ShareThis Page

Is WWE setting up for Shane McMahon return?

| Friday, Aug. 23, 2013, 12:01 a.m.
Shane McMahon
Shane McMahon
Shane McMahon (right) with his father, Vince (left), and brother-in-law Triple H (center).
Shane McMahon (right) with his father, Vince (left), and brother-in-law Triple H (center).

Wrestling fans 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.

@BigMike_Da_Boat #TribWRESTLING Should Shane McMahon come back and help Daniel Bryan feud with the new corporation?

It's never bad when Shane McMahon is involved. He's got charisma. He always has memorable moments in matches, and he's got the last name McMahon which always counts for something.

The way the McMahon family (Vince, Stephanie and Triple H) have joined together on-camera, it certainly seems logical to think Shane would have a spot in the story. However, I'm not expecting it.

Shane has had great success with international business relations. He was involved in finalizing deals between WWE and Mexican television networks. He decided to leave WWE and he's had notable business accomplishments. His resume has included being a board member for an international sports agency as well as CEO for a Chinese media company. He doesn't need to fall into tables or take chair shots.

@Beckylynne78 How do you think CM Punk will fit in the title picture? He seems to be completely out of it #tribwrestling

I hate to break it to someone who has a picture of CM Punk for their Twitter profile ― CM Punk is the square peg in the round hole that is the current WWE title picture. There isn't anyone who would be more out of place than him.

Punk is a star. He's successfully reached a level where he doesn't need the title. He doesn't need to win. He's been in six matches on pay-per-view in 2013 and lost five of them. But, he's doesn't need to win because there is no debate over how talented he really is.

WWE is building Daniel Bryan and capitalizing on his momentum. Punk would only get in the way of that if he enters the title picture. Bryan needs to be the full and only focus for the audience to get behind as he tears down the faction WWE Champion Randy Orton is now aligned with.

If Punk were to be involved in the same angle as Bryan, you once again have put Bryan in the “weak link” angle where he has to prove himself. This is a solo mission for him and is more significant than ever for Bryan to be successful with John Cena being out for months because of injury.

@AJPhenomenal1 #TribWRESTLING Thoughts on AJ Styles?

AJ Styles is to TNA what Sting was to WCW/NWA.

He's the guy who was there from the start who never went anywhere else. Is he talented? Yes. Is he as big of a star as Sting was? Of course not. Nowhere near but that's because TNA has never reached the popularity WCW/NWA did.

Styles' contract with TNA Impact reportedly expires in September, and he posted on social media asking his fans where he should go next? He named WWE, Ring of Honor, stay with TNA or Japan as options.

The reality is, if WWE wanted him, he would already be there. Styles is a nice guy from what I hear, and he's extremely talented in the ring. I don't know if he'll translate to much in WWE at this stage in his career. He's always viewed as a kid by many fans. I hear fans speak as if he's the next big thing which was fine ... 10 years ago. He's 36.

He would be another guy like Kofi Kingston or Evan Bourne. Everything from his look to promos to in-ring work would be similar to those guys. WWE doesn't need another guy with those credentials. Styles has spent more than a decade building his career and name. If WWE brought him in, it would likely repackage him because that's what they do. WWE likes to succeed with their own creations and their own characters. The name AJ Styles wouldn't mean anything. I don't know if he really wants that.

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.