Velvet Sky = one of the worst female wrestlers in the sport today

[Fire Marshall Bill]

She's not great, nobody can make that claim. Her match with Sarita was pretty damn bad, that's true. I do have to give her credit that she does try, but she just looks very sloppy and generally uncoordinated in the ring at times. If she wants to be a singles wrestler, she needs a lot of work. Compared to Lacey Von Erich, however, Velvet Sky is Kurt Angle. I'm amazed that Lacey can get out of the bed and dress herself in the morning quite frankly.

Couldn't have said that part any better myself. When I was watching the match it almost appeared to me that their body language in the ring read like they were saying to each other "is this what you're gonna do next? Yep. Ok here goes..." I guess you'd call it bad chemistry between the 2. It's weird though because I've never seen Velvet have a match that bad before. Maybe I just didn't notice before. I won't deny there are things about her that are very distracting...

In regards to looks compared to Kelly Kelly though I don't think it's really an equal comparison. Kelly Kelly is extremely attractive no doubt. But she's also got that "girl next door" look going on. Not that it's bad in any way. But Velvet Sky is just smoking hot. Period. Plus with WWE being PG and TNA not Velvet automatically has the advantage because TNA presents her in a much hotter way.

 

[Nicole13Edge/HardyFan]

I think that Velvet is an excellent wrestler but she is just like Lita she lives in somebody else's shadow and you all know that Lita is an awesome wrestler.

As for her never becoming knockouts champion I think that you are wrong and that she will hold that title. When Edge first came a lot of people never thought he would be a main eventer or world champion and on Janurary 2006 he proved people wrong and now he is a 9 time world champion. Jeff is another nobody thought that he would be world champion and on December 14th 2008 at Armageddon he beat Edge and proved all of you wrong and now he is TNA world champion.

So as far as Velvet being the worst she is far from it she is one of the best, and she will be TNA knockouts champion one day.

 

[wrestling fan 666]

Okay, a wrestler has a bad match and everyone jumps on what a terrible wrestler she is. I think all of you are a bit harsh on this one. Granted, the match with Sarita was bad; but like said before, not everyone has good chemistry in a wrestling ring. Yes, she could use some work, but considering there's Lacey, Vicki Guerrero, Alicia Fox, ODB, the list goes on; she isn't too bad either. I think if they continued with the Angelina feud with her, she could've had more ring time, exposure, and time to grow as a singles wrestler. It was cut off too early and she needs a good feud to prove herself; just not with Sarita.

And I AM SICK TO DEATH with all the critics who are saying that "they're just eye candy", "c@#k tease", etc. Some of their matches are better than the guys and they get not as much pay. Being pretty is a bonus, but you need skills to even become a TNA Knockout (Lacey excluded) and I think you underestimate Velvet's desire for the sport.

 

[Kenny Powers]

I really don't think Velvet is the worst female wrestler out there. Lacey is worse than Velvet, but even Lacey and Velvet look like Trish and Lita compared to the WWE Divas. The Bellas are a joke along with the majority of the NXT rookie divas. I would put Velvet over Eve any day. She isn't great, but is far from the worst female wrestler. Obviously there are some good divas in WWE, but I think the bad ones outweigh the good.

Lacey and Velvet are really only 2 women in the Knockouts division that are bad. TNA still has Mickie James, Tara, Madison Rayne, Angelina Love, Katie Lee Burchill, Taylor Wilde, Sarita, Hamada, and sometimes Daffney. WWE has Natalya and maybe Laycool? Melina and Beth Phoenix. The TNA knockouts were a joke recently, but with the new additions to the roster I have to say they are on their way to being the best knockout division again.

 

[yoshi_doce2006]

If I remember correctly Hulk Hogan sucked in the ring too. The thing was Hogan could tell a great story and had the charisma to make it work. Even though Sky isn't on the Hogan level by any long stretch of the imagination she has all the intangibles to make it work, and she does. Sky will always be very good, be able to tell a good story in the ring and out, however unless she gets better in the ring she will never hold the belt. Then too she is still in her 20's and even Ric Flair didn't even win his first World Championship until he was 31.

