# CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]



## Starbuck

It's a new year so we decided a new ratings thread would be suitable. Discuss all ratings related topics in here please. Let the shit storm begin...again.


----------



## Juggernaut Reigns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I Predict a 3.5 Rating for tomorrow


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

CM Phil - WHAT A DRAW! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


----------



## HEELKris

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I'm not sure even The Rock can save the ratings. When was the last time RAW got a 3 rating? In fucking August 2012 #ThanksPunk


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

unk2


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

i'd say a 3.2 rating is just about right for tomorrow


----------



## Azuran

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

WWE is dying.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

FIRST PAGE!


----------



## Shazayum

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

My guess is a 3.0 rating. Rock won't be able to spike them up very high; not a knock on him, nobody can.


----------



## Arcade

Wrestling is fake and gay. That's why ratings are low.


----------



## Green Light

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

People are still gonna tune out for the 90% of the show that Rock isn't in. I doubt he'll move the overall rating whatsoever.


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

has no peer has no flaw, the greatest wrestler of all time and also the biggest draw 

:Rock


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

2.8. HUGE game on tomorrow. No way they hit 3.0. Rock or no Rock.


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Even with the return of The Rock on the show tomorrow & the announcement of C.M. Punk Vs. Ryback in a TLC match, WWE RAW is still going head-to-head with the BCS National Title game, featuring Notre Dame (whom are huge in ratings to begin with). So I would not be predicting big numbers for WWE tomorrow.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

DAT 2.0 ERA CONTINUZE

unk3


----------



## Juggernaut Reigns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The-Rock-Says said:


> 2.8. HUGE game on tomorrow. No way they hit 3.0. Rock or no Rock.


Oh what game is on? sorry am from uk


----------



## Redwood

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Why, Starbuck? Why?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



RaneGaming said:


> Oh what game is on? sorry am from uk


BCS National Championship Game


----------



## blur

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

CM Punk can't draw!

I'm guessing a 2.9 for tomorrow night tho.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

This BCS bowl game has been so hyped with two of if not the two biggest draws in college football right, Notre Dame and Alabama.

I can see this show struggling in the 3s even with all the star power. It is gonna get hammered in the 18-34 male demo with that BCS game on.


----------



## krai999

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Walk-In said:


> Even with the return of The Rock on the show tomorrow & the announcement of C.M. Punk Vs. Ryback in a TLC match, WWE RAW is still going head-to-head with the BCS National Title game, featuring Notre Dame (whom are huge in ratings to begin with). So I would not be predicting big numbers for WWE tomorrow.


you americans and your rugby


----------



## Curry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Think 2.9 will be about right for tomorrow wit the game on, still a big jump.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I think they'll pull 3.0 easily. It's roughly the first week back to school for kids; they'll be getting back into the routine. And most of the holiday madness is over so it's, again, back into the routine. One major reason they're bringing back a lot of shows this week, plus airing brand new ones. It's a TV week.

But what do I know? Everything, that's what.


----------



## TripleG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

We're past the Holidays, they aren't up against Monday Night Football, and The Rock is showing up to pretty much kick off Wrestlemania season. 

Ratings have got to go up....right?


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

In the days of DVR, any show that lasts 3hrs that isn't a sport, is likely to be DVRed. WWE gets over 3M people watching LIVE in USA, but I wonder how many actually watch on DVR.

Either way...I hate this thread. Last thing this site needs is ratings threads. We should just ban all rating threads on this site lol. Then maybe people will stop caring about them.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

We shouldn't ban ratings threads. I mean, as long as it's all in one thread and legitimate talk about WWE ratings. Sorry to sound corny, but this is talk about something we're all very interested in. It's the same as if we were talking about the NHL lockout. Seeing shitty ratings can give us all hints into what WWE might try next.

We should ban people who run in here and bitch about (just an example...) how CM Punk doesn't draw so he needs to be fired. That would solve a lot.


----------



## Dr. Jones

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

They could promise live nudity and reveal definitive proof of who killed JFK and they wouldn't be able to hit a 4


----------



## Three Dog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

with the event thats goin on i would have to say Raw will pull in a 2.9-3.2, and thats me being generous top end. I will attempt to watch it in the hopes someone kool will return for the special. but I will most defiantly have a backup channel in the wings.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

2.7 is my prediction.


----------



## DegenerateXX

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Meh, I'm gonna be the optimist who says they'll get at least a 3.0


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



TripleG said:


> We're past the Holidays, they aren't up against Monday Night Football, and The Rock is showing up to pretty much kick off Wrestlemania season.
> 
> Ratings have got to go up....right?


They're not up against an NFL game. They're up against the BCS Championship. That's the college football Super Bowl.

Kickoff isn't until 8:30 though, so I think the opening segment will be a huge attempt at grabbing attentions. Then after that, pray the football game is a blow-out.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Any expectation above a 2.8-2.9 is not even realistic. Not only because of the strong competition but also because of how low they drew in the last two weeks, nobody is bumping a 1.0 overnight unless it's a blockbuster, once a generation mega buzz like Rock's return was in 2011. Add to that, the promotion for Rock's return was the weakest of all time. They just threw a random ad or mention like it was some side attraction. Next week is when it should start to go up to 3.0s again. I imagine that Rock's promo will be in the 9pm segment. Especially after they ruined any strong/reliable timeslot with the horrendous 3 hour concept. Then probably an appearance during the TLC match to close the show.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

If they get 3.0 they'll do a dance.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> Any expectation above a 2.8-2.9 is not even realistic. Not only because of the strong competition but also because of how low they drew in the last two weeks, nobody is bumping a 1.0 overnight unless it's a blockbuster, once a generation mega buzz like Rock's return was in 2011. Add to that, the promotion for Rock's return was the weakest of all time. They just threw a random ad or mention like it was some side attraction. Next week is when it should start to go up to 3.0s again. I imagine that Rock's promo will be in the 9pm segment. Especially after they ruined any strong/reliable timeslot with the horrendous 3 hour concept. Then probably an appearance during the TLC match to close the show.


Making up excuses already, nice.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The first Raw in the new year often "magically" jumps up to a whole rating point. Main reason being that MNF is over. And in this case, Rock is back, maybe some other big names are also appearing and Ryback vs Punk in TLC (is it?!) will finally happen after three months of build.

They should easily pass the 3.0 mark. Actually my prediction is a 3.5 rating as crazy as it sounds at first.


----------



## God Movement

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

3.0

Ryback vs CM PUNK will draw DAT number


----------



## TheF1BOB

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The lack of Phils drawing power in the thread title upsets me. 

DAMN U STARBUCK! 8*D


----------



## TheRainKing

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Stad. said:


> Making up excuses already, nice.


He's just being realistic. Ratings and overall interest in the product are very low at the moment, so even with The Rock's return they are not going to get a huge number. I'm not expecting anything above 2.9.


----------



## IncapableNinja

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Starbuck said:


> It's a new year so we decided a new ratings thread would be suitable. Discuss all ratings related topics in here please. Let the shit storm begin...again.





Rock316AE said:


> Any expectation above a 2.8-2.9 is not even realistic. Not only because of the strong competition but also because of how low they drew in the last two weeks, nobody is bumping a 1.0 overnight unless it's a blockbuster, once a generation mega buzz like Rock's return was in 2011. Add to that, the promotion for Rock's return was the weakest of all time. They just threw a random ad or mention like it was some side attraction. Next week is when it should start to go up to 3.0s again. I imagine that Rock's promo will be in the 9pm segment. Especially after they ruined any strong/reliable timeslot with the horrendous 3 hour concept. Then probably an appearance during the TLC match to close the show.





Stad. said:


> Making up excuses already, nice.


"...and thank you for making this Raw Ratings Thread 'where it all begins, again', thank you very much!"

:vince2

_Finnnnnddd a wayyy, a way to be..._

2.8-3.0 for tonight, depending on the score of the American football match. Hilarious drops for Miz/Barrett/Kofi/Brodus/Cesaro/Del Rio/Divas. 

Next week's show will lead Raw firmly into the promised land of the 3.0's. Then it's back to the 2's until the Undertaker's WM feud begins.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



IncapableNinja said:


> 2.8-3.0 for tonight, depending on the score of the American football match. *Hilarious drops for Miz/Barrett/Kofi/Brodus/Cesaro/Del Rio/Divas.*


This right here. I believe that the sound of *so many* TV remotes being using simultaneously, will be heard from space.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Stad. said:


> Making up excuses already, nice.


True, I have 19 more pages of "excuses". I need to protect the good name of a guy who statistically broke every record in the history of the industry and set things so high up there to unimaginable levels of success. A 0.1-0.2 less here? It's all gone. 

Big difference between a realistic and hopeful prediction. There's no magic formula on TV, it's all about a pattern. If you put a Ferrari in the middle of 100 Fiats, it wouldn't create 101 Ferraris.


----------



## TheF1BOB

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> True, I have 19 more pages of "excuses". I need to protect the good name of a guy who statistically broke every record in the history of the industry and set things so high up there to unimaginable levels of success. A 0.1-0.2 less here? It's all gone.
> 
> Big difference between a realistic and hopeful prediction. There's no magic formula on TV, it's all about a pattern. *If you put a Ferrari in the middle of 100 Fiats, it wouldn't create 101 Ferraris.*


Technically they're the same.


----------



## Timber Timbre

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I fully expect the Rock to bump the ratings back in the 3. something range, if only for the fact that his return was marked with a nicely done promo package to let everyone know that this isn't going to be your typical throwaway show. The advertised WWE title match alone should get a few more eyeballs to tune in.

Even the Rock is not going to save a poorly written show, so they can't half-ass his return angle like they did with the build up to Survivor Series 2011. If that's the case, people will only tune into the segment that's showcasing the aforementioned Ferrari, and won't bother with everything else which will hurt the overall bottom line.


----------



## Scottish-Suplex

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

So if ratings remain the same over the next couple months, are the mega Rock marks gonna react similar to a Christian discovering there is no God? The forum will be filled with broken men.


----------



## Timber Timbre

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Another thing you have to consider is Rock's Twitter as a promotion tool. Alot of on and off and non-wrestling fans follow him. If he's hyping up his return on that website, it might be just as important a factor to consider as that RAW promo they shot since a sizable portion of that group might tune-in out of curiousity. 

Rock's advertised returns have always made decent to good numbers since 2011, if the Rock appears regularly on RAW, then some people eventually skip a show or two, but that always happens when the novelty of anything wears off. This will mark his first appearance since RAW 1000th, so it's a big deal that people will be interested in.


----------



## Clique

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Gimmicky said:


> So if ratings remain the same over the next couple months, are the mega Rock marks gonna react similar to a Christian discovering there is no God? The forum will be filled with broken men.


The ratings weren't that impressive last year on the RTWM so they should be use it by now.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

If the rating is really good - Rock gets the praise

If the rating is bad - Punk gets the blame.

DEAL . WITH . IT


----------



## TheF1BOB

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

What if the rating is average? :hmm:


----------



## blur

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

If the ratings are below 2.8/2.9, get ready for "DA GOAT CAN'T DRAW LOLZ".


----------



## Timber Timbre

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

To be completely honest, at this point it would be the WWE that isn't drawing. I'm certainly not the Rock's biggest fan on this website, but the man is one of the biggest names in Hollywood, and perhaps even the biggest wrestling name that's still active on a part-time basis. If the WWE's lack of foresight to utilize a guy like that properly gets them shit numbers, then they more than deserve the blame. 

The Rock proved that he's a draw, and he's still a ways away from being over the hill as an overall performer.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The ratings might pick up during Mania season especially if rock wins the title.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock's segments always get at least 3.5 and above that it's almost impossible to even imagine a scenario of The Great One tanking in the viewership department.......:Rock

..........unless of course you're a mark for some failures who gets blamed for the companies' rating disasters and want to take out your frustration on somebody whom you'd wish your irrelevant idol had the same star power as. unk3


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Rock's segments always get at least 3.5 and above that *it's almost impossible to even imagine a scenario of The Great One tanking in the viewership department*.......:Rock
> 
> ..........unless of course you're a mark for some failures who gets blamed for the companies' rating disasters and want to take out your frustration on somebody whom you'd wish your irrelevant idol had the same star power as. unk3


Damn right! Wait...



> John Cena coming out to cut a promo and The Rock closing the show lost 349,000 viewers. The show finished with a 3.30 quarter rating, which likely came as a surprise to officials.


:Rock


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> *The Rock’s promo at John Cena gained 643,000 viewers to a 3.53 quarter rating, which is nothing really special for the overrun.* John Cena coming out to cut a promo and The Rock closing the show lost 349,000 viewers. The show finished with a 3.30 quarter rating, which likely came as a surprise to officials.


:lol Way to nitpick, man. Like I said.....

And who dropped the most viewership numbers that night outside of the divas? Yeah this guy.....



> *Punk* vs. Daniel Bryan *lost 289,000 viewers*.


:lmao

unk3


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Doesn't change the fact that Rock lost viewers and closed the show at a 3.3

Rock can't draw, ratings killer.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Doesn't change the fact that *Rock* lost viewers and closed the show at a 3.3
> 
> Rock can't draw, ratings killer.


You spelled *Cena* wrong.

And :lol again at Punk/Bryan nerd wrestling losing 300k viewers.


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I expect the overrun to get a pretty good number. That was compelling TV, featuring one of the biggest stars in wrestling history. Plus, the BCS title game was well into blow-out mode by that point.

I expect the rest of the show, since it was dreadful & completely forgettable, to get a 2.5 or worse.


----------



## TheF1BOB

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Phil marks will cry when they realize Dwayne was responsible for the ratings this week.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Jesus fucking Christ, how is it that this thread can continue to be so petty?


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Da Silva said:


> Jesus fucking Christ, how is it that this thread can continue to be so petty?


You thought it was bad before? Now Punk & The Rock are going to feud on TV finally. It's going to be so, so worse around the forum. If the RAW thread last night is any indication, it's going to take over every thread. It turned into a pissing contest about who "won" the overrun segment, as if it was some contest or some shit. "Punk killed Rock!" "Rock did great, you're crazy!"

It's going to get really stupid, really soon.


----------



## Crona

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Walk-In said:


> You thought it was bad before? Now Punk & The Rock are going to feud on TV finally. It's going to be so, so worse around the forum. If the RAW thread last night is any indication, it's going to take over every thread. It turned into a pissing contest about who "won" the overrun segment, as if it was some contest or some shit. "Punk killed Rock!" "Rock did great, you're crazy!"
> 
> It's going to *get* really stupid, really soon.


Implying it wasn't already? I do agree, it is going to get much worse.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Well WWE, way to knock the ball right... 

into the foul zone.

Even with the return of the GOAT, it was exactly the same old shit. Nothing but rerun matches we've seen booked time & time again over the past several months. The hyped "main event" wasn't even the main event. It was a pathetic lack-luster main event at that, with a predictable finish. And the return of the Rock, the basket they put all the ratings eggs in this week, didn't even start until the time slot was technically over. Did they really expect people to sit through MORE than three hours of absolute SHIT just for the hope that Rock MIGHT come out? First of all, being a school night, all of the kids already went to bed an hour or two earlier, and that's at least, what, half(?) their audience right there. Then I suspect a significant number of viewers who were waiting for the Rock, when by 11:00, when TV Guide says the show is over, there had not even been so much as a hint of the Rock all night, these people probably tuned out at 11:00 thinking they had been suckered, that either the Rock was in fact NOT coming out, or even if he was, he would only have like 60 seconds or less before the show went off the air. 

Then finally the return, and it did not live up to expectations. It did not have that epic feel we've all come to expect from Rock's returns.

The only thing about the entire show that brought even the faintest of a smile to my face was when Punk stood up for underutilized talent like Tyson, and pointed out that talent is not what gets you ahead in WWE.

So the Rock's big return bringing RAW back into the 3s?

No way.


----------



## Slam_It

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Anyone know where I can find the RAW viewership for 2012? I found this: http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2012-tv-ratings/
which has ratings, but doesn't list the amount of viewers. It's also missing the last RAW of the year.


----------



## Eddie Ray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Slam_It said:


> Anyone know where I can find the RAW viewership for 2012? I found this: http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2012-tv-ratings/
> which has ratings, but doesn't list the amount of viewers. It's also missing the last RAW of the year.


whats fascinating is that since the 3 hour format RAW has taken a nose dive and those figures back it up completely.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I think the best indication for Raw's numbers is to look at the Slammy's numbers:

Slammy Awards 2012
Hour 1 - 4.29 million
Hour 2 - 4.41 million
Hour 3 - 3.99 million

The hour Flair returned in had 4.4 million viewers, a great hourly number these days outside of WrestleMania season. For the regular watcher, but not dedicated aka "I must watch everything" watcher, hour 1 last night had Cena/Ziggler for a good chunk, hour 3 had Punk/Ryback and Punk/Rock whilst hour 2 had.... nothing lol. On that basis, I think:

Hour 1 - 4.2 million
Hour 2 - 4.0 million
Hour 3 - 4.6 million

Is realistic.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_67724.shtml



> -- Monday's WWE Raw featuring The Rock's return scored 321,033 in social activity, which was the highest score in four months dating back to September 10, 2012.
> 
> Raw ranked #2 on social media behind the BCS National Title game on ESPN. Raw ranked higher than "Love & Hip Hop" and "Catfish" - both shows regularly topped Raw during the Fall 2012 season. [ Data Source: Trendrr.TV ]


not ratings but the social media score was the highest it has been in 4 months and was # 2 right behind the BCS game


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Aren't the ratings usually out by now?


----------



## kendoo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

does anyone know roughly what the ratings are in the uk and other countrys were it airs live/taped


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Da Silva said:


> Jesus fucking Christ, how is it that this thread can continue to be so petty?


See the quote in my sig:


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Let see how Rocky draws against a bunch of amateur... football players. unk2


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_67733.shtml




> Some potential good news for WWE and USA Network's Raw TV ratings is the viewership trend during the BCS National Title game.
> 
> Due to the blow-out nature of college football's championship game, there was a drop-off from about a 20.0 rating at 9:30 p.m. EST to about a 15.0 rating at 10:00 p.m. EST, which is when the game officially became a blow-out at halftime. At 10:00 EST, WWE went right into their TV main event of C.M. Punk vs. Ryback in a TLC match for the WWE Title.
> 
> By the time halftime was over, the BCS game only returned to about a 16.0 rating before falling to about a 14.0 rating at the end of the 10:00 p.m. hour. As Raw was set to deliver the much-anticipated confrontation between C.M. Punk and The Rock, the BCS Title game rating fell to about a 13.0 rating.
> 
> The picture bodes well for the performance of WWE's third hour, which has struggled during the three-hour Raw era. WWE is currently on a 20-show streak where viewership has declined from the second to third hour. If the third hour holds up, the overall Raw TV rating should be perform better-than-expected prior to the game starting.
> 
> - The following are Key Points in the BCS TV Ratings, based on a timeline released by sports reporter Darren Rovell (@DarrenRovell)
> 
> - 8:25 p.m. EST: 14.0 rating for final pre-game activity
> - 8:30 p.m. EST: 20.0 rating game-start
> - 9:00 p.m. EST: 21.0 peak rating at start of Raw's second hour
> - 9:30 p.m. EST: 20.0 rating
> - 10:00 p.m. EST: 15.0 rating at start of Raw's third hour
> - 10:30 p.m. EST: 16.0 rating post-Halftime
> - 11:00 p.m. EST: 13.0 rating start of Raw over-run
> - 11:30 p.m. EST: 12.0 rating for end-game


BCS numbers. So maybe they could have done a 3.0 at least


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

These are only metered market household ratings, and like every other household rating (fast national or final) completely irrelevant.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

On the other hand... http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-second-biggest-audience-of-all-time/164576/


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

We should be able to find out worldwide ratings. I'd rather see those, then ratings for 1 country, which doesn't even contain the majority of the WWE Universe.


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I don't know why people care about ratings so much.

Last night's Rock/Punk promo could drawn less than 2.0 and I would enjoy it more than I would enjoy a 400 day reign with Super Cena no selling and smiling over everything, even if that drew a 5.0.


----------



## checkcola

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



BlakeGriffinFan32 said:


> I don't know why people care about ratings so much.


Because some people enjoy analyzing pro wrestling from a business point of view.


----------



## Grass420

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



checkcola said:


> Because some people enjoy analyzing pro wrestling from a business point of view.


exactly, it also used as a benchmark to see how much advertising is worth on a show.. if the show gets higher ratings then a 30 second spot for advertising is worth a lot more.

Networks such as USA Network buy the rights to the show for a cost, and then sell advertising to pay for the show. The networks take a chance on buying the rights of a show.. hoping that the revenue from the advertising will exceed what they get for paying the rights to host the show.

If ratings continue to go down, company's looking to invest in advertising will go elsewhere to have their commercials aired. If ratings go down far enough that USA Network feels they can have less risk playing something else, they will drop Raw on Monday nights.
i.e. perhaps there are other programs they can play, that will cost them less to air, but still have a better return on investment.


----------



## sharkboy22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Damn, not even The Rock could freaking bring in the ratings. We need more Maddox!

On a definitely more serious note, if the third hour is really hurting RAW like it is, why the fuck is WWE continuing it? Somehow, someway they gotta find a way to explain going back to two hours.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Grass420 said:


> exactly, it also used as a benchmark to see how much advertising is worth on a show.. if the show gets higher ratings then a 30 second spot for advertising is worth a lot more.


People aren't saying ratings aren't important, but why people on here care, is what makes no sense. WWE getting a 3.2 or 3.15 rating has NO difference to anyone on this site, yet they obsess over it as if they've invested their life savings into WWE stocks. Though even TV ratings don't seem to have an impact on the WWE stock price.


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



sharkboy22 said:


> Damn, not even The Rock could freaking bring in the rating.


The rating isn't out yet, breh.


----------



## mb1025

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



dxbender said:


> People aren't saying ratings aren't important, but why people on here care, is what makes no sense. WWE getting a 3.2 or 3.15 rating has NO difference to anyone on this site, yet they obsess over it as if they've invested their life savings into WWE stocks. Though even TV ratings don't seem to have an impact on the WWE stock price.


Because ratings is what keeps your TV on the air. If you like to watch the WWE people would be interested to know what their ratings are like because it impacts if they will able able to watch the WWE in the future. 

I have been saying on other forums that WWE is lucky that there isn't a WCW type company right now. Looking past going to 3 hours WWE is looking very much like WCW 2000 everyday. 

I also think a lot of people are over looking that the WWE is just rinse and repeating their road to WrestleMania's every year. You always the have moment of staring at the banner or the big name coming back to get in a promo battle. You have the same names rumored to be involved with the same names. You put Taker in a match we know he won't lose. 

I remember Chris Jericho was interviewed on the Monday Night Wars DVD and he said you couldn't tell what day it was in WCW well the WWE is right there in that same boat. 

Nothing is new. Rock and Punk felt like we turned back the clock and replaced Cena with Punk. They used the same material and PUnk went back to breaking the 4th wall. Would be nice if we didn't hear that stuff all the time, but we do. Kind of has no impact after watching it all the time.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*It doesn't really matter what anyone says, whatever the rating say...the buyrates will show The Rock and Punk are both big draws. But mainly Rock, of course. A mark gotta mark.*


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *It doesn't really matter what anyone says, whatever the rating say...the buyrates will show The Rock and Punk are both big draws. But mainly Rock, of course. A mark gotta mark.*


the rock will show that he is a big draw maybe the biggest one in wwe history 
but cm punk?c'mon man he is the worst drawing champion since diesel 1995


----------



## TomahawkJock

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Kinda hard to say Punk is the cause of it all when the rest of the show is utter shit as well.


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



dxbender said:


> People aren't saying ratings aren't important, but why people on here care, is what makes no sense. WWE getting a 3.2 or 3.15 rating has NO difference to anyone on this site, yet they obsess over it as if they've invested their life savings into WWE stocks. Though even TV ratings don't seem to have an impact on the WWE stock price.


People are looking for validation. They want to be able to use buys, TV ratings etc to justify their biases and nostalgia. Its a talking point and nothing more. Nobody even knows what USA Network or WWE's thought process about TV ratings are or why things are how they are, they just want the talking point. 


Its impossible to know unless you work in these places how important these numbers are to them and why. So in reality, they just want to use them to perpetuate their personal biases and to validate their opinions. Considering we all stating our opinions in here, most don't feel they need any validation of their personal opinion, but some do, its a sad state of affairs where your satisfaction of with what you see depends on what other people see.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



jonoaries said:


> People are looking for validation. They want to be able to use buys, TV ratings etc to justify their biases and nostalgia. Its a talking point and nothing more. Nobody even knows what USA Network or WWE's thought process about TV ratings are or why things are how they are, they just want the talking point.
> 
> 
> Its impossible to know unless you work in these places how important these numbers are to them and why. So in reality, they just want to use them to perpetuate their personal biases and to validate their opinions. Considering we all stating our opinions in here, most don't feel they need any validation of their personal opinion, but some do, its a sad state of affairs where your satisfaction of with what you see depends on what other people see.


I agree with you. For some it's ammunition to use so they can try to make their opinion into fact. Am exercise in complete futility but they are still trying.

It becomes even less relevant when the numbers are what they are but WWE still shows faith in Punk, giving him a record breaking run. That says a bit about what WWE thinks, although that shouldn't matter much to anyone what they think about Punk. Whether it's good or bad, it's our own opinions that matter.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Its no secret that for USA Network (and 99% of the other channels) only the A18-49 numbers (Live+SD and C3) are important.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...rs_Latest_Episode_of_WWE_Inbox_be_a_STAR.html



> - The internal belief is that RAW will stick to three hours at least through WrestleMania 29. This doesn't mean that it will go back to two hours after WrestleMania but there will definitely not be a change between now and then. There are top officials who believe that going to three hours hasn't been good for the product.
> 
> Source: F4Wonline.com


whoever those top officials are deserve a raise


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Hour 1 - 4.29m
Hour 2 - 4.32m
Hour 3 - 4.65m

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...tfish-love-hip-hop-3-teen-mom-ii-more/164357/


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 4.29m
> Hour 2 - 4.32m
> Hour 3 - 4.65m
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...tfish-love-hip-hop-3-teen-mom-ii-more/164357/


No real surprises then.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

rock made the ratings jump


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> rock made the ratings jump


this


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 4.29m
> Hour 2 - 4.32m
> Hour 3 - 4.65m
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...tfish-love-hip-hop-3-teen-mom-ii-more/164357/


- identical hour 1 to the Slammy Awards
- highest hour 2 since the Slammy Awards
- highest hour 3 since July 30th, 2012

Three hour average is 4.42 million, highest since August 27th.


