Is Lita the most underrated Diva of all time?

[Hollywood Naitch]

No, I don't think Lita is underrated at all. When people talk about the Divas division being at its strongest in the early 2000s, the first 2 women that are mentioned are Trish Stratus and Lita. They were great performers, definitely among the greatest women wrestlers of all time.

Lita was incredibly popular, with her look, in-ring high flying style (that no other diva had) and her association with the very popular Hardy Boyz- she was like the sexy rock chick who was actually a good wrestler. The pops she used to get were as big as, if not bigger than alot of the big name male wrestlers- a point that is mentioned on the recent "Attitude Era" DVD.

When her neck began giving her issues, and the fans turned on her after the Matt Hardy/Edge incident, she became a ****tier character- a manager for the "Rated R Superstar", and was excellent in that role too. It didnt change peoples opinions of her as a performer though. She still got a brilliant pop when she returned against Heath Slater last year.

So, in no way do I think Lita is underrated. People respect her achievements and talents, and while she isnt as popular as Trish, I would say she is an easy number 2 when it comes to popularity and respect for divas in the last 15 years. Its a shame the divas division now has declined so much from its glory days with Lita and Trish leading the way.

 

[Makaveli31]

Er no... I'm most definitely not. Are you seriously going to tell me that Trish and Lita moved the merchandise that Austin and Rock did, or sold as many tickets? Do you think their matches - regardless of how good they were - could have ever drawn as much as Austin vs Rock at Mania 17? If you think so you are delusional. Quarterly ratings would prove you wrong. Merchandise and ticket sales would prove you wrong. Historical evidence of women never being strong draws in any part of the world compared to their male counterparts would prove you wrong.

Don't misread me though, Lita and Trish were certainly bigger than no name midcarders, and maybe even accomplished wrestlers like Christian, Dolph Ziggler, and Sheamus. But certainly not men that are considered amongst the top 10 of all time.

OK, I'm comparing pop,crowd reactions and being OVER. Rock and Austin had MUCH more merchandise to choose from than Team Extreme who were relatively new at the time they came on the scene in 2000 while Rock and Austin had been there a full three years before.

So you're going to base ENTIRE ticket sales on JUST Rock and Austin?!? Now YOU'Re delusional. They weren't the ONLY reasons why people packed arenas who see WWF in 2000 and by 200 I would say the TLC ladder matches outdid ANYTHING Rock and Austin did.

Show the quarter ratings to prove me wrong, I don't care about historical evidence I care about what I saw and heard and Lita was just as OVER if not MORE over than ANYBODY in 2000.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

I think Lita is held in very high regard by the WWE and wrestling fans in general. She was a terrific in-ring performer and not a bad little actress. She played heel and face very well and she could be tough, scary, and sexy.

I'd say someone like Ivory is the one that doesn't get the appreciation she deserves. That woman oozed personality.

 

[Kidpolean]

Trish and Lita were 1 and 2 kinda like Cena and Punk. I dont think she was underrated, she is considered one of the greatest ever and she should be. I liked Lita because she took bumps that the other women wouldnt take and unlike most women wrestlers, she seems to really like wrestling. Nowadays we have a bunch of wanna be models who couldnt put on a good match to save their lives. There are a couple of women that I would put over Lita though...like Sable, Chyna, Trish, and Mickie James but she has her place as one of the best women wrestlers ever

 

[#MrScissorsKick]

Sorry, but Lita in any sense is remotely close to the most underrated diva of all time. She was in an era where divas were relevant and their division was the best it's ever been in. Lita had competition with Trish Stratus, Gail Kim, Molly Holly, Jacqueline, Victoria, Stacy Kiebler and ivory. If anyone is the most underrated diva of all time it's most definitely Eve Torres. Eve is a 3 time Divas champion and pretty much was the highlight of the divas division. No one comes close to Eve.

 

[Jay Jayerson]

She may have been under appreciated by her employers. But she is not underrated. Her being underrated would mean the fans didnt appreciate her IMO. And I challenge you to find people who think so. Everyone who watched her knew she was the real deal.

Unlike todays barbies... I mean Divas... she worked her ass off to make sure we all knew she was more than just a nice rack and a pretty face. I have all the respect in the world for her.