 

[hatehabsforever]

I really don't think Velvet is the worst female wrestler out there. Lacey is worse than Velvet, but even Lacey and Velvet look like Trish and Lita compared to the WWE Divas. The Bellas are a joke along with the majority of the NXT rookie divas. I would put Velvet over Eve any day. She isn't great, but is far from the worst female wrestler. Obviously there are some good divas in WWE, but I think the bad ones outweigh the good.

Lacey and Velvet are really only 2 women in the Knockouts division that are bad. TNA still has Mickie James, Tara, Madison Rayne, Angelina Love, Katie Lee Burchill, Taylor Wilde, Sarita, Hamada, and sometimes Daffney. WWE has Natalya and maybe Laycool? Melina and Beth Phoenix. The TNA knockouts were a joke recently, but with the new additions to the roster I have to say they are on their way to being the best knockout division again.

Come on, KP, I know you know better than this. Comparing Lacey and Velvet to Trish and Lita, compared to anyone, is Shattered Dreams-ish. I don't believe for one moment that Velvet Sky is the worst female wrestler out there, not by a long shot. There are clearly several knockouts and divas who are worse in the ring than she is.

I find it ironic that the TNA faithful continue to prop up the Knockout division and tear down the Divas division, yet all of a sudden the Knockout division is on the upswing and why? Because of a steady influx of WWE Divas, from Tara and Mickie James and Winter and possibly soon Serena. The same divas who were part of the same Divas division last year that was supposedly so inferior to the Knockouts.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love Velvet Sky. One of the few moments on a typical episode of iMPACT that will make me stop whatever I am doing and watch is during her ring entrance. But don't try to pass her off as a competent wrestler. She's an abysmal wrestler with a terrific body and abundant sex appeal, being featured in a non-PG environment. You could take Kelly Kelly or several other wrestlers from the Divas division, insert them into TNA, give them free reign to dress and act however they please, and they'd be every bit as good as Velvet Sky.

 

[MrHashasheen]

If I remember correctly Hulk Hogan sucked in the ring too. The thing was Hogan could tell a great story and had the charisma to make it work.

I don't know about that. Supposedly Hogan put on matches in Japan that were excellent in terms of quality, even if you don't compare them to his matches in the USA. As for Velvet, like I said before, she's an average women's wrestler, which makes her good for a tag-team for the Knockouts but less so in terms of a singles push.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Come on, KP, I know you know better than this. Comparing Lacey and Velvet to Trish and Lita, compared to anyone, is Shattered Dreams-ish. I don't believe for one moment that Velvet Sky is the worst female wrestler out there, not by a long shot. There are clearly several knockouts and divas who are worse in the ring than she is.

I may have went overboard comparing Velvet and Lacey to Trish and Lita. I was only pointing out that there are WWE divas that are just as bad as Velvet and Lacey. Mickie James was in TNA before WWE so I wouldn't say that the improvement of the Knockouts division was solely because of ex WWE divas. Either way though, it doesn't matter where the talent is from as long as they can wrestle or look good for the camera.

Velvet and Lacey are bad, but Velvet is far from the worse out there.

 

[hatehabsforever]

I may have went overboard comparing Velvet and Lacey to Trish and Lita. I was only pointing out that there are WWE divas that are just as bad as Velvet and Lacey. Mickie James was in TNA before WWE so I wouldn't say that the improvement of the Knockouts division was solely because of ex WWE divas. Either way though, it doesn't matter where the talent is from as long as they can wrestle or look good for the camera.

Velvet and Lacey are bad, but Velvet is far from the worse out there.

Undoubtedly there are WWE divas as bad or worse than Velvet Sky. Alicia Fox, Kelly Kelly, the Bellas, just to name a few. I agree with you, as long as they can wrestle or look good for the camera, that's all that really matters, especially the latter.

