrong" of the mega fight from last year, it's simply the chance to add more cash to his bank account.

If the leader of "The Money Team" is expecting an amount based on the draw of the initial fight then this potential rematch won't go any further than the negotiation table, as it would be extremely risky for fight promoters to guarantee an amount without taking into account how the lackluster "super fight" might affect pay-per-view buys for the rematch. Just as an estimate, I would say that a potential rematch would probably do about 2.5 million buys, a staggering number despite it being a little more than half of the number for the original fight. That said, if Floyd is willing to take less of a guarantee in exchange for PPV points, it's a much safer option for promoters because there are several million dollars at risk when negotiating the contract. If the rematch flops financially, the fighters will still get paid the guarantee so a promotional group isn't going to risk the debt if the deal isn't logical. As comical as it might sound, $100 million each might not close the deal even if it makes monetary sense.

If the bout happens, it would probably contain more action, but the result would be the same, Mayweather uses defense to win on the score cards. Floyd made a career out of avoiding damage, and even at 39, he undoubtedly has less miles on his body than Manny, who was involved in some brawls during his career. Prior to the victory against Vargas, Pacquiao showed his age in some of his recent contests, and realistically, there's no reason to expect that he would show the speed necessary to defeat Mayweather.

Questions remain about if the rematch will materialize, but it could be asked, should it take place?

 When the mega fight flopped, it did nothing to help boxing and almost reinforced the notion that it was an antiquated sport that no longer showcased the tremendous competition of the past. Granted, those that follow the sport can cite the action of Golovkin, Provodnikov, Kovalev, and others, but the main stream public saw two of boxing's biggest stars in a lackluster bout so it certainly didn't help the perception of the sport. Is it worth the risk of the credibility of boxing for another disappointing fight?

On the flip side, Andre Ward and the previously mentioned Kovalev fought to a compelling and debated decision last week. Isn't it better for the future of the sport if the discussion is about the winner of a competitive bout of two fighters in their prime than a possibly lackluster rematch of aging stars?

If I had to guess, I would say that a Manny/Mayweather rematch won't get signed, simply because Floyd won't return to the ring unless it's for similar money to the initial fight and logistically, it would be difficult to judge if a rematch would generate that type of revenue. That being said, it might be more beneficial for boxing to avoid the potential pitfalls of the rematch and to focus on the current stars that can improve the future of the sport.

Goldberg vs. Lesnar

At Wrestlemania 20, a milestone for what became one of the most valuable franchises in entertainment, the event returned to Madison Square Garden, the site of the inaugural event in 1985. Besides an overall solid card, the show is known for a match that is memorable for all the wrong reasons.

At the time, a 27-year-old Brock Lesnar had grown tired of the road schedule that was required for a WWE superstar just two years after his debut on TV. Lesnar, a former NCAA national amateur champion, was rocketed to the main event scene and paired with Paul Heyman in 2002, a move WWE brass hoped would secure their next top star for the future. The savvy NYC fans knew that Brock was discarding an opportunity that others worked years to achieve and the audible chants of "you sold out!" sent a clear message. It was widely reported prior to his departure that the former WWE champion planned to pursue an NFL career, which emphasized that he was a sports entertainer strictly for the money, a notion that further infuriated the fans in attendance.

For Bill Goldberg, the former WCW champion had spent a year under WWE contract and it was clear that WWE brass were still intent on downgrading stars from the Ted Turner organization. Goldberg, who was limited in the ring, was booked in scenarios where he would've had to carry matches, something he wasn't known for at any point in his career. He was also made to look secondary to Triple H, who was injured during a few months of the previous year, but somehow continued to be booked as the champion on Raw. The bottom line is, Goldberg didn't get over in the WWE because the WWE didn't want it to happen and did nothing to make it even remotely possible. The former Atlanta Falcon was Turner's biggest star a few years before he signed a WWE deal so they knew what they were getting as far as an in ring product. Goldberg didn't have the technical ability to work 20 minute pay-per-view main events, but his intensity and the presentation were incredible. Despite undoubtedly winning, management still had a "Monday night war" type of mind set, WCW had to look inferior to WWE. Plus, with only a one-year contract signed, Vince McMahon wasn't going to reestablish Goldberg's name value, which had been damaged during the latter stages of WCW, for him to possibly sign elsewhere. Goldberg knew he was being shafted and considering the lucrative Turner contract he had previously, he didn't need the money or the hassle so he unofficially retired after he left WWE.