----------



## vanboxmeer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

It's almost as if the casual fan cares about The Rock.


----------



## wwffans123

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

the only reaon i watched the raw because of Rock,nothing left.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

ROCK'S GONNA ROCK with them ratings! :rock4


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

oh the GOAT GOATing again.

Is there no stopping this great man? :Rock


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

That 1/2 hour of Punk must have drawn well.


----------



## TheF1BOB

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

DWANE MARKS R STPID, IT WAS CAUSE OF R LEADAR! unk2


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

so whats the final rating


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Look at that, the Punk dominated third hour drawing in dem numbers unk


----------



## God Movement

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Dwayne Drawing Dem Digits


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

well damn, might have actually gotten a 3.0 for that one. 

Im suprised Hour 2 did so well. Felt like a hour of just midcarders. Thought it would be the clear least watched hour.
But no suprise that Hour 3 did the highest.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Every hour gained. So, good sign......or not.


----------



## the fox

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

the first time since when the third hour is the highest?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Lets me assess these viewership figures right here.



Yeah, these tell me that because Phill was in the third hour for a total of 40 minutes that the third hour was the highest since Phill hit Dwayne with the GTS. If I were the creative team I would place Phill all throughout the show as the audience clearly responds to him.

Vince and Paul should be very happy with these numbers.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Damn, The GOAT surprised even me with this third hour viewership. Imagine if there wasn't a monster competition against it. I expected much lower because of the horrendous numbers they did in the last two weeks. Next week should be higher. Rock also broke the 20 weeks streak of the second to third hour drop.


----------



## TheRainKing

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Dwayne 'The Ratings' Johnson does it again.


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

CM Punk, what a guy. Dominated that 3rd hour + overrun with almost 50 minutes of airtime. 3rd hour rises in viewers. No suprise there unk2


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



JasonLives said:


> CM Punk, what a guy. Dominated that 3rd hour + overrun with almost 50 minutes of airtime. 3rd hour rises in viewers. No suprise there unk2


This right here. Numbers don't lie brah. CM GOAT unk2


----------



## Kurt 'Olympic Gold

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> - Hour 1: 4,290,000
> 
> - Hour 2: 4,320,000
> 
> - Hour 3: 4,650,000 *
> 
> *Note: For the first time in weeks Raw finally broke the streak of losing viewers in the third hour of the show.


The Rock.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Good to see the best part of the show got the best rating. The promo was fantastic. Both men delivered, big time.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

DAT RAWKY!



> Lets me assess these viewership figures right here.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, these tell me that because Phill was in the third hour for a total of 40 minutes that the third hour was the highest since Phill hit Dwayne with the GTS. If I were the creative team I would place Phill all throughout the show as the audience clearly responds to him.
> 
> Vince and Paul should be very happy with these numbers.


DAT COOKIEPUSS! unk


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Obis, your avi looks like a bird HHH.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The-Rock-Says said:


> Obis, your avi looks like a bird HHH.


No, HHH looks like a human version of my avi.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

DAT HATE


----------



## Scottish-Suplex

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

So what's competition like next week, by the sounds of things it was stiff this week or something.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Gimmicky said:


> So what's competition like next week, by the sounds of things it was stiff this week or something.


I don't know, it's the 20th anniversary and while I don't think it's been as promoted as the 1000th episode, it should still pull in an even higher number with Rock along with the potential of Austin, not to mention resident WWE legends like Flair, Foley, possibly Taker and HHH/HBK/DX gracing us with their presence.

If it's anything like Raw 1000, it should be one hell of a show, not just for ratings, but for entertainment. But we'll have to wait to see.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Holy fuck Rock. He pulled back like a million viewers or something lol. Looks like the final confrontation, given the viewership for the hour, could have and probably should be hitting around 5 million viewers or over which is the magic number. DA RAWK AND DEM CASUALS.


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Gimmicky said:


> So what's competition like next week, by the sounds of things it was stiff this week or something.


Jackass marathon on MTV 3 or 4. :cheer


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Highest average viewership since August 27.










:rock4:rock4


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk bringing dem ratings in. BITW.

unk2


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Highest 3rd hour since 30th of July.


----------



## The XL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Obvious bump because of the Rock


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The-Rock-Says said:


> Highest 3rd hour since 30th of July.


Which was the Raw when Punk was on commentary for the main event. I tell ya, give that man a microphone or commentary headset for 30mins and watch dem ratings soar. Numbers don't lie unk2


----------



## TheWFEffect

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Viewship stayed basically the same people on the edge of their seats waiting for the Rock also the booking was well done on RAW and all their best talent got showcased well.


----------



## nwoattitude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

When you guys say that Punk is the reason for the bump and that he is drawing more than Rock, are you trolling? Or do you actually believe it? lol. Serious question. I am not trolling.


----------



## kendoo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

anyone got the ratings for the uk, or other countrys that show it live/taped


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



RatedR10 said:


> Highest average viewership since *August 27*.


Which just happens to be the night of DAT TEAR.

:hhh and :rock4 bringing in DEM NUMBAHS.


----------



## blur

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Did someone say HHH?


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

An extra 200 thousand to 400 thousand people show up and you dumb fucks squirt in your pajamas. Wake me when this awful product gets a 4.


----------



## FoxyRoxy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The Rock proving in 2013 he still draws.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

He's a Nostalgia Act. He draws because 2002 draws. Other numbers comparable to this involved Triple H and Brock Lesnar. This isn't even the highest average viewership in the past half a year. Austin/Punk would have drawn the same friggin' numbers. A few hundred thousand people still marking like children for AE/Ruthless Aggression stuff show up, watch that one little portion and then ultimately leave. The only long term payoff to this Era-milking is to devalue the present era and kill your viewership whenever you don't have somebody of a 2000 _vintage_ show up.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The combination of THE ROCK, CM Draw, Rydraw, and Mark "Ratings" Henry are responsible for that incredible viewership jump in the third hour.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rating was a 3.1 Which is amazing considering the BCS game was the second highest cable ratings in history.

What can I say, Rock is a huge draw. Wont be surprised if the Rock/Punk promo gets a higher number then any of the Cena/Rock promos leading in to WM 28 (which were not that high)


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Wont be surprised if the Rock/Punk promo gets a higher number then any of the Cena/Rock promos leading in to WM 28 (which were not that high)


You can't _*see*_ me! 

Cuz you turned the channel.


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Which is amazing considering the BCS game was the second highest cable ratings in history.


It would have been higher too, if Notre Dame was winning & the game wasn't a blow-out. Notre Dame is a HUGE draw. Always have been.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Rating was a 3.1 Which is amazing considering the BCS game was the second highest cable ratings in history.
> 
> What can I say, Rock is a huge draw. Wont be surprised if the Rock/Punk promo gets a higher number then any of the Cena/Rock promos leading in to WM 28 (which were not that high)


no. you're wrong.

Plus cena and rock broke the wm record.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

3.1 is a fantastic number for current times. Rock/Punk promo should have done a great number. There you have it. They obviously got the numbers in to watch. Let's see if they can keep them.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock's return segment with Punk can be higher than a 3.6 if the overall rating is a 3.14(which is a huge increase that surprised me), but the peak of Rock/Cena in terms of TV audience was in 2011. And nothing is touching that for a long, long time if at all. Rock's first advertised return in Chicago did one of the most watched segments in the last decade. Rock/Cena in Atlanta after WM27 also drew a crazy audience with a 4.6.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I'd reckon 3.5 is a good guess for Rock/Punk since that's what DAT TEAR segment got and they're both working on similar numbers. The first Rock/Cena interactions were getting MEGA numbers though. Rock/Punk is never touching it.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock was missing for majority of the show, hopefully he's more involved in the next eps.


----------



## Alim

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Great rating. Looking forward to see the break down.


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The cold hard fact and the matter is that the Rock PROVED that he is still draw today. That rating was all because of him. To all the people that think this is CM Punk and Ryback's doing, you have lost your bloody mind.

The Rock is here to stay, the Rock will save the WWE!


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

While I don't care bout ratings, one thing I'm wondering....

Since Raw airs live, what are ratings like in other parts of USA? Ones where Raw begins at 5 or 6pm? Cause I'd imagine it won't be that great? Cause 1-2 of those hours won't even be primetime, meaning much less people watching.

Not sure how tv shows work(for example,a (not live) show airing on CBS at 8pmEST, would it air at 5pm in Western USA, or will it air 8pm local time)


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Finally Raw is back in the 3's. It should stay that way until WrestleMania season is over too. Expecting a nice overrun number too for Rock/Punk, somewhere between 3.5 - 3.7.

Nothing is going to touch Rock/Cena from 2011 though, which did do huge numbers.


----------



## Mister Hands

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SPCDRI said:


> He's a Nostalgia Act. He draws because 2002 draws. Other numbers comparable to this involved Triple H and Brock Lesnar. This isn't even the highest average viewership in the past half a year. Austin/Punk would have drawn the same friggin' numbers. A few hundred thousand people still marking like children for AE/Ruthless Aggression stuff show up, watch that one little portion and then ultimately leave. The only long term payoff to this Era-milking is to devalue the present era and kill your viewership whenever you don't have somebody of a 2000 _vintage_ show up.


I don't think it's fair to completely discount the name value the Rock has, but by and large, the general point of this post is spot on. The most we can hope for from this, as far as I can tell, is _maybe_ it'll properly elevate Punk, depending on how hard they have Rocky bitch-slap him. And, bar Cena, Punk's already miles ahead of everyone else on the roster anyways.


----------



## Honey Bucket

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

People also making a mess in their britches over those ratings growths, even though they tend to forget that bar the last 45 minutes or so, this episode of Raw was absolute monotonous dross. Oh well, easily forgotten about thanks to a minute increase in numbers right?


----------



## DFUSCMAN

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

DAT BITW dominating that 3rd hour which drew DEM RATINGS

40 minutes of the 3rd hour and the overrun with Rock. PUNK=RATINGS

BITW unk

On a more serious note, the overrun rating should be huge, Rock was advertised for weeks in advance and was promoted throughout the show. Punk and Rock has been a heavily promoted feud by WWE so there first confrontation in the ring together should have a great overrun number.

Viewership going up consistently through the hours is also a nice thing to see.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

3.14 rating


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Excellent rating. I knew it was going to be in the 3.0 range. I'm sure it will stay this way until after Wrestlemania.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



chronoxiong said:


> Excellent rating. I knew it was going to be in the 3.0 range. I'm sure it will stay this way until after Wrestlemania.


With Punk gaining new fans on twitter Monday night, lets hope they can continue it through out the year and hopefully rise.


----------



## The GOAT One

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Wow, wasnt expecting that. Great number considering the circumstances.


----------



## Apocalypto

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

A 3.1 a great rating? LMFAO

Years ago this would mean a major shake up and some firings.


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



THE MIGHTY KRANG said:


> People also making a mess in their britches over those ratings growths, even though they tend to forget that bar the last 45 minutes or so, this episode of Raw was absolute monotonous dross. Oh well, easily forgotten about thanks to a minute increase in numbers right?


Good ratings mean show is good, didntja know


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*I wonder what the 20th Anniversary of Raw's ratings will be. Even though it will be more star studded than Raw 1000 I doubt it'll do as good. WWE has been promoting it poorly.*


----------



## CenaSux84

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk/Rock isn't coming anywhere near Rock/Cena 2011 ratings. Some of those segments were near 7 million viewers.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *I wonder what the 20th Anniversary of Raw's ratings will be. Even though it will be more star studded than Raw 1000 I doubt it'll do as good. WWE has been promoting it poorly.*


Will it be? Lesnar won't be there and we don't know for sure if Austin, Taker, Flair, HHH, HBK or other DX members will be there. But I hope you're right. 

In any event, the rating next week will be huge as it's the first Raw since August last year with no Football competition as well as being Raw 20th anniversary as well as Rock being back.

I'm predicting a 3.5 rating, like I did for this week before realizing that they would have major competition. Next week they should be able to get that rating.


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Genuinely surprised by the overall number.


----------



## The Main Headliner

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Considering Raw was going against the BCS championship, which mostly everyone else was watching, anything in the 3's is good.

Ratings should pick up soon with no direct Monday competition anymore.


----------



## Brye

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Apocalypto said:


> A 3.1 a great rating? LMFAO
> 
> Years ago this would mean a major shake up and some firings.


Well considering that this isn't then and it's a different time, how about living in the present with the rest of us?


----------



## Ray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

If only Mark Henry was on the show. 4.0 + rating for sure.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



dxbender said:


> While I don't care bout ratings, one thing I'm wondering....
> 
> Since Raw airs live, what are ratings like in other parts of USA? Ones where Raw begins at 5 or 6pm? Cause I'd imagine it won't be that great? Cause 1-2 of those hours won't even be primetime, meaning much less people watching.
> 
> Not sure how tv shows work(for example,a (not live) show airing on CBS at 8pmEST, would it air at 5pm in Western USA, or will it air 8pm local time)


I thought it's showed at 8 - 11 everywhere (US wise) and just live for the East coast? I could be wrong.


----------



## BKsaaki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> Damn, The GOAT surprised even me with this third hour viewership. Imagine if there wasn't a monster competition against it. I expected much lower because of the horrendous numbers they did in the last two weeks. Next week should be higher. Rock also broke the 20 weeks streak of the second to third hour drop.


Rock316AE analysing dem digits. :sandow2


----------



## SrsLii

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Skyfall said:


> I thought it's showed at 8 - 11 everywhere (US wise) and just live for the East coast? I could be wrong.


It does. Apparently the kid who asked that is 8, or possibly Amish.


----------



## Catsaregreat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Skyfall said:


> I thought it's showed at 8 - 11 everywhere (US wise) and just live for the East coast? I could be wrong.


Ive had Dish and Fios and Raw has always aired live at 5pm for me here on the west coast


----------



## SrsLii

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Catsaregreat said:


> Ive had Dish and Fios and Raw has always aired live at 5pm for me here on the west coast


If you watch a satellite feed, of course it will be. The cable and/or broadcast feeds that 99% of people have had for their entire lives play things on a delay, unless it's a live sports game, which WWE is not.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Apocalypto said:


> A 3.1 a great rating? LMFAO
> 
> Years ago this would mean a major shake up and some firings.


Ah, stupidity rears its ugly head yet again. Ratings are about context...

Eh screw it, I've tried explaining this too many times


----------



## Ndiech

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

punk fans should bow down to the Great One.he's giving your non-drawing hero mega exposure with all this.


----------



## Heisenberg316

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

back in 2008/09 this would have been your regular rating. WWE is reaching TNA levels in terms of ratings.


----------



## Miccoli#10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Ratings will be huge when he'll be wwe champion again !!


----------



## Sin City Saint

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Miccoli#10 said:


> Ratings will be huge when he'll be wwe champion again !!


That's their hope. I see ratings going up no matter what in 2013 (with the use of the part timers being better timed than when they were previously used) - (even post 'Mania -- as I'm sure they can get one of the big four part timers (Rock, Lesnar, HHH, 'Taker) for both Survivor Series in November and SummerSlam even sooner in August, with other big storylines involving the full-time roster being hotshotted between the big four pay-per views....


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...er_s_Toast_Vince_McMahon_Appearance_More.html



> Due to the holidays, we're just now getting the RAW numbers from the New Year's Eve show. The numbers from this week with The Rock's return will be available later. The NYE show drew a 2.32 rating with 3.55 million viewers.
> 
> The segment breakdowns are just estimates this week but The Miz and John Cena vs. Cody Rhodes and Damien Sandow stayed even with the opener. Sgt. Slaughter vs. Antonio Cesaro lost around 155,000 viewers while Kane and Daniel Bryan vs. Heath Slater and Drew McIntyre stayed even. The segment with CM Punk, Paul Heyman and Vince McMahon gained 465,000 viewers for a 2.5 quarter rating in the 9pm time slot.
> 
> Sheamus vs. Dolph Ziggler lost around 155,000 viewers. Eve Torres brawling with Kaitlyn and Alberto Del Rio backstage with Ricardo Rodriguez lost 300,000 viewers. Ricardo vs. Big Show stayed even in the 10pm time slot with a 2.2 quarter rating. Wade Barrett vs. Kofi Kingston also stayed even. The Shield brawling with Ryback, Sheamus and Randy Orton gained 160,000 viewers. The final segment with Dolph Ziggler, AJ Lee and Cena gained around 800,000 viewers and was the highest point of the show with a 2.6 final quarter rating and a 2.9 overrun.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> The segment with CM Punk, Paul Heyman and Vince McMahon *GAINED* 465,000 viewers for a 2.5 quarter rating in the 9pm time slot.


unk2


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock's main event segment with Punk did the peak of the show with a 3.7. Highest number since Big Show/Cena in July.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> Rock's main event segment with Punk did the peak of the show with a 3.7. Highest number since Big Show/Cena in July.


How do you know? did Dave say it somewhere?


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Cena gaining 800,000 viewers.

Is there a more consistent drawing machine then him out there?


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Wow. Highest numbers since a total "Who gives a fuck?" segment in July with Cena and the Big Show, the two stalest bitches on the roster.
DEM RATINGZ!

8*D


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> Cena gaining 800,000 viewers.
> 
> Is there a more consistent drawing machine then him out there?


Cena has had low rated segments fairly recently so no one is drawing reliably, apart from part-timers.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SPCDRI said:


> Wow. Highest numbers since a total "Who gives a fuck?" segment in July with Cena and the Big Show, the two stalest bitches on the roster.
> DEM RATINGZ!
> 
> 8*D


A segment when Punk was on commentary, give that man a microphone and the ratings go up. Numbers don't lie unk2


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Oh, so it was a Cena/Big Show "match?"

Who could possibly care about another Cena/Big...

WHATS THAT YOU SAY! THE BEST IN THE WOLRD IS ON COMMENTARY?!1

:mark: :mark: :mark:

8*D


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

IF Rock 316AE is right about the Punk/Rock number being a 3.7 (which it most likely is because Rock316AE likes his numbers )

The Punk/Rock promo drew a higher number then ANY of the Rock/Cena promos on the lead up to WM 28 last year.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Shouldn't we be calling these the Punk/Rock, or Phillip/Dwayne promos, as it were?

PYPE BOMBZ!!!!

:mark: 8*D unk


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> IF Rock 316AE is right about the Punk/Rock number being a 3.7 (which it most likely is because Rock316AE likes his numbers )
> 
> The Punk/Rock promo drew a higher number then ANY of the Rock/Cena promos on the lead up to WM 28 last year.


not the highest overall. The first confrontations betweens cena and rock blows punks and rocks out of the water.

You have to compare when they first meet each other. NOt when they already had a year long rivalry lol. And even then they broke the all time mania record.


MASSIVE RATINGS.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> not the highest overall. The first confrontations betweens cena and rock blows punks and rocks out of the water.
> 
> You have to compare when they first meet each other. NOt when they already had a year long rivalry lol. And even then they broke the all time mania record.
> 
> 
> MASSIVE RATINGS.


Comparing when they first meet each other isn't a very thought trough comparison. When Rock came back to challenge Cena it was so much bigger news since he had been gone far longer and hadn't had a match in forever. Now he's coming back a few months after he's had a long feud and matches, which isn't even remotely as "fresh".

The best comparison is probably to do some middle of the feud ratings for both. That's still beneficial to the first feud since it had been so long before that, but it's a much more fair comparison and therefor more telling.


----------



## blur

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

How much is Rock/Cena's first segment draw?


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> You have to compare when they first meet each other.


So RAW 1000 then? What number did that GTS KTFuckout get?

But regardless of the number, that _*was*_ indeed their first confrontation, so The Cynical's comparison context is still valid. RockPuss>RockPebbles


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SerapisLiber said:


> So RAW 1000 then? What number did that GTS KTFuckout get?
> 
> But regardless of the number, that _*was*_ indeed their first confrontation, so The Cynical's comparison context is still valid. RockPuss>RockPebbles


Raw 1000 main event was cena vs punk lol and that was a major show lol.


Like rocks comeback in 2011. He had a string of raws and was focused on cena and miz. They drew unbelievably well.

LIKE 4.6+ segments for rock and cena and huge ratings for the whole show a number of weeks.


Feb. 14-18	3.14
Feb. 21-25	3.9
2/28 – 3/4	3.8
March 7-11	3.92
March 14-18	3.65
March 21-25	3.35
3/28 – 4/1	3.84
April 4-8	3.82


----------



## Green Light

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Cena and Rock's first face to face confrontation in Chicago before Mania 27 had 7.2million viewers If I recall correctly, not sure what the rating was


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> Raw 1000 main event was cena vs punk lol and that was a major show lol.


Huh? Did someone here say that RAW 1000 main event was _*NOT*_ Cena-Punk? Wasn't me, that's for damn sure.

But getting back on topic, which was when Rock & Punk "first met each other" as you put it, that was indeed likewise at RAW 1000. It was NOT this past Monday, so Cynical's comparison was valid.


----------



## TheF1BOB

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> How do you know? did Dave say it somewhere?


Rock316AE knows everything. :jordan2


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> Feb. 14-18	3.14
> Feb. 21-25	3.9
> 2/28 – 3/4	3.8
> March 7-11	3.92
> March 14-18	3.65
> March 21-25	3.35
> 3/28 – 4/1	3.84
> April 4-8	3.82


BTW, are these their segments or was this the overall number?


----------



## samizayn

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Check this out: http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insigh...n-and-twitter-establish-social-tv-rating.html

Should make for more accurate numbers, which is good. I guess pushing twitter is going to pay off for them after all.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



greendayedgehead said:


> Check this out: http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insigh...n-and-twitter-establish-social-tv-rating.html
> 
> Should make for more accurate numbers, which is good. I guess pushing twitter is going to pay off for them after all.


I really don't think it's going to give more accurate numbers. For one, people can make multiple accounts. Two, I feel only hardcore fans of tv shows and other medias tend to go online to talk about their interest, so it might not be the best representative of the entire audience. TBH, I think people put way too much credence on twitter and what trends on it.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

A post of mine last March:

14/02/11 - 3.84 rating / 5.7 million
28/03/11 - 4.77 rating / 7.31 million
04/04/11 - can't find
01/05/11 - 4.10 rating / 6.26 million (opening)
01/05/11 - 3.23 rating / 4.95 million (closing)
14/11/11 - 3.8 rating / 5.5 million
27/02/12 - 3.46 rating / 5.22 million
05/03/12 - 3.57 rating / 5.07 million
12/03/12 - 3.51 rating / 5.12 million

Only full segments where he has been in the ring are included.

I make Monday:

07/01/13 - 3.7 rating / ~5.2 million

Oh, and amusingly, I noticed that the go home Raw for WrestleMania had a 3.04 rating last year. So Raw this past Monday beat that, and with an extra hour. Yeah...


----------



## samizayn

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> I really don't think it's going to give more accurate numbers. For one, people can make multiple accounts. Two, I feel only hardcore fans of tv shows and other medias tend to go online to talk about their interest, so it might not be the best representative of the entire audience. TBH, I think people put way too much credence on twitter and what trends on it.


Ah, true. But a big problem from what I gather is that right now a significant part of the audience isn't being counted because they don't have a Nielsen box, or watch RAW by other means.


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SerapisLiber said:


> Huh? Did someone here say that RAW 1000 main event was _*NOT*_ Cena-Punk? Wasn't me, that's for damn sure.
> 
> But getting back on topic, which was when Rock & Punk "first met each other" as you put it, that was indeed likewise at RAW 1000. It was NOT this past Monday, so Cynical's comparison was valid.


no it was not
there was also cena so cena punk and the rock drew that number not punk and the rock
cena vs rock drew and draws alot better than punk vs the rock period


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock giving that mainstream exposure to Punk as expected. 