Though it could be argued she worked in a time where there were more opportunities (though I would also argue that Trish and Lita had to make their own opportunities). Cant blame the current roster for not bringing it when they generally have matches last 3 minutes.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Unfortunately for Lita she was in the ring with a better wrestler than her and Trish happened to get the praise for that reason.

I wouldn't call her underrated, she was always held at a higher regard then pretty much any diva not named Trish Stratus or The Fabulous Moolah so I can't call Lita underrated, she gets a lot of praise.

If I had to give the most underrated diva to anyone currently it would be Natalya. I just feel she's one of the most technically sound wrestlers men or women and she doesn't get much opportunity to prove that. She's pretty much an afterthought when I feel she should be near the top of the divas division right behind AJ.

 

[jacdnwarrior]

I wouldn’t call Lita underrated. Some performers thought less of her as a performer (I get that from a preview of a shoot Ivory did), perhaps jealousy, perhaps not. I call Ivory, Gail Kim, Natalya, Jacqueline, Jazz, Victoria, Beth Phoenix, Molly Holly underrated. She is a talented performer, no one can deny that.

Even with Trish, she was very good, worked hard from being a valet to being a divas champ. She did have her flaws. She wasn’t as comfortable on the mike as others were. She could make mistakes in the ring. She also came at a time when looks were more important than talent, and it was like that for some time (people say it's still that way). It was T&A, women with breast implants, best sexiest outfits, in swimwear posing for posters. Trish had the looks (so does Lita) and she and WWE made money off that. She was good, but she was really helped, by the writers who helped give her great segments and by a lot of performers she worked with and Lita was her one of her biggest helpers.

I would say the company has shown less appreciation for Lita than she deserves. In some cases, it pisses on her. I think her injury took her out of the equation for a while and that led the way for Trish to be the main focus. The biggest thing that hurt Lita, (her reputation more so than anything else ) was the Lita/Matt Hardy/Edge triangle and how the company chose to address it. People cheat all the time but this event hurt her very much backstage and with the fans. The ho chants were just relentless. I don’t think she was ever the same after that in terms of her standing with the fans and company.

 

[drobs85]

Lita and Trish or equal. So no Lita was never underrated. I do believe Ivory and Victoria were though. WWE could have gotten a-lot more out of those two.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

The way to look at this is that Lita and Trish were two sides of a coin. Both started out as managers and were probably intended to stay that way.

Trish was not always the best wrestler, indeed she was initially a fitness model but took advantage of the training she got and became a great worker. I don't think she was better than Molly Holly in the ring, but she was able to learn, improve and turn heads as she did so. She changed from your classic T and A to a decorated worker and that is not easy to do, but you could tell she had to work at it, it wasn't natural to her.

Lita was a "natural", she was far more effortless in the ring and had a great timing and understanding of body language and who she would appeal to. She had been one of the Hardyz Omega crew so was far more at home in the ring, being inventive and "hanging" with guys, thus she instantly appeared to be better than a lot of the guys in the ring and over time she had more of a personality than Trish did.

What probably damages her in a lot of people's eyes is the Edge/Matt Hardy stuff. Trish never had any scandals or anything that detracted, a lot of people wrong as it may be felt that Lita's out of ring activities and sexual persona detracted from her in the ring. I think that's wrong and at the end of the day her work with Edge was amongst her best but the "sex celebration" stuff wasn't really her finest hour.

I think in time she'll get her HOF appearance, when Matt and Jeff go in as well.

 

[Bernkastel]

OK, I'm comparing pop,crowd reactions and being OVER. Rock and Austin had MUCH more merchandise to choose from than Team Extreme who were relatively new at the time they came on the scene in 2000 while Rock and Austin had been there a full three years before.

Crowd pop doesn't mean anything if the wrestler isn't making money. For a short while Ziggler got better pops than Cena, but did that make him better? Of course not. Team Extreme were popular, but not main event popular. Case in point where the breakout star Jeff didn't see the main event until many years later.

So you're going to base ENTIRE ticket sales on JUST Rock and Austin?!? Now YOU'Re delusional. They weren't the ONLY reasons why people packed arenas who see WWF in 2000 and by 200 I would say the TLC ladder matches outdid ANYTHING Rock and Austin did.