The combination of Brock's lack of dedication to the business and Goldberg's contract expiring led to one of the worst matches in Wrestlemania history. The diehard MSG crowd was hostile toward the bout, which is ultimately what the match is known for. Lesnar didn't want to be a pro wrestler even though he had a golden opportunity, Goldberg was tired of the politics, and it was obvious that both of them just wanted to finish the match without injury.

So, why should the fans want to see a rematch of one of the worst matches in Wrestlemania history?

At Survivor Series, the names will be the same, but it's a very different scenario than the contest in 2004. Lesnar is still there only for the money, but his stint in the UFC made him a much bigger star than he was during his initial run in WWE. When Brock left, he was enough of a star, and enough of an athlete that he became a commodity in the UFC. The Zuffa hype machine, using many pro wrestling tactics, promoted Lesnar as a monster and as a result, he gained many stream exposure. Was Lesnar given opportunities in MMA because of his name value from sports entertainment? Absolutely, and there's nothing wrong with that because it was a smart business move. Despite concluding his full-time UFC career with a pair of devastating losses, his run as the UFC Heavyweight champion presented him as the "legitimate athlete" when he returned to the WWE in 2012. In many ways, the WWE and UFC co-promoted and both benefited from the incredible athlete that Brock continues to be even as he nears the age of 40.

Everyone, probably even most within the WWE, will acknowledge that lackluster results of the Goldberg experiment in 2003. At this point, most of the "WCW stigma" was resolved when World Wrestling Entertainment reached the point where they became the undisputed sports entertainment company without any legitimate competition a few years ago. Plus, there's a vested interest in promoting Bill Goldberg as a WCW legend because there's money to be made from the WWE network, merchandise, DVDs, and the HOF induction. There's also the fact that presenting Goldberg as a major star to a new generation of fans pushes video game sales of WWE 2K17, a major money deal for everyone involved. Some fans might not realize it, but several millions of dollars are required to produce the game and if it sales well, there are millions of dollars of potential profit so there's more to Goldberg's return to the WWE than just the angles on TV.

Bill Goldberg mentioned previously that he wanted to get the chance to wrestle a match for his family, Brock Lesnar gets another substantial paycheck for working a limited schedule, and the WWE gets the chance to market everything that goes along with the rematch so it's a win-win situation. The hostile environment of the original bout is actually what creates the intrigue for the rematch. What's going to happen when Goldberg and Lesnar are in the same ring again? Hopefully, the match is kept relatively short and it's a basic contest that showcases the trademark moves. That's what the people are paying to see and nobody is expecting a Flair/Steamboat type classic from Goldberg vs. Lesnar at Survivor Series. Assuming the match is at least watchable, I would guess that it's very possible that Lesnar is booked to win the rematch to set up a the trilogy at Wrestlemania to go along with a Goldberg HOF induction. Regardless of if there's another contest next year, it will be extremely interesting to see how the rematch is presented on pay-per-view.

The Joey Styles situation

There are enough politics in pro wrestling.

During last night's broadcast of Evolve 72 on the FloSlam app, an expanded distribution platform for the group, Joey Styles was doing commentary for the show. Styles, who was fired from his job at WWE.com a few months ago after he criticized the WWE product during a Facebook interview, made a reference to a Donald Trump quote toward a female performer on the show.

 "Joanna, you look great tonight and if our next President were here tonight, he’d want to grab you by the —" Styles said.

Anyone that is reading this knows the original quote from Trump surfaced from footage caught after a  mic that was left in between interviews with Access Hollywood 11 years ago. Whoever you voted for is your business and political affiliation has nothing to do with Styles' comments. After one of the most divisive elections in the history of the country and those from both sides lashing out at each other, is there really any place for any type of political references at wrestling shows? Isn't professional wrestling an escape from some of the harsh reality of the world?

Take nothing away from Joey Styles, he was the voice of one of the most influential promotions at one of the most influential times in wrestling history. His trademark, "oh my God!" sound byte is plastered over  some of the wildest moments in the sport, and his legacy as an announcer is immortalized through the WWE network. Along with that, the sum of his work puts him among the best commentators in business, Ross, Solie, Russel etc. Granted, he had a different deliver in a different era, but when you list the greatest announcers in the history of the industry, he makes the list.