It took The People's champ's multi dimensional appeal for people to finally start caring about Phil's irrelevant mid card reign.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Well, with that last 2012 breakdown, for those that care, here are the gains/losses from the 9PM (3 hour shows only), 10PM, and Overrun spots. I included the ratings for the ones I knew, but the ones that don't have one or if there's something that's incorrect, feel free to let me know:



> ---
> 9PM Slot(3-hour shows):
> 12/31: 465,000 (2.5)- Punk/Heyman/Vince
> 12/24: 550,000 (2.4)- Show/Sheamus
> 12/17: 605,000 (3.20)- Flair/Punk/Heyman/Cena
> 12/10: 201,000 (2.87)- Sheamus/Ziggler and end of Punk/Heyman
> 12/3: 138,000 (2.63)- Cena-Sheamus/Show-Ziggler
> 11/26: 90,000 (??)- Vickie/AJ/Cena/Dolph and Kofi/Tensai
> 11/19: 195,000 (2.85)- Vickie/AJ/Cena
> 11/12: 745,000 (3.38)- Lawler/Punk/Heyman/Foley
> 11/5: 341,000 (??)- Maddox/Vince/Vickie
> 10/29: 373,000 (3.25)- Cena/Guerrero
> 10/22: 529,000 (2.94)- Vince/AJ/Heyman/Vickie
> 10/15: 512,000 (3.04)- Ryback/Ziggler-Otunga
> 10/8: 466,000 (2.92)- Barrett/Sheamus
> 10/1: 421,000 (??)- Show/Sheamus debate
> 9/24: 877,000 (3.2)- Punk/Foley
> 9/17: 381,000 (??)- Miz/Booker T/Ryback
> 9/10: 555,000 (??)- Punk/Orton
> 9/3: 370,000 (??)- Anger Management and Punk/Sheamus
> 
> 8/27: 525,000 (??)- Cena/Miz
> 8/20: 280,000 (??)- Orton/Del Rio
> 8/13: 516,000 (??)- Piper/Jericho/Ziggler/Miz
> 8/6: 480,000 (??)- Orton/Show
> 7/30: 521,000 (??)- Bryan/Sheamus
> 7/23: 616,000 (3.91)- Bryan/AJ Wedding
> 6/11: 978,000 (??)- Bryan/Punk/Kane/AJ
> 4/23: 865,000 (??)- Kane/Orton/Bearer
> 
> 10PM Slot:
> 12/31: +0 (2.2)- Show/Ricardo
> 12/24: 140,000 (2.5)- Punk/Heyman/Ryback
> 12/17: -502,000 (2.64)- 3MB/DelRio-Miz-Dreamer
> 12/10: 115,000 (2.78)- Vickie/AJ
> 12/3: 493,000 (2.73)- Vince/Vickie
> 11/26: -17,000 (2.70)- Cena/Ziggler
> 11/19: 105,000(??)- Sandow/Sheamus
> 11/12: 755,000 (3.28)- Ryback/Maddoxx
> 11/5: -49,000 (??)- Del Rio/Kofi
> 10/29: 324,000 (2.94)- Sheamus/Show
> 10/22: 62,000 (??)- Team Hell No/Rhodes Scholars and Show/Kane
> 10/15: 279,000 (??)- Barrett/Sheamus
> 10/8: 210,000- (2.84)- Bryan-Kane/Ziggler-Del Rio
> 10/1: -63,000 (??)- Sandow/Sheamus
> 9/24: -129,000 (2.75)- Sheamus-Rey-Sin Cara/Del Rio-Otunga-Ricardo
> 9/17: -169,000 (2.78)- Kane/Bryan Hug it Out
> 9/10: 164,000 (3.08)- Kane-Bryan/Young-Titus
> 9/3: -55,000 (3.02): Kane/Bryan
> 8/27: 257,000 (3.51)- HHH
> 8/20: 199,000 (3.32)-Kane-Ryder/Bryan-Miz plus Cena/Punk
> 8/13: 247,000 (2.94)- Cena-Punk/Show-Bryan
> 8/6: 232,000 (3.45)- Lesnar/Heyman/HBK/HHH
> 7/30: 51,000 (3.24)- Jericho-Christian/Miz-Ziggler
> 7/23: 424,000 (334,000+90,000) (??)- Heyman/HHH/Stephanie/Lesnar
> 7/16: 282,000 (??)- Miz-Eve/Bryan-AJ
> 7/9: 66,000/280,000 (??)- Cena-Kane/Jericho-Big Show
> 7/2: 234,000 (??)- Sheamus-AJ/Dolph-Vickie and Slater/Doink
> 6/25: 803,000 (3.69)- Cena/Jericho
> 6/18: 559,000 (3.74)- Heyman/HHH
> 6/11: 320,000 (3.59)- Show/Kofi
> 6/4: 340,000 (2.93-3.02)- Punk/Kane
> 5/28: -30,000 (2.79)- Punk/Bryan
> 5/21: 390,000 (3.01)- Kane/Bryan w/ Punk (?)
> 5/14: 1,033,000 (3.37)- Kane/Show/Laurinaitis
> 5/7: 191,000 (2.89)- Sheamus-Orton/Jericho-Del Rio
> 4/30: -68,000 (??)- Orton/Swagger
> 4/23: 270,000 (3.63)- Punk/Jericho
> 4/16: 400,000 (??)- Cena
> 4/9: 379,000 (3.19)- Punk/Jericho
> 4/2: 148,000 (3.6)- Punk/Henry
> 3/26: 132,000 (2.96)- Punk/Christian/Jericho + Clay/Hawkins
> 3/19: 327,000 (3.2)- Cena/Henry w/Rock appearance
> 3/12: 869,000 (3.73)- Taker/HBK
> 3/5: 205,000 (3.20)- Punk-Sheamus/Bryan-Jericho
> 2/27: 388,000 (3.09)- Cena/Miz
> 2/20: 1,122,000 (3.85)- Taker/HHH
> 2/13: 822,000 (3.56)- HBK/HHH
> 2/6: 94,000 (??)- Punk/Jericho
> 1/30: 219,000 (3.54)- Punk/Bryan
> 1/23: 609,000 (??)- Kane/Ryder
> 1/16: 526,000 (??)- Over the top Challenge
> 1/9: 128,000 (3.0)- Punk/Swagger
> 1/2: 325,000 (??)- Cena/Miz
> 
> Overrun:
> 12/31: 800,000 (2.9)- Cena/Ziggler/AJ Lee
> 12/24: 140,000 (2.3)- Cena/Del Rio
> 12/17: 510,000 (3.0)- Cena-Vickie/Ziggler-AJ
> 12/10: 627,000 (2.96)- Cena/Show/Sheamus/Ziggler/Ryback/Shield Brawl
> 12/3: 509,000 (2.86) Punk/Miz Lie Detector Segment and Shield/Ryback and Team Hell No
> 11/26: 592,000 (2.66)- Punk/Kane and Shield/Ryback
> 11/19: 419,000 (2.87)- Punk 365 Title Celebration
> 11/12: 528,000 (2.99)- Punk/Cena
> 11/5: 1,084,000 (3.22)- Punk-Ziggler/Cena-Ryback
> 10/29: 708,000 (3.26)- Punk/Foley SVS Teams Announcement
> 10/22: 1,058,000 (2.89)- Punk/Sheamus
> 10/15: 766,000 (3.10)- Punk/McMahon/Cena/Ryback
> 10/8: 1,233,000 (3.46)- Punk/McMahon
> 10/1: 532,000 (2.7)- Punk-Ziggler/Bryan-Kane
> 9/24: 428,000 (2.74)- Punk/Cena/Heyman
> 9/17: 823,000 (3.14)- Punk-Del Rio/Sheamus-Cena
> 9/10: 411,000 (3.11)- Cena/Hart/Punk
> 9/3: 442,000 (2.99)- Cena/Del Rio
> 8/27: 479,000 (3.35)- Punk/Lawler
> 8/20: 446,000 (3.36)- Punk/Cena/Lawler
> 8/13: 817,000 (3.44)- Lesnar/HBK
> 8/6: 345,000 (3.27)- Cena/Bryan
> 7/30: 1,181,000 (3.86)- Cena/Show w/ Punk
> 7/23: 389,000 (4.43)- Punk/Cena w/ Show-Rock
> 7/16: 719,000 (3.99)- Punk/Show w/ Cena
> 7/9: 711,000 (??)- Punk-AJ/Bryan-Eve
> 7/2: 684,000 (3.47)- Cena-Punk/Bryan-Show-
> 6/25: 567,000 (3.57)- Cena/Jericho
> 6/18: 573,000 (3.74)- Cena/Laurniatis-Otunga
> 6/11: 721,000 (3.99)- Vince/Laurniatis/Cena/Show
> 6/4: 299,000 (3.14)- Cena/Cole
> 5/28: 436,000 (2.91)- Show/Clay/Kingston/Truth
> 5/21: 878,000 (3.49)- John Cena and Sheamus vs. Tensai, Jack Swagger and Dolph Ziggler in the Lumberjack Match
> 5/14: 990,000 (3.43)- Cena/Laurinaitis
> 5/7: -105,000 (2.94)- Punk/Bryan-Tensai
> 4/30: 578,000 (3.49)- Cena/Laurinaitis/Tensai
> 4/23: 873,000 (3.83)- Lesnar/Cena
> 4/16: 319,000 (3.42)- Cena/Tensai
> 4/9: 301,000 (3.42)- Cena/Otunga w/ Lesnar
> 4/2: 1,036,000 (3.9)- Lesnar Return
> 3/26: 626,000 (3.57)- Rock/Cena
> 3/19: 597,000 (3.32)- Taker/HHH/HBK
> 3/12: 509,000 (3.51)- Rock concert
> 3/5: 763,000 (3.57)- Rock/Cena
> 2/27: 643,000 (3.53)- Rock
> 2/20: 601,000 (3.31)- Battle Royal for WWE Title match at WM
> 2/13: 505,000 (3.14)- Cena/Ryder/Kane
> 2/6: 443,000 (3.42)- Jericho vs. Punk vs. The Miz vs. R-Truth vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. Kofi Kingston
> 1/30: 753,000 (??)- HHH/Laurnaitis/Undertaker
> 1/23: 761,000 (3.54)- Punk/Laurnaitis
> 1/16: 817,000 (3.32)- Punk, Bryan and Chris Jericho vs. Mark Henry, David Otunga and Ziggler plus the segment with Punk, Foley and John Laurinaitis
> 1/9: 640,000 (2.84)- Cena/Ziggler plus Cena/Kane/Ryder parking lot
> 1/2: 543,000 (3.26)- Cena/Kane


Just some interesting little facts:

-Highest rating was for Raw 1000's Overrun, a 4.3, for Punk vs. Cena's end with Big Show and Rock running in.

-Highest rating outside of the Raw 1000 show was tied for Punk vs. Big Show from Raw 7/16/12 with the Cena MITB announcement afterwards, and the Vince/Cena/Show/Laurinaitis segment, which was also the return of Vince if I'm not mistaken, where Vince announced if Show lost, Laurinaitis would be fired. 

-Highest gain of the year was for CM Punk vs. Vince McMahon overrun which was a gain of 1,233,000.

-Highest 10PM gain was Taker/HHH Raw 2/20/12 where Taker gets HHH to accept his challenge for WM28.

-Highest 10PM rating was the same as the above.

-Highest 9PM rating outside of Raw 1000 was some Cena/Vince segment I don't remember at all.

-Highest 9PM gain since Raw moved to 3 hours was Lawler's return/Punk, Heyman, and Foley coming out after (although it should be noted, the end of the segment lost 876,000 viewers).

-Lowest overrun gain was a loss of 105,000 in the Punk vs. Bryan and Tensai main event on 5/7.
-The lowest 10PM gain (outside 3-hour shows) was a loss of 68,000 by Orton vs. Swagger on 4/30
-Lowest 10PM including 3 hour Raws was a loss of 502,000 for Del Rio, Miz, and Dreamer teaming up to face 3MB 12/17.
-Lowest 9PM gain was 90,000 for some Vickie, AJ, Cena, Dolph segment, and Kofi facing Tensai 11/26.
-Lowest overrun rating was 2.3 for Cena vs. Del Rio Christmas Eve.
-Lowest overrun rating outside of Christmas Eve was 2.6 for Punk vs. Kane with Ryback and Shield interference
-Lowest 10PM rating was Big Show vs. Ricardo from 12/31 for a 2.2
-Lowest 9PM rating was 2.4 for Show vs. Sheamus Lumberjack match Christmas Eve
-Lowest 9PM outside of Christmas Eve was Punk, Heyman, and Vince 12/31 was a 2.5.

I'm missing a lot of the ratings for the 9PM slot, as well as quite a few for the 10PM.


----------



## RAB

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Kofi Kingston bringing in the viewers for that last hour, damn!


----------



## Vyed

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Where is that 3.7 QHR from?


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



uknoww said:


> no it was not
> there was also cena so cena punk and the rock drew that number not punk and the rock
> cena vs rock drew and draws alot better than punk vs the rock period


Facepalm* Yes, _*CYNICAL'S*_ comparison *IS* valid, because he was not freakin' comparing the RAW 1000 to this past Monday, he was comparing this past Monday to Rock & Cena's fued to WM. Cynical didn't even mention RAW 1000. 

So once again, Cynical's context for comparison was indeed valid.

It was Amuroray who said that wasn't fair because it was not fair to compare this past Monday to Cena-Rock's RTWM, but rather when Cena & Rock first met.

I merely pointed out that this past Monday was not the first time Rock and CM Punk met either. So Amuro's ad hoc stipulation was exactly that, just an ad hoc.

That's it. That was the whole point of even mentioning RAW 1000. Period.

Trying to hash out who had the drawing power at RAW 1000 or whatever else is just you guys losing focus and trailing off onto your own little thing.

ADD ftw I guess.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*Wrestling in the UK*
- In 2012, *WWE Raw* averaged 160,000 (9.2%) for live airings and 38,000 (0.3%) for its first repeat, a total of *198,000 viewers* per week. Unsurprisingly, the highest rating was for Raw 1000, which had 357,000 (15.1%), peaking with 479,000 (20.2%) for the return of The Rock. This is an increase on the 2011 average of 174,000 viewers.
- In 2012, *WWE SmackDown* averaged *104,000 viewers* for first run airings. This is down on the 2011 average of 116,000 viewers.
- In 2012, *TNA Impact* averaged *199,000 viewers* for first run airings.

Note that all ratings include anyone who watched that airing within 7 days (so no, 160,000 did not sit up to 2am and watched Raw live, they merely recorded it overnight to watch later)


----------



## TheRainKing

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



D.M.N. said:


> *Wrestling in the UK*
> - In 2012, *WWE Raw* averaged 160,000 (9.2%) for live airings and 38,000 (0.3%) for its first repeat, a total of *198,000 viewers* per week. Unsurprisingly, the highest rating was for Raw 1000, which had 357,000 (15.1%), peaking with 479,000 (20.2%) for the return of The Rock. This is an increase on the 2011 average of 174,000 viewers.
> - In 2012, *WWE SmackDown* averaged *104,000 viewers* for first run airings. This is down on the 2011 average of 116,000 viewers.
> - In 2012, *TNA Impact* averaged *199,000 viewers* for first run airings.
> 
> Note that all ratings include anyone who watched that airing within 7 days (so no, 160,000 did not sit up to 2am and watched Raw live, they merely recorded it overnight to watch later)


Damn, WWE don't get many viewers in the UK these days. It would be interesting to see what the viewership figures in the UK were like during the attitude era.


----------



## nwoattitude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock really proving that he is the biggest box office draw in the history of the business. Sad thing is that the 5 million plus numbers will probably leave when The Rock does.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



TheRainKing said:


> Damn, WWE don't get many viewers in the UK these days. It would be interesting to see what the viewership figures in the UK were like during the attitude era.


The WWE is on the premium TV package in the UK, everyone I know that watches it watches it on the internet. And it's not unpopular, the Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania will be events for two of the pubs within walking distance where I live and they're both normally packed on these nights.


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Do ratings help to decide a Wrestler can draw or he is over with the fans ?


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Technically speaking, if you're drawing you're over.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mrmacman said:


> Do ratings help to decide a Wrestler can draw or he is over with the fans ?


To a certain extent. But actually, MONEY helps decide whether a Wrestler is a draw. How much money does he or she make for the company. Television rating has its limitations, especially in the internet age.

This is one reason why I think often critics go too far in the comparison to ratings under Punk and ratings under Diesel/Nash. When Nash earned the nickname "lowest drawing WWE champ in history" it wasn't just that TV ratings were down. Also, house show attendance was down, with arenas being half full, sometimes less, merch sales were down, PPV buys were down. Business all around was down. (To be fair, much of that was not Nash's fault, but problems he inherited from the previous generation, fallout from the steroid trials, top talents leaving to WCW, etc.) 

But under Punk's reign, business is not anywhere near what it was under Nash (even when accounting for inflation), in fact, business isn't down at all under Punk. I think that's what many critics of Cena & Orton miss as well. TV ratings have been consistently going down for the past 6 years annually, yet many of us were mind-boggled as to why Vince kept keeping the belt on Cena.

Because Cena makes money. Without money, ratings don't mean shit. That's one reason why Stacker 2 dropped WWE as a sponsor. Yes, ratings were high at the time, but Stacker was not seeing an increase in sales after airing ads on WWE.

Same with being over with the crowd. Doesn't mean much if they won't pay to see you at house shows or buy your merchandise and PPVs.

What WWE wants wrestlers to draw are $ signs, not Nielson points. Ratings are just one aspect of measurement, and that by itself is not reliable data.


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mrmacman said:


> Do ratings help to decide a Wrestler can draw or he is over with the fans ?




No it's money. People on here put way too much stock in the ratings. Ratings are used for to see if sponsors what to put their ads on a particular TV show. What makes WWE money are PPV buys, live event attendance, and merchandising. Ratings are a help, but they aren't the end all be all that people in the IWC claim to be.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Da Silva said:


> The WWE is on the premium TV package in the UK, everyone I know that watches it watches it on the internet. And it's not unpopular, the Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania will be events for two of the pubs within walking distance where I live and they're both normally packed on these nights.


Do tv ratings even include DVR stuff? And I'm sure many people who can't watch it live(since it airs in middle of the night over there), probably just watch it online or something.



Speaking of other country tv ratings. I wonder what WWE ratings for Canada are. I think it was something like 400,000 people?(which is equivalent to 4M in USA). The show DOESN'T air live in Canada so would be interesting to see what the ratings are like for LIVE show(not even the people from the network who watch WWE, watch the Canadian feed of the show since it's not live,so proves how much that network cares about the viewers)


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



dxbender said:


> Do tv ratings even include DVR stuff? And I'm sure many people who can't watch it live(since it airs in middle of the night over there), probably just watch it online or something.


I think they do, but it doesn't take away from the fact that most people in the UK watch it via illegal streaming.


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Were segment breakdowns released yet for this week?


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Da Silva said:


> I think they do, but it doesn't take away from the fact that most people in the UK watch it via illegal streaming.


Maybe it does count in UK, but I know other places like USA, don't include DVR ratings. They don't release DVR ratings until the "season" is over.

I remember seeing TV ratings for all tv shows(once you factored in DVRs) in 2012 and some shows got several million extra viewers from DVR ratings. An average show(on national tv) that gets similar viewers as WWE, had about 2-3M extra viewers thanks to DVR. So really makes me think that in USA at least, WWE does have a few million people who DVR Raw.


----------



## Apocalypto

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Brye said:


> Well considering that this isn't then and it's a different time, how about living in the present with the rest of us?


Call me when the present becomes good. Until then, off to 1998 I go.


----------



## SrsLii

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



dxbender said:


> Maybe it does count in UK, but I know other places like USA, don't include DVR ratings. They don't release DVR ratings until the "season" is over.
> 
> I remember seeing TV ratings for all tv shows(once you factored in DVRs) in 2012 and some shows got several million extra viewers from DVR ratings. An average show(on national tv) that gets similar viewers as WWE, had about 2-3M extra viewers thanks to DVR. So really makes me think that in USA at least, WWE does have a few million people who DVR Raw.


That is not even a little bit correct. 

DVR watches are all added in within seven days of the original broadcast, to whoever asked the original question.


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



dxbender said:


> Maybe it does count in UK, but I know other places like USA, don't include DVR ratings. They don't release DVR ratings until the "season" is over.
> 
> I remember seeing TV ratings for all tv shows(once you factored in DVRs) in 2012 and some shows got several million extra viewers from DVR ratings. An average show(on national tv) that gets similar viewers as WWE, had about 2-3M extra viewers thanks to DVR. So really makes me think that in USA at least, WWE does have a few million people who DVR Raw.


lol your wrong buddy, another example of people posting so called "facts" that are lies, internet is full of this crap

they have the dvr numbers within seven days, maybe sooner, if you read up on this stuff you will know this, on raw usually about 10-15% watch on dvr, not that big of a number, so there's a little bump, not much though, most watch raw live despite what some think, look at the real websites and real numbers


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Are we ever going to get the breakdown from last week?


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Once the Rock and Lesnar leave after WM, this show is gonna drive the car off a cliff. 3 Hours of VM Punk and Super Cena all year. In the words of Scott Hudson... Good _NIGHT_!


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



roadkill_ said:


> *Once the Rock and Lesnar leave after WM, this show is gonna drive the car off a cliff.* 3 Hours of VM Punk and Super Cena all year. In the words of Scott Hudson... Good _NIGHT_!


Yeah, because Lesnar brought soooo much to the company, during his initial run. He couldn't even significantly boost ratings when he was on the show.


----------



## Shazayum

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Yeah, because Lesnar has brought soooo much to the company, during this limited run. He couldn't even significantly boost ratings when he was on the show.


Ratings aren't the only thing that matters. His feud with Cena was entertaining and then creative, not Lesnar, ruined his luster by making him lose to Cena.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Yeah, because Lesnar brought soooo much to the company, during his initial run. He couldn't even significantly boost ratings when he was on the show.


He added in the RAWs very close to SummerSlam and Extreme rules, as well as drastically improving the buy rates for both PPVs, he will have a big influence leading into Mania. Besides, he adds a lot of entertainment value, which is what I think *roadkill.* was talking about more so than ratings.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Yeah, because Lesnar brought soooo much to the company, during his initial run. He couldn't even significantly boost ratings when he was on the show.


Lesnar pulled 3.5's on the B-Show. Punk pulls 2.2's on the A-Show.

Fail.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Hour 3 did the poorest.

Either Ziggler V Cena or Rock concert did a disappointing number.

My guess is that the 125,567,748th Cena v Ziggler was responsible. 

Or was that awful Miz + Flair segment responsible?


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Hour 3 did the poorest.


Well now, isn't this a turn up for the books :Rock


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Shazayum said:


> Ratings aren't the only thing that matters. His feud with Cena was entertaining and then creative, not Lesnar, ruined his luster by making him lose to Cena.


Lesnar doesn't give a shit - he's only there for the money anyway, not to add anything entertaining to the show. If his stomach wasn't all fucked up, he'd still be in the UFC ,and wouldn't have given a WWE return a second thought.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Don't know if posted:

http://nodq.com/wwe/360295650.shtml

Hour 1- 4.50 million
Hour 2- 4.68 million
Hour 3- 4.47 million

Average: 4.55 million

If I'm not mistaken, Punk's match and promo was in hour 2. Therefore, Punk>everyone. The end.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock Concert was a full overrun segment. But really watching 3 hours of RAW last night was unbearable, I felt like I'm watching two weeks of shows just to get to a 15 minutes Rock segment. Cena/Ziggler in their best of 560 series probably didn't help. Overall rating should be up, though.


----------



## Annihilus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I think its sad that they have to lie to us and promise "legends returning" and big things for a 20th anniversary show just to pop a bigger rating. Nobody returned who hadn't been seen in WWE in the last month and nothing special happened.

I dont see any point in trying to break down the ratings by hour though, here's a fact: people are getting wrestling fatigue from these 3 hour RAWs and want to stop watching after 2 hours, thats why the 3rd hour often has a lower rating even though it has the main event.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> Rock Concert was a full overrun segment. But really watching 3 hours of RAW last night was unbearable, I felt like I'm watching two weeks of shows just to get to a 15 minutes Rock segment. Cena/Ziggler in their best of 560 series probably didn't help. Overall rating should be up, though.


Ziggler's gonna need more than a best of 560 series right now to have a chance of winning it.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> Don't know if posted:
> 
> http://nodq.com/wwe/360295650.shtml
> 
> Hour 1- 4.50 million
> *Hour 2- 4.68 million*
> Hour 3- 4.47 million
> 
> Average: 4.55 million
> 
> If I'm not mistaken, Punk's match and promo was in hour 2. Therefore, Punk>everyone. The end.












:flair (he was in the second hour too yeah?)

Edit: Third hour


----------



## The GOAT One

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Flair was in 3rd hour.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk takes over hour 3 last week, and takes over hour 2 this week.

CM GOAT.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



roadkill_ said:


> Lesnar pulled 3.5's on the B-Show. Punk pulls 2.2's on the A-Show.
> 
> Fail.


lol ignorance.

Cause a 3.5 a decade ago is totally the same thing today. And smackdown is obviously the same as a decade ago. Obviously, it is still 2003, I forgot. Stupidity really annoys me.


----------



## Callisto

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



roadkill_ said:


> Lesnar pulled 3.5's on the B-Show. Punk pulls 2.2's on the A-Show.
> 
> Fail.


Bringing up ratings from roughly a decade ago doesn't legitimize your point.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

3.24. The most watched RAW since RAW 1000. 



> The 20th Anniversary of WWE Raw on Monday, January 14 scored a 3.24 rating, up one-tenth from last week's 3.14 rating for The Rock's return. Last week's Raw faced the BCS National Title game; this week was the first Raw unopposed by football in five months.
> 
> - Raw averaged 4.55 million viewers, which was up three percent from an average of 4.42 million viewers last week.
> 
> However, the Viewership Drop-Off returned. The third hour was the least-watched hour of the show, drawing slightly fewer viewers than the first hour in the new timeslot.
> *
> But, in the demographic ratings, the third hour was the highest rated among key males for Ric Flair's TV appearance, John Cena vs. Dolph Ziggler in the cage, and the Rock Concert.*
> 
> Hourly Break Down: 4.50 million first hour viewers, peak of 4.68 million second hour viewers, and a five percent drop-off to 4.47 million third hour viewers.
> 
> It marks 24 out of 26 Raw episodes during the three-hour era where third hour viewership has declined from the second hour.
> 
> - On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #1 in overall viewers and in the key male demos, removing football from the competition.
> 
> In the week-to-week demos, Raw was up slightly compared to last week. The biggest increase was one-tenth among males 18-49, which reached the highest rating since August 27.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

^ so you bold the key demo? I don't think I have ever heard you bring up the key demo before. But, since it benefits your heroes, you try and bring it to light?

Key demo is THE only thing that matters when correlating ratings to revenue, find it funny though you never mention it til now, tho.


----------



## Ray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

DAT ROCK NOT BRINGING IN DEM VIEWERS FOR HOUR 3 :rock4

Still doing good business though. RAW was sold out last night and the week before, and the overall rating is up.


----------



## BKsaaki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Lesnar doesn't give a shit - he's only there for the money anyway, not to add anything entertaining to the show. If his stomach wasn't all fucked up, he'd still be in the UFC ,and wouldn't have given a WWE return a second thought.


And he's still a lot more relevant and entertaining than your Dear leader Punk.


----------



## dan the marino

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Not surprised to see the ratings are the highest since RAW 1000. Considering last night was more or less a normal RAW episode (with the Rock in the last 10 minutes) I'd be shocked if they remained anywhere near that high next week. They really misused the 20th anniversary, it could've been a big show with a lot of nice cameos and fun matches, segments, etc. Instead... nothing really happened and nothing really progressed. Aside from Punk/Rock at the end a bit.


----------



## Teh_TaKeR

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



BKsaaki said:


> And he's still a lot more relevant and entertaining than your Dear leader Punk.


unk2

I have this feeling that you're feeling Borks feelings feel good with your feeling on feelings on Punk.














:troll


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

What was in hour 2 other than Punk/Brodus?


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



purple_gloves said:


> What was in hour 2 other than Punk/Brodus?