What an asinine statement. If that were true in the slightest then WWE would have done ladder matches every week. Competitors like Edge, Christian, The Hardys, and Dudleys would have all been major main event players in the 90's... but none of them reached the top until well after 2000.

Show the quarter ratings to prove me wrong, I don't care about historical evidence I care about what I saw and heard and Lita was just as OVER if not MORE over than ANYBODY in 2000.

Slyfox has put together a list of ratings here.

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=252015

Based on seeing and hearing is how fans justify Cena as being shit. Obviously that's not true when you look at the money he makes. Claiming Lita drew as much money as Rock or Austin based on how big of pops she got is just ludicrous.

 

[Rabbid Wolverine]

Lita was UNDERtheRATED R superstar

But no, she wasn't underrated, she had time to shine, trish was probably more of a people person and got over better than lita in the back and in the crowd but lita had her opportunities and ran with them. She was Awesome.

As for underrated, I gotta go with Natalya, wtf happened to her, i got fed up when they had her farting and now she's coming down with Khali for some reason..

 

[Makaveli31]

Crowd pop doesn't mean anything if the wrestler isn't making money. For a short while Ziggler got better pops than Cena, but did that make him better? Of course not. Team Extreme were popular, but not main event popular. Case in point where the breakout star Jeff didn't see the main event until many years later.



What an asinine statement. If that were true in the slightest then WWE would have done ladder matches every week. Competitors like Edge, Christian, The Hardys, and Dudleys would have all been major main event players in the 90's... but none of them reached the top until well after 2000.



Slyfox has put together a list of ratings here.

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=252015

Based on seeing and hearing is how fans justify Cena as being shit. Obviously that's not true when you look at the money he makes. Claiming Lita drew as much money as Rock or Austin based on how big of pops she got is just ludicrous.

Crowd pops don't mean anything when it comes to wrestlers making money?!? LOL not THAT's an asinine statement. So I guess the fans are the ones who making the reactions and blowing the roof of areas aren't paying money by you're logic right? So I guess Team Extreme had NO EFFECT on ticket sales, ratings, and PPV buyrates by you're logic because "pops don't mean anything" they come from people who are not spending money. Pure nonsense.

Who cares about "main events" THEY STOLE THE SHOW. Hell Hogan/Andre was main event at WM III but Savage/Steamboat STOLE THE SHOW.And Team Extreme CAUSED Jeff to BECOME the breakout star. The TLC matches he had put Jeff and Matt ON THE MAP and on the road to superstardom. Of course it didn't happen overnight.

The 90's? TLC matches happened in 2000 and YES they put ALL the competitors ON THE MAP in the 2000's. They made the Hardy's, the MADE Edge and Christian and they MADE the Dudley's. Every week?!? Have you seen the TLC ladder matches and the risks involved!?? Are you crazy?!? they couldn't do it EVERY week because someone would probably injure themselves. You're argument is falling apart/.

I'm not saying Lita drew as much. When did I say that?!? I said she was OVER just as much. I've already stated Rock and Austin were BONAFIDE superstars by the time she debuted so OF COURSE she was not going to draw a smuch money but she was OVER. Do you understand the concept of being OVER?

 

[Bernkastel]

Crowd pops don't mean anything when it comes to wrestlers making money?!? LOL not THAT's an asinine statement. So I guess the fans are the ones who making the reactions and blowing the roof of areas aren't paying money by you're logic right?

Lets see here... Cena gets booed and is seemingly hated by everyone not over the age of 12. But yet he draws more money than anyone else. See where I'm going with this? Crowd reaction alone is not an accurate measurement of success or popularity. There are obviously other factors that you seem keen on ignoring.

So I guess Team Extreme had NO EFFECT on ticket sales, ratings, and PPV buyrates by you're logic because "pops don't mean anything" they come from people who are not spending money. Pure nonsense.

The effect on revenue that Austin and Rock had? Absolutely not. Team Extreme was popular, but not popular enough to be headliners. If they were, they would have been in the main event winning world titles in the late 90's and early 00's.

Who cares about "main events" THEY STOLE THE SHOW. Hell Hogan/Andre was main event at WM III but Savage/Steamboat STOLE THE SHOW.

Hogan slamming Andre most definitely got a bigger pop than Savage wrestling Steamboat. Terrible argument right there.