The problem for Joey Styles appears to be that he often tries to make insider or edgy comments simply to seem "cool" and it cost him opportunities. Keep in mind, during the Facebook interview that got him fired from WWE, he often said "and this will make the office mad" before he was critical of the direction of the product and then it actually became the result. Maybe Joey thinks he's still in ECW where he can get away with saying anything, but for as long as he worked in the industry, he knows what not to say about a corporate company. Styles is smart enough to know what he shouldn't say and if he says it anyway in an attempt to be "edgy" then there can be consequences.

Again, it has nothing to do with political affiliation, you can vote for Trump, Hilary, or Jesse Ventura. But, when something is completely polarizing, why mention it during a wrestling event, especially when it's guaranteed to sour at least half the audience? Either people from both sides will take it as mocking a candidate that they support or making light of something that they find offensive. Plus, regardless of someone's view on if such a remark should or shouldn't be a factor to vote, it undoubtedly had a vulgarer context. What exactly did Styles' comment add to the show? It didn't push a wrestler or an angle and it certainly didn't sell any tickets.

Since the backlash on Twitter, Gabe Sapolsky, the booker of Evolve, and the booker for ROH during arguably the peak of the promotion, issued an apology on social media for Styles' comments. About 30 minutes later, Gabe tweeted that Evolve had parted ways with Joey Styles. Aside from Evolve, Styles has done work with Chikara, a VERY PG product so it remains to be seen if he will continue there. After his WWE release, Styles mentioned that he returned to working in marketing and wrestling projects were just a hobby on the weekends. It might be time for Joey to get a new hobby.

Ironically, (but not surprisingly) as of this writing, Joey Styles has not issued an apology or any type of statement about his dismissal from Evolve. Credit to Gabe for making the right decision in a timely manner so that the incident didn't distract from their next show. However, I want to make it clear, I didn't pen this column to reprimand Styles, but rather to let fans know that they shouldn't sour on Evolve simply because of this negative incident that had more to deal with Joey than it did the actual content of the shows. Through a working agreement with WWE, Evolve features some of the stars of the WWE cruiser weight division, and more specifically, they always produce quality shows. Drew Gulak, Ethan Page, Zack Sabre Jr., and others provide performances that give the fans their money's worth. It's a very unique deal between WWE and Evolve because obviously, the Evolve product is tailored toward a specific demographic so it's not as though they are going to compete with WWE, but the global exposure that Raw provides for some stars on Evolve shows helps boost the organization. If Evolve can get more viewers and became a more solidified  group then it allows a platform for more competitors to make a name for themselves. Basically, the Evolve organization is good for pro wrestling, it gives fans a solid product and it gives wrestlers a stage to make a name for themselves.

As for Joey Styles, if someone's comments gets them fired twice within the span of a few months then maybe they should be more careful about what they say to an audience.

The next Evolve event is today and you can get more information about the different ways you can watch the show at DGUSA.TV and WWNLive.com

The WWE Expansion

In theory, a 24/7 wrestling channel should be a major fan's dream and during the peak of the pro wrestling boom in 1998, a similar concept would've generated millions because of the supply/demand ratio at the time.

Nearly two decades later, World Wrestling Entertainment is the undisputed champion of the industry and after years of meticulous negotiating, they own the video library of nearly every major wrestling promotion that existed in the United States. As a result, more footage is available to more fans than any other time in history, but is that too much of a good thing?

After the brand extension, more pay-per-views were added to the schedule and as of now, there's usually a PPV event every 2-3 weeks, which has already watered down the concept of those shows being perceived as "special events." Since Smackdown was moved to Tuesday to air live, a key if the perception of the show is going to be considered near the level of Raw, if there's a pay-per-view that week then it translates to 8-9 hours of wrestling in the span of just a few days. At some point, it's too much for the viewer to digest and angles begin to blend together or at least don't stand out as much as they could've. Between pay-per-views, Raw, and Smackdown, is there really a demand for that much live wrestling content?