Divas match
Rock and Foley backstage
Sheamus v 3MB
Cena backstage iirc


----------



## deadmanwatching

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Lulz dwayne cant draw.


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The shitstorm is erupting I see.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Yeah I can see a drop next week with fans coming to see a RAW 1000 esque show not returning next week.


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



jonoaries said:


> The shitstorm is erupting I see.


Nah, won't happen till the breakdown gets released.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock and Sock spiked Hour Two. Not Punk's undrawing aura.

So Doooowayne basically had the 2 biggest gaining spots of the night......







:rock4

1.5 m gain from Punk/Brodus for Rock & Sock reunion

and prob 500k gain from from Cena/Ziggler for the concert


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



BKsaaki said:


> And he's still a lot more relevant and entertaining than your Dear leader Punk.


Not really, no.


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Well either Miz/Flair, ME or the Rock Concert did FAR below what it really should have. Or they all three just did pretty poor while everything inbetween tanked in Hour 3.

Like always, 3 hours is a problem. Especially if the previous 2 hours arent all that exciting. Honestly, this format wouldnt even work if this was WWF during 98-99. The writers just cant do storylines and feuds to fill up 3 hours. And I understand them. They have a hard time doing it with 2 hours. And you would think that with 3 hours you could do much more to build up the actual RUMBLE, you know, the main reason for the PPV.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*Wasn't The Rock concert entirely in overrun though?*


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Not really, no.


Yes he is. 

His MMA career is still more talked about 6 times over than Punk's whole life.

And Brock's match in Extreme Rules alone pretty much shat on Punk's whole 2012 in-ring catalogue and everything else he had done in the past year.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Yes he is.
> 
> His MMA career is still more talked about 6 times over than Punk's whole life.
> 
> And Brock's match in Extreme Rules alone pretty much shat on Punk's whole 2012 in-ring catalogue and everything else he had done in the past year.


It's hard to resist falling for your attempts and calling you an idiot, but I am barely.

Punk's matches with Bryan at OTL, and against Cena at MITB 2011 were FAR better than Cena/Lesnar.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*I think he's talking about relevancy THANOS, in which case I'm inclined to agree with him.*


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

THE RAWK putting phil over so much that he shall now permanently be known as CM DRAW. Move over Cena, you have been replaced as top full-time draw in the business.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *I think he's talking about relevancy THANOS, in which case I'm inclined to agree with him.*


I agree with him on that point because UFC is WAYYY bigger than WWE and Brock is the biggest draw over there all time. What I responding to with the last sentence he wrote!


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*I see.*


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



THANOS said:


> It's hard to resist falling for your attempts and calling you an idiot, but I am barely.
> 
> *Punk's matches with Bryan at OTL, and against Cena at MITB 2011 were FAR better than Cena/Lesnar.*


Maybe MITB 2011, I'll give you that it was better, mainly thanks to a superb carry job by Cena covering for Punk's dozens of botches.

But OTL? Nobody outside of those basement-dwelling indy marks even thought it was a decent match at slightest. It was 20 minutes of sloppy pretentious catch wrestling that was only saved from disaster by Bryan's smooth executions. Sheamus-Bryan, Punk-Jericho and Shield-Hell No/Ryback were all FAR better than it.


----------



## blur

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

RAWK not drawing anymore. :Rock

save.us.Tyson


----------



## deadmanwatching

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Save us russo.


----------



## antdvda

ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *Wasn't The Rock concert entirely in overrun though?*


That's what I thought.


Sent from my iPhone using Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## fabi1982

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

10:00 PM 4.47 
9:00 PM 4.68 
8:00 PM 4.50 

Soruce: tvbythenumbers


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

CM DRAW


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Maybe MITB 2011, I'll give you that it was better, mainly thanks to a superb carry job by Cena covering for Punk's dozens of botches.
> 
> *But OTL? Nobody outside of those basement-dwelling indy marks even thought it was a decent match at slightest. It was 20 minutes of sloppy pretentious catch wrestling that was only saved from disaster by Bryan's smooth executions. Sheamus-Bryan, Punk-Jericho and Shield-Hell No/Ryback were all FAR better than it.*


:lmao :lmao :lmao

We already have a front-runner for most laughable post of 2013.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



BANKSY said:


> CM DRAW


It was obviously a 1.5 m gain for the Rock and Sock segment.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Maybe MITB 2011, I'll give you that it was better, mainly thanks to a superb carry job by Cena covering for Punk's dozens of botches.
> 
> *But OTL? Nobody outside of those basement-dwelling indy marks even thought it was a decent match at slightest. It was 20 minutes of sloppy pretentious catch wrestling that was only saved from disaster by Bryan's smooth executions. Sheamus-Bryan, Punk-Jericho and Shield-Hell No/Ryback were all FAR better than it.*


:bosh

Worst troll on these forums.


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I had a feeling it wouldn't get as a good of a rating as I thought it would have. It just felt like a normal RAW. With very few legends showing up, it was mediocre to say the least.


----------



## Ray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Wait, so Hour 3 had Flair, Cena, AND ROCK with an OVERRUN in it, but it still did below Hour 2?

CM GAWD unk


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Dwayne's guitar is too small to draw with GOD.

unk3


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

flair miz segment ended up the most watched part of the show


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



validreasoning said:


> flair miz segment ended up the most watched part of the show


Really? Seems way to LOL-worthy to be true.


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk finally does good numbers. 

Meanwhile, the "WHY DO YOU CARE ABOUT RATINGS? THEY MEAN JACKSHIT AND IT'S VINCE'S AND WWE'S FAULT" mentality goes out the window.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock promo was entirely overrun, therefore not included in hour 3.


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



WallofShame said:


> Rock promo was entirely overrun, therefore not included in hour 3.


Yes it is...
Which is why its even more sad since the overrun usually does huge, especially with The Rock, and help Hour 3. 
Sure it might have done huge now aswell, but that has to mean most of the things in hour 3 tanked pretty bad.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Miz has thanked Flair on twitter for making MizTv segment the most watched part of Raw's 20th anniversary.


----------



## charmed1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

It was a horrible show that rightfully should have tanked but got ratings based purely on hype alone..definitely not for the quality of the show.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

These punk marks are retarded. Every show since the summer does like 2.7 and then the last two shows are 3.2. What's the difference between the last two shows and every other show? The Rock. He's the whole reason the ratings are up every hour... people are turning to raw to see whether he is on. Have we not learned over the last year that CM Punk aka 'Kevin Nash 2.0', is not a ratings draw?


----------



## Twisted14

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Is there a breakdown out yet? Last week's hasn't been released yet either has it? What's taking so long?


----------



## TheRainKing

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Twisted14 said:


> Is there a breakdown out yet? Last week's hasn't been released yet either has it? What's taking so long?


It's part of a conspiracy to ruin the ratings thread.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



YamchaRocks said:


> Punk finally does good numbers.
> 
> Meanwhile, the "WHY DO YOU CARE ABOUT RATINGS? THEY MEAN JACKSHIT AND IT'S VINCE'S AND WWE'S FAULT" mentality goes out the window.


It was the Rock and Sock segment that spiked hour 2 with 1.5 m gains.

You can see the breakdown later.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

So... no breakdown for the past two weeks yet? Any idea when they will be posted?


----------



## ChrisPartlow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I heard Raw last week had 20 viewers! That's right, however 15 is more accurate because Colt Cabana, CM Punk, The Rock, and Vince McMahon's TV's don't count.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



ChrisPartlow said:


> I heard Raw last week had 20 viewers! That's right, however 15 is more accurate because Colt Cabana, CM Punk, The Rock, and Vince McMahon's TV's don't count.


Have you ever considered that you're not actually as funny as you think you are?


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

1/7
John Cena vs. Dolph Ziggler match gained 214,000 viewers. 
Eve Torres vs. Kaitlyn lost 224,000 viewers. 
Backstage stuff with Santino Marella, Ricky Steamboat and Wade Barrett, and Randy Orton and 3MB in an interview, lost 484,000 viewers. 
Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow and Randy Orton vs. Heath Slater gained 172,000 viewers at 9 p.m. 
Barrett vs. Marella with Steamboat in the corner gained 101,000 viewers.
Antonio Cesaro vs. Great Khali lost 80,000 viewers. 
Sheamus vs. Jinder Mahal gained 150,000 viewers. 
C.M. Punk vs. Ryback in the TLC match gained 515,000 viewers. 
Big Show vs. Kofi Kingston lost 1,037,000 viewers.
From start-to-finish, the segment with Rock and Punk that ended the show gained 887,000 viewers.

1/14
Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett lost 171,000 viewers.
Kane vs. Damien Sandow and the Mick Foley Hall of Fame announcement with the brawl with The Shield, Ryback, Randy Orton and Sheamus losing 497,000 viewers. 
The Ryback interview and Kaitlyn vs. Eve Torres for the Divas title gained 509,000 viewers.
C.M. Punk vs. Brodus Clay lost 149,000 viewers. 
The C.M. Punk post-match interview, the cars being destroyed video of old Raw episodes and Mick Foley, The Rock and Vickie Guerrero backstage gained 142,000 viewers. 
Sheamus vs. 3MB in a Battle Royal and a John Cena backstage interview lost 202,000 viewers. 
Miz TV with Flair and Antonio Cesaro gained 449,000 viewers at 10 p.m. 
Daniel Bryan vs. Cody Rhodes, plus A.J., Big E Langston and Dolph Ziggler promo and vignette on weddings in WWE lost 752,000 viewers.
John Cena vs. Dolph Ziggler in the cage match gained 118,000 viewers. 
The final segment with The Rock concert and the brawl with Punk gained 207,000 viewers.


Average 2012 viewership including DVR (no word if +3 or +7)
Raw: 4.75 million viewers
Smackdown: 3.04 million viewers
Main Event: 1.38 million viewers 
Saturday Morning Slam: 1.14 million viewers

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter


----------



## deadmanwatching

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

jinder mahal gained 150,000 viewers,Heath Slater gained 172,000 

3mb= GOAT


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



wb1899 said:


> *C.M. Punk vs. Brodus Clay lost 149,000 viewers.*


:ti I just *KNEW* it

Man, Ryback has been pulling them numbers. Almost Rock-like gains there.









Rydraw


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Meh, casual fans just turn there tv off when they see Cm punk.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Or they turn off when they see Brodus Clay.

Why did the ratings not drop during other CM Punk segments? Marks :lol


----------



## deadmanwatching

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cookie Monster said:


> Or they turn off when they see Brodus Clay.
> 
> Why did the ratings not drop during other CM Punk segments?


when the ratings increases its phill the draw , when they loses its Brodus clay



Cookie Monster said:


> Marks :lol


I know:lol


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cookie Monster said:


> Or they turn off when they see Brodus Clay.
> 
> *Why did the ratings not drop during other CM Punk segments?* Marks :lol


Because they wanted to see Doooowayne and Rydraw maybe?.....










> *The Ryback interview and Kaitlyn vs. Eve Torres for the Divas title gained 509,000 viewers*













> *C.M. Punk vs. Brodus Clay lost 149,000 viewers.*


:lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## Quasi Juice

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mrmacman said:


> Meh, casual fans just turn there tv off when they see Cm punk.


Can you read? Punk's segments gained viewers. Only his match against Clay lost some viewers, but who can blame them, Clay is boring as fuck. They only lost 100,000. Hell, Kingston's match lost 1 MILLION viewers.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Quasi Juice said:


> *Can you read?* Punk's segments gained viewers. Only his match against Clay lost some viewers, but who can blame them, Clay is boring as fuck. They only lost 100,000. Hell, Kingston's match lost 1 MILLION viewers.


Can you?



> C.M. Punk vs. *Ryback* in the TLC match gained 515,000 viewers.





> From start-to-finish, the segment with *Rock* and Punk that ended the show gained 887,000 viewers.





> The *Ryback* interview and Kaitlyn vs. Eve Torres for the Divas title gained 509,000 viewers.





> The final segment with *The Rock* concert and the brawl with Punk gained 207,000 viewers.


Take out the real viewership magnets around his vicinity and they won't sit around for his 97 lbs pizza hut delivering ass.



> *C.M. Punk vs. Brodus Clay lost 149,000 viewers.*


:lmao :ti :lmao


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Because they wanted to see Doooowayne and Rydraw maybe?.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao


The divas stood for the vast majority of that quarter as Ryback's interview was very short (although unintentionally hilarious, so definitely worth watching). Bow before them instead because Ryback was also part of the previous quarter that lost almost half a million.

But it doesn't matter since these can't be the right figures as they don't show the 1,5M gain for Rock and Sock you promised us.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Can you?
> Take out the real viewership magnets around his vicinity and they won't sit around for his 97 lbs pizza hut delivering ass.



Don't you see how stupid it is?

So because a segment gained in which CM Punk was in, it's not down to him but The Rock and Ryback. Yet when they lose viewers, it's not because of the likes of Brodus Clay, it is in fact CM Punk. 

Shits hilarious.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

ADR/Bigshow/Vince and Miz/Flair/Cesaro had better rating than Rock/Punk? Thats interesting.

And LOL at a 25 second match losing over million viewers


----------



## deatawaits

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Ok that overrun no. for the the rock concert has to be wrong that's friggin' insane.And you can't blame punk for he wasn't even there except for 1 and a half minute.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Cm Punk may not be a huge tv draw (he can draw when he's doing something interesting), but he is certainly a wrestling forum draw. Jesus Christ. It seems every single thread descends into a full on debate about the pros and cons of the man!

Anyway, I think these numbers show that Ryback is definitely winning the rumble. They'd be stupid not to.


----------



## Twisted14

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Looks to me that these numbers mean shit. Everything is always all over the place every week, nothing is ever consistent. I don't see how anyone can try to argue that one wrestler does or doesn't draw from the information given in these breakdowns.

I often like to see these numbers to get a rough idea of how the show went, what might have been popular, what might not have been popular, as well as to see which hours are the most successful and how the third hour does. But this week... I can't tell a damn thing. Big Show/Kofi losing 1 million? The divas match gaining half a million? The Rock Concert overrun only bringing in 200,000? The fuck is even happening? 

None of these numbers are consistent with anything in the past. That isn't saying much because nothing is ever consistent.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...how_vs_Kofi_Kingston_Punk_vs_Ryback_More.html



> - Due to the holidays, we're just now getting the ratings breakdown for the January 7th WWE RAW with the return of The Rock. That show did a 3.15 rating with 4.44 million viewers. RAW that night went up against the BCS Championship football game which drew 26.83 million viewers.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, John Cena vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 214,000 viewers. Kaitlyn vs. Eve Torres lost 224,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with Santino Marella, Ricky Steamboat and Wade Barrett plus Randy Orton and 3MB in an interview lost 484,000 viewers. Kane and Daniel Bryan vs. Cody Rhodes and Damien Sandow plus Randy Orton vs. Heath Slater gained 172,000 viewers in the 9pm time slot for a 2.94 quarter rating.
> 
> Barrett vs. Marella gained 101,000 viewers. Antonio Cesaro vs. The Great Khali lost 80,000 viewers. Jinder Mahal vs. Sheamus gained 150,000 viewers. Ryback vs. CM Punk in the TLC Match gained 515,000 viewers, a very good growth for 10pm right now. The first part of the match did a 3.52 quarter rating and the second part did a 3.44 quarter rating. Kofi Kingston vs. Big Show lost 1,037,000 viewers - way more viewers lost than any segment in 2012. That was likely fans turning back to the football game.
> 
> From start to finish, the segment with The Rock and CM Punk gained 887,000 viewers. The Punk interview before Rock came out did a 3.17 rating. The Rock/Punk segment back and forth did a 3.67 quarter rating. At the finish, which went longer than usual, they were at a 3.34 quarter rating.



http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._The_Rock_s_Concert_Team_AJ_Segment_More.html



> - As noted, the January 14th episode of WWE RAW did a 3.19 rating with 4.54 million viewers. This was the biggest audience for RAW since the 1,000th episode on July 23rd, 2012.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, they opened strong with Vince McMahon, Big Show and Alberto Del Rio doing a 3.44 quarter rating. Wade Barrett vs. Randy Orton lost 171,000 viewers, which is good considering how strong the opener was. Kane vs. Damien Sandow and the Mick Foley Hall of Fame announcement plus the brawl with The Shield, Sheamus, Ryback and Orton lost 497,000 viewers. Ryback's interview plus Kaitlyn vs. Eve Torres for the Divas Title gained 509,000 viewers at 9pm for a 3.33 quarter rating.
> 
> Brodus Clay vs. CM Punk lost 149,000 viewers. Punk's post-match interview, the video of past RAW car moments plus the backstage segment with The Rock, Foley and Vickie Guerrero gained 142,000 viewers. Sheamus vs. 3MB in a Over the Top Challenge plus a John Cena segment lost 202,000 viewers. MizTV with Ric Flair, The Miz and Antonio Cesaro gained 449,000 viewers at 10pm for the show's peak rating of 3.50.
> 
> Cody Rhodes vs. Daniel Bryan plus a backstage segment with AJ Lee, Big E Langston and Dolph Ziggler lost 752,000 viewers - which is likely to be among the biggest drops of this year. Cena vs. Ziggler in the steel cage match gained 118,000 viewers. The closing segment with The Rock's concert and the brawl with Punk gained 207,000 viewers for a 3.20 quarter rating. That gain is considered low for a RAW overrun.


includes some of ratings of the quarters


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

punk still cant draw on his own lolololol


----------



## Sam Knight

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The Ryback interview and Kaitlyn vs. Eve Torres for the Divas title gained 509,000 viewers
Ryback=GOAT


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:flair2 is the GOAT. Comes in and works with Punk and gives him the highest segment of the night a few weeks ago. Comes in again and works with Miz and Cesaro and gives them the highest segment of the night. All that needs to be said really.


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Wow crazy breakdown. Rock/Punk isn't as hot with the casual fans as we all thought. 




> *The Rock/Punk segment back and forth did a 3.67 quarter rating. At the finish, which went longer than usual, they were at a 3.34 quarter rating.*


So the overrun lost viewers towards the end? Similar to Rock/Cena promo weeks before WM 28.





> MizTV with Ric Flair, The Miz and Antonio Cesaro gained 449,000 viewers at 10pm *for the show's peak* rating of 3.50.


So the viewer's interest peaked with Flair/Miz. Casuals didn't even care about the advertised Rock concert. 

No wonder third hour did poor, Flair/Miz at 10pm and Cena/Ziggler gaining at a odd quarter has actually saved the third hour from completely bombing.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Nothing to do with any storyline being "hot" or not. It's always happening when you cross the 15 minutes overrun because it also attract non-wrestling viewers.

3.7 is a great audience for a selling promo. But the 3 hour concept is killing everything. Nobody is willing to sit through 3 hours of RAW just to get to a 15 minutes segment. Me included. Plus, they didn't even advertised anything for the show beforehand, everything is on the spot promotion. Didn't even tell the audience that Rock is there next week.

The Rasslin' GOD! doing business even today :flair3 Not surprising.


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock with that LOW overrun. No suprise there, I think people just want a little more action from The Rock. Not a lame ass concert.

Some of the quarters are a little questionable, since many segments/matches ran from one quarter to the other.


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

This is exactly why I don't want Austin/Punk. Punk just isn't a star in the casuals eyes. Punk pretending to be a badass against the Rock after running away from Ryback and other babyfaces, is not believable in the least. 

Austin/Punk would only hurt Austin's big return after a decade. He can't even get close to the WM main event with Punk as opponent. Austin/Cena is the way to go.


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Further proof that Punk is no draw. Having lower numbers then a divas match is just bad....


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cookie Monster said:


> Don't you see how stupid it is?
> 
> So because a segment gained in which CM Punk was in, it's not down to him but The Rock and Ryback.


Are you seriously saying that Punk was the reason that segment gained even though it had Rock and Foley in it? If that was true then surely his match would of gained too then as it would indicate people want to tune in and watch him regardless of what he is doing?

I think deep down you know your wrong.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Let's just blame Punk and ignore the fact that Cena lost even more viewers for his segment...


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Falkono said:


> Are you seriously saying that Punk was the reason that segment gained even though it had Rock and Foley in it? If that was true then surely his match would of gained too then as it would indicate people want to tune in and watch him regardless of what he is doing?
> 
> I think deep down you know your wrong.


I'm sorry but if I was to DVR Raw, which I don't, however I may have to start doing. I would fast forward through Punks match with Brodus fucking Clay. I'm a massive Punk fan and will tune in to any match of his when it's of a decent calibre or a promo of his, but even a match against Brodus Clay would make me tune out.

I think deep down you know you're (yes, that's right you're, not your) a Punk hater.


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

They didn't even hype Punk/Clay it was a 1 minute promo for Brodus talking about how Punk mentioned him last week then he came out.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Felpent said:


> This is exactly why I don't want Austin/Punk. Punk just isn't a star in the casuals eyes. Punk pretending to be a badass against the Rock after running away from Ryback and other babyfaces, is not believable in the least.
> 
> Austin/Punk would only hurt Austin's big return after a decade. He can't even get close to the WM main event with Punk as opponent. Austin/Cena is the way to go.


Punk running away against one opponent and not against another has nothing whatsoever to do with him being a star or not. It's scripted entertainment and therefor the fault of the writers for not building a consistent bridge between the feuds. His stardom affects completely different things.

As for Austin not being near the WM main event, that makes me laugh. He'd have a great chance at main eventing with a lot of guys as he's seen by many as the all time great and suggesting that he'll only be there with Cena is a bit insulting towards him. Not that it really matters as Punk is the opponent because Austin wants to work with him.


----------



## FreakyZo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I swear to god this is the worst thread on the forum filled with delusional Rock marks and trolls. It should just be closed


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

how is that overrun possible when it went 15minutes

shit


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Evil Peter said:


> Punk running away against one opponent and not against another has nothing whatsoever to do with him being a star or not. It's scripted entertainment and therefor the fault of the writers for not building a consistent bridge between the feuds. His stardom affects completely different things.
> 
> As for Austin not being near the WM main event, that makes me laugh. He'd have a great chance at main eventing with a lot of guys as he's seen by many as the all time great and suggesting that he'll only be there with Cena is a bit insulting towards him. Not that it really matters as Punk is the opponent because Austin wants to work with him.


Well its the truth. Austin/Punk can main event if Vince allows it to go on last, thats not the issue. The problem is it won't be the key drawing match, Rock/Brock and Cena/Taker and possible HHH match would completely overshadow it. 

I don't want fucking Stone Cold to be in the position Jericho was at WM 28 and thats where he would be with punk as opponent. If that's going to be the case, i'd rather Austin not return at all.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

More detailed report just in:



> MizTV with Ric Flair, The Miz and Antonio Cesaro gained 449,000 viewers at 10pm for the show's peak rating of 3.50. *The elbow drop Flair delivered to his own jacket gained 357,000 of those viewers.*


GOAT


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> Nothing to do with any storyline being "hot" or not. It's always happening when you cross the 15 minutes overrun because it also attract non-wrestling viewers.
> 
> 3.7 is a great audience for a selling promo. But the 3 hour concept is killing everything. Nobody is willing to sit through 3 hours of RAW just to get to a 15 minutes segment. Me included. Plus, they didn't even advertised anything for the show beforehand, everything is on the spot promotion. Didn't even tell the audience that Rock is there next week.
> 
> The Rasslin' GOD! doing business even today :flair3 Not surprising.


Ha, making up convenient excuses for Dwayne's poor numbers, I see. If Rock wasn't involved in that overrun, you would've shit all over it.



Cookie Monster said:


> Don't you see how stupid it is?
> 
> So because a segment gained in which CM Punk was in, it's not down to him but The Rock and Ryback. Yet when they lose viewers, it's not because of the likes of Brodus Clay, it is in fact CM Punk.
> 
> Shits hilarious.


I wouldn't even bother with him. Not only is he a Punk-hating, troll... he genuinely believes over half a million people tuned in especially to see Ryback in the TLC match, and to see his shitty promo this week - despite the Divas taking up most of the quarter, and Ryback not even being advertised.


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cookie Monster said:


> I'm sorry but if I was to DVR Raw, which I don't, however I may have to start doing. I would fast forward through Punks match with Brodus fucking Clay. I'm a massive Punk fan and will tune in to any match of his when it's of a decent calibre or a promo of his, but even a match against Brodus Clay would make me tune out.
> 
> I think deep down you know you're (yes, that's right you're, not your) a Punk hater.


Okay so let me put it like this.....

If say Rock was wrestling Brodus Clay would you fast forward it? If Stone Cold was wrestling him? If Undertaker was wrestling him? If HBK was wrestling him? Hell even if Brock was wrestling him? You know you wouldn't so why is Punk any different? It isn't about who they are wrestling it is about the individual. Because by your own logic if Punk goes back to the mid-card and wrestles people around that level you will fast forward them. Meaning how much of a Punk fan would you really be? A draw is someone who pulls in viewers no matter who they face. 

Secondly i'm not a Punk hater. I think he isn't as big a deal as people on here try and make out. Some people try and put him in the same bracket as people like Rock and Stone Cold and he shouldn't be there. Hell he is having the longest reign of any champion since 1983. Do I think he is that good? Hell no. So it isn't about hating him it is about pushing someone who isn't actually that good. So when these type of numbers come up it backs up that belief that other people don't think he is that big a deal either. 2012 was up there with the worst years in terms of entertainment level and ratings. Punk was champion for the entire year. That isn't saying he is to blame, far from it. It is saying he is one of the many reasons.

As for the English lesson, many thanks....But YOUR (not you're) opinion is wrong.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I didn't watch it. Simply because I knew Cole, CM Punk, soccer moms and general shittiness isn't a trade off for even a Rock cameo. The Rock is no longer good enough to watch this vomit, especially if you can catch the 6 minutes out of 180 on YT.