Splitting hairs, though, on the Mickie James comment. Sure, she was in TNA prior to becoming a WWE diva, but let's be fair, her fame and notoriety has come predominantly from her WWE tenure, not her previous TNA time. By all accounts, she's a "WWE reject" first and foremost. I just find it interesting that the Knockout division has received new life by adding a bunch of WWE divas to their roster, the same divas who came from the WWE women's division that was supposedly so inferior to the Knockouts in the first place.

 

[Superstar77]

I really didn't think that Velvet's match against Sarita was that bad. I thought it was decent. People are seriously over exaggerating how bad that match was. If you noticed Velvet was getting frustrated during the match the announcers were even pointing that out. I believe it's part of the storyline of Velvet trying to prove that she win matches on her own without help. Which could be a good storyline and maybe something positive comes out of it for Velvet.

As for Velvet being the worst female wrestler ever no she is not. I think she is decent and has some talent. Yes Velvet is very great at promos and her character work is amazing but I think her gimmick and character along with how she is booked hinders her in the ring. I think Velvet can have good matches she just needs to be booked to her strengths as a wrestler. BTW she was wrestling long before the Diva Search.

With that said I think Velvet is a good talent and is probably one of the most marketable women on the roster and with the right booking could be a good Knockout champion someday IMO.

 

[shattered dreams]

I find it ironic that the TNA faithful continue to prop up the Knockout division and tear down the Divas division, yet all of a sudden the Knockout division is on the upswing and why? Because of a steady influx of WWE Divas, from Tara and Mickie James and Winter and possibly soon Serena. The same divas who were part of the same Divas division last year that was supposedly so inferior to the Knockouts.

You could take Kelly Kelly or several other wrestlers from the Divas division, insert them into TNA, give them free reign to dress and act however they please, and they'd be every bit as good as Velvet Sky.

You keep saying people think the KOs are better because they added WWE divas. That is an odd way of looking at it. By the same logic you are using here we should be finding it ironic that "everyone" dislikes the WWE midcard situation but says TNA has been improved by bringing in some of those guys. Oh wait, they actually claim TNA suxs for bringing in supposed rejects. Well, now I am confused.

But anyway the moral of the story is it's about how the talent is used. Tara was a joke in WWE and hasn't worked there for over a year and a half. The KOs have improved through a focus on stories and some emphasis on bringing the wrestling back up a notch. Mickie certainly contributed to the latter part but was WWE really letting her show her full abilities in the ring or were they too busy calling her fat and making us watch her play second fiddle to hogsplashes etc.? The reason people trash on the divas is not that some of them are not talented, it is about how they are used. There are plenty of things that have nothing to do with Mickie that have contributed to the KOs being on the uptick: the development of Madison Rayne, Angelina Love getting her visa issues worked out, Sarita seeing increased tv time wrestling as a heel and other stuff as well.

Judging by that last part I quoted you are just as guilty of exaggeration as you were claiming he was. Kelly kelly certainly was hot when she was allowed to ****e it up but she never had any mic skills or character and Velvet clearly does. How kelly is used is my point from before. WWE takes attractive women, that lack a variety of looks, and has them focus on their weakest attribute, wrestling. Even more confusing, often the more talented women at wrestling end up having to wrestle down to the level and job to the more attractive ones. In that scenario everyone is wasting their best talents, which is why they can possibly contribute more in other environments. No one is saying kelly doesn't have a use in the world of prowrestling, simply pointing out that the way WWE has to do it does not properly capitalize on her "talents."

 

[hatehabsforever]

You keep saying people think the KOs are better because they added WWE divas. That is an odd way of looking at it. By the same logic you are using here we should be finding it ironic that "everyone" dislikes the WWE midcard situation but says TNA has been improved by bringing in some of those guys. Oh wait, they actually claim TNA suxs for bringing in supposed rejects. Well, now I am confused.

