I'm not wild about her. Putting the belt back on her has killed the Women's division dead. Putting Wylde and Roxxi against the Beautiful People and "the Governor" just makes my head hurt. THAT'S what's killing the women's division. Kong is still palying the dominant heel role but it's just not working as well this time. She was beaten one time, and that pretty much ends the mystique of her. She's like a female Goldberg. Once the first loss gets there, she's just not that special anymore. Still a great lok and a great character, but at the end of the day it's just not the same this time around.
I strongly disagree with both of these points.
1) What's killing the women's division in TNA, in my opinion, is the fact that they have not found a suitable replacement for Gail Kim. While Taylor Wilde is a decent wrestler, she was in no manner whatsoever the right person to take the TNA Women's Knockout Championship from Kong. Sure, the way she beat Kong was surprising, but, if anything, her time in TNA has shown why WWE terminated her development deal. Wilde is a diamond in the rough, but there is still much polishing and refining to be done before one can rightly call her an asset to TNA's women's division. So, in my opinion, putting the title back on Kong was a step forward after taking two steps back.
2) Kong has much, much more going for her than Goldberg did. While her being undefeated in TNA may have added suspense to her character's development, there is much more to Kong's being special. She is pretty much a female Bam Bam Bigelow or Big Van Vader. For someone her size, you would not expect her to be able to do the things that she does. And, her unique look only adds to her singularity.
While I don't think Kong is killing the division it does seem she is beginning sort of stale. The problem with Kong is the same problem the Big Show has in the WWE. It just doesn't look real or plossible for them to lose to smaller guys, without a roll up or something, but it seemingly makes the other girls(the whole division)look weak if they can't even pin Kong.
Kong is a draw and is an amazing wrestler but you can't just have one unstoppeable force and have the rest look weak in comparison. Also with Kong if she starts losing cleanly her character is almost destroyed, but she can't countinue dominating and making the other knockouts like wimps. I just think her character should get a rehaul and maybe have her take a month off or something. She is a great talent and helps the division and is an aset but TNA needs to make sure they take the time to rebuild and focus on the other girls who are talented in their own right(ODB, Roxxi, Love, Bolt)
I both agree and disagree with you. I agree with you that Kong does seem to be getting sort of stale because of the way she is booked against her competition. However, I disagree with you over where culpability for this staleness lies.
I think it is safe to say that Kong is the center of the women's division; that is to say, TNA's women's division is being built around her. If this is so, then TNA must be able to adapt the Knockout roster to make her feuds/angles fresh. Currently, as I said in my previous post, there are only two women on the Knockouts roster that could hold their own with Kong: Roxxi and Raisha Saeed/Cheerleader Melissa (there's also Sojourner Bolt, but I think her confidence makes her seem like a better wrestler than she really is). Excepting these female wrestlers, everyone else pales in comparison to Kong, no matter how good they may seem when they are not wrestling her. Thus, I think it is the responsibility of TNA to hire female wrestlers with Kong in mind. Right now, TNA could pick up both MsChif and Sara Del Rey, two female wrestlers that could have great matches with Kong.
As for big wrestlers losing all credibility when they lose to smaller guys, I will partially agree with this. However, this is not to say that you can't have a situation in which a monster heel can remain fresh for years rather than months. Take the example of Big Van Vader in WCW during the early to mid 1990s. Vader was WCW's premier heel for many years. Furthermore, he lost and didn't lose his credibility whatsoever, primarily because those he lost to were wrestlers like Sting, Ron Simmons, and Hulk Hogan. Ultimately, I cite the example of Vader to raise the following point: it is almost always the case that wrestlers are only as good as the opponents they lose to.