Let's be honest here, while the WWE makes hundreds of millions of dollars a year, pro wrestling isn't as relevant in pop culture as it once was, something that the ratings reflect. Sports entertainment isn't trendy the way it was a decade and a half ago. Don't get me wrong, the WWE is a successful company, in part because they usually maximize the potential revenue from the core audience, but there isn't an overwhelming demand for more content. Along with several hours of live programming each week, the WWE network streams a 24 hour schedule, including special events such as the Stone Cold podcast. At some point, the average viewer has enough wrestling for the week and tunes into something else.

Essentially, it seems like WWE brass could be in danger of unintentionally over saturating their own product because with the amount of content available, viewers might simply pick and chose what they want to watch before they channel surface to another genre. Sure, there are those diehard fans within the wrestling bubble, but the general public, which makes up the bulk of the WWE's business doesn't necessarily demand endless hours of sports entertainment. A network subscription might sell with the affordable price for the pay-per-view, but is that same consumer watching weekly? Depending on the competition on a particular night, pro wrestling ratings are sometimes sluggish and with more entertainment options than any other time in history, it becomes even more critical for the effectiveness of angles to be maximized to maintain viewership, but again, is that realistically possible with several hours of live programming each week?

As simplistic as it sounds, pro wrestling is up against very formidable competition for ratings right now and with a revolving door of various rematches often booked, it's difficult to create the "must see" atmosphere for a particular contest. The MLB postseason provided compelling drama for the better part of a month and the world series garnered major ratings. The NFL season, despite being down slightly compared to previous years, still poses opposition to PPVs or Raw depending on the teams scheduled. The TV dramas such as The Walking Dead also compete with pay-per-views in terms of live viewers. Obviously, the network has the on-demand feature to allow fans to watch at their convenience, but the point is the product is still not being perceived as "must see" in that scenario, which could transition to the TV broadcast.

I don't have the answer for how to make the current product more of a weekly draw, and as mentioned, I don't know if it's possible with several hours of live programming each week. Some have suggested that Raw be scaled back to the traditional two-hour format, a logical point because it would package the show better without some of the potential flat points during the production, but the expansion to three hours a few years ago didn't have much to do with the actual content of the show. The USA network requested that Raw add another hour, as it generates more ad revenue and it also provides an additional hour of steady ratings for them. Basically, the additional hour was strictly a business move, not an attempt to add more substance to the product.

Essentially, more wrestling doesn't automatically mean better wrestling. If the causal viewer decides to limit the amount of sports entertaining programming they watch, it can lead to stagnant numbers that will reflect a stagnant product. Again, if a well booked angle gets lost in the shuffle of the expansion of WWE shows, how effective is it? Keep in mind, there's NXT weekly, and a cruiser weight show to be added soon, both of which are in some ways used to introduce or further talent on the main roster. Is the casual viewer going to watch all those shows?

Another aspect of the WWE being a corporation is the stock price, a number that can determine the estimated value of the company at any given time. That stock price, while often kept stable by the diehard demographic, is mostly determined by how many of the general public are spending money on the product. As harsh as it might sound, the most loyal fans don't usually determine WWE's rate of main stream success, as a corporation, the priority is to reach the main stream demographic of causal fans. If the product remains watered down, it's remains to be seen how or if management generates more viewers for the shows than the roughly 3.1 rating that they average right now. By the way, that's a solid number for a weekly TV show, but when you consider that the peak of the Attitude era had 10 million viewers a week, there's obviously the potential for an increase for the ratings.

The bottom line is, the combination of over saturation  and lack of angles that generate a buzz around the product creates a ceiling on the level of success the promotion achieves. Granted, the company is profitable and without any legitimate competition, there's no risk of another group getting a piece of the pie so it might not make a major difference, but as a business, it's not ideal to have an artificial limit of success.

Will the fight network buy TNA?

After much unnecessarily complicated legal jargon, it was ruled in a Nashville courtroom this week that Billy Corgan's request for an injunction to prevent a major shift in the ownership of Impact Ventures, the company he's the president of, was invalid so Dixie Carter can now sell a majority share to Anthem Entertainment, the parent company of the Fight Network, which is based in Canada.

According to the proceedings, Corgan invested $1.8 million for what equates to  36% of the company, a share that Anthem is willing to buy from him to get him to leave the company. Legal posturing aside, Corgan's attorney presented a case that claimed TNA was insolvent, and had the injunction been granted, the path could've technically been cleared for the the leader singer of Smashing Pumpkins to take over the promotion. Since there were offers to buy TNA, that "technically" proves it has value and therefore not insolvent so the court denied the injunction, which will allow Anthem to purchase almost the entire stock in TNA. There was also the hurdle of Tennessee law that would've prevented Corgan from taking over even if the organization was proven to be insolvent after he invested.