But anyway the moral of the story is it's about how the talent is used. Tara was a joke in WWE and hasn't worked there for over a year and a half. The KOs have improved through a focus on stories and some emphasis on bringing the wrestling back up a notch. Mickie certainly contributed to the latter part but was WWE really letting her show her full abilities in the ring or were they too busy calling her fat and making us watch her play second fiddle to hogsplashes etc.? The reason people trash on the divas is not that some of them are not talented, it is about how they are used. There are plenty of things that have nothing to do with Mickie that have contributed to the KOs being on the uptick: the development of Madison Rayne, Angelina Love getting her visa issues worked out, Sarita seeing increased tv time wrestling as a heel and other stuff as well.

Judging by that last part I quoted you are just as guilty of exaggeration as you were claiming he was. Kelly kelly certainly was hot when she was allowed to ****e it up but she never had any mic skills or character and Velvet clearly does. How kelly is used is my point from before. WWE takes attractive women, that lack a variety of looks, and has them focus on their weakest attribute, wrestling. Even more confusing, often the more talented women at wrestling end up having to wrestle down to the level and job to the more attractive ones. In that scenario everyone is wasting their best talents, which is why they can possibly contribute more in other environments. No one is saying kelly doesn't have a use in the world of prowrestling, simply pointing out that the way WWE has to do it does not properly capitalize on her "talents."

Simple question for you SD. Supposedly the Knockout Division used to be so much better than the Divas. All of you TNA marks continue to say this. Then the Knockout division went into the shitter for a while, becoming a shadow of it's former self up until recently. Again, I've read this sentiment on here many times from several loyal TNA faithful.

All of a sudden, the Knockout division is on the rise, and is supposedly kicking the divas' butts again. Simple question. Would this be the case if you took Tara, Mickie James, Winter, (and possibly Serena if she ends up in TNA) off of the roster? Would the development of Rayne, Love's visa issues being resolved, and Sarita's ioncreased TV time be enough to return the Knockout division to its past glory? I think we all know the answer to this.

Fact. The Knockout division is improved because it has added several former WWE divas. If they could get them, I'm sure they'd add Melina, or Beth Phoenix, or Natalya, or a couple more, and the Knockout division would be even stronger again. All I am suggesting is that the divas division is not as bad as people suggest. And that the Knockout's division is not necessarily as strong as some would suggest.

 

[johnbragg]

By the same logic you are using here we should be finding it ironic that "everyone" dislikes the WWE midcard situation but says TNA has been improved by bringing in some of those guys. Oh wait, they actually claim TNA suxs for bringing in supposed rejects. Well, now I am confused.

WWE has some of the top women wrestlers in the world. So does TNA. TNA arguably had better women wrestlers a year or two ago than WWE did. Mickie James, Victoria/Tara, Gail Kim, Awesome Kong, Alyssa Flash get fired. TNA signs James and Tara, and starts to give them a focused story, also involving Love, Sky and Rayne.

That is using talent well. TNA has used James and Tara rather well.

When ex-WWE champions Jeff HArdy and RVD came in, they were in the World title mix. That made sense.

Contrast that with bringing in Bobby Lashley and treating them immediately as a world title contender, or bringing in WWE 2003 jobber Orlando Jordan as a weekly midcard act, or bringing back Richards and Rhino and Raven again and treating them as the equals of Styles, Morgan, and Beer Money. That is bringing in rejects and putting them over your own stars.

They avoided doing the same with Knox and Carlito and Helms and Burchill and making a big deal of them. TNA did something right there, although they could use Benjamin and Hass as a tag team.

 

[shattered dreams]

Simple question for you SD. Supposedly the Knockout Division used to be so much better than the Divas. All of you TNA marks continue to say this. Then the Knockout division went into the shitter for a while, becoming a shadow of it's former self up until recently. Again, I've read this sentiment on here many times from several loyal TNA faithful.