----------



## FreakyZo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Falkono said:


> Okay so let me put it like this.....
> 
> If say Rock was wrestling Brodus Clay would you fast forward it? If Stone Cold was wrestling him? If Undertaker was wrestling him? If HBK was wrestling him? Hell even if Brock was wrestling him? You know you wouldn't so why is Punk any different? It isn't about who they are wrestling it is about the individual. Because by your own logic if Punk goes back to the mid-card and wrestles people around that level you will fast forward them. Meaning how much of a Punk fan would you really be? A draw is someone who pulls in viewers no matter who they face.
> 
> Secondly i'm not a Punk hater. I think he isn't as big a deal as people on here try and make out. Some people try and put him in the same bracket as people like Rock and Stone Cold and he shouldn't be there. Hell he is having the longest reign of any champion since 1983. Do I think he is that good? Hell no. So it isn't about hating him it is about pushing someone who isn't actually that good. So when these type of numbers come up it backs up that belief that other people don't think he is that big a deal either. 2012 was up there with the worst years in terms of entertainment level and ratings. Punk was champion for the entire year. That isn't saying he is to blame, far from it. It is saying he is one of the many reasons.
> 
> As for the English lesson, many thanks....But YOUR (not you're) opinion is wrong.


Simple Punk is there every week so if you miss him wrestle this week, don't worry you can see him next week. The same cant be said about Taker, Rock, Austin, Brock, etc you fucking troll.


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Ha, making up convenient excuses for Dwayne's poor numbers, I see. If Rock wasn't involved in that overrun, you would've shit all over it.
> 
> 
> I wouldn't even bother with him. Not only is he a Punk-hating, troll... he genuinely believes over half a million people tuned in especially to see Ryback in the TLC match, and to see his shitty promo this week - despite the Divas taking up most of the quarter, and Ryback not even being advertised.


What is with all this Punk hater/troll crap. You use that expression to try and imply someone is wrong because they don't share the same like of someone as you. Where because you like him therefore you have to be right....way to argue!

To see Rock and Punk numbers better read the breakdown for the week before. 
"The Punk interview before Rock came out did a 3.17 rating"
"The Rock/Punk segment back and forth did a 3.67 quarter rating"

So before Rock came out it was a 3.17 and after he came out it was a 3.67. 
To try and imply Rock brought in less viewers then Punk this week even though there was a previous segment where Punk lost viewers is just stupid....


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Falkono said:


> Okay so let me put it like this.....
> 
> If say Rock was wrestling Brodus Clay would you fast forward it? If Stone Cold was wrestling him? If Undertaker was wrestling him? If HBK was wrestling him? Hell even if Brock was wrestling him? You know you wouldn't so why is Punk any different? It isn't about who they are wrestling it is about the individual. Because by your own logic if Punk goes back to the mid-card and wrestles people around that level you will fast forward them. Meaning how much of a Punk fan would you really be? A draw is someone who pulls in viewers no matter who they face.
> 
> Secondly i'm not a Punk hater. I think he isn't as big a deal as people on here try and make out. Some people try and put him in the same bracket as people like Rock and Stone Cold and he shouldn't be there. Hell he is having the longest reign of any champion since 1983. Do I think he is that good? Hell no. So it isn't about hating him it is about pushing someone who isn't actually that good. So when these type of numbers come up it backs up that belief that other people don't think he is that big a deal either. 2012 was up there with the worst years in terms of entertainment level and ratings. Punk was champion for the entire year. That isn't saying he is to blame, far from it. It is saying he is one of the many reasons.
> 
> As for the English lesson, many thanks....But YOUR (not you're) opinion is wrong.


I probably would. Just like I fast forward other pointless matches on the card. If I was to DVR, I wouldn't watch anything unless results or people on here suggested me too. Like Ziggler/Cena cage match, I'd have stopped and watched that mainly due to the fact it is a cage match on Raw.

I'd usually just watch for the promos alone and some of The Shield. Punk won't be going down to the mid card and if he does, I'd be fuming with the WWE for doing that to one of the best talents they have to offer. In fact, I'd want him to pack his bags and walk out of that fucked up company.

Who on here has put him in that bracket. Go get me some quotes. NO ONE puts Punk in that bracket. Heck, people don't even put fucking Cena in that bracket. You not thinking he is that good just sum this all up. I understand if in your opinion you're not a fan of him, but how can you straight up say he is not good. The guy is the best on the mic in the company and quite easily the most entertaining superstar they have right now, by a landslide. You may think that regarding 2012, but for me it was one of the best years for WRESTLING. You know, it is a wrestling company after all and there were many many 4 star + matches.

I don't see how he is one of the reasons. He is being who he is. You can blame those shitty Hollywood writers and the so called "creative" team they have though. I'm quite surprised you haven't churned out the usual bullshit of "PG IS KILLING DIS COMPANY"


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Quasi Juice said:


> Can you read? Punk's segments gained viewers. Only his match against Clay lost some viewers, but who can blame them, Clay is boring as fuck. They only lost 100,000. Hell, Kingston's match lost 1 MILLION viewers.


Right, so when he has segments with others and it gains viewers, the credit goes to him. But if it's the same scenario and viewers go away, it's all down to however he was in the ring with.

Totally makes sense. :HHH3


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



FreakyZo said:


> Simple Punk is there every week so if you miss him wrestle this week, don't worry you can see him next week. The same cant be said about Taker, Rock, Austin, Brock, etc you fucking troll.


But they were there every week for years. People wanted to watch them no matter what they did. That is the difference.

You guys are now saying people only want to watch the current guys if they are fighting top guys i.e adding a condition to it.

If people like someone they will tune in no matter what they are doing. It shows how popular something/someone is. 

As for the troll comment....what a way to make your argument (or lack of one) seem more plausible...


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

No point in blaming Punk for low ratings. Yes he is the champion and he doesn't draw but who else can you replace him with? Anyone wants to see Rock/Ryback for Rumble? Rock's typical lame comedy vs feed me more crap? No thank you. Punk/Rock is the best option.

Besides Punk is just there to drop the WWE title to the Rock anyway.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Falkono said:


> But they were there every week for years. *People wanted to watch them no matter what they did.* That is the difference.
> 
> You guys are now saying people only want to watch the current guys if they are fighting top guys i.e adding a condition to it.
> 
> If people like someone they will tune in no matter what they are doing. It shows how popular something/someone is.
> 
> As for the troll comment....what a way to make your argument (or lack of one) seem more plausible...


Do you have any evidence to support this? Any breakdowns from the Attitude Era that show Rock gaining in random matches against jobbers? I'm not saying it didn't happen, I'm just saying you can't really use that if you don't know for sure that it did happen.

The way I see it at the moment is, there are some Punk fans who are on his cock way too much, and there are some Punk haters who are way too critical of him. One wrestler being a huge tv draw on his own, is very rare, and people seem to forget this. Punk is clearly not one of them, but he is the best they have got at the moment and is a fantastic heel whether he draws or not.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

90% of the people in this thread would fail a basic college statistics course.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Falkono has a point. Best example is a random HHH vs Taka in the middle of the show on Raw in 2000 (Much like Punk vs Clay this week). Hunter was there wrestling twice on TV each and every week (Punk only wrestles one time a week on TV). And Taka was even less charismatic and less over than Clay. 

And still, Hunter/Taka was a huge success (both in the ratings and live) and Punk/Clay wasn't. Can Punk defenders or anybody claiming the champ is not important to the ratings in general explain this situation?


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



murder said:


> Falkono has a point. Best example is a random HHH vs Taka in the middle of the show on Raw in 2000 (Much like Punk vs Clay this week). Hunter was there wrestling twice on TV each and every week (Punk only wrestles one time a week on TV). And Taka was even less charismatic and less over than Clay.
> 
> And still, Hunter/Taka was a huge success (both in the ratings and live) and Punk/Clay wasn't. Can Punk defenders or anybody claiming the champ is not important to the ratings in general explain this situation?


It's no where near the same. Taka was an unbelievable worker and one of the best in the company at the time. Him and HHH had a superb match which MAIN EVENTED Raw. I still watch it on Youtube and it was a superb TV match, it bares no comparison whatsoever to Clay/Punk.

If Punk had been spouting his mouth off and say someone like Tyson Kidd challenged him for the title back stage and it main evented Raw, THEN you could compare. plus I wouldn't even DVR that because that would be one of the matches of the year. Especially if it was somewhere hot, imagine it being in Canada.

Tyson Kidd would like a million bucks like he always does given the chance, you give him a few false finishes, the crowd go absolutely ape shit, only for CM Punk to end up winning, maybe even add some sort of dirt form in there to get the Canadian crowd really buzzing.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Are people really trying to compare HHH/Taka to Brodus/Punk?


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Lady Killer said:


> Are people really trying to compare HHH/Taka to Brodus/Punk?


You've just seen it with your very own eyes :lol


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cookie Monster said:


> It's no where near the same. Taka was an unbelievable worker and one of the best in the company at the time. Him and HHH had a superb match which MAIN EVENTED Raw. I still watch it on Youtube and it was a superb TV match, it bares no comparison whatsoever to Clay/Punk.


No the main event was Rock vs Bossman/Buchanan in a cage. This match happened in the middle of the show. And yes Taka was a sperb worker but he wasn't over at all going in cause he wasn't a regular on TV for almost two years. Clay on the other hand has received a big push this past year.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



murder said:


> No the main event was Rock vs Bossman/Buchanan in a cage. This match happened in the middle of the show. And yes Taka was a sperb worker but he wasn't over at all going in cause he wasn't a regular on TV for almost two years. Clay on the other hand has received a big push this past year.


Sorry for that, you're right in terms of the main event but that isn't really the point. You can't compare Triple H/Taka to Brodus/Punk at all. If you honeslty put Kidd/Punk in the same match (obviously Kidd was injured) and you give them the same length of time they gave HHH/Taka, we'd of seen something very special.

Plus, the company as a whole was drawing at the time. WWE really isn't relevant right now. I don't know how many times this will be said in these type of threads.


----------



## B. [R]

*The argument with ratings.*

On one hand, ratings should not matter to us the fans because we are not shareholders in the company or WWE employees in any way. 

On the other hand, it makes sense because we as fans use ratings as a benchmark to gauge how well the product is doing as a whole as it should, that's why they're ratings. 

I agree with a lot of the rage over shitty ratings, because it's like seeing something you've seen grow and flourish for years like a garden and then taking a flamethrower and torching it to cinders. In regard to the product, this is especially true for me watching Raw because it is just lacking so much and it's disappointing to see more and more people tune out in droves. 

Sure, you can blame CM Punk/Cena or what have you, but the fact is that it is painful to watch the show knowing that you sympathize with the people who do tune out the show. Inb4 "Well if you don't like, don't watch it" I watch still, because I'll always hold out hope that it will get better again, just like I did for The Rock returning. I know the vast majority of you do to, and I think you'd be inclined to agree.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

HHH/Taka wasn't a squash. HHH was a million times the heel Punk is, meaning people paid money to see HHH lose. People actually thought Taka had a chance to win. Crowd was rabid.

All differences between Taka/HHH and Punk/Clay. Can't believe I had to do that.


----------



## deadmanwatching

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

When it comes to rating punk marks fall so hard

comparing Taka to Punk:lmao


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



deadmanwatching said:


> when the ratings increases its phill the draw , when they loses its Brodus clay





Hawksea said:


> Can you?
> Take out the real viewership magnets around his vicinity and they won't sit around for his 97 lbs pizza hut delivering ass.





Cookie Monster said:


> Don't you see how stupid it is?
> 
> So because a segment gained in which CM Punk was in, it's not down to him but The Rock and Ryback. Yet when they lose viewers, it's not because of the likes of Brodus Clay, it is in fact CM Punk.
> 
> Shits hilarious.





Choke2Death said:


> Right, so when he has segments with others and it gains viewers, the credit goes to him. But if it's the same scenario and viewers go away, it's all down to however he was in the ring with.
> 
> Totally makes sense.


Well, let's check the data and see...



JY57 said:


> The Punk interview _*before*_ Rock came out did a 3.17 rating





JY57 said:


> Brodus Clay vs. CM Punk lost 149,000 viewers.





JY57 said:


> Punk's post-match interview ... gained 142,000 viewers.


Punk by himself- _*gains*_ to 3.17 (after Kofi-Show losing _OVER A MILLION_ goddamn viewers).

Punk _*with Funkasaurus*_- loses.

Punk by himself again- _*gains*_ again.

So what's the catalyst here?

Brodus Clay. 

So yes, when Punk's segments gain it's him (or _partly_ him if he's with someone else), and when it loses, it's clearly the other guy. The data here affirms it.

So-


Amuroray said:


> punk still cant draw on his own lolololol


=FAIL. Punk wasn't on his own. He had 400 lbs of talentless fat weighing him down on that one.

When Punk was on his own, those two segments gained. /discussion


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Lady Killer said:


> HHH was a million times the heel Punk is, meaning people paid money to see HHH lose.


That's the whole point I was trying to get across. Hunter drew as champion no matter who the opponent was.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



murder said:


> That's the whole point I was trying to get across. Hunter drew as champion no matter who the opponent was.


You give Funaki the belt in the Attitude Era and he'd draw. The business was on top. Wrestling was on fire. Do you not understand this?


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Weren't plenty of Punk's segments before Christmas sometimes gaining like 500,000 each time? 

Now I'm no mathematician but unk2


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cookie Monster said:


> You give Funaki the belt in the Attitude Era and he'd draw. The business was on top. Wrestling was on fire. Do you not understand this?


oh! Would he? 

You just lost all credibility with that statement.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Felpent said:


> oh! Would he?
> 
> You just lost all credibility with that statement.


They were throwing the belt around like it was nothing in the Attitude Era. You give Funaki the belt for one week, the ratings wouldn't have changed one bit. People tuned in to see The Rock, Stone Cold, Triple H, Mick Foley, The Undertaker regardless.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Really surprised at the breakdown for Rock/Punk, especially this week. A little over 200,000 viewer gain for The Rock Concert that was hyped all night? 

While Cena did gain, I just thought it'd be more considering it's Cena and it's a steel cage match.

Props to the divas though... big gain.


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

It's more to drawing than ratings. Champion has to headline PPVs, house shows and prove he can draw PPV buys and crowds in thousands. Funaki as champion wouldn't hurt for one week sure, but what about 425+ days reign like Punk? He would have killed the company.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Felpent said:


> It's more to drawing than ratings. Champion has to headline PPVs, house shows and prove he can draw PPV buys and crowds in thousands. Funaki as champion wouldn't hurt for one week sure, but what about 425+ days reign like Punk? He would have killed the company.


During the Attitude Era though, the likes of Austin, The Rock, Taker, HHH would draw in the house shows, the PPV buys etc. I mean lets face it the prestige of the belt in the Attitude Era really wasn't anything special. You honestly put someone of Punks ability in the Attitude Era and give him a lengthy reign, with some of the creativity they had back in the late 90s, allowing him the mic time and start compelling feuds with the likes of HHH, Austin, Rock etc. and you have yourself an even bigger star than you have now, I can bet you that.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cookie Monster said:


> They were throwing the belt around like it was nothing in the Attitude Era. You give Funaki the belt for one week, the ratings wouldn't have changed one bit. People tuned in to see The Rock, Stone Cold, Triple H, Mick Foley, The Undertaker regardless.


Wouldn't say "put the belt on Funaki and he'd draw." WCW tried that with David Arquette and look what happened....


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Falkono said:


> *What is with all this Punk hater/troll crap. You use that expression to try and imply someone is wrong because they don't share the same like of someone as you.* Where because you like him therefore you have to be right....way to argue!
> 
> To see Rock and Punk numbers better read the breakdown for the week before.
> "The Punk interview before Rock came out did a 3.17 rating"
> "The Rock/Punk segment back and forth did a 3.67 quarter rating"
> 
> So before Rock came out it was a 3.17 and after he came out it was a 3.67.
> To try and imply Rock brought in less viewers then Punk this week even though there was a previous segment where Punk lost viewers is just stupid....


No, I use that expression, because that's what he is. You've seen the crap he posts about Punk... "his 97lb Pizza Hut delivering ass" and these little gems:



Hawksea said:


> .....and the *4 million* average of weekly viewers WWE had lost over the course of his irrelevant title reign.





Hawksea said:


> Go back to ROH. No one will miss him.





Hawksea said:


> Yes he is.
> 
> His MMA career is still more talked about 6 times over than Punk's whole life.
> 
> And Brock's match in Extreme Rules alone pretty much shat on Punk's whole 2012 in-ring catalogue and everything else he had done in the past year.





Hawksea said:


> Agreed. It felt so forced. I was like, this guy is a 120 pounds and 5 decently built men can't restrain that freak?





Hawksea said:


> Best in the world at having........
> 
> Horrible ratings
> *PPV buys down the drain when he's the main attraction*
> Mid card feuds
> *Overrated matches that were just as good as Val Venis' were*
> *Only appealing to basement dwelling neckbeard virgins
> Looking like a Pizza hut delivery guy*
> *Probably losing a shoot fight to even half of his own fans.*
> Horrible hair cut
> Horrible tattoos
> *Being a fugazi (aka fake tough guy)
> Being a physical manifestation of an internet tough guy*





Hawksea said:


> Giving the title to Rocky would increase the company's tough guy-o-meter which has drop ten fold over the last 14 months
> and had audiences disappearing in droves because for the first time in their lives, they felt more bad ass and more manly than a WWE champion.
> WWE *NEEDS* this title change.


Punk-hating, troll - plain and simple.

And just for good measure, here's his view on the Shield and the signing of El Generico:




Hawksea said:


> Didn't I tell you Shield fanboys before? They are the ADR of stables. And they're already way past their 15 minutes.
> They'll be sent back to their posts at Walmart soon.
> 
> Nexus >>>>>>>>>> Shield





Hawksea said:


> El Boringico
> 
> Yeah, let's fill the tough guy leagues with more trash collectors, janitors, electricians, department store guards, bus drivers, construction workers and so on...... fpalm
> 
> This will be the death knell of professional wrestling.


So, not just a Punk-hating, troll, but a troll full stop.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

All this Punk can't draw talk, although true, is taking away from the good ratings the last two episodes have had. Remember just a few weeks ago when RAW was constantly hovering around 2.7 and we were all wondering if it would hit 2.0 before 3.0? Well, once again the Rock saves the show and raises the ratings to 3.2. Rock = GOAT TV draw


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cookie Monster said:


> During the Attitude Era though, the likes of Austin, The Rock, Taker, HHH would draw in the house shows, the PPV buys etc. I mean lets face it the prestige of the belt in the Attitude Era really wasn't anything special. You honestly put someone of Punks ability in the Attitude Era and give him a lengthy reign, with some of the creativity they had back in the late 90s, allowing him the mic time and start compelling feuds with the likes of HHH, Austin, Rock etc. and you have yourself an even bigger star than you have now, I can bet you that.


So thats where the title belongs, on Austin/Rock/HHH/Foley etc... who draw. And that's where the title rotated even if it changed hands a bit too much. WWF title is the company's top prize, in year 2000 every ppv ended with the title match. Why would you put that on Funaki? Whats the difference between WWF title and the IC title in your scenario? If Funaki holds the WWF title, what do the main eventers, the big draws fight about? 

No offense but the more you post, the more your posts get ridiculously stupid. You should stop now.

And about Punk in the Attitude era, well it wouldn't work. AE was all about larger than life characters, punk would be a jobber at best.


----------



## Arya Dark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*Best.Thread.EVER 



... EVER!




I wonder why people care so much about ratings. Is it a bragging rights thing? I know why ratings matter to each individual wrestler but I really can't find myself giving a shit. At least not giving a shit enough to look it up and compare it to what happened 6 years ago.

I'm not putting down those that do and those that are into it this much, btw. So please don't take it like that. I just find this train-wreck of a thread fascinating. 

Keep up the good work.*


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Felpent said:


> So thats where the title belongs, on Austin/Rock/HHH/Foley etc... who draw. And that's where the title rotated even if it changed hands a bit too much. WWF title is the company's top prize, in year 2000 every ppv ended with the title match. Why would you put that on Funaki? Whats the difference between WWF title and the IC title in your scenario? If Funaki holds the WWF title, what do the main eventers, the big draws fight about?
> 
> No offense but the more you post, the more your posts get ridiculously stupid. You should stop now.
> 
> And about Punk in the Attitude era, well it wouldn't work. AE was all about larger than life characters, punk would be a jobber at best.


They didn't even need the titles that is the thing. They gave the belt to Big Show and had him feud with The Big Bossman for god sake. Thank god it didn't last long but I doubt the ratings on Raw or PPV buys dipped. I can't even be bothered to check, correct me if I am wrong though.

Why wouldn't he work? Why can't Punk be a "larger than life character" is it because he hasn't taken steroids in his life? I think that would have been a big appeal to Punk in the Attitude Era. The average fan I think would see Punk going up against the guys like Austin, The Rock and almost see a part of themselves, especially with him being rebellious kid too who would go and stand up to bullies etc.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Ratings won't even matter once they start putting microchips in our heads so we can watch TV and go on the internet with our minds, and there will be no way of telling dem ratings, we're fighting a losing battle here people unk2


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Could you imagine the heat Punk would get in the attitude era with his SES gimmick? How anyone can say a man of Punk's talents wouldn't be a star in any era .


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Felpent said:


> So thats where the title belongs, on Austin/Rock/HHH/Foley etc... who draw. And that's where the title rotated even if it changed hands a bit too much. WWF title is the company's top prize, in year 2000 every ppv ended with the title match. Why would you put that on Funaki? Whats the difference between WWF title and the IC title in your scenario? If Funaki holds the WWF title, what do the main eventers, the big draws fight about?
> 
> No offense but the more you post, the more your posts get ridiculously stupid. You should stop now.
> 
> And about *Punk in the Attitude era, well it wouldn't work. AE was all about larger than life characters, punk would be a jobber at best.*


Sorry, but you're wrong. Punk was made for the AE.



BANKSY said:


> Could you imagine the heat Punk would get in the attitude era with his SES gimmick? *How anyone can say a man of Punk's talents wouldn't be a star in any era .*


Because they don't know what they're talking about.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



BANKSY said:


> Could you imagine the heat Punk would get in the attitude era with his SES gimmick? How anyone can say a man of Punk's talents wouldn't be a star in any era .


He wouldn't get anything because back then, being edgy was not exactly special (it was the norm) and people weren't so sensitive as they are today. Mediocre talent like Punk was designed for shit like the 'PG era' where any untalented piece of garbage can just walk in and become World Champion overnight.

Hell, he's not a star _today_ despite the ridiculously low standards and the terrible overpush he's gotten.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



BANKSY said:


> Could you imagine the heat Punk would get in the attitude era with his SES gimmick? How anyone can say a man of Punk's talents wouldn't be a star in any era .


Damn I can imagine it now, fuck.

I could literally see things being thrown into the ring. Imagine if it was happening in WCW for god sake, toilet roll everywhere. Punk would just be preaching and laughing at them as they do it :lol

MONEY.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

So a randomly placed Punk/Brodus non-title match loses viewers in a spot that normally loses viewers, that was completely unadvertised by the way, and people are making the thread all about it. 

Should've just named this thread "The CM Punk Ratings Discussions (with some other Raw rating stuff here and there)". I mean good god, I think I've maybe seen only one person address the fact ROCK in an advertised overrun throughout the show, gained only about 200,000 viewers. Or that despite how it's worded, Punk's "pipebomb" last week seemed to gain viewers.

But as usual with this thread for the haters, if Punk gains viewers, ignore it. If Punk loses viewers, laugh it up as much as possible.



> Hell, he's not a star today despite the ridiculously low standards and the terrible overpush he's gotten.


:lmao DAT BLIND PUNK HATE!


----------



## Rick_James

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Just my 2 cents here, but Punk's promo's are either hit or miss, there are times where they are pretty corny "you're a loser, you're a loser too, you don't deserve to win"... lame stuff, but he does have some times where he comes out with something great, in your face, and edgy. My big complaint with Punk is he puts on great matches, but he really doesn't wrestle like a heel. He doesn't take any real short cuts, no foreign objects, no low blows, no interference from Paul Heyman... he puts on great matches, but he wrestles exactly the same as if he were a face. 

As for the ratings, not sure you can blame it all on Punk as there are obviously a lot of other issues with the show. Not quite sure putting the title on Cena or Ryback (the only other options) would change anything.


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cookie Monster said:


> They didn't even need the titles that is the thing. They gave the belt to Big Show and had him feud with The Big Bossman for god sake. Thank god it didn't last long but I doubt the ratings on Raw or PPV buys dipped. I can't even be bothered to check, correct me if I am wrong though.


I can't be bothered to check either, but I can assure you if big show was the focus of the show every week as champion, it would have. But this is a pointless argument, you don't put the main event title on a mid carder and expect the product to be as successful as it was.




> Why wouldn't he work? Why can't Punk be a "larger than life character" is it because he hasn't taken steroids in his life? I think that would have been a big appeal to Punk in the Attitude Era. The average fan I think would see Punk going up against the guys like Austin, The Rock and almost see a part of themselves, especially with him being rebellious kid too who would go and stand up to bullies etc.





mblonde09 said:


> Sorry, but you're wrong. Punk was made for the AE.


Don't be marks. Punk even in this era is struggling to be a star despite being the longest reigning champion in modern history, I don't think he would have lasted as a midcarder in AE, let alone the main event. Blame it on steroids or whatever, fact of the matter is Punk is NOT larger than life. Numbers prove that everyweek. I understand this argument is based on the assumption that SES gimmick would have worked, but there is no guarantee he wouldn't have gotten legit X-pac heat instead with that gimmick. Forget the main event, look at the guys he has to compete with in the midcard scene Jericho, Kurt, Benoit, Eddie.. all of them in their prime. Are you telling me Punk as a talent is better than everyone of them?


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> He wouldn't get anything because back then, being edgy was not exactly special (it was the norm) and people weren't so sensitive as they are today. Mediocre talent like Punk was designed for shit like the 'PG era' where any untalented piece of garbage can just walk in and become World Champion overnight.
> 
> Hell, he's not a star _today_ despite the ridiculously low standards and the terrible overpush he's gotten.


Strange how someone that's supposedly not very talented can make guys like Austin and The Rock want to work specifically with him when (if, in one case) they are coming back. I wonder who I should set my trust in when it comes to judging talent. The poster on the Internet or some of the biggest stars in wrestling history?