And Team Extreme CAUSED Jeff to BECOME the breakout star. The TLC matches he had put Jeff and Matt ON THE MAP and on the road to superstardom. Of course it didn't happen overnight.

Wrong. Team Extreme got Jeff noticed enough to be considered for the main event. He didn't win the WWE championship because he was a member of Team Extreme; he had cut those ties long before.

The 90's? TLC matches happened in 2000 and YES they put ALL the competitors ON THE MAP in the 2000's. They made the Hardy's, the MADE Edge and Christian and they MADE the Dudley's. Every week?!? Have you seen the TLC ladder matches and the risks involved!?? Are you crazy?!? they couldn't do it EVERY week because someone would probably injure themselves.

Yeah. It put them on the map as solid midcarders; not as main eventers. Edge had to evolve into the Rated R Superstar first, and got huge rubs from Cena and Mankind to get over. Jeff was put over by Triple H and feuded with CM Punk to build his credibility.

Case in point this match...

[youtube]bzMheTGBXYo[/youtube]

Hardy was over, but not to the point that WWE wanted to give him the title just yet. There was a valid reason for that.

You're argument is falling apart

Says the guy using crowd reaction as the primary criteria to judge a wrestler's popularity.

I'm not saying Lita drew as much.

Then what are you saying then?

When did I say that?!? I said she was OVER just as much. I've already stated Rock and Austin were BONAFIDE superstars by the time she debuted so OF COURSE she was not going to draw a smuch money but she was OVER. Do you understand the concept of being OVER?

Over refers to how much heat a wrestler gets, but just because a wrestler gets heat doesn't make them popular. I've already pointed that out. Try reading my post all the way through before jumping into manic mode next time.

 

[HBsam31]

I never really looked at her as being underrated. She got huge pops, and hell she main evented a show with Trish which I don't believe happened since. She is not talked about as much as Trish, but is it possible Lita left on bad terms? Lita was not as good as Trish imo, but she definitely gets her due. SO no I don't think she was underrated at all.

 

[Warhood]

I honestly would have to say yes. Even though, when you look at both Trish and Lita separately, I believe they both deserve to be two of the best diva's of all time and defiantly of the era. Also, neither could have been fully made without the other. However, the question is WHY Lita is less talked about than Trish?

I believe this is because of their last feuds/storylines. Trish went out as a face and literally on top of the Diva's division, while Lita was not only a heel but failed to get her last Wrestlemania moment when she lost her chance to capture her last title.

Putting this together, it would seem to me that this is why Lita is underrated. ​

 

[Makaveli31]

Lets see here... Cena gets booed and is seemingly hated by everyone not over the age of 12. But yet he draws more money than anyone else. See where I'm going with this? Crowd reaction alone is not an accurate measurement of success or popularity. There are obviously other factors that you seem keen on ignoring.

So I guess Cena is not "hated" by everyone over 12 unless 12 year olds suddenly have disposable income to buy tickets, PPV, and merchandise. I never said "crowd reaction" ALONE is a measurement for success but usually if a guy is getting "pops" it means he's pretty successful in his craft and people are paying to see him otherwise they wouldn't be cheering. I would say it's pretty solid indicator. And you're example of Cena is non-existent because he does get "pops".

Team Extreme was popular, but not popular enough to be headliners. If they were, they would have been in the main event winning world titles in the late 90's and early 00's.

Again, you are putting words in my mouth. Where have I EVER said that Team Extreme had the effect on revenue that Austin and Rock had? Read my posts carefully before replying.

Hogan slamming Andre most definitely got a bigger pop than Savage wrestling Steamboat. Terrible argument right there.

So you remember a body slam over one of the greatest matches in WWF history. Shows what kind of fan you are but there's nothing wring with that. I simply prefer wrestling over spots though. And Savage/Steamboat were FULL of "pops" I suggest you watch the match.

Wrong. Team Extreme got Jeff noticed enough to be considered for the main event. He didn't win the WWE championship because he was a member of Team Extreme; he had cut those ties long before.

Again, you are putting words in my mouth. I said Team Extreme PUT JEFF ON THE MAP. I NEVER said he won the championship BECAUSE of Team Extreme. His TLC matches put his name out there as someone who could potentially be THE MAN one day. Please read more carefully.

