Kelly Kelly has been released.

[Big Nick Dudley]

I'd call it a big loss, but she's a Diva, so no one cares.

Hot as fuck, though. Hottest Diva I can remember. Hopefully she does something awesome now... like porn, or at least Playboy. Hopefully porn. I like that. Kelly in porn, that is.

 

[The Dragon Saga]

That statement makes zero sense. Seriously, think about what you just said.

It did. Personally I don't care for whose making more money, bringing in the most attention etc, etc, I know it's important and it matters, but I'd take good wrestling over someone who was nothing more than a human publicity stunt. K2 could wrestle, but not well, it made for poor and painful viewing at times.

 

[Vega]

Judging by that visiting playschools and such is an important part of what makes a great wrestler in this age.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

It did. Personally I don't care for whose making more money, bringing in the most attention etc, etc, I know it's important and it matters, but I'd take good wrestling over someone who was nothing more than a human publicity stunt. K2 could wrestle, but not well, it made for poor and painful viewing at times.

Better stock up on those Beth Phoenix Youtube videos.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Do any of you guys really give a shit? If they quit showing women's wrestling completely, would any of you notice?

 

[Slyfox696]

Did you seriously just make up an artificially assigned quality level to tell Harthan that what he cares about is bullshit, because it's an artificially assigned quality level?

No.

Pro wrestling has always been about making people care. It's how Santino and his sock puppet still have a job. It's how Mick Foley, who looked like Hobo Joe down at the trainyard, became world champion. It's how a Vanilla Ice wanna-be became John Cena, the biggest pro wrestling superstar since Austin and Rock left.

It's not an artificially assigned quality level, it is very much THE quality that matters.

Yes it did.

No it didn't. The product IS the business. The business is creating a product that sells. If the product sells, it is good business. It's as simple as that.

You know just as well as I do what he's saying. She was good for the WWE; she made them some money and got better pops than most of the Divas. But as far as an entertainment value - aka the "product" from OUR end of the viewing screen - she sucked.

How can that possibly make sense to you?

Since when have you ever seen people pay money for someone who isn't entertaining? Since when do people pop for someone who doesn't entertain them?

The fact is people don't pay for something that doesn't entertain them. You cannot say something in pro wrestling is good for business, but a bad product. That makes no sense.

It did. Personally I don't care for whose making more money, bringing in the most attention etc, etc, I know it's important and it matters, but I'd take good wrestling over someone who was nothing more than a human publicity stunt. K2 could wrestle, but not well, it made for poor and painful viewing at times.

You just COMPLETELY changed the scope of your statement. You went from saying Kelly Kelly was bad for "the product" to saying Kelly Kelly didn't entertain you.

I don't give a flying fuck what entertains you. If you're entertained by Kelly Kelly, great, if not, great. But your statement indicated she was bad for the product, which makes absolutely ZERO sense when in the same statement you said she was good for business.

Your statement made no sense.

 

[ABMorales787]

Never cared about her. Like ever.

 

[UltimateCMPunkMark]

I don't think actually that many wrestling fans actually were sad/cared about her release. Even tho she had one of the biggest fan bases ever, she still had A LOT of haters. Just like John Cena. Only difference is that cena dominated the men's division and she dominated the diva's division.

 

[Alastor]

This is a division that had Santino dress in drag as the main event...

 

[The Crock]

She was pretty damn attractive. Wasn't really bad compared to the other divas either -- she was the only one that had that "star" quality to her, though.

 

[The Dragon Saga]

You just COMPLETELY changed the scope of your statement. You went from saying Kelly Kelly was bad for "the product" to saying Kelly Kelly didn't entertain you.

I don't give a flying fuck what entertains you. If you're entertained by Kelly Kelly, great, if not, great. But your statement indicated she was bad for the product, which makes absolutely ZERO sense when in the same statement you said she was good for business.

Your statement made no sense.

Mike explained my original comment. When I said product I mean't from an in-ring standpoint, she was good for business, she was horrible from an entertainment and talent standpoint. If you don't care about what entertains who, then that's cool, pretty much leaves the discussion dead in the water.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

If she was horrible from an entertainment and talent standpoint, that would mean she would be bad for business no matter which way you slice it.

 

[The Dragon Saga]

If she was horrible from an entertainment and talent standpoint, that would mean she would be bad for business no matter which way you slice it.

She brought publicity, Maxim 100 and all that type of crap. Plus I'm sure shes done other stuff and made the company some money via appearances and the sorts, but she wasn't a good performer.

 

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

Since when have you ever seen people pay money for someone who isn't entertaining? Since when do people pop for someone who doesn't entertain them? The fact is people don't pay for something that doesn't entertain them. You cannot say something in pro wrestling is good for business, but a bad product. That makes no sense.

You're right, of course. I think I was arguing more for what he was trying to say, not for what he was actually saying. The "product" is the business; to that point I will concede. What I believe he was trying to say is that a person can be good for business, and still be absolutely terrible. As I've said, I don't think Kelly was THAT bad. But many do, and many more are just thoroughly unimpressed and flat-out not entertained by her. Then again there are tens of thousands (perhaps hundreds) that don't find John Cena entertaining, and he is unquestionably good for business.

I think that's the point Dragon Saga was trying to get at (and it's not helped by the fact that wrestling fans use the word "product" to mean "what entertains us"), and I doubt anybody disagrees that you can draw well and not be liked by even the majority of the fans. To counter it though...sometimes I have a sneaking suspicions that even the biggest Cena haters still "like" John Cena. And that they'd rather having him around, because booing him is fun, rather than him not be around at all. But, that's just a theory...

 

[Slyfox696]

Mike explained my original comment. When I said product I mean't from an in-ring standpoint, she was good for business, she was horrible from an entertainment and talent standpoint. If you don't care about what entertains who, then that's cool, pretty much leaves the discussion dead in the water.

No, what you MEANT was that YOU didn't enjoy her from an entertainment and talent standpoint. That obviously isn't the case for other wrestling fans (at least in comparison to other Divas), so you cannot say she was horrible, you can only say you didn't enjoy her.

You were speaking from an objective perspective, when you really just meant your personal preference. There's a big difference.

If she was horrible from an entertainment and talent standpoint, that would mean she would be bad for business no matter which way you slice it.

It's amazing how people never understand this basic premise. No one cares about terrible entertainment.

You're right, of course.

Of course.

The "product" is the business; to that point I will concede. What I believe he was trying to say is that a person can be good for business, and still be absolutely terrible.

Terrible in what way? The point of pro wrestling is to make people care, and she did that. When you make people care, and you make good business (in relation to other Divas), you cannot be terrible.

That's like saying someone who is an MVP in a sport is terrible. It just doesn't make sense.

I think that's the point Dragon Saga was trying to get at (and it's not helped by the fact that wrestling fans use the word "product" to mean "what entertains us"), and I doubt anybody disagrees that you can draw well and not be liked by even the majority of the fans.

There's a difference between being liked and being cared about.

In pro wrestling, you have to make people care about you. If you can do that, then you've done well.