It's hilarious what lengths people go to in order to try to justify their opinions. It's not about talent, it's about taste.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

You can't expect for people to take Punk seriously as a legitimate threat to anyone after he spent months running away from his opponents and receiving assistance from The Shield at every title defense since his heel turn. Hell, right before his confrontation with the Rock he needed The Shield's help against Ryback in the TLC match. So, 15 minutes later the crowd is supposed to believe that the same man running for his life against Ryback is this god that "Rock's arms are too short to box with"? :westbrook2

Heel Triple H could get away with doing this because he possessed the size to be physically imposing and people knew that if he wanted to he could beat their beloved faces in a fair fight. Since Punk doesn't have the size to be intimidating enough to a man, woman, or child he could not afford that type of booking for his heel run. In fact, it is a glaring contradiction to the "Best In the World" title that Punk loves to mention every speech. They should've had Punk winning matches using cunning and skill so that he lived up to his moniker. Triple H was "The Game" because he plotted and schemed against you both inside and outside of the ring.

And none of these stars in the PG Era draw on a consistent basis but for the sake of continuing tradition....


----------



## TheF1BOB

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

People want proof on how Punk would look like in the Attitude Era?


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Really confused. Why are we comparing Punk vs Clay to a match that happened fourteen years ago? Besides, the Attitude Era ended twelve years ago. Am I missing something?

_Surely_ the WWE/World Champion has been in a 'random quarter' match with a glorified jobber since then at some point in the last fourteen years? Pretty sure there are some examples from the mid 2000's from when Benoit and Batista were World Champions, if not then HHH just before hand in 2003.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Evil Peter said:


> Strange how someone that's supposedly not very talented can make guys like Austin and The Rock want to work specifically with him when (if, in one case) they are coming back. *I wonder who I should set my trust in when it comes to judging talent.* The poster on the Internet or some of the biggest stars in wrestling history?
> 
> It's hilarious what lengths people go to in order to try to justify their opinions. It's not about talent, it's about taste.


That is the funniest thing about some of these clowns in this thread who are questioning Punk's talent. They must actually think that their opinions are more valid than the countless legends who have gone out of their way to say how talented they think Punk is. Rock, Austin, Hogan, HBK, Jim Ross, Bret Hart etc...


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Talent roster was huge during the AE. Peak level. Punk is barely promoted NOW, when the talent pool is at an all-time low and someone is claiming that he would have been anything above a low card performer? Comedy. What Punk does now is to say "controversial on purpose" statements for the "AWWW" reaction in a minority of the fanbase. This was an ordinary thing back then all over the industry. Only place Punk could have been in is ECW around 2000.

As for that Taka/HHH match, it was a top of the hour match. Great TV match. Started 5.7, ended 6.0 but wasn't Top 3 of the night back then.

BTW, Big Show got the title because he was doing good business, not because he was just a random guy. He had one of the most promoted feuds of the year with Bossman before SVS 1999 when he got the belt.

The Clay/Punk match shouldn't be a problem, only important aspect of the Rumble PPV promotion is Rock's title chase. To make it the most important thing in his life and with this money line: "Fact: You ain't God. But God as my witness, in 13 days I WILL beat you for the WWE Title". He basically covered it. They just need to promote it as much as possible along with the Rumble concept.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



D.M.N. said:


> Really confused. Why are we comparing Punk vs Clay to a match that happened fourteen years ago? Besides, the Attitude Era ended twelve years ago. Am I missing something?
> 
> _Surely_ the WWE/World Champion has been in a 'random quarter' match with a glorified jobber since then at some point in the last fourteen years? Pretty sure there are some examples from the mid 2000's from when Benoit and Batista were World Champions, if not then HHH just before hand in 2003.


Punk may not be a massive tv draw, but my god he is a HUGE wrestling forum draw.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> *Talent roster was huge during the AE*. Peak level. Punk is barely promoted *NOW, when the talent pool is at an all-time low* and someone is claiming that he would have been anything above a low card performer? Comedy. What Punk does now is to say "controversial on purpose" statements for the "AWWW" reaction in a minority of the fanbase. This was an ordinary thing back then all over the industry. Only place Punk could have been in is ECW around 2000.
> 
> As for that Taka/HHH match, it was a top of the hour match. Great TV match. Started 5.7, ended 6.0 but wasn't Top 3 of the night back then.
> 
> BTW, Big Show got the title because he was doing good business, not because he was just a random guy. He had one of the most promoted feuds of the year with Bossman before SVS 1999 when he got the belt.
> 
> The Clay/Punk match shouldn't be a problem, only important aspect of the Rumble PPV promotion is Rock's title chase. To make it the most important thing in his life and with this money line: "Fact: You ain't God. But God as my witness, in 13 days I WILL beat you for the WWE Title". He basically covered it. They just need to promote it as much as possible along with the Rumble concept.


Those 2 sentences are all anyone needs to see regarding Punk not being a huge draw. How can anybody possibly be expected to be a huge draw, when they have nobody of any note to feud with on a regular basis?


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



purple_gloves said:


> That is the funniest thing about some of these clowns in this thread who are questioning Punk's talent. They must actually think that their opinions are more valid than the countless legends who have gone out of their way to say how talented they think Punk is. Rock, Austin, Hogan, HBK, Jim Ross, Bret Hart etc...


This hypocritical clown also claims "Cena is crap" yet based on his logic, it's invalid because plenty of legends have put over Cena's talent.

Why bother being in a forum if you can't even form your own opinion and need validation from "legends"? That's certainly not what I do. It's cool if there's a big name who agrees with me on something but I'm not insecure enough to demand their approval for my opinion to exist. I also don't push my opinion as fact, I may come across as very blunt but that's just my personality.

And to the person who was quoted in the post I quoted, you're on my ignore list so don't bother responding to me again.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:lmao 

I missed this thread.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> This hypocritical clown also claims "Cena is crap" yet based on his logic, it's invalid because plenty of legends have put over Cena's talent.
> 
> Why bother being in a forum if you can't even form your own opinion and need validation from "legends"? That's certainly not what I do. It's cool if there's a big name who agrees with me on something but I'm not insecure enough to demand their approval for my opinion to exist.
> 
> And to the person who was quoted in the post I quoted, you're on my ignore list so don't bother responding to me again.


Cena is crap is a light hearted joke after a sustained period of having this guy shoved down my throat.

I have formed my opinion. It just so happens that the likes of Austin, Rock, Hogan, HBK etc, also share my opinion.


----------



## Tony Tornado

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Not only is CM Punk the greatest wrestler in the world today he is also a proven draw. Everyone who says otherwise is in denial.


----------



## Pasab

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

WWE shareholders thread will never grow old... :cool2


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

How can people say Punk wouldn't have been a draw in AE? He'd be a One Man Right To Censor times 10. He'd be LOATHED. His feuding with Austin and Mankind would have been glorious. He'd probably have wound up the most hated heel in any promotion in say, 1997 or 1998 with the Straight Edge Society gimmick.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cookie Monster said:


> You give Funaki the belt in the Attitude Era and he'd draw. The business was on top. Wrestling was on fire. Do you not understand this?


And why was business on top? Because of guys like Austin, Rock, Hunter (among others) being the focus (and/or champion) of the shows. 

If anybody drew at that time, because wrestling was hot, then why did Jarrett drew only 2's at the same time on the other channel? 

Good thing people like you don't run this company. This whole mentality of anybody can draw is what killed WCW by the way. You know there was a WCW champion in April 2000 called David Arquette ...


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk could have ran over Stone Cold.

I did it for the Dwayne.


----------



## Brye

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



BANKSY said:


> Could you imagine the heat Punk would get in the attitude era with his SES gimmick? How anyone can say a man of Punk's talents wouldn't be a star in any era .


My god, that would fucking own. (Y)


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk killed it in those 1/7 ratings. And again with that post match promo in a random quarter. 

CM GOD.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*CM Punk wouldn't have been a main eventer in the Attitude Era. Upper midcarder with very rare main event appearances, at best. There was just too much talent and charisma going around at that time. He probably would've gotten big during the Ruthless Agression Era.*


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SPCDRI said:


> How can people say Punk wouldn't have been a draw in AE? He'd be a One Man Right To Censor times 10. He'd be LOATHED. His feuding with Austin and Mankind would have been glorious. He'd probably have wound up the most hated heel in any promotion in say, 1997 or 1998 with the Straight Edge Society gimmick.


I think you pretty much nailed it. He would be the leader of Right to Censor. Congradulations I guess.

In 1998 not a person in the world care to see straight edge vs beer drinker. Just 10x more compelling characters out there.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Evil Peter said:


> Strange how someone that's supposedly not very talented can make guys like Austin and The Rock want to work specifically with him when (if, in one case) they are coming back. I wonder who I should set my trust in when it comes to judging talent. The poster on the Internet or some of the biggest stars in wrestling history?
> 
> It's hilarious what lengths people go to in order to try to justify their opinions. It's not about talent, it's about taste.


I think you guys are really overstating the Rock wants to work with Punk argument. Rock wants to win the championship and Punk's just the #2 guy in the company right now making him the most logical choice. 

It's like saying the Miz is great because Rock headlined 2 PPVs with him. Nah, Miz was just in position to capitalize on the Rock's return. Really Rock Punk is just a stepping stone to get to Rock Cena 2.

With Stone Cold it's a different story. SCSA wants to work wit Punk because he respects him. They hold similiaraties.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock named three guys he wanted to work with at the Mania Press conference: Cena, lesnar and Taker. No mention of Punk. Only reason he wrestles Punk at Rumble is because Rock wants the title and Punk has been the champion. Like Gillberreturns said, it's the same scenario as with Miz two years ago.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock is facing Punk, therefore chances are Rock wanted to work with Punk, because Rock isn't forced into anything in WWE and if Rock didn't want to work with Punk, Punk wouldn't be champion right now.

As far as the whole AE and where Punk would fit in, here's the most truthful answer you'll find in this thread. NO ONE HAS ANY FUCKING IDEA! It's that simple. The correct answer isn't "He'd be a top heel in 1998" and it certainly isn't "LOL NO HE SUCKS COMPARED TO AUSTIN, ROCK, TAKER, HHH, FOLEY, ETC." 

Now with the truth out of the way, let's get back to DEM OPINIONS! I think he would've had a nice place in the main event, especially with a guy like Austin as the top draw, under his Straight-Edge gimmick for at least the duration of the feud and could've become the most hated heel in the company not just for that time, but for all the AE and maybe even all time just off that. However I don't know how the gimmick would fare outside a Stone Cold feud, as with a guy like Rock (The Rock at that time, not The Rock of today), there isn't a lot Punk could play off of, and the same with Taker unless they do what they tried to have Punk do in 09 with Taker, which I don't think worked too well back in 09 and therefore wouldn't work so well in 99. 

But yeah, outside of a feud with Austin, he would be pretty limited unless he caught on BIG during that feud and because of that feud, which could've happened. Besides that he'd probably go in and out of main event similar to Jericho and Angle in 2000-2001, and used to give upper midcarders a feud to transition them from the mid-card into the main event. But overall I don't see why he wouldn't be a staple in the Attitude Era in some way. His persona/aura has always screamed "ATTITUDE" for one reason or another. He would've had a nice place, but not in the place he's in now.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> Rock is facing Punk, therefore chances are Rock wanted to work with Punk, because Rock isn't forced into anything in WWE and if Rock didn't want to work with Punk, Punk wouldn't be champion right now.
> 
> As far as the whole AE and where Punk would fit in, here's the most truthful answer you'll find in this thread. NO ONE HAS ANY FUCKING IDEA! It's that simple. The correct answer isn't "He'd be a top heel in 1998" and it certainly isn't "LOL NO HE SUCKS COMPARED TO AUSTIN, ROCK, TAKER, HHH, FOLEY, ETC."
> 
> Now with the truth out of the way, let's get back to DEM OPINIONS! I think he would've had a nice place in the main event, especially with a guy like Austin as the top draw, under his Straight-Edge gimmick for at least the duration of the feud and could've become the most hated heel in the company not just for that time, but for all the AE and maybe even all time just off that. However I don't know how the gimmick would fare outside a Stone Cold feud, as with a guy like Rock (The Rock at that time, not The Rock of today), there isn't a lot Punk could play off of, and the same with Taker unless they do what they tried to have Punk do in 09 with Taker, which I don't think worked too well back in 09 and therefore wouldn't work so well in 99.
> 
> But yeah, outside of a feud with Austin, he would be pretty limited unless he caught on BIG during that feud and because of that feud, which could've happened. Besides that he'd probably go in and out of main event similar to Jericho and Angle in 2000-2001, and used to give upper midcarders a feud to transition them from the mid-card into the main event. But overall I don't see why he wouldn't be a staple in the Attitude Era in some way. His persona/aura has always screamed "ATTITUDE" for one reason or another. He would've had a nice place, but not in the place he's in now.


Nobody is saying Rock didn't pick Punk I'm just saying it's not a big endorsement on Punk. Rock wanted to be champ and Punk is the most logical choice for him to go over. It's not like he came back with intentions to work with CM Punk. He's just the most logical choice and really the only realistic choice too. Sheamus is squared in as a face and Rock doesn't like Orton. He's not doing him any favors.

As far as him in the Attitude era goes. I think you're point on Punk's act not working on many stars says it all. You don't get championship runs to work with one person. WWF had a whole list of guys that had great feuds with Austin. His act would of had to been extremely successful in the mid cards and then he would have been promoted to the main event scene. I just don't see him climbing that ladder especially if his straight edge personality kept him from roiding back in a time when you had to roid to look believable. It's not like he can throw that back in someone's face. Someone calls him weak and throws a roiding jab he's fired.


----------



## ChrisPartlow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



JY57 said:


> ADR/Bigshow/Vince and Miz/Flair/Cesaro had better rating than Rock/Punk? Thats interesting.
> 
> And LOL at a 25 second match losing over million viewers


No one cares for Punk, it's time to send him back to the midcard where he can complain about Tyson Kidd and Brodus Clay plus shoot on people.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:lol Punk wouldn't have even made it past Saturday Shotgun back in the AE. The mic work there was so politically incorrect that they wouldn't have any trouble making fun of Punk like a backyard bully would do to a scrawny looking kid.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Damn, Attitude Era way over-hyped. It was the best era in terms of business. In terms of entertainment quality, it had just as much stupid shit as any other era. Mae Young giving birth to a hand? And BTW, that hand was fathered by none other than Mark "Ratings" Henry. Remember sexual chocolate? They also had a transsexual hold the intercontinental title, and won it in like a home-maker's kitchen cookout match (?) or something stupid like that. We also had vampires. And it wasn't even subtle, like with Undertaker being supernatural, this was straight out fangs and blood. BTW, that was when Edge and Christian first started getting over. We also got Mick Foley's worst gimmick- Dude Love. Kane was supposed to be burned on half his body and talked through a vibrator device. We also had random streaking from hairy fat-ass ugly men. We had Pat Patterson's shit-stained underwear as a finisher. Sockpuppets as a finisher (pro-wrestlers don't know how to bite?). Terry Funk wearing pantyhose over his head on a regular basis. Etc. Etc.

Sorry, but the Attitude Era was not untouchable. It was right time, right place. And all of those "larger than life" characters, all three of them (Rock, Austin, Taker. It. Period.) as well as the other top talent of the time were all invisible mid-carders for years prior to that point who no one saw any main event potential in. Blue Bloods? Chip & Dale dancers? Hollywood Blondes & Ring Masters? "Chia-pet head"s?

People talk about what Punk would have been like in the Attitude Era. Hell, what would any of those alleged "untouchables" of the AE have been like today? I don't mean bringing them back FROM the AE, like the case with the Rock right now, _*after*_ he's already been transfigured like Christ. I mean if we took Chia-pet head and threw him into the scene right now and try to get over his new "Rock" gimmick? Could he still have gotten away with "Cookie Puss" and telling another man to "strip naked"? Would he need a Cena/Sheamus force-em-down-our-throat push to get that crap over today, or would it have the natural, unburiable Bryan appeal? It would be interesting to see. Or actually, no it wouldn't, since most of today's product is not interesting to see, at all.

Context. 
Bury a diamond in a pile of shit or put it on display in a fine jewelry store- in which context is it more likely to get noticed?

Anyway...


GillbergReturns said:


> I just don't see him climbing that ladder especially if his straight edge personality kept him from roiding back in a time when you had to roid to look believable.


Right, because Foley became WWE Champ 3 times in the AE by being all roided up. Same way Jericho got over and into the main event scene.


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk in the attitude Era ?

Would he be used better in the Attitude Era is a much better question....


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mrmacman said:


> Is there any chance of dolph cashing in his Money in the Bank contract on Rock/Punk ?


No.

He can only use the briefcase to cash in for the World Heavyweight championship.


----------



## Figure4Leglock

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mrmacman said:


> Punk in the attitude Era ?
> 
> Would he be used better in the Attitude Era is a much better question....




Punk would have been ignored during attitude era because of his size. I could have seen him competed for European title and Hardcore title, maybe for tag team title picture as well.

There was just too many larger than life characters back then. Upper Mid-carder at most.


----------



## TheRainKing

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk didn't have 'the look' to make it in the attitude era, back then all the top stars were big guys that looked intimidating, so there was no place for dweebs like Punk. Besides, back in the attitude era the WWE wouldn't have allowed people to go out and 'shoot' in every promo, instead wrestlers had to make promos that were based in kayfabe (the way it should be), that alone would leave Punk with no promo material.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Interesting to see if they increase viewrship on go home show


----------



## deadmanwatching

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Next week Rock will low blow punk,that will result in 7.2 ratings.


----------



## Duke Silver

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



TheRainKing said:


> Punk didn't have 'the look' to make it in the attitude era, back then all the top stars were big guys that looked intimidating, so there was no place for dweebs like Punk. *Besides, back in the attitude era the WWE wouldn't have allowed people to go out and 'shoot' in every promo, instead wrestlers had to make promos that were based in kayfabe (the way it should be), that alone would leave Punk with no promo material.*


Oh look, the "all Punk can do is shoot" response. Do people get off on speaking so much mis-information in this thread? Any time I come in here someone's spouting some fallacy.

:HHH3unk2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



JY57 said:


> Interesting to see if they increase viewrship on go home show


That should be interesting, but what I'm really interested in seeing is the number for the fallout show. Last year they got a 3.55, which I think was the second highest rating of the year, with over 5 million viewers on average, so it'll be interesting to see if Rock winning the title could push them even past that, which had Laurinaitis' job in HHH's hand and Taker's return.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



TheRainKing said:


> Punk didn't have 'the look' to make it in the attitude era, back then all the top stars were big guys that looked intimidating, so there was no place for dweebs like Punk. Besides, back in the attitude era the WWE wouldn't have allowed people to go out and 'shoot' in every promo, instead wrestlers had to make promos that were based in kayfabe (the way it should be), that alone would leave Punk with no promo material.


The Attitude Era's main guy Stone Cold Steve Austin was 6'2. Hardly a massive individual. Whether you thought he was "intimidating" or not is your opinion but in any case the height argument is such a fallacy when guys like HBK, Bret Hart and Austin were all the top guy at one stage and none of them were over 6'2. Which is not a massive height in the wrestling world. Hell if you want to take it further, Ric Flair is 6'1 and was the NWA's biggest draw for years. The height argument alone is complete rubbish.

As for the "CM Punk shoots in every promo" argument well that is wrong and deep down you know it. Either that or you haven't been watching the show because aside from his recent "pipebomb" Punk hasn't done any "shoot" promos in a long while.


----------



## Dunk20

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> Last Monday’s edition of Raw saw the Divas Championship match between Eve Torres and Kaitlyn post the greatest viewership gains of the night, according to the Wrestling Observer Newsletter.
> 
> The match, which was Eve’s final WWE match and featured Kaitlyn winning the Divas Title in her hometown of Houston, Texas, was part of the segment that gained 509,000 viewers, the night’s biggest gain in viewership. Its quarter of the show had a 3.33 rating.
> 
> The stats are even more impressive when compared to The Rock’s big closing segment, which only gained 207,000 viewers.
> 
> This news could serve as a sign that, much like fans of TNA’s Knockouts, WWE fans are specifically tuning in for the Divas.
> 
> RELATED: In Video: Eve Torres Addresses WWE Departure
> 
> Also on the topic of the Eve/Kaitlyn match, the Wrestling Observer Newsletter is also reporting that Monday’s match was originally scheduled to take place at the Royal Rumble.
> 
> *The report states that it was Eve who convinced officials to make the switch, as she felt that it would be better if her final night and Kaitlyn’s big title win took place in Kaitlyn’s hometown of Houston.*


Sorry if it was posted already.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



TheRainKing said:


> Punk didn't have 'the look' to make it in the attitude era, back then all the top stars were big guys that looked intimidating.


Really? Foley, HBK, and Jericho were intimidating because of their size? Who knew being the same size as Punk made them bigger than Punk? Or in Foley's case, weighing more than Punk turns all that fat into muscle?


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Seriously a 15 minute overrun (with the ROCK) gains 200k and all you are bitching about Punk?

FYI just because you post in this thread it does not make you a smark


----------



## ChrisPartlow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



TheRainKing said:


> Punk didn't have 'the look' to make it in the attitude era, back then all the top stars were big guys that looked intimidating, so there was no place for dweebs like Punk. Besides, back in the attitude era the WWE wouldn't have allowed people to go out and 'shoot' in every promo, instead wrestlers had to make promos that were based in kayfabe (the way it should be), that alone would leave Punk with no promo material.


This is why he gets no reaction. Vince is pissed, I heard next show on Raw the reason Punk is not going to show up is because he's been assigned hotdog duty in the stands. I heard he's "the best in the world" at that.


----------



## TheRainKing

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Crusade said:


> The Attitude Era's main guy Stone Cold Steve Austin was 6'2. Hardly a massive individual. Whether you thought he was "intimidating" or not is your opinion but in any case the height argument is such a fallacy when guys like HBK, Bret Hart and Austin were all the top guy at one stage and none of them were over 6'2. Which is not a massive height in the wrestling world. Hell if you want to take it further, Ric Flair is 6'1 and was the NWA's biggest draw for years. The height argument alone is complete rubbish.


It's not about height, it's about physique, presence, and looking like a star.




























------------











Come on guys, is it that hard to tell the difference?


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Is the difference the fact that the background is quite dark in the first few and very bright in the fourth picture?


----------



## TheRainKing

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Ok, just for you.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

When he's in the ring with any of those people he doesn't look out of place and that's the important thing.

Selective stills count for fuck all.


----------



## TheRainKing

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

If you say so. 

I'm not saying Punk wouldn't be able to feature in the attitude era at all, only that he wouldn't be a big star.

Even if his size wasn't holding him back, he would still lack the character needed to get over with the fans.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Never came here cuz I don't really care about ratings, but this is just like the GOAT and Punk/Rock discussion thread. Pointless thread.


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



TheRainKing said:


> It's not about height, it's about physique, presence, and looking like a star.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Come on guys, is it that hard to tell the difference?


Punk manages to have presenxe without having bulky muscles... that's what I notice.


----------



## Phenom

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Kabraxal said:


> Punk manages to have presenxe without having bulky muscles... that's what I notice.


For me, Punk has very little presence, and doesn't look like a credible main eventer. He looks mismatched against most of his opponents. I still think that he should be in the mid card.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk is well above midcard level. You're saying he is no better than Kofi or Cesaro? Please, that is just ridiculous.


----------



## Phenom

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



K.W.H. said:


> Punk is well above midcard level. You're saying he is no better than Kofi or Cesaro? Please, that is just ridiculous.


That's exactly what I'm saying, and I don't see why it's so ridiculous. Compare the physiques, presence and movesets of Punk, Kofi and Cesaro, and you'll see that Punk is much more suited to the mid card. Against natural main eventers like Rock, he simply doesn't cut it, IMHO. The Rain King's post above serves to highlight this beautifully.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

To each his own I guess. Size isn't everything, but okay. Just don't see how Punk, who has beaten Cena over and over, can't stand up to Rock, who has only beaten Cena once.


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



K.W.H. said:


> To each his own I guess. Size isn't everything, but okay. Just don't see how Punk, who has beaten Cena over and over, can't stand up to Rock, who has only beaten Cena once.


I wouldn't bother.. the size only crowd are so locked into that ridiculous mindset they won't ever change despite all the proof to the contrary.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



K.W.H. said:


> To each his own I guess. Size isn't everything, but okay. Just don't see how Punk, who has beaten Cena over and over, can't stand up to Rock, who has only beaten Cena once.


That's how most discussions about Punk goes. The biggest thing that says that Punk has done well is the respect he's constantly getting from his peers. Austin, Rock, Hogan etc have all talked about how they think he can hold his own with anyone and similar things. Respect from your peers is pretty much the biggest compliment you get when it comes to the quality of your work, regardless of what profession you are in.

That of course isn't something that should affect your own taste because we all like what we do. It is something that should make the kids stop trying to validate their own opinions and trying to make it into fact though, and instead just be secure enough to have an opinion that they stand for. There are talented wrestlers that I myself don't like very much. I'm adult enough not to talk about those wrestlers all the time though.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:lmao
oh my this thread is killing me


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

^^^Indeed. But morover, I remember on his DVD it was said that while in developmental Punk easily blew up to over 240. So he can get big anytime he wants, he just doesn't think it's healthy. He said on his DVD that the reason he's so much leaner now is because he's gone all vegan but the pay off is he has way more energy and stamina etc.

I also find stuff like this funny-


TheRainKing said:


> Da Silva said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is the difference the fact that the background is quite dark in the first few and very bright in the fourth picture?
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, just for you.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think Silva had something more like this in mind-










Still not _too_ terribly imposing, but still better than the cherry-picking Rain has engaged in, which is exactly the point. Folks like that aren't being objective, they're just engaging in confirmation bias.

For instance, he also picked a photo of Jericho circa '97 or so, and not when he was the flabby world heavyweight champion.

So hell, if you're going to select photos from yesteryear, why not do the same with Punk?


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The ratings have struggled even with John Cena and The Rock being featured. So poor ratings can't all be blamed on Punk.

If The Rock has not wanted to work with Punk then The Rock really is an outstanding actor. I don't recall The Rock and The Miz having terrific promos and segments. I don't remember The Rock and The Miz getting into brawls. I don't remember The Rock putting over The Miz at all, much less to the degree he has put over Punk so far.