Yeah. It put them on the map as solid midcarders; not as main eventers. Edge had to evolve into the Rated R Superstar first, and got huge rubs from Cena and Mankind to get over. Jeff was put over by Triple H and feuded with CM Punk to build his credibility.

Solid mid-carders are a step from main event. It's called stepping stones. You know Austin, Rock, Cena etc....were "mid-carders" once also right? Or don't you know that?

Case in point this match...

[youtube]bzMheTGBXYo[/youtube]

Hardy was over, but not to the point that WWE wanted to give him the title just yet. There was a valid reason for that.

Says the guy using crowd reaction as the primary criteria to judge a wrestler's popularity.

And what do you base it on? You still have not given me a valid reason.

Then what are you saying then?

I'm saying in 2000, Lita was just as popular in terms crowd reaction as Rock and Austin. NOTHING about merchandise, ticket sales, stock markets, weather patterns, etc...I'm speaking about PURELY crowd reactions..."pops"

Over refers to how much heat a wrestler gets, but just because a wrestler gets heat doesn't make them popular. I've already pointed that out. Try reading my post all the way through before jumping into manic mode next time.

Over refers the amount of crowd reaction gets. I would say that the bigger pop the more popular the wrestler. Do you have an example? And DON'T say Cena, last time I checked he got some pretty big pops.

 

[Bernkastel]

So I guess Cena is not "hated" by everyone over 12 unless 12 year olds suddenly have disposable income to buy tickets, PPV, and merchandise. I never said "crowd reaction" ALONE is a measurement for success but usually if a guy is getting "pops" it means he's pretty successful in his craft and people are paying to see him otherwise they wouldn't be cheering. I would say it's pretty solid indicator. And you're example of Cena is non-existent because he does get "pops".

OK, I'm comparing pop,crowd reactions and being OVER.

That's what you said. If we were using more than one measurement for success, we most certainly wouldn't be having this argument.

Again, you are putting words in my mouth. Where have I EVER said that Team Extreme had the effect on revenue that Austin and Rock had? Read my posts carefully before replying.

I would say the TLC ladder matches outdid ANYTHING Rock and Austin did.

You most certainly implied it here. Saying that Team Extreme and the TLC matches outdid and drew more than anything Rock and Austin accomplished.

If that's not what you mean't, next time write more carefully.

So you remember a body slam over one of the greatest matches in WWF history. Shows what kind of fan you are but there's nothing wring with that. I simply prefer wrestling over spots though. And Savage/Steamboat were FULL of "pops" I suggest you watch the match.

I've seen it - it was great, but it wasn't as great as Hogan/Andre. The same way the TLC matches weren't as great as Austin/Rock.

And what do you base it on? You still have not given me a valid reason.

I haven't? I'm pretty sure that I did before we got off topic.

Quarterly ratings would prove you wrong. Merchandise and ticket sales would prove you wrong. Historical evidence of women never being strong draws in any part of the world compared to their male counterparts would prove you wrong.

Your response...

I don't care about historical evidence I care about what I saw and heard and Lita was just as OVER if not MORE over than ANYBODY in 2000.

You implying right there that Lita draws as much as the male main eventers.

I'm saying in 2000, Lita was just as popular in terms crowd reaction as Rock and Austin. NOTHING about merchandise, ticket sales, stock markets, weather patterns, etc...I'm speaking about PURELY crowd reactions..."pops"

And I'm saying you're an idiot if you think like that. "Crowd pops" don't mean jack shit if the audience doesn't get invested in you like they do other wrestlers. Fans didn't buy Lita merchandise as much as they bought Rock and Austin merchandise. Fans weren't lining up in droves after the shows to get autographs from Lita, but they were for Austin and Rock. You didn't see nearly Lita signs as you did Austin and Rock signs. Do you still want to say crowd reaction is everything?

Over refers the amount of crowd reaction gets. I would say that the bigger pop the more popular the wrestler. Do you have an example? And DON'T say Cena, last time I checked he got some pretty big pops.

Please show me any instance in history where Lita got anywhere near pops like these.

[youtube]p-uKpqDbh_o[/youtube]

Don't worry; I'll wait

 

[Makaveli31]

That's what you said. If we were using more than one measurement for success, we most certainly wouldn't be having this argument.