First of all, Billy Corgan really got shafted here and as I wrote previously, it appears as though Dixie just wanted someone to pick up the tab for her vanity project without any intention of actually selling to him. Again, it doesn't speak well to the character of Dixie Carter when one of her few allies that attempted to help Impact Wrestling was basically swerved and it had to result in a lawsuit. It's disappointing that someone with the passion and dedication to the sport with good intentions such as Corgan got swerved by Dixie. During the court hearing earlier this week, Corgan wasn't there, but his attorney presented his side of the case. However, Dixie Carter made an appearance in court. Of course she did because Dixie wouldn't miss a chance to be seen in public, which is the entire point of her vanity project. Her father Bob Carter, owner of the billion dollar Panda Energy company, bought her a wrestling company so she could play TV star, which she did often.

Adding to this bizarre situation, Anthem Entertainment sent a press release after the court decision and specifically said that Billy Corgan was no longer involved with the company, but the musician responded, saying that he hasn't been paid the money that he's owed yet. Keep in mind, Corgan is still a legitimate investor and still owns stock in the promotion so he can't be forced to leave. There seems to be two main options for Corgan, he could stick around as a minority shareholder just to prove a point or he could suggest an inflated price if Anthem really wants to buy his stake in the group. Depending on the path he wants to take, Corgan could actually make a profit from this whole debacle. Obviously, it would be his personal decision, but my two cents worth of advice would be for him to get as much cash from Anthem as he can, if they want to pay to clean up Dixie's mess then let them do it at a premium. Along with paying off Corgan, The Fight Network will have to cover the costs of other recent TNA lawsuits, including American Express, the Audience One production company, and others.

From what's reported, Anthem would own 95% of the organization and Aroluxe would work for the production staff. As mentioned in the column I penned about the initial lawsuit news, if the Fight Network bought TNA it would further their expansion into the United States, but several questions remain, including what exactly is Anthem Sports going to do with TNA? How exactly is the Fight Network going to make TNA profitable? What are they going to do different than what was already done? Granted, Anthem is worth several million dollars so theoretically, they could fund the company indefinitely without any concern of potential profits, but why buy the company if they are content just to own it? The bottom line of business is to make a profit and even the billion dollar Panda Energy organization eventually stopped funding Dixie Carter so what exactly is Anthem expecting to gain from ownership of Impact Wrestling? The lack of brand identity, revenue streams, no house shows, marginal pay-per-view numbers, and a tainted public perception still exist. Basically, all the same problems will remain with the only difference being the group that covers the expenses. At the same time, you can't blame the Fight Network for this mess either, they didn't attempt to swindle Billy Corgan when he originally invested to keep TNA afloat, that was Dixie. The Fight Network is in the television business and are attempting to acquire the second largest pro wrestling company in the United States to continue to provide content for their stations. Regardless of how distant of a second place it might be, TNA is a national promotion and it seems like Anthem thinks there's a chance it could become profitable in the future. A side note, if the Fight Network gets ripped off on this deal then they will get what they deserve because it's obvious the type of business person that Carter is from the well documented laundry list of lawsuits.

Since the Anthem press release, Corgan posted a series of tweets that he could sell his stock in the company to an outside bidder without any legal order. That is true, but it's doubtful that anyone on the outside would want to get involved with the circus surrounding TNA.

The only real good news from all of this is that the talented TNA roster will continue to have a job and a national stage to display there skills. Remember the 95% that Anthem Entertainment would own after all the disputes are settled? Dixie Carter will still own 5% of the company and she will still be the chairman. Yes, as insane as it sounds, someone is willing to pay all the lawsuits and expenses, but allow Dixie Carter to stay employed in TNA. It's a crazy scenario until you consider the two jokers running in the election next week then you can see how easy it would be for an inept person to be the chairman of something as inconsequential as a secondary pro wrestling company.