----------



## BKsaaki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SerapisLiber said:


> Really? Foley, HBK, and Jericho were intimidating because of their size? Who knew being the same size as Punk made them bigger than Punk? Or in Foley's case, weighing more than Punk turns all that fat into muscle?


Yeah,Foley's a Hardcore legend at that time,and he took those insane bumps which sky-rocketed him,HBK wasn't even wrestling in the attitude era.Jericho was an upper mid-carder.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

^And thus you concede the point- those guys weren't intimidating _*because of their size*_.

Staying on point FTW.

BTW, HBK did not wrestle for _*most*_ of the AE. But he was champ leading into it.


----------



## BKsaaki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I don't disagree at all.Punk would have had decent run as the IC or the European Champion


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

OF COURSE The Rock is going to look bigger than CM Punk...

Namely because The Rock is an admitted steroids user and other performance enhancing drugs in his books and in interviews, like with Howard Stern. Wow, the guy who doesn't have to work matches 150 nights a year and can use steroids looks bigger than the guy who has to bump all over the world and can't use PEDs. You don't say!

PEDs are aPpearance enhancing drugs in wrestling. They do NOTHING in wrestling for your performance. If PEDs increased your PERFORMANCE as a wrestler, Ryback would be Shawn Michaels.


----------



## TheRainKing

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SerapisLiber said:


> For instance, he also picked a photo of Jericho circa '97 or so, and not when he was the flabby world heavyweight champion.
> 
> So hell, if you're going to select photos from yesteryear, why not do the same with Punk?


I think your missing the point. I chose an old picture of Jericho because I was comparing Punks size with guys from the attitude era, therefore I needed a picture of Jericho from that time. What good is comparing Punk to the flabby Jericho? That has no relevance to anything. Likewise, where is the relevance in showing pictures of how Punk use to look? We're comparing how Punk looks *now* with how guys looked in the attitude era.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

To be fair, I think Punk would've had a lengthy 400 day plus reign as a light heavyweight champion...........

..........at Saturday Shotgun. 8*D

With his pseudo-"5 star matches" against legendary in-ring technician Duane Gill. Man, what a rivalry that would've been.


----------



## Boygirl

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Is a 3.2 good enough for an anniversary show?


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Yeah, by 2013 standards.


----------



## frankieorton

*It´s a shame for cm punk been wwe champ for a year, and raw with lowest ratings*

in history, in my opinion that mean, that cm punk doesnt draw the interest in the people, including myself, They have to bring the rock to save the program, because honestly im even prefer john cena as champ, than cm punk with fat heyman always holding the title


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



TheRainKing said:


> I think your missing the point. I chose an old picture of Jericho because I was comparing Punks size with guys from the attitude era, therefore I needed a picture of Jericho from that time. What good is comparing Punk to the flabby Jericho? That has no relevance to anything. Likewise, where is the relevance in showing pictures of how Punk use to look? We're comparing how Punk looks *now* with how guys looked in the attitude era.


The relevance is plenty, because it shows that Punk can be, and has indeed been, ripped and added to the fact I cited from his DVD that he can, and has, gotten up to over 240 lbs. Hell, Jericho was usually billed as only 226 lbs. And Punk is as tall as Austin. 

So since the argument was a *hypothetical* over whether or not Punk could have been a main-eventer in the Attitude Era because of size, and since in that argument you included Jericho, it only logically follows that a guy who has proven he can be just as ripped and also be even bigger than one of those main-eventers (Jericho) can himself also be included in that group.

And this whole ad hoc of "how Punk looks _*NOW*_" is nothing short of a pigeonholing fallacy done ex post facto to try and salvage something from your failed argument.

Not once so far since you made this *initial post which sparked this particular exchange* has the ad hoc stipulation of only "Punk _*NOW*_" ever been made. In fact, since your first words there were "Punk didn't" as in "_*did*_ not", that implies _*past*_ tense, and as we all know- "now"=/=past tense. Your own grammar has betrayed the limited scope of just "now".


----------



## TheRainKing

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SerapisLiber said:


> The relevance is plenty, because it shows that Punk can be, and has indeed been, ripped and added to the fact I cited from his DVD that he can, and has, gotten up to over 240 lbs. Hell, Jericho was usually billed as only 226 lbs. And Punk is as tall as Austin.
> 
> So since the argument was a *hypothetical* over whether or not Punk could have been a main-eventer in the Attitude Era because of size, and since in that argument you included Jericho, it only logically follows that a guy who has proven he can be just as ripped and also be even bigger than one of those main-eventers (Jericho) can himself also be included in that group.
> 
> And this whole ad hoc of "how Punk looks _*NOW*_" is nothing short of a pigeonholing fallacy done ex post facto to try and salvage something from your failed argument.
> 
> Not once so far since you made this *initial post which sparked this particular exchange* has the ad hoc stipulation of only "Punk _*NOW*_" ever been made. In fact, since your first words there were "Punk didn't" as in "_*did*_ not", that implies _*past*_ tense, and as we all know- "now"=/=past tense. Your own grammar has betrayed the limited scope of just "now".


I'm really quite bored of this.

Yes I did use the wrong tense when I said "Punk didn't", as I actually meant "Punk doesn't", it was a typo, nothing else. I'm sure you'll argue that I'm just changing my argument, but I really couldn't care less. To end this discussion, I'll just repeat my original point.. I don't believe Punk has the look or character required to be a big star in the attitude era.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: It´s a shame for cm punk been wwe champ for a year, and raw with lowest ratings*



frankieorton said:


> in history, in my opinion that mean, that cm punk doesnt draw the interest in the people, including myself, They have to bring the rock to save the program, because honestly im even prefer john cena as champ, than cm punk with fat heyman always holding the title


Yeah, and this guy received the best type of promotion that could ever be given to a pro wrestler in the last 14 months and nobody still gives a sht. 

This is like some major record label promoting the hell out of an obscure "indie" band just because of how extremely vocal and deludedly self righteous their 600 pretentiously hipster fans are. Then they only sell 1,200 copies of their first major studio album after its release.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: It´s a shame for cm punk been wwe champ for a year, and raw with lowest ratings*



Hawksea said:


> Yeah, and this guy received the best type of promotion that could ever be given to a pro wrestler in the last 14 months and nobody still gives a sht.
> 
> This is like some major record label promoting the hell out of an obscure "indie" band just because of how extremely vocal and deludedly self righteous their 600 pretentiously hipster fans are and only selling 1,200 copies of their first major studio album after its release.


Only, it's nothing like that.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

SerapisLiber owned the Punk haters. Green rep indeed.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: It´s a shame for cm punk been wwe champ for a year, and raw with lowest ratings*



Hawksea said:


> Yeah, and this guy received the best type of promotion that could ever be given to a pro wrestler in the last 14 months and nobody still gives a sht.
> 
> This is like some major record label promoting the hell out of an obscure "indie" band just because of how extremely vocal and deludedly self righteous their 600 pretentiously hipster fans are. Then they only sell 1,200 copies of their first major studio album after its release.


Best type of promotion? Are you on crack?

Booked as a cowardly heel, hardly ever main eventing ppv's, and playing second fiddle to SuperCena. Not the best way to promote a champion is it? Sheamus and Ryback have been promoted a lot more, as supposed crowd favourites, and people still care more about Punk.

You claim people don't give a shit about him. Well I do, a hell of a lot of people on here do, and the live audiences clearly do, because he still gets a better reaction than the likes of Sheamus and Ryback. Ratings how been poor yes, but the pool of available talent is at an all time low, storylines are generally lacklustre, the whole product is watered down and lacks intensity, and to top it all off, the show is now 3 hours long. Ratings would still be shit if Cena had been champ for 400 days. Only a retard would solely blame Punk for that.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Phenom said:


> *For me, Punk has very little presence, and doesn't look like a credible main eventer.* He looks mismatched against most of his opponents. I still think that he should be in the mid card.


Nobody cares, and fortunately Vince/HHH/management don't share your skewed opinion either. Punk was born to main event, and he doesn't look mismatched against Rock at all. He didn't look mismatched against Cena, nor did he look out of place against 'Taker, for that matter.



Kabraxal said:


> Punk manages to have presence without having bulky muscles... that's what I notice.


Yep, that's what I noticed too.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Why is this turning into a thread about Punk's muscle mass?:argh: Simply put, he is a smaller guy than others, he has even said in interviews that he doesn't bench press or do a lot major work with weights. Argument over.

As for the rating. Good for the show given what we had before, despite a large amount of the show being filler and overall a let-down.


----------



## Duke Silver

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I appreciate that Punk conditions his body for wrestling rather than appearance. Marathon man.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Nobody cares, *and fortunately Vince/HHH/management don't share your skewed opinion either*. Punk was born to main event, and he doesn't look mismatched against Rock at all. He didn't look mismatched against Cena, nor did he look out of place against 'Taker, for that matter.
> 
> 
> Yep, that's what I noticed too.


Unfortunately for you, the masses DO share his opinion.

2.8, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7...... fpalm absolutely hideous, just like Punk's phyaique.

And :lol at Gillberg's Saturday Shotgun light heavyweight reign having more average viewers than Phil "I'm going to put wrestling back on the map again" Brooks.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Unfortunately for you, the masses DO share his opinion.
> 
> 2.8, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7...... fpalm absolutely hideous, just like Punk's phyaique.
> 
> And :lol at Gillberg's Saturday Shotgun light heavyweight reign having more average viewers than Phil "I'm going to put wrestling back on the map again" Brooks.


He's not even the number 1 man in the company, why do his little muscles get all the blame?


----------



## Mister Hands

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Kabraxal said:


> Punk manages to have presenxe without having bulky muscles... that's what I notice.


The funny thing about Punk is, despite people saying that he doesn't have "the look" or that he doesn't care about how he presents himself, I'd say at least 50% of the most striking, memorable and unique imagery in WWE over the last few years has occurred during a Punk segment. Indian-style on the ramp is obvious. Manson-Jesus with his family. Cutting a promo on Jerry Lawler whilst sitting on the announcer's desk. Blowing McMahon a kiss. Singing happy birthday to a distressed child. His BITW t-shirt. Talking to Jericho with a towel around his head to hide his baldness. Heyman holding the title aloft. Even something simple and obvious like ripping the WWE logo off the mic the other week. He gets presentation in a way that almost no one else in the company seems to. Whether that's as important to a John. Q. Everyman as the stereotypical wrestler's build, I dunno. Probably not. But I'd definitely say it's a trait that'll make WWE forgive a lot of Punk's shortcomings, perceived or actual.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Unfortunately for you, the masses DO share his opinion.
> 
> 2.8, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7...... fpalm absolutely hideous, just like Punk's phyaique.
> 
> And :lol at Gillberg's Saturday Shotgun light heavyweight reign having more average viewers than Phil "I'm going to put wrestling back on the map again" Brooks.


How is that unfortunate for him? Punk having had a record breaking reign shows how much the masses mean compared to the respect of his peers. Not to mention that the reports are saying that the two guys WWE feel that they can count on to draw interest is Cena and Punk, and they would have more knowledge than we do which wrestlers are bringing in money and which aren't. We've seen plenty of title reigns cut short, but this one wasn't.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Just looked at cenas 2005, 2006 and 2007 and 09 numbers. His years drew stupidly high numbers. 2011 and 12 were still great for him in the ratings.

So did orton in 2008,2009 and 2010. Batista and edge drew great. Punk is pathetic.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> Just looked at cenas 2005, 2006 and 2007 and 09 numbers. His years drew stupidly high numbers. 2011 and 12 were still great for him in the ratings.
> 
> So did orton in 2008,2009 and 2010. Batista and edge drew great. Punk is pathetic.


*The roster was also much better in those years where he got "stupidly high numbers." Love how you Punk haters just completely ignore that fact.*


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



K.W.H. said:


> *The roster was also much better in those years where he got "stupidly high numbers." Love how you Punk haters just completely ignore that fact.*


He was the main attraction.

He was forced down everybody throats and still drew massive numbers.

Its widely accepted that the numbers were down to cena during 05,06 and 07. Ortons run drew stupid numbers aswell. Edge drew great with cena. Batista did GREAT.

Punk cant come close to these. Dont use the different roster excuse. That only applies to the AE.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

2005 on Raw had not only Cena, but the likes of HHH, Flair, Batista (for the first half), HBK, Angle, and I'm sure I'm missing some.
2006 on Raw had Cena, Edge at his peak as a very strong draw, the return of DX, Vince being in a prominent role throughout the year... so yeah...
2007 on Raw had Cena at his peak in drawing power, HBK, and Orton
2008 on Raw had Cena, Orton, HHH, HBK, and Jericho
2009 on Raw had Cena, Orton at his peak, HHH, and DX in the latter half.

Now I'll give you that 2007 being a great year in the ratings on Raw was down pretty much solely to Cena, especially during the mid-part of the year between Backlash and Summerslam. However 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2009 all had such a strong cast of guys who were at the top of their drawing game that weren't just Cena. 2005 had Batista. 2006 had Edge. 2009 had Orton. Even 2010 had The Nexus angle to help Cena, but the numbers weren't even THAT great there. 2012, Punk had no one. Cena isn't a draw anymore in really a draw anymore in this day and age. Ryback, while showing promise in quarter hours, failed to keep the overall show afloat. And that's it. Rock, Taker, HHH, Lesnar, etc. were all there on Raw for the first few months, and Lesnar/HHH during the summer, but besides that there's no proven full-time draw on the roster anymore. That hasn't happened before as usual there was always one-two big time draws a year to keep ratings up.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> 2005 on Raw had not only Cena, but the likes of HHH, Flair, Batista (for the first half), HBK, Angle, and I'm sure I'm missing some.
> 2006 on Raw had Cena, Edge at his peak as a very strong draw, the return of DX, Vince being in a prominent role throughout the year... so yeah...
> 2007 on Raw had Cena at his peak in drawing power, HBK, and Orton
> 2008 on Raw had Cena, Orton, HHH, HBK, and Jericho
> 2009 on Raw had Cena, Orton at his peak, HHH, and DX in the latter half.
> 
> Now I'll give you that 2007 being a great year in the ratings on Raw was down pretty much solely to Cena, especially during the mid-part of the year between Backlash and Summerslam. However 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2009 all had such a strong cast of guys who were at the top of their drawing game that weren't just Cena. 2005 had Batista. 2006 had Edge. 2009 had Orton. Even 2010 had The Nexus angle to help Cena, but the numbers weren't even THAT great there. 2012, Punk had no one. Cena isn't a draw anymore in really a draw anymore in this day and age. Ryback, while showing promise in quarter hours, failed to keep the overall show afloat. And that's it. Rock, Taker, HHH, Lesnar, etc. were all there on Raw for the first few months, and Lesnar/HHH during the summer, but besides that there's no proven full-time draw on the roster anymore. That hasn't happened before as usual there was always one-two big time draws a year to keep ratings up.


Cena was the biggest star on all brands since 05. Maybe Batista for the first part of 05 but then on in its been all cena. He outsold everybody in shirts etc BY A LONG WAY during this time.

Cena was the FACE of the wwe for 6 years and drew great numbers. Out of all the big guys you mentioned cena was higher then them all during this period. Cena got 10 title reigns during this period with one being over a year ffs.

He carried the show. HHH AND Stephanie has admitted as much. He is a great draw and will go down as on of the best in history. 

Punk can never match this. Orton did for a period and so has Batista and edge. Punk doesnt have main stream appeal. 

You cant see me was made popular by cena. Cena is one of the 4 biggest stars in the history of the business. Rock has admitted as such. Cena is on cereal boxes etc.

Cena caused a bump in the rating in 05 with Batista aswell from 04.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Cena could've been the biggest draw all of those years, and I'm not gonna deny it. My point is he had other big draws/guys at their peaks to assist/keep the ratings afloat on the red-brand. It wasn't just him except maybe in 2007, which I addressed in my post. Punk doesn't/didn't have anyone. He didn't have anyone to put him over besides HHH, who really didn't. And Cena of course, but that led to nothing. He doesn't have a full-time draw to assist him/make him and even Cena isn't a real draw anymore. Who knows how Edge would've done without Cena being a big draw in 2006. Or Orton without Cena being a big draw in 2009 (past the whole McMahons storyline leading into Mania).


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> Just looked at cenas 2005, 2006 and 2007 and 09 numbers. His years drew stupidly high numbers. 2011 and 12 were still great for him in the ratings.
> 
> So did orton in 2008,2009 and 2010. Batista and edge drew great. Punk is pathetic.


Ah, good, then you also saw how since 2006 there has been a downward trend in the annual ratings.

As per Gerweck:
2005- 3.81
2006- 3.90
2007- 3.61
2008- 3.27
2009- 3.57
2010- 3.28 
2011- 3.21
2012- 3.00

And that downward trend took a sharp curve with the move to 3 hours.

Ratings were already going down before the shift of focus onto Punk.

Yet PPVS this year are up. I haven't heard any reports of house shows or merchandise being down. Business isn't suffering with the belt on Punk.

It seems only the _*FREE*_ tv is where there has been a decline, and long before Punk and therefore cannot be blamed on Punk.

And as has been said in these threads time & again, there's other factors as well. Notice the trend began in 2006, when Youtube got mainstream exposure and video hosting sites exploded. I remember MTV saying that was the main catalyst for the death of TRL. People can watch shit for free on the web. Video killed the radio star, but Internet killed the videos star. Hell, it's better that way, then they don't have to sit through 3 hours. TV, though it's still got some fight in it, is a dying medium.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Ratings average went up in 2009 from 2008. Cena was not prominent at all in 08 and away injured on two occasions. In 09, he was the most prominent guy on Raw along with Orton. Therefore, he showed his drawing abilities there.

Also numbers have been going down steadily since 2002 but when Cena and Batista were established as top guys, WWE found their draws after a long search since Austin and Rock departed.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SerapisLiber said:


> Ah, good, then you also saw how since 2006 there has been a downward trend in the annual ratings.
> 
> As per Gerweck:
> 2005- 3.81
> 2006- 3.90
> 2007- 3.61
> 2008- 3.27
> 2009- 3.57
> 2010- 3.28
> 2011- 3.21
> 2012- 3.00
> 
> And that downward trend took a sharp curve with the move to 3 hours.
> 
> Ratings were already going down before the shift of focus onto Punk.
> 
> Yet PPVS this year are up. I haven't heard any reports of house shows or merchandise being down. Business isn't suffering with the belt on Punk.
> 
> It seems only the _*FREE*_ tv is where there has been a decline, and long before Punk and therefore cannot be blamed on Punk.
> 
> And has been said in these threads time & again, there's other factors as well. Notice the trend began in 2006, when Youtube got mainstream exposure and video hosting sites exploded. I remember MTV saying that was the main catalyst for the death of TRL. People can watch shit for free on the web. Video killed the radio star, but Internet killed the videos star. Hell, it's better than way, then they don't have to sit through 3 hours. TV, though it's still got some fight in it, is a dying medium.


05-2011 was around the same high level with cena. He turned the trend around from the downward spiral since the end of the AE. Made more money then anybody for the company


PPvs this year has been about cena. Raws have been about punk.

Cena is one of the 4 stars in the history of the business.

Punk is nowhere.

Thats it. Punk is the lowest drawing champ since 97. YOU CANT ARGUE IT.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> 05-2011 was around the same high level with cena. He turned the trend around from the downward spiral since the end of the AE. Made more money then anybody for the company
> 
> 
> PPvs this year has been about cena. Raws have been about punk.
> 
> *Cena is one of the 4 stars in the history of the business.*
> 
> Punk is nowhere.
> 
> Thats it. Punk is the lowest drawing champ since 97. YOU CANT ARGUE IT.


Exactly. That's why you can't compare him to Punk. One man draws like Cena, are extremely rare. I don't think anybody is claiming that Punk is on the same level as Cena. But you, along with others, are allowing your dislike of CM Punk, to cloud any common sense. Are you really that stupid to believe that the low ratings are solely down to Punk being champ?

The roster is shit compared to what it was in all of those "Cena years". Right now is the worst possible time for anybody to be champ and be expected to draw.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

How much do people think that timezones plays a noticeable difference in tv ratings for Raw? Since it airs live, it airs 8-11pmEST(compared to most shows that air in primetime,which just air ___pm local time)

So 8-11pm LIVE for WWE is 5-8pm LIVE for California. How many people even watch TV from 5-7pm? Not much. Which is why primetime TV is so big, cause that's when everyone is watching.

California alone is 38M people, I think the entire west coast(meaning PST timezone) is probably like 50+M people? So WWE each week for Raw isn't reaching like 10-15% of people who watch TV in USA. Imagine how many more people would actually be watching Raw if it aired 8-11pm LOCAL TIME. It's the same reason you see sports games in west coast starting at 10pmEST. Cause they're caring about west coast viewers only. I think WWE could have 1-2M extra viewers if it aired at a better time in west coast.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Not really, the time zone discrepancy was still there during the Monday Night Wars when ratings had reached their pinnacle.


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> 05-2011 was around the same high level with cena. He turned the trend around from the downward spiral since the end of the AE. Made more money then anybody for the company
> 
> 
> PPvs this year has been about cena. Raws have been about punk.
> 
> Cena is one of the 4 stars in the history of the business.
> 
> Punk is nowhere.
> 
> *Thats it. Punk is the lowest drawing champ since 97. YOU CANT ARGUE IT*.


Ratings =/= quality. I have enjoyed both of Punk's reigns. It's been a very long time since I enjoyed something Cena did. I disagree he one of the top four stars in the history of the business. He is up there but I still think he has more to go. Punk is climbing the ranks too and I think he will be big enough to headline a Hall of Fame class once it's all said and done.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Mister Hands said:


> The funny thing about Punk is, despite people saying that he doesn't have "the look" or that he doesn't care about how he presents himself, I'd say at least 50% of the most striking, memorable and unique imagery in WWE over the last few years has occurred during a Punk segment. Indian-style on the ramp is obvious. Manson-Jesus with his family. Cutting a promo on Jerry Lawler whilst sitting on the announcer's desk. Blowing McMahon a kiss. Singing happy birthday to a distressed child. His BITW t-shirt. Talking to Jericho with a towel around his head to hide his baldness. Heyman holding the title aloft. Even something simple and obvious like ripping the WWE logo off the mic the other week. He gets presentation in a way that almost no one else in the company seems to. Whether that's as important to a John. Q. Everyman as the stereotypical wrestler's build, I dunno. Probably not. But I'd definitely say it's a trait that'll make WWE forgive a lot of Punk's shortcomings, perceived or actual.


Great post. This is why Punk is the best in the world - and this is what the Punk-haters can't - or simply refuse to comprehend.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Great post. This is why Punk is the best in the world - and this is what the Punk-haters can't - or simply refuse to comprehend.


That post was subjective. People can't appreciate Punk is the 'best in the world' because he sat on the announcers table? LOL.

The biggest viewership hemorrhage in wrestling history must mean we're all morons, right?


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



BlakeGriffinFan32 said:


> Ratings =/= quality. I have enjoyed both of Punk's reigns. It's been a very long time since I enjoyed something Cena did. I disagree he one of the top four stars in the history of the business. He is up there but I still think he has more to go. Punk is climbing the ranks too and I think he will be big enough to headline a Hall of Fame class once it's all said and done.


I agree here. Ratings as a measurement for quality is for people that think McDonald's makes the best food. So you can either be a fan of what you yourself like, or you can be a McMark and look at ratings.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

What makes this thread funny is that nobody realises that Punk's aimed demographic is the type of people who watch Raw online and record it.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*Most people who cling to the ratings don't even know how it works. And all the people who blame Punk for the decline hate his guts anyway, so naturally no one is gonna take the haters serious.*


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Hoping that atrocious John Cena promo bombs.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

What time do American kids usually go to bed, with school the next day? That's Cena's aimed demographic, are they even awake for the end of RAW?


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The first 4 minutes of that Cena promo is some of the most painful shit. I mean just awful. It hurts to see a guy attempt comedy and bomb, literally bomb, in front of thousands of people and millions of viewers. 

Was that scripted? That could not have come from writer's pens and then been okayed by Steph, Kevin Dunn and Vince McMahon. It couldn't have been.

Could it?


----------



## dan the marino

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

If we have come to the point where people watch a show or not based on whether one guy is the champion, well that says a lot about how badly WWE has screwed up their product.


----------



## kiguel182

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



ChickMagnet12 said:


> What makes this thread funny is that nobody realises that Punk's aimed demographic is the type of people who watch Raw online and record it.



Most people here have no idea what they are talking about. They see some numbers and spit fire against the people they don't like. Simple as that.

I like to see the breakdowns but discussing them in this thread is close to impossible.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_68052.shtml



> -- WWE Raw's social media score dropped 46 percent Monday night. The show scored 208,970 in social activity, which does not compare favorably to 389k last week and 321k the week before.
> 
> Raw ranked #4 on cable TV, the show's lowest ranking since October 22. Raw trailed "Catfish" on MTV and two NBA games - one on TNT and the other on NBATV. [ Data Source: Trendrr.TV ]


ratings out tomorrow because of holiday


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



roadkill_ said:


> The biggest viewership hemorrhage in wrestling history must mean we're all morons, right?


If you continually blame that hemorrhage on anything other than what's actually to blame, then yes, you're all morons.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



JY57 said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_68052.shtml
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- WWE Raw's social media score dropped 46 percent Monday night. The show scored 208,970 in social activity, which does not compare favorably to 389k last week and 321k the week before.
> 
> Raw ranked #4 on cable TV, the show's lowest ranking since October 22. Raw trailed "Catfish" on MTV and two NBA games - one on TNT and the other on NBATV. [ Data Source: Trendrr.TV ]
> 
> 
> 
> ratings out tomorrow because of holiday
Click to expand...

Damn, not looking good at this point. GOAT saving dem ratingz, eh?:rock3

Obviously, the low ratings cannot be blamed on a particular talent, just as it's obvious now that just one particular talent cannot save it.

Hell, even Jesus couldn't turn _*this*_ piss into wine.