The definition of OVER = Accepted by fans. A face wrestler is considered over when he is being cheered and supported by fans.

Bottom line. I'm sorry I have breakout the wrestling definition book on you but I think this instance calls for it.

You most certainly implied it here. Saying that Team Extreme and the TLC matches outdid and drew more than anything Rock and Austin accomplished.

If that's not what you mean't, next time write more carefully.


Yes, IN THE RING. Did I say outdrew? I don't see OUTDRAW. I think I stated in my original argument about Trish and Lita and all my statements refer to IN THE RING. You seem want to interject pure non-sense. I stated repeatedly that I am not talking about ticket sales and merchandise. I'm speaking about being OVER (refer to definition up top if you are still confused.)

I've seen it - it was great, but it wasn't as great as Hogan/Andre. The same way the TLC matches weren't as great as Austin/Rock.

Pure opinion. Dumb. But pure opinion.

I haven't? I'm pretty sure that I did before we got off topic.



Your response...

Again not talking $$$$ merchandise or ratings. (Refer to definition up top if still confused.)

You implying right there that Lita draws as much as the male main eventers.

Again refer to definition up top if still confused.

And I'm saying you're an idiot if you think like that. "Crowd pops" don't mean jack shit if the audience doesn't get invested in you like they do other wrestlers. Fans didn't buy Lita merchandise as much as they bought Rock and Austin merchandise. Fans weren't lining up in droves after the shows to get autographs from Lita, but they were for Austin and Rock. You didn't see nearly Lita signs as you did Austin and Rock signs. Do you still want to say crowd reaction is everything?

No you're the idiot if you think "pops" mean the crowd is EMOTIONALLY INVESTED in a character. That's the dumbest thing I ever heard. So they just POP FOR NO REASON? Get outta with that! Again, you bring up ticket sales and merchandise. I have no idea why. Yes, when speaking about a character being OVER crowd reaction is everything. Refer to definition up top if still confused.

Please show me any instance in history where Lita got anywhere near pops like these.

[youtube]p-uKpqDbh_o[/youtube]

Don't worry; I'll wait [/QUOTE]

Did I say she was more over than Stone Cold in 1998? I don't have too. I was there in 2000 and I heard myself. You can either take my word and everyone else's who saw Team Extreme in 2000 or not. Simple.

 

[Makaveli31]

No you're the idiot if you think "pops" mean the crowd is EMOTIONALLY INVESTED in a character. That's the dumbest thing I ever heard. So they just POP FOR NO REASON? Get outta with that!

Sorry I meant to say if you DON'T think. I know how you like to twist my words.

 

[Bernkastel]

The definition of OVER = Accepted by fans. A face wrestler is considered over when he is being cheered and supported by fans.

I never said Lita wasn't over I said she wasn't as over as Trish.

Textbook definitions are meaningless if you don't understand them. What do you think the word "supported" means? Crowd reactions are only one form of support, and usually they are the weakest. Merchandise sales, media sales, ticket sales, advertisements, and investments in television and radio also constitute support.

No you're the idiot if you think "pops" mean the crowd is EMOTIONALLY INVESTED in a character.That's the dumbest thing I ever heard. So they just POP FOR NO REASON?

The definition you gave me also mentioned acceptance. In pro wrestling acceptance is the same thing as being emotionally invested. Fans can't possibly accept something they aren't reacting to.

Yes, IN THE RING. Did I say outdrew? I don't see OUTDRAW. I think I stated in my original argument about Trish and Lita and all my statements refer to IN THE RING.

In the ring, what? I'm not referring to something subjective here. Objectively we measure how good a wrestler was in the ring to how much they draw. And Lita didn't draw as much as Trish.

You seem want to interject pure non-sense. I stated repeatedly that I am not talking about ticket sales and merchandise. I'm speaking about being OVER (refer to definition up top if you are still confused.

By buying merchandise and the like, fans show which workers they are more willing to support. By your logic WWE could just push whichever wrestler was getting good crowd pops and expect them not to sink... but that's almost never the case. See Zack Ryder.

It's very possible for fan to "pop" for something, and not feel no obligation to support them. TNA had that problem for a long time, where fans thought AJ Styles was the shit, but couldn't be bothered buying one of his shirts.