All of a sudden, the Knockout division is on the rise, and is supposedly kicking the divas' butts again. Simple question. Would this be the case if you took Tara, Mickie James, Winter, (and possibly Serena if she ends up in TNA) off of the roster? Would the development of Rayne, Love's visa issues being resolved, and Sarita's ioncreased TV time be enough to return the Knockout division to its past glory? I think we all know the answer to this.

Fact. The Knockout division is improved because it has added several former WWE divas. If they could get them, I'm sure they'd add Melina, or Beth Phoenix, or Natalya, or a couple more, and the Knockout division would be even stronger again. All I am suggesting is that the divas division is not as bad as people suggest. And that the Knockout's division is not necessarily as strong as some would suggest.

So I see you chose to repeat your silly assertion without continuing the discussion at hand. In your OP on the topic you specifically state that environment AKA company effects Kelly Kelly's ability to entertain. You flat out said she would be more entertaining in TNA, yet you continue to spout this fallacy that simply because TNA signs talented ex-divas that the diva division itself is that good. Like I said in my last post no one is saying their are not talented divas, it is the way they are used that is the issue. Yes, there are talented divas and yes TNA has received a boost from adding Tara (hasn't worked for wwe since jan 2009 anyway) and Mickie but by your logic WCW and WWF both got the same thing out of Stone Cold. If you cannot see the obvious differences in the way the divas are booked vs how the KOs are (no matter which wrestler is in the ring for either company) then I think you have worse "eyesight" than you claim I do.

 

[hatehabsforever]

So I see you chose to repeat your silly assertion without continuing the discussion at hand. In your OP on the topic you specifically state that environment AKA company effects Kelly Kelly's ability to entertain. You flat out said she would be more entertaining in TNA, yet you continue to spout this fallacy that simply because TNA signs talented ex-divas that the diva division itself is that good. Like I said in my last post no one is saying their are not talented divas, it is the way they are used that is the issue. Yes, there are talented divas and yes TNA has received a boost from adding Tara (hasn't worked for wwe since jan 2009 anyway) and Mickie but by your logic WCW and WWF both got the same thing out of Stone Cold. If you cannot see the obvious differences in the way the divas are booked vs how the KOs are (no matter which wrestler is in the ring for either company) then I think you have worse "eyesight" than you claim I do.

For the record, you still haven't answered my question. Rather than going off on a tangent and attempting to baffle me with bullshit, why not simply answer my question? Would the Knockout's division have enjoyed their sudden re-birth, their sudden move back to respectibility, had an influx of WWE divas not occurred? Would Angelina Love, Madison Rayne, or Sarita, in and of themselves, have been enough to save the Knockouts division, or did they need the talents of the above mentioned WWE divas to bring face value and whatnot back to their women's division?

To be clear, I didn't say that Kelly Kelly would be better in TNA, at least that's not what I intended to say. I said that she could do anything in TNA that Velvet Sky (who I repeat, I absolutely love) can do in terms of in-ring wrestling. Kelly Kelly could come to ringside with even skimpier clothing, shake her ass and straddle the middle rope, and the fans (myself included) would love it. Then she could fumble her way through a match with whomever, just like she does in WWE, just like VS does in TNA. Don't try to convince me that Velvet Sky has better in-ring technical skills than Kelly Kelly, I'm simply not buying it.

 

[shattered dreams]

For the record, you still haven't answered my question. Rather than going off on a tangent and attempting to baffle me with bullshit, why not simply answer my question? Would the Knockout's division have enjoyed their sudden re-birth, their sudden move back to respectibility, had an influx of WWE divas not occurred? Would Angelina Love, Madison Rayne, or Sarita, in and of themselves, have been enough to save the Knockouts division, or did they need the talents of the above mentioned WWE divas to bring face value and whatnot back to their women's division?

Actually your original question was how does the addition of divas helping the KOs not make the divas division (DD hmm) good? I answered that several times. The question you pose here is impossible to answer because it is speculation but my guess would be yes but not as easily. Divas plural I do not think applies. Tara was part of the KOs when it was still considered by those bastions of credible rhetoric (about time I had a catchphrase) the IWC to still be "good." Winter has not had a match yet. It is all about Mickie in this case. I also believe sudden re-birth is an overstatement. The decline of the KOs was exaggerated. They needed to re-group and build back up the female talent. They could likely have done that through non-wwe divas but why not use a talent if it is available? Why should WWE misusing a talent that provided a boost to TNA mean WWE should be praised? It basically means what I was saying, that being WWE has some talented women but uses them poorly for various reasons, which is why they shine in a company that is better at putting these talents to use.

Want to talk about dodging a question how long are you going to ignore my answer to your original question and pretend the way the talents are used is directly comparable?

To be clear, I didn't say that Kelly Kelly would be better in TNA, at least that's not what I intended to say. I said that she could do anything in TNA that Velvet Sky (who I repeat, I absolutely love) can do in terms of in-ring wrestling. Kelly Kelly could come to ringside with even skimpier clothing, shake her ass and straddle the middle rope, and the fans (myself included) would love it. Then she could fumble her way through a match with whomever, just like she does in WWE, just like VS does in TNA. Don't try to convince me that Velvet Sky has better in-ring technical skills than Kelly Kelly, I'm simply not buying it.

Did I ever try to? I just said Velvet has better character and mic skills. Those are also important when it comes to entertaining and interacting with a crowd. The character can help add something to matches as well.

 

[hatehabsforever]

Want to talk about dodging a question how long are you going to ignore my answer to your original question and pretend the way the talents are used is directly comparable?

Actually, I have no intention of dodging your question, I guess I got sidetracked by your ramblings, your off-topics tangents, or as you like to say, your rhetoric.

Of course the way the female talents are used is not directly comparable. WWE is far more blatant in the fact that they use their female talent as eye-candy only. A lot of time, they aren't even involved in primary storylines. Their matches are slapped together without a lot of planning and forethought. I'm not sure really anyone would argue this. All I am saying is TNA uses it's females as eye candy as well, even more so because of their clothing and blatant sexuality (again, not complaining). Yet TNA, and more specifically, their marky fans, try to tout their female wrestlers as more than this, and it's laughable. The Knockouts as a whole have no more in-ring talent than the divas, they never really have, this is just another IWC generated fallacy.

By the way, while we are throwing hypothetical questions out there, how about this one? Say Velvet Sky, who is supposedly a terrific in-ring wrestler who has tremendous mic skills and can carry a storyline better than any WWE diva, let's say she leaves TNA and ends up in the PG world of WWE. Now, she cannot dress as provocatively anymore, has to tone down her entrance antics, and change her style of in-ring action and backstage antics. Has to take the word "bitch" out of her vocabulary, which will cut her mic time in half by itself. How do you think she'd fare? How would her wrestling skills and mic work fare? I think we all know the answer to this. She'd be a stereotypical Diva, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[ABMorales787]

Actually, I have no intention of dodging your question, I guess I got sidetracked by your ramblings, your off-topics tangents, or as you like to say, your rhetoric.

Of course the way the female talents are used is not directly comparable. WWE is far more blatant in the fact that they use their female talent as eye-candy only. A lot of time, they aren't even involved in primary storylines. Their matches are slapped together without a lot of planning and forethought. I'm not sure really anyone would argue this. All I am saying is TNA uses it's females as eye candy as well, even more so because of their clothing and blatant sexuality (again, not complaining). Yet TNA, and more specifically, their marky fans, try to tout their female wrestlers as more than this, and it's laughable. The Knockouts as a whole have no more in-ring talent than the divas, they never really have, this is just another IWC generated fallacy.

By the way, while we are throwing hypothetical questions out there, how about this one? Say Velvet Sky, who is supposedly a terrific in-ring wrestler who has tremendous mic skills and can carry a storyline better than any WWE diva, let's say she leaves TNA and ends up in the PG world of WWE. Now, she cannot dress as provocatively anymore, has to tone down her entrance antics, and change her style of in-ring action and backstage antics. Has to take the word "bitch" out of her vocabulary, which will cut her mic time in half by itself. How do you think she'd fare? How would her wrestling skills and mic work fare? I think we all know the answer to this. She'd be a stereotypical Diva, nothing more, nothing less.