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Mister Hands said:


> The funny thing about Punk is, despite people saying that he doesn't have "the look" or that he doesn't care about how he presents himself, I'd say at least 50% of the most striking, memorable and unique imagery in WWE over the last few years has occurred during a Punk segment. Indian-style on the ramp is obvious. Manson-Jesus with his family. Cutting a promo on Jerry Lawler whilst sitting on the announcer's desk. Blowing McMahon a kiss. Singing happy birthday to a distressed child. His BITW t-shirt. Talking to Jericho with a towel around his head to hide his baldness. Heyman holding the title aloft. Even something simple and obvious like ripping the WWE logo off the mic the other week. He gets presentation in a way that almost no one else in the company seems to. Whether that's as important to a John. Q. Everyman as the stereotypical wrestler's build, I dunno. Probably not. But I'd definitely say it's a trait that'll make WWE forgive a lot of Punk's shortcomings, perceived or actual.


This is a very good post.

However I do think whoever was in that position it would be the same. It isn't Punk it is who the company decides to push/market. If Ryder was given the belt and a 400+ day title run it would be the same.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SerapisLiber said:


> Not really, the time zone discrepancy was still there during the Monday Night Wars when ratings had reached their pinnacle.


So....who cares about comparing now and the past. I'm talking about WWE today. WWE in 2013. Not 1998 or something. Why do people ALWAYS bring up attitude era in EVERY SINGLE DISCUSSION.

It's like "which pizza topping is your fave"?
Answer..."I like ___,it's what I ate during attitude era!"

Or...."What's your fave colour"
Answer...."I like ____,it reminds me of attitude era"


I'm glad nobody on this forum works for a news or sports station. Every single one of their reports would be like:
For news-A fire has killed 10 people. Not as much as a fire back in 1998 killed when 15 people died.
For sports:
Lebron James scored 50 points in a huge win for the Miami Heat. But Kobe Bryants 81 point game years ago was better. 
OR
With the 1st overall pick in the NBA draft, ___ was drafted. He's alright. But he's never going to be close to Michael Jordan, so who cares.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Huh? You're trailing off onto something else now. The fact that California is three times zones away from the East Coast is an objective fact that has been around since long before RAW even existed. Favorites and personal opinions has nothing to do with this. I simply referenced the Monday Night Wars era because that was when ratings were at their highest, even though they had the same time zone delays as today, hence differences in ratings across ANY era cannot use times zones as an excuse.

If the highest ratings had been only two years ago or had been 40 years ago, I would have referenced that then.

The whole point of my post is that the time zone discrepancy will ALWAYS be there and has ALWAYS been there ever since the dawn of television. NO nationally broadcasted program can use that as an excuse for or against ratings, because ALL shows have to deal with it.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

You can't say the fans aren't there because Raw 1000 was proof of this. The ratings were getting higher and higher as the night progressed. It is just that the WWE has pissed off the majority of their fans with their terrible booking, horrible characters, and god awful story lines all year long. Now they are paying the price for not delivering Austin and all of the legends that people wanted to see on the 20th Anniversary show. People were legit pissed on social media. 

But the main problem is that nobody cares about these new stars. And to make matters worse every time a legend comes back to feud with these guys the WWE always has to make them appear as equals when they are not. Fans hate that. How are we supposed to believe that Rock, HHH, HBK, Lesnar, Undertaker, Jericho, Foley, and Austin are equal to anyone on this roster, when as soon as they show up they get put into the main event without doing anything, and the current people with the 2 main titles are at best in the 3rd to 4th match on the card?

The only way anyone from this Era is getting put over big time is if they do an Attitude Era vs PG Era program that lasts one year. From the night after Wrestlemania to the following Wrestlemania. It is a relatively simple story line for them to do even with their limited availability dates. But more importantly, how the hell do you come out with a game promoting this but not actually do a storyline with it? Which further proves Vince has lost it.

If you do the feud though, no holding legends back, no scripted promos, no dumb story lines, no terrible filler. Let the legends be the heels because they know what it takes to get booed. Anyone thinking that these guys couldn't get booed is delusional. Just have them bring up all of the complaints with this Era that everyone has been saying for the longest time. And actually the split crowd reactions would be appropriate because in this program you would be asking people to take sides. People would watch that. What people won't watch, is their favorites coming back to be watered down into nothing more than shells of their former selves and unfortunately that is all that has been happening lately.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SerapisLiber said:


> Damn, not looking good at this point. GOAT saving dem ratingz, eh?:rock3
> 
> Obviously, the low ratings cannot be blamed on a particular talent, just as it's obvious now that just one particular talent cannot save it.
> 
> Hell, even Jesus couldn't turn _*this*_ piss into wine.



Rock has already saved the ratings. What were the ratings before the Rock came back? They were hovering around 2.7 every week. Since he's been back they have gone up to 3.2 for both weeks.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

What if Cena's promo is more viewed than Rock/Punk? :lmao I actually wouldn't know what to say tbh.


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Starbuck said:


> What if Cena's promo is more viewed than Rock/Punk? :lmao I actually wouldn't know what to say tbh.


Please god lets not that happen..


----------



## dan the marino

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Honestly I don't think that says much, people flip the show on when they flip it on, and in Cena's case he got what is usually reserved for the biggest moment of the night, plus overrun. A bigger tell is when they flip away from the show I'd imagine.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I bet the third hour lost a lot of viewers.

If the Cena promo is more viewed than Rock/Punk/Shield promo... wow. fpalm


----------



## WWE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Doesn't the third hour usually lose viewers? I assume that


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Terrible ratings this week.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

That is last week! This is this week: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-raw-pawn-stars-love-and-hip-hop-more/166162/

Hour 1 - 4.370 million
Hour 2 - 4.419 million
Hour 3 - 4.162 million

....not great numbers.


----------



## Shazayum

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

JOHN FELIX ANTHONY RATINGS KILLER CENA.


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



D.M.N. said:


> That is last week! This is this week: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-raw-pawn-stars-love-and-hip-hop-more/166162/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.370 million
> Hour 2 - 4.419 million
> Hour 3 - 4.162 million
> 
> ....not great numbers.


Should have had Rock/Punk last...


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Shazayum said:


> JOHN FELIX ANTHONY RATINGS KILLER CENA.


We dont have the breakdown yet.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Cena will get the highest rated segment.

It's a shame we don't get the minute by minute numbers tho.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Things are slowly dipping since Rock first returned and Rock/Punk started but I don't think it's going to affect the buyrate of the Rumble. It's one of those cases where a lot of people are going to want to see it no matter what the build is. I think so anyways. I don't want to spark some huge debate here but Rock/Cena didn't set the world on fire in terms of TV ratings but when it came to live gate and PPV, it broke records. Brock/HHH at Summerslam last year, again, didn't set the world on fire in terms of TV ratings but it ended up with a great buyrate because at the end of the day the attraction was Brock Lesnar vs. Triple H. I think this will be a similar case. At the end of the day the attraction is still Rock fighting for the title for the first time in 10 years against a guy who hasn't been beaten for 400+ days. 

Having said all that, hour 2 is the highest rated hour and I suspect that it's down to Rock/Punk. It also looks like they could have hit the 5 million mark too which is always nice. Hour 3 dropped way down. I'm curious to see what Cena's segment did just for the lulz. DAT HEEL CENA PROMO.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

3.04 rating


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Starbuck said:


> Things are slowly dipping since Rock first returned and Rock/Punk started but I don't think it's going to affect the buyrate of the Rumble. It's one of those cases where a lot of people are going to want to see it no matter what the build is. I think so anyways. I don't want to spark some huge debate here but Rock/Cena didn't set the world on fire in terms of TV ratings but when it came to live gate and PPV, it broke records. Brock/HHH at Summerslam last year, again, didn't set the world on fire in terms of TV ratings but it ended up with a great buyrate because at the end of the day the attraction was Brock Lesnar vs. Triple H. I think this will be a similar case. At the end of the day the attraction is still Rock fighting for the title for the first time in 10 years against a guy who hasn't been beaten for 400+ days.
> 
> Having said all that, hour 2 is the highest rated hour and I suspect that it's down to Rock/Punk. It also looks like they could have hit the 5 million mark too which is always nice. Hour 3 dropped way down. I'm curious to see what Cena's segment did just for the lulz. DAT HEEL CENA PROMO.


Agreed.

There doesn't seem to be much correlation at all, between ratings and ppv buys these days.

I reckon the rumble will do a good number.


----------



## The Tony

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



JY57 said:


> 3.04 rating


Rock is on the show and they have 3.04 with no NFL. That shows how bad the show is and how no one cares.


----------



## Teh_TaKeR

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Lol. No one gives a flying shit about the product even with the Rock. 

Really sad...

:rock
unk2
:cena


----------



## Ray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

DAT ROCKY bringing in DEM RATINGS :rock


----------



## shought321

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Expect Vince to appear next week. :lol


----------



## TrentBarretaFan

3rd hour loses viewers? That's why they should move RAW (after change to 2 hours) and SD to 8-10 PM... 10-11 PM is too late for little kids...


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Hopefully the main event bombed :cena


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

You can bring back any one wrestler, even from the hottest period of wrestling. And it will probably provide alittle bit of a jump for a few weeks here and there. But until the company "builds from within" and pushes their current wrestlers, writes logical storylines, and push the fans to get emotionally invested into the current workers, the ratings aren't consistently going to be high.

I'm not saying not to have the stars from previous years come in every once in awhile and do a match. There's nothing wrong with that. But that should be the "cherry on top" type of thing. Instead, it's their MAIN storyline. That's a problem. Outside of the storyline involving someone from a decade ago, there's not much for fans to get emotionally invested in. It's a problem.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I hope we get a breakdown this week.



roadkill_ said:


> People can't appreciate Punk is the 'best in the world' because he sat on the announcers table? LOL


No, because you simply can't appreciate how much he puts into his character and performance, and how he's perfected it.



Falkono said:


> However I do think whoever was in that position it would be the same. It isn't Punk it is who the company decides to push/market. If Ryder was given the belt and a 400+ day title run it would be the same.


No it wouldn't, because Ryder is not Punk, nor is he on Punk's level. Ryder cannot do what Punk can do - nor can anyone else, for that matter... it's ALL Punk. What an utterly ridiculous thing to say.



Tony316 said:


> Rock is on the show and they have 3.04 with no NFL. That shows how bad the show is and how no one cares.





Teh_TaKeR said:


> Lol. No one gives a flying shit about the product even with the Rock.
> 
> Really sad...


This is what most people are failing to realise... the sad reality, is pro-wrestling is not as popular in this day and age. It's not like it was 10,15 years ago - the truth is, pro-wrestling is almost a dirty word these days... niche programming, at best, which is being reflected in the ratings.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> This is what most people are failing to realise... *the sad reality, is pro-wrestling is not as popular in this day and age. It's not like it was 10,15 years ago - the truth is, pro-wrestling is almost a dirty word these days... niche programming, at best, which is being reflected in the ratings*.


This is not necessarily true. It is not that it is not as popular as it was before, it is just that the current wrestlers and the quality of the program simply aren't that good. Look at Raw 1000. Purely from a nostalgia standpoint they were able to draw in 7 million people and this was without Austin. Do you honestly think that if that same show had the legends coming back to do something meaningful, like starting feuds with the current stars, that people wouldn't have started back watching on a consistent basis? If you do then you are delusional. What all of the people who stopped watching wrestling but tuned into the Raw 1000 episode said, "Ho hum.. they are only here for one night, so I am only going to watch for one night. I don't care about these new guys." The only way to truly recapture those viewers was to start an Attitude Era vs PG Era feud that lasted at least a year long so the people could have a chance to get used to seeing the new guys. 

But you absolutely cannot make them appear as if they are on the same level at first. This is why the current legend vs newcomer feuds are failing to bring in viewers and higher buyrates. You can't treat the legends as larger than life figures who get whole nights dedicated to their presence, main event over titles, and get title matches without having to do anything as equals to these PG Era stars. No one is buying that and it is just making them turn their heads in disgust watching their favorites being watered down to complete the illusion. These isolated legend vs PG Era feuds are only short term fixes on a serious problem that will really plague the WWE once the part timers disappear for good.

I really don't understand why Vince hasn't decided to do an Attitude Era vs. PG Era program. It is a merchandise goldmine. You could re-release some of the more popular Attitude Era shirts and even create Team Attitude Era and Team PG Era tees. Hell, the potential avenues the storyline could take would be innumerable as well as the matches we could get out of it. It truly is sad times for wrestling, when fans and ESPN writers have a greater grasp on the entertainment and marketing aspects of the business than the people who are running it.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Falkono said:


> It isn't Punk it is who the company decides to push/market. If Ryder was given the belt and a 400+ day title run it would be the same.


Lol


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Falkono said:


> However I do think whoever was in that position it would be the same. It isn't Punk it is who the company decides to push/market. If Ryder was given the belt and a 400+ day title run it would be the same.


*So you're saying anyone could do what Punk is doing. Is that is true, then why aren't they? Punk is as far removed from Vince's favorite look as you could be, pretty sure if someone like Ryder could do it, then he would be. What a ridiculous thing to say.*




Fanboi101 said:


> Rock has already saved the ratings. What were the ratings before the Rock came back? They were hovering around 2.7 every week. Since he's been back they have gone up to 3.2 for both weeks.


*
Wow, getting that half point for a few weeks. You do realize they already got their guaranteed money from USA Network right? They aren't making more money from these ratings boosts. So exactly what did Rock 'save'?*



mblonde09 said:


> This is what most people are failing to realise... the sad reality, is pro-wrestling is not as popular in this day and age. It's not like it was 10,15 years ago - the truth is, pro-wrestling is almost a dirty word these days... niche programming, at best, which is being reflected in the ratings.


*It's not a sad reality. Wrestling is better and more relevant than it was in years like 1995. Better roster, void of a few legends who were in their prime then, but still better. And most fans don't care how relevant it is anyways. They just wanna enjoy the show.*


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



K.W.H. said:


> *So you're saying anyone could do what Punk is doing. Is that is true, then why aren't they? Punk is as far removed from Vince's favorite look as you could be, pretty sure if someone like Ryder could do it, then he would be. What a ridiculous thing to say.*


The point was whoever is getting the most air time and in the main event for 400+ days will be the person with the most notable events of that period. It isn't saying Ryder is better then Punk it is saying whoever Vince put in that position would have the same effect. When Punk loses and someone else becomes champ they will then be the focus. That is just how it is.

And who knows maybe others could do it if they were given a chance? People like Sandow and Ziggler have improved so much in terms of on the mic and wrestling ability. The problem with WWE is it sticks to the formula. How can you create stars if you don't give them a chance?


----------



## SrsLii

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I think I'm going to go download 1995 and watch it so it's fresh in my mind and see if it makes today's crap any better.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Falkono said:


> The point was whoever is getting the most air time and in the main event for 400+ days will be the person with the most notable events of that period. It isn't saying Ryder is better then Punk it is saying whoever Vince put in that position would have the same effect. When Punk loses and someone else becomes champ they will then be the focus. That is just how it is.
> 
> And who knows maybe others could do it if they were given a chance? People like Sandow and Ziggler have improved so much in terms of on the mic and wrestling ability. The problem with WWE is it sticks to the formula. How can you create stars if you don't give them a chance?


*No worries, Sandow will have his day. That guy is destined for greatness. Not sure about Ziggler, he is really good but just doesn't seem main event worthy to me.*


----------



## the fox

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Tony316 said:


> Rock is on the show and they have 3.04 with no NFL. That shows how bad the show is and how no one cares.


and the great tna rating is?


----------



## WWE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Doesn't the second hour usually get the most viewers? Thats the only time where people usually watch RAW anyways


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The worry for WWE is that even the first and second hour isnt doing so well. That the 3rd hour would do weak is expected, both WWE and USA Network expected it. Thats why they are paying less for the 3rd hour then the previous two.

For WWEs sake I hope they abandon the 3 hour concept after Wrestlemania. People are just getting burned out.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> No, because you simply can't appreciate how much he puts into his character and performance, and how he's perfected it.


There's something called opinions. Just because you worship Punk as god, doesn't mean others feel the same way and that doesn't make them "ignorant".


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



the fox said:


> and the great tna rating is?


What does that have to do with anything? 

I think all things considered, WWE has a lot more to worry about than TNA as far as ratings go.


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



murder said:


> What does that have to do with anything?
> 
> I think all things considered, WWE has a lot more to worry about than TNA as far as ratings go.




WWE should worry about TNA when TNA can actually buyout WWE's top stars which will be never. This isn't the Monday Night Wars, and before then nobody knew what the ratings were or even met.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



bigdog40 said:


> WWE should worry about TNA when TNA can actually buyout WWE's top stars which will be never. This isn't the Monday Night Wars, and before then nobody knew what the ratings were or even met.


I didn't say WWE has to worry about TNA, I said WWE has more to worry about TV ratings than TNA does. 

By the way, what do you mean, nobody knew what the ratings were before the Wars? We know TV ratings dating back to 1985.


----------



## deadmanwatching

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Skidmark187 can't draw.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



murder said:


> I didn't say WWE has to worry about TNA, I said WWE has more to worry about TV ratings than TNA does.
> 
> By the way, what do you mean, nobody knew what the ratings were before the Wars? We know TV ratings dating back to 1985.


*I think he meant fans didn't care or ever talk about it. Ratings were never a hot topic to fans until the Monday Night Wars heated up in '97.*


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



the fox said:


> and the great tna rating is?


TNA is 10 years old. WWE is 60 years old with 100 times the budget but only twice the rating.

TNA: 1.1
WWE: 2.2, just last month.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SrsLii said:


> I think I'm going to go download 1995 and watch it so it's fresh in my mind and see if it makes today's crap any better.



A few wrestlers back then are legends now.You would definetly enjoy it.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

TNA have been hovering around 1.0 since forever. They will never be on a competitive level with WWE.


----------



## The Tony

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



ChickMagnet12 said:


> TNA have been hovering around 1.0 since forever. They will never be on a competitive level with WWE.


They will comepete with the WWE one day. It's just a matter of time. TNA's Impact taping tonight in Manchester:


----------



## El_Absoluto

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



roadkill_ said:


> TNA is 10 years old. WWE is 60 years old with 100 times the budget but only twice the rating.
> 
> TNA: 1.1
> WWE: 2.2, just last month.


-PPV sales
-Merch sales
-Toy sales
-House shows

TNA is a non issue.


----------



## TromaDogg

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:lol

Why are TNA's ratings even being bought up in a WWE ratings discussion thread?

Is this the desperation that some WWE fans will now stoop to?

Good grief. fpalm


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

TNA won't be on the same level as WWE like WCW was, because they don't have the money to throw at it like Ted Turner did. He had a shitload of money. . .has a small fraction of it.

Unless TNA gets sold to a big company or some rich bastard like Mark Cuban, it's never going to legitimately compete with WWE. Mark Cuban would probably throw money at that shit, but he's a WWE fan.


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SinJackal said:


> TNA won't be on the same level as WWE like WCW was, because they don't have the money to throw at it like Ted Turner did. He had a shitload of money. . .has a small fraction of it.
> 
> Unless TNA gets sold to a big company or some rich bastard like Mark Cuban, it's never going to legitimately compete with WWE. Mark Cuban would probably throw money at that shit, but he's a WWE fan.


Different times, different era's.

In the UK TNA is now bigger then WWE.
Sky the company who broadcast WWE here bought TNA's channel and have heavily advertised it.
If you said something like that would happen 10 years ago people would of laughed.

Point being TNA does not need to increase it's spending because WWE is decreasing. Something that was getting an 8 rating is now getting 2's. If the trend continues then that will fall further. As it declines so does the amount of money it can generate. It is pretty obvious the reason they have a third hour right now is because they wanted more time for advertising. That might give them a bit extra cash but it annoys fans and they will switch off because of it.

TNA doesn't need to do anything but wait. WWE is killing themselves. Those awards should always be taken with a pinch of salt imo but right now I think few true wrestling fans would say RAW is better then Impact right now. TNA went away and re-invented itself. Tried new things. A lot of them sucked but now they have the right balance. WWE is too scared to try anything new and because of that it will stay in the death spiral it is in right now.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I've never watched TNA. Don't they get a 1 rating most weeks? I don't think WWE will ever fall that hard.


----------



## SrsLii

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Did I miss something or did we not get the quarter-by-quarter ratings this week?


----------



## The Tony

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



K.W.H. said:


> *I've never watched TNA*. Don't they get a 1 rating most weeks? I don't think WWE will ever fall that hard.


You should.


----------



## SrsLii

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



K.W.H. said:


> I've never watched TNA. Don't they get a 1 rating most weeks? I don't think WWE will ever fall that hard.


You should. I know Tony just said that, but I figured I'd say it too since, you know, he's Tony.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



K.W.H. said:


> I've never watched TNA. Don't they get a 1 rating most weeks? I don't think WWE will ever fall that hard.


Actually, WWE has already fallen a lot harder. They once got a 8.1 and used to get monthly averages of 6's and now are getting 2's without and 3's with Rock.

TNA has only fallen from a 1.45 to their average 1.0 rating.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Where are DEM QUARTER HOURZ. I want to see how many people Cena lost with his middle school playground spastic shit-ramblings.

:cena2


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Tony makes one post ---> WWE ratings thread turns into TNA ratings thread.

Can't really say one show is better than the other based on ratings alone. TNA has marketable stars loaded with mic skills/charisma and even looks and they still get far less ratings than WWE simply due to the lower brand value. I'm sure guys like James Storm, Robert Roode, Austin Aries, AJ Styles, Joseph Park, Christopher Daniels, Kaz and oldtimers like Hardy and Angle would do just fine ratings wise if they were in the WWE. Can't compare the two like that.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Falkono said:


> Different times, different era's.
> 
> In the UK TNA is now bigger then WWE.
> Sky the company who broadcast WWE here bought TNA's channel and have heavily advertised it.
> If you said something like that would happen 10 years ago people would of laughed.


Well at least you could acknowledge that WWE is on Sky Sports and TNA is on Challenge TV... oh, wait. Challenge is available to a lot more people than Sky Sports so this is not surprising in the slightest.



murder said:


> Actually, WWE has already fallen a lot harder. They once got a 8.1 and used to get monthly averages of 6's and now are getting 2's without and 3's with Rock.
> 
> TNA has only fallen from a 1.45 to their average 1.0 rating.


And this is a bit of exaggeration. Surely TNA should be growing, not falling if they are to 'challenge' WWE?


----------



## SrsLii

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Loudness said:


> Tony makes one post ---> WWE ratings thread turns into TNA ratings thread.


Tony is the biggest draw in this thread.


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Isnt TNA known for being Aces and 0.8's? unk2


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Do you know what Raw ratings and TNA's existance have in common, they are irrelvant. Why are people bringing TNA into a WWE ratings discussion thread? There ratings have nothing in common


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



-Extra- said:


> Isnt TNA known for being Aces and 0.8's? unk2


Nah, read Tonys post. WWE is the vanilla midget promotion while TNA is mainstream 8.0 per show, only losers watch WWE. Reason WWE is still relevant is cause of Rocky (insert Tonypicturehere.jpg) mentioned it.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Face it, even if WWE keeps losing ratings, TNA's will not improve as a result. All the same, if WWE gets a ratings boost, it won't hurt TNA either because I doubt the extra viewers are all TNA fans. So both shows' ratings are irrelevant to each other.


----------



## Tony's Biggest Fan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Loudness said:


> Nah, read Tonys post. WWE is the vanilla midget promotion while TNA is mainstream 8.0 per show, only losers watch WWE. Reason WWE is still relevant is cause of Rocky (insert Tonypicturehere.jpg) mentioned it.


I'd rather watch TNA 2004 which averaged 0.3 than the John Cena 2.5-3.0 show over at the Eunk


----------



## Stone Cold Crazy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

oops wrong thread.


----------



## CoverD

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Crap, wrong thread >_<


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I'm expecting nothing less than a 7.5 rating. Expecting the breakdown to look a little something like this:



> The opening with the Rumble fallout, CM Punk raging, Heyman, and Vince started the show with an 8.0 and almost 13,000,000 viewers, which is earth-shattering to say the least. According to an insider report, it was as soon as Punk's music hit that the number started sky-rocketing. Randy Orton vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 9,183,000 viewers, bringing the show down to 3,817,000, people tuning out after realizing they'd be bored to death watching a bunch of losers after the GOAT rage. Ryback and Prime Time Players in the Make-Me-Laugh segment lost 627,000 viewers. Looks like no one was laughing, because they tuned out. It also appears that fortunately not many saw The Barrett Barrage buried by Bo Dallas as that match lost 1,190,000 viewers.
> 
> Cena/Ziggler and The Shield attack with Sheamus and Ryback running out gained 740,000 viewers, a good gain for the segment, but a bad overall rating. The Tensai/Clay dance off lost 896,000 viewers, which is terrible because by this point, less than 2,000,000 viewers were watching Raw. It gets worse as our World Champion Alberto Del Rio and his main challenger The Big Show, lost another 170,000 viewers. However the show low came during the divas match, which lost another 1,113,000 viewers. People were not tolerating Raw tonight... that is... until...
> 
> The Rock's WWE Championship speech gained 6,742,000, bringing the rating back up and over 4.0 and at this point over 7,000,000 people were tuned in. But it gets better because as soon as Punk came out, another 6,400,000 viewers popped in, beating out the start of the show and closing in on 14,000,000 viewers. But this was NOT the peak of the show. Because there is only one man who could bring the ratings higher than a combination of The Voice of the Voiceless and The People's Champion ever could. A man with class. A man who's slowly but surely bringing dignity and intelligence back to the WWE. A man who is trying to show the unwashed masses the way to enlightenment, despite their lack of mental ability and the constant up-hill battle he must endure. The unwilling hero. The savior of the ignorant. The cart-wheel tearin', pink-tights wearin', man with an awesome beard and no fear, with the greatest physique in the world and mentally has no peer! Daaaaaaaaaaaaaamiiiiiiieeeeeeeeen SAAAAAAAAAAAAANDOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWW! Mr. Sandow's match gained 18,341,000 viewers to an earth shattering 23.0 rating. It seems the masses know just how much of a hero Mr. Sandow is, but are too lazy to embrace his teachings. Tis' a shame. It should be noted that the "Thank you Sandow!" chants were the loudest ever heard according to numerous fans who attended the event. Little do the ignorant fools know Sandow doesn't require their nasally voices screaming for him, but rather just need them to follow what he says, yet they never do.
> 
> Anyway, back to the rest of the breakdown. Ryder/Khali sing off and 3MB lost 30,000,000