Again, you bring up ticket sales and merchandise. I have no idea why. Yes, when speaking about a character being OVER crowd reaction is everything. Refer to definition up top if still confused.

No it's not; as I've already pointed out.

Did I say she was more over than Stone Cold in 1998? I don't have too. I was there in 2000 and I heard myself. You can either take my word and everyone else's who saw Team Extreme in 2000 or not. Simple.

Yes you did...

I don't care about historical evidence I care about what I saw and heard and Lita was just as OVER if not MORE over than ANYBODY in 2000.

Now you are just making yourself look incompetent.

 

[Makaveli31]

Echelon;4470815]I never said Lita wasn't over I said she wasn't as over as Trish.

Textbook definitions are meaningless if you don't understand them. What do you think the word "supported" means? Crowd reactions are only one form of support, and usually they are the weakest. Merchandise sales, media sales, ticket sales, advertisements, and investments in television and radio also constitute support.

So tell me, how many more tickets did Trish sell than Lita when BOTH were active? How much more was invested in Trish's character than Lita's when BOTH were active. How much more "media sales" did Trish have than Lita when BOTH were active? And don't try to twist it I mean head to head numbers when both were active wrestlers? Or are you making those up also?

The definition you gave me also mentioned acceptance. In pro wrestling acceptance is the same thing as being emotionally invested. Fans can't possibly accept something they aren't reacting to.

So OBVIOUSLY the fans invested in Lita. You've answered you're own question as whether Lita was over with the fans. You said

"Crowd pops" don't mean jack shit if the audience doesn't get invested in you like they do other wrestlers.

So you just contradicted yourself because pop and "acceptance" i.e. invest ARE THE SAME THING!!

In the ring, what? I'm not referring to something subjective here. Objectively we measure how good a wrestler was in the ring to how much they draw. And Lita didn't draw as much as Trish.

Simple prove that. Their best feud was against each other. And I submit that Lita's with Team Extreme were MORE OVER than Trish Stratus with her partners. In my opinion. Show me head to head when they were feuding with different people and BOTH were active that Trish "drew more" than Lita.

By buying merchandise and the like, fans show which workers they are more willing to support. By your logic WWE could just push whichever wrestler was getting good crowd pops and expect them not to sink... but that's almost never the case. See Zack Ryder.

It's very possible for fan to "pop" for something, and not feel no obligation to support them. TNA had that problem for a long time, where fans thought AJ Styles was the shit, but couldn't be bothered buying one of his shirts.

I've already stated the definition of OVER. I'm not going to repeat myself. If AJ Styles was getting cheered He was over. Plain and simple.

No it's not; as I've already pointed out.

Yes you did...

Show me where I said Lita was more over than Stone Cold was in 1998? Please show me. Lita wasn't even in the WWF in 1998.

Now you are just making yourself look incompetent.

[/QUOTE]

You're whole argument had made you look incompetent.

 

[Bernkastel]

So tell me, how many more tickets did Trish sell than Lita when BOTH were active? How much more was invested in Trish's character than Lita's when BOTH were active. How much more "media sales" did Trish have than Lita when BOTH were active? And don't try to twist it I mean head to head numbers when both were active wrestlers? Or are you making those up also?

Was Lita named Diva of Decade? Did she go into the Hall of Fame first? Was Lita as marketable as a champion, or as the face of the division? Did Lita do as much work post retirement as Trish did?

The answer to all of these is no.

So OBVIOUSLY the fans invested in Lita.

I never said they weren't.

So you just contradicted yourself because pop and "acceptance" i.e. invest ARE THE SAME THING!!

"Pop" and "acceptance" are the same thing, but "support" is different entirely. You remember support, right? The third piece of that definition you gave me. The fans and the WWE supported Trish more than they did Lita, because she was simply better.

Simple prove that.Their best feud was against each other.

Take away the Trish and Lita feud from both and Trish still has her feuds with Jazz, Victoria, Molly Holly, Mickie James, Christy Hemme, Stephanie and HHH, and Jericho along with her work with Snooki, Test and Albert, Bubba Dudley, Christian and Tomko, and Mr. McMahon. What does Lita have? Her work with Team Extreme, Kane, Matt Hardy, Edge, and Essa Rios.

