They already hired her. Then got rid of her and decided she wasn't good enough for the Diva Search so...

What about that fall that Jeff Hardy took last night?
I know wrestlers know how to fall, how to protect themselves etc, but from that height, onto steel steps, that's gotta hurt, a lot, however you do it.

On the current roster WWE have the best crop of ladies they've had in a long time, Nattie, Charlotte, Sacha Banks, Paige, Naomi and AJ Lee are all very capable in the ring, then the likes of Nikki Bella, Layla, Summer Rae, Alicia Fox, Bayley and Becky Lynch are all at least above average, only Rosa and Eva Marie are completely useless and they're only kept around for their looks and to star on the Total Divas show, if that gets cut they'll probably be released. The reason people just assume WWE female performers are useless is because they're not given enough TV time for their matches and have to rush through them all the time.

So with a pretty deep and talented ladies roster why would WWE have any interest in Velvet a 33 year old woman who's always been pretty ropey in the ring.

WWE wrestling is the most theatrical on the planet. It's very showy and pantomimey so they don't their women to know what their doing in the ring. It's just part of the circus show.

Ugh. I don't like Lockdown. The cage makes all the matches feel the same. Oh we like thousand island dressing, so let's have thousand island dressing on everything! Even dessert! That'll work.

And also, if you're going to do hardcore, I want Shane McMahon style actually amazing death defying hardcore. I'm no longer impressed by people hitting each other on the back with foil trays.

So yeah. Spud & Mandrews were good. Other than that a totally forgettable Impact for me.

WWE is very pantomimey yes, that's part of its appeal but I wouldn't say they don't want their women to know how to work in the ring, it's just that WWE think(and are right) that the majority of fans watching have little interest in women's wrestling and therefore it's treated as a after-thought and only granted minimal tv-time.

sable used to get bigger pops than the top wwe faces have since 2002 lol

Yeah but that was never because of her wrestling skills! Back in the Attitude Era the ladies definitely added entertainment but it wasn't by wrestling.

yup! but give me an entertaining raw or impact over a wrasslin one anyday of the week.

They got their highest viewers so far on Destination America last week.

Don't you why your telling this lot they all think its a WWE thread.

I have to disagree with some of that
Nattie, Charlotte, Sacha Banks, Paige and AJ are much better than her

Bayley Becky Lynch and Emma are better but not as good as the others

Naomi and Layla is about the same as her


The Bellas -Summer Rea- Rosa -Eva -Alicia Fox and Cameron are worse than useless even on NXT and FCW they were they are given more time and a better chance they were useless I'd take Velvet over then any day and she's not very good herself

Velvet has been in the business a long time and has travelled the world. She's worked in front of live PAYING audiences. A big difference from that and the college crowd for NXT.

As in NXT actually draws one?

Arent the NXT tapings free?

aren't the TNA ones at Universal free?

When they do them there again they will. When they don't do them there fans pay. NXT wrestlers don't have that luxury, they don't have UK tours or TV tapings from different buildings.

Yep the NXT crowd would realise how bad she is in the ring very fast because in NXT the women wrestle

Even when they are free nobody goes what chance to they have when they charge.

No but they do have house shows that draw a crowd which fans do pay for tickets for. Something TNA doesn't have any more.

You can't take a shot at NXT for having a non-paying TV crowd in a TNA thread who hold the majority of their tapings in front of non-paying crowds lol. Use some logic man.

I think if Velvet did go to WWE she would be shocked at

1) People actually do go to wrestling shows
2) You actually get paid for this.

Okay hold on. I have no interest in a NXT vs TNA thing, but TNA have been using multiple venues for years now and always charge wherever they're allowed to. The only place they don't charge is Universal, and that's because they're not allowed to. In comparison, NXT is definitely a free show which tapes in a single venue. That doesn't make TNA better than NXT, but that was Hazy's point and it stands.


If you're going to come over to the TNA thread to take cheap shots don't complain when you get called out!

When do I complain? If you and others want to call me Anti-TNA, go for it. If you can't see a joke when it's slapping you in the face, that's your problem.

The point also stands that TNA for the majority of their time have produced television in a venue that they can't charge for. They are heading back to that very same venue this year. So my point also stands.

I didn't enjoy Impact this week, but US ratings were up yet again, doing 691,000 viewers. It's great for wrestling that their viewership on DA is still growing as people discover the show. I do wonder at what point it'll level off. 700k is well over what most were predicting before the move.

Interestingly, Impact on DA this week was only 3,000 viewers short of what Spike was showing in the same slot.

True and when free or charge nobody goes to watch it.

Really what chance do they have when people won't watch for FREE