WWE News: Creative Team Gives SmackDown Diva a Heel Turn [Spoiler Alert]
WWE News Sees A New Heel Turn For A SmackDown Diva
With Michelle McCool's departure and the face turn of Layla, there wasn't much in the way of female heels on SmackDown.
Well, now after a recent live show, the brand now has another woman to draw heat and that woman is Rosa Mendes.
Rosa Mendes, who has been portrayed as a babyface character in recent months, was reverted back to the dark side. She appeared as a heel character against babyface Natalya at last night's SmackDown live event in Pensacola, Florida. The third generation wrestler beat Mendes via Sharpshooter.
Mendes' sudden turn can be attributed to the shortage of heel Divas on SmackDown. Layla established herself as a babyface on Friday's episode of SmackDown, leaving Alicia Fox as the lone heel on the brand. However, Fox suffered a shoulder injury at the television taping after taking a clothesline from Kharma and therefore is out of action. Meanwhile, Kharma is working this weekend's Raw live event tour. This leaves Mendes as the lone active heel Diva on SmackDown.
That sound you just heard was everyone snoring at the thought of her as a major heel on SmackDown.
I love WWE, but the one thing that always infuriates me is how they never seem to see the big picture and always make reactionary decisions based on one-time pops or ratings grabs. Furthermore, they never plan for the future.
So when Michelle McCool left and the draft hurt the talent pool on SmackDown, the creative team had to turn to Rosa Mendes to be a heel character on one of the biggest shows in the company. It's a joke, and we as fans deserve better.
I know the company doesn't think much of the women's division, at least not like it used to, but this isn't going to go over well and there's nothing the creative team can do.
It's just a mess of a situation and I can't believe the women's division has come to this.
Most recent updates:
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?