Lita's credentials don't even hold a candle to Trish's.

And I submit that Lita's with Team Extreme were MORE OVER than Trish Stratus with her partners. In my opinion. Show me head to head when they were feuding with different people and BOTH were active that Trish "drew more" than Lita.

I'd take Team Extreme over Test and Albert, sure, but does that one chapter make Lita better than Trish's whole career? Of course not.

I've already stated the definition of OVER. I'm not going to repeat myself. If AJ Styles was getting cheered He was over. Plain and simple.

You stated it, but you didn't even understand the very definition you gave me, so I clarified it for you. Crowd reaction is but one part of what constitutes as being over - the "acceptance" part. You've also got merchandise sales and all that other jazz that make up the "support" part.

The fact still remains; Trish was a better wrestler than Lita by a mile and a half.

Show me where I said Lita was more over than Stone Cold was in 1998? Please show me. Lita wasn't even in the WWF in 1998.

Please show me where Lita was more over than The Rock in 2000. Since you claimed that she was more over than anyone else.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

Lita is considered one of the all-time greats among the women in WWF/E history, but Trish was the one they always pushed because she was more marketable to a mainstream audience. Lita was more popular among wrestling fans, but Trish was more popular overall.

Then you have her critics who say she was overrated, calling her a spot monkey who couldn't cut promos.

To me, the most underrated woman of the Diva Era would be Molly Holly. She was arguably the most technically sound in the ring, but she was not what WWE wanted their Divas to be. Molly is a devout Christian and would not have the sex appeal WWE wanted in their Divas, making her unmarketable in their eyes.

This is a perfect answer. Lita was absolutely the better worker than Trish (who wasn't bad in her own right), and that's a big part of why the two worked so well together (probably the best of any female workers in North America this century). Trish was more marketable though. She was more the girl next door (that never seems to actually live next door to you) that you'd like to take home to mom... where Lita was more the bad girl everyone wanted a one nighter with.

I disagree with the people saying that Lita's best work was as a face. I always thought her heel run was by far her best work... and apparently by reading some of these responses, I guess it was underrated like the question asks.

Plus yes, Molly Holly was the most underrated woman on the roster back then. Out of them all, she was the one that could work the best, and as such it was on her to help get the rest of them over. It's the way it is in wrestling. The strongest workers aren't usually the ones on the top of the card. They're the ones who are putting over those at the top, and making them look like a million bucks.

And the guy telling everyone here that being a good worker, or knowing 'how to do wrestling moves' means fuck all? You really need to stop reading smark forums. You know nothing.

 

[Bernkastel]

Lita was absolutely the better worker than Trish (who wasn't bad in her own right), and that's a big part of why the two worked so well together (probably the best of any female workers in North America this century).

How do you figure? Did Lita have the high profile feuds that Trish had? Did she have as many memorable matches? Could she work well with any opponent?

The answer to each of those is no.

Trish was more marketable though.

Yes, because she was the bigger draw.

I disagree with the people saying that Lita's best work was as a face. I always thought her heel run was by far her best work... and apparently by reading some of these responses, I guess it was underrated like the question asks.

She was a great complement to Edge, but then again so was Vickie.

Plus yes, Molly Holly was the most underrated woman on the roster back then. Out of them all, she was the one that could work the best, and as such it was on her to help get the rest of them over. It's the way it is in wrestling.

Molly was an average performer. She had little to no charisma and couldn't connect to the fans beyond being anything more than a mid range talent.

The strongest workers aren't usually the ones on the top of the card. They're the ones who are putting over those at the top, and making them look like a million bucks.

Surely this isn't a serious response. The best workers are always placed at the top of the card. Why? Because they are the ones drawing money. If a wrestler doesn't draw, fans don't care about them, and if the fans don't care about a worker, then how could they be any good?

And the guy telling everyone here that being a good worker, or knowing 'how to do wrestling moves' means fuck all? You really need to stop reading smark forums. You know nothing.

I'm assuming that's directed at me. The sheer number of moves a wrestler can execute is not, in any way, a measurement of how good a performer they are. The object of wrestling is to use those moves to put on the best show possible.

That's not smark logic - smarks think the opposite of that.