>>17365059While it is generally useful to judge wrestlers in terms of their look, charisma, and in-ring ability, you shouldn't make the mistake of reducing something as deep and complex as the endless variety of ways a wrestler can get over with an audience to the question of whether he or she possesses those characteristics.
I don't know if she has it in her, but then again neither do you, but Baszler could conceivably turn her career around by taking on an entirely new gimmick and exhibiting a side of her personality WWE audiences have not yet seen. Even though Creative would never sign off on it, it's possible that Baszler could portray a ruthless butch dyke character raging in a world filled with heterosexuals and especially sexy hetero-women wrestlers to stomp out of spite. Ridiculous yes, but the point is that it's possible a busted up bore like Baszler could possess certain qualities that you and I have never seen before but which shine through with a new gimmick that could rescue her from the unfortunate reality she's living now. Maybe Baszler could portray this character in a way that connects with fans that Zoey Starks never could. Maybe the reverse is true, and Starks could pull off this character while Baszler couldn't. Maybe both of them can, maybe neither. My point is that there are many more than three qualities a performer would need to possess in order to see it through. These specific qualities, to reiterate my point, can be hard to identify. Wrestling audiences have shown us forever that they won't always embrace the attractive and charismatic athlete, and that some unconventional acts can get wildly over.