I agree. Velvet would be just another face in WWE. They did it to Gail Kim after all. And that's why to my belief the TNA Knockouts are seen as superior. They don't suffer from all the weight of things taken into account from being in WWE, No need to be borderline bulimic, you can be who you want and there are stories placed for your character to develop.

WWE is missing on some merch with this. There are no females to drive merchandise. There are girls who like WWE. Why not produce a Diva who can be the focal point and sell merch from there? They had the perfect opportunity with Mickie James, but instead chose to hassle her over her Country album and "weight issues". No matter how you steer it, TNA is a better home for women.

By the way, what the hell does "tangents" and "rhethoric" mean?

 

[shattered dreams]

Of course the way the female talents are used is not directly comparable

But isn't this the entire premise of your original assertion?

WWE is far more blatant in the fact that they use their female talent as eye-candy only. A lot of time, they aren't even involved in primary storylines. Their matches are slapped together without a lot of planning and forethought. I'm not sure really anyone would argue this. All I am saying is TNA uses it's females as eye candy as well, even more so because of their clothing and blatant sexuality (again, not complaining).

So you are saying that TNA is even better at the only thing WWE does with their divas yet you want us to believe that this makes the divas as good as the KOs for what reason again?

Yet TNA, and more specifically, their marky fans, try to tout their female wrestlers as more than this, and it's laughable. The Knockouts as a whole have no more in-ring talent than the divas, they never really have, this is just another IWC generated fallacy.

Do they have more in-ring talent? Arguably not. Do the KO's get to do more in the ring than the divas? Absolutely. That is the point. In WWE the women glam up as eye candy but are only allowed to take it so far. In TNA they can take it further, whether it be in outfits, actions in and out of the ring, storylines and promos. In TNA they actually get some time to try and tell a real story. If you cannot tell a difference between the wrestling that the TNA KOs ever did compared to the divas, all I can say is wow and hope you do not have a drivers license.

By the way, while we are throwing hypothetical questions out there, how about this one? Say Velvet Sky, who is supposedly a terrific in-ring wrestler who has tremendous mic skills and can carry a storyline better than any WWE diva, let's say she leaves TNA and ends up in the PG world of WWE. Now, she cannot dress as provocatively anymore, has to tone down her entrance antics, and change her style of in-ring action and backstage antics. Has to take the word "bitch" out of her vocabulary, which will cut her mic time in half by itself. How do you think she'd fare? How would her wrestling skills and mic work fare? I think we all know the answer to this. She'd be a stereotypical Diva, nothing more, nothing less.

So do you want to continually prove my point for me that there are obvious reasons transitioning to TNA from WWE could be a boost for TNA compared to irrelevant to the state of the WWE?

I suspect Velvet would be decent in WWE precisely because they do not need her to be able to wrestle. By WWE standards she is good enough for sure. The only reason you notice she has deficiencies in TNA is that they actually try and work to a higher level and most of the KOs are capable of it. I doubt they would give her time to use her promo work and character but if they did she could certainly do it. If you think all she does is say bitch that is ridiculous. It would be a sad day when she covered up some though.

By the way, what the hell does "tangents" and "rhethoric" mean?

Means I disagreed with him and instead of presenting a counter-argument within the evolving discussion he wants to keep repeating his idea while ignoring these "tangents" and hope that means he is still right.

 

[Calderownz]

Personally, Velvet isn't that bad. Her match with Sarita wasn't horrid and she can only be blamed partially for it, considering the better wrestler (Sarita) has to take half, if not more of the blame.

Velvet should stick to tag teaming though. Personally, I think she can get over with charisma and character in a tag for better than by herself. Nonetheless, she isn't the worst.

Von Erich, Alicia Fox and a host of others come to mind to garner that title.