The UFC sale

When Dana White convinced his friends in the boxing business to purchase an ultimate fighting league in 2001, Lorenzo and Frank Fertitta bought the organization for $2 million because they were fans of the sport, and hoped to shed light on a genre that was shut out by the establishment several years earlier. Once dubbed a blood sport, the no-holds-barred competition in the original octagon was called too brutal by many of the corporate suits that made decisions about distribution. At one time, the concept of mixed martial arts was banned in almost every state and rejected by most pay-per-view providers. Still, there was always conversation among the public about the spectacle that was simply known as "ultimate fight" before the term mixed martial arts was popularized.

Lorenzo, a casino executive and a former member of the Nevada State Athletic Commission that sanctioned many major boxing events, had the cash and the connections to at least give the UFC a chance, as well as get officials to listen to the changes that were made under Zuffa  management to make the sport legitimate. New weight divisions, rules, and protocols were added to ensure competition, not a barbaric spectacle. As time went on, more states began allowing UFC cards to be held there, but it wasn't easy to brand or market the sport. Under the Fertittas, the Ultimate Fighting Championship made its way back to pay-per-view, but most of the general public was unaware of these grapplers or how the sport had progressed.

During the first few years that Zuffa owned the company, the project was nearly $40 million in debt. Most would've throw in the towel, but Zuffa didn't. In what proved to be the key to success, the UFC finally got a cable deal with Spike TV in 2005 to televise their cards and just as important, the Ultimate Fighter reality show. The main stream finally had the chance to see not only the sport, but also the story of the athletes, which is what truly generated the initial boom in popularity. As Forrest Griffin and Stephen Bonner slugged it out in a bout reminiscent of Rocky and Apollo, the general public saw a glimpse of what the sport could showcase. In some ways, the argument could be made that Griffin/Bonner was the most important fight in UFC history because it was the right fight at the right time, and without it, there might not be a UFC today. Add to that "The Iceman" Chuck Liddel, who was in the prime of his career, knocking out opponents on pay-per-view, and the company began to turn the corner.

Fast forward 11 years and it was officially announced at UFC 200 this past July that the Ultimate Fighting Championship was sold to the WME-IMG group for a record-setting $4 billion. After years of political sparring, MMA was sanctioned in New York and the new ownership is set to promote a historic card at the world's most famous arena, Madison Square Garden. The venue where Roddy Piper battled Mr. T and Hulk Hogan, Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier squared off in "the fight of the century," and multiple sports championships were decided will host the UFC later this month.

The line-up for the event is stacked, showcasing three title fights and many former champions. At the top of the card, the company's most popular star, Conor McGregor will attempt to make UFC history when he steps into the cage against lightweight champion Eddie Alvarez for a chance to hold titles in two divisions. Despite the perceived accolades on the line, the announcement of this main event has drawn criticism and could be an indication of the direction of the promotion under WME. The brash Dublin native brings a dynamic style and Ali-type promotional efforts to hype his bouts similar to the pro wrestling genre, and in the process became one of the company's top pay-per-view draws.

However, McGregor is a relatively new commodity and lacks in some areas of his game so he might not be as dominate as some of the organization's past stars. But, Conor's drawing power is especially important at this point, considering many of the athletes that made the Zuffa era profitable are either retired or winding down their careers so WME needs a top star to promote. From a business prospective, the group just paid $4 billion to acquire the UFC so they need stars to make a return on the investment. All things considered, it appears as though the main event at UFC 205 was booked simply as an opportunity to promote Conor as the first two division champion in UFC history, not because competition justifies it. Conor, the Featherweight champion, has yet to defend the belt he won after he knocked out Jose Aldo in 14 seconds in 2015. Instead, he fought Nate Diaz at welterweight in March of this year after then-lightweight champion Rafel Dos Anjos suffered an injury that caused him to cancel the title fight. Some think Conor underestimated his opponent, and he was submitted in the second round. He avenged the loss when he won a unanimous decision against Diaz in another welterweight bout at UFC 202 in August.

Somehow getting a victory at 170 LBS justifies McGregor getting a lightweight title shot, while Conor hasn't defended the featherweight title yet. It's obvious that this is being done just to attempt to draw as much money as possible for the Madison Square Garden card, which makes sense from a business prospective, but it sacrifices some of the credibility of the sport. As further proof of that, UFC president Dana White recently said on an edition of the UFC Tonight show that if Conor wins the 155 LBS belt, he will immediately vacate one of the titles and decide what belt he wants to defend in the future. I have to ask, if there are already no plans for Conor to defend both titles, why would the Alvarez/McGregor fight even take place? Doesn't it effect the credibility of either the featherweight or lightweight division when someone willingly vacates the title? How are fans supposed to view either of those belts as important going forward if they are being used as a promotional prop for UFC 205? As talented as he is, McGregor has done literally nothing to earn a lightweight title shot and it's blatantly obvious that the focus of the main event is on him, not the potential competition of an Alvarez/McGregor fight. Alvarez, who defeated Dos Anjos to win the championship in July, is a solid pro, but is lesser known to the fan base. He won the title at an event that aired on the Fight Pass streaming service so his victory wasn't publicized as much as it could've been either. Basically, the fact that Alvarez is the lightweight champion is secondary to the hype of McGregor possibly winning a second title. That being said, Alvarez could use his grappling skills to defeat Conor, derailing the hype, but at this point, drawing the money for UFC 205 is the top priority.

The bottom line is, the sizzle of the McGregor persona is being promoted over the substance of the competition of the sport.

Another example of this business strategy is the return of Ronda Rousey, who was knocked out via a highlight reel head kick by Holly Holm last year. One of the most popular stars in MMA, Rousey appeared at Wrestlemania, various TV shows, and movies before she was KO'ed in her first professional defeat. Ronda, a former bronze medalist in judo at the 2008 Olympics, is one of the most dominate fighters in women's MMA history, but she was overconfident against Holm and lost the Women's Bantamweight championship in devastating fashion, which prompted many to question if she would fight again. Holly, a former multiple time boxing champion, wasn't prepared for the ground skills of the dangerous Amanda Nunes at UFC 200 and was submitted in the second round. After several months of speculation, Ronda Rousey will return to the octagon in December and get a shot at the title. If this was a rematch against Holly Holm, it would be a different situation, but what exactly justifies an immediate title fight for Rousey? The only logical answer is the money involved in promoting Ronda as the Women's Bantamweight champion again.

Since these decisions were made, there was some backlash from the UFC roster, including Jose Aldo's request to be released from his contract, and Julianna Pena threatened to quit when it was announced that Rousey would get a title shot when she returned. Along with that, Georges St. Pierre recently claimed that he's a free agent when he terminated his UFC contract after a deal couldn't be made for him to return to the octagon. One of the many hurdles that prevented a GSP return was how the Reebok deal, a topic of much debate in recent months, would affect his sponsorship money. A court case will probably determine the status of St. Pierre's deal, which won't be the first time that legal action will be used to determine a UFC contract dispute. Fighter pay and the structure of contracts has been a controversial topic for years, but will only be magnified after a corporate group paid $4 billion for the company. Despite being casino executives, the organization under the Zuffa banner had more of a blue collar atmosphere to it because the Fertittas risked millions for the sport, but WME-IMG is strictly corporate and won't get the benefit of the doubt on the topic of paying athletes fair wages. In fact, the corporate side of the UFC could sour some fans on the organization.

So, what does all this translate to for the sport?

For now, it's very simple, if it draws money and people are willing to pay to see Conor McGregor get an unjustified title shot against Eddie Alvarez than the competition aspect is secondary. It's disappointing, but from a business prospective, it's about what the general public is willing to pay to watch and what fight draws the most money, not necessarily what the competition of the sport suggest should take place. The UFC is as much as a business, if not more so than it is a sport so none of these decisions should be all that surprising to the diehard MMA fans. Granted, if UFC management continues to dilute the competition of the sport, there's a risk of the credibility of the organization, but at this point, if it draws major money, why wouldn't WME-IMG promote it?

Is the UFC putting cash ahead of competition? Yes, and if it draws money then from a business prospective, UFC 205 will be a success.

Regardless of any criticism, the MSG card will draw major money for the UFC and it could potentially be the start of a new era for the promotion. The concern here is will the WME group go too far with the sizzle and fans are letdown with a lack of substances for events going forward? The Fertittas deserve major credit and the pay off for everything they did for the sport, but at the same time, it's concerning that new management will run the UFC. While Dana White is still the president, Lorenzo stepped down after the purchase and longtime booker Joe Silva also left the company so some of the key figures that made the UFC successful aren't working for the company now. It remains to be seen if WME can truly advance the sport further than Zuffa took it, but it certainly provides an intriguing scenario during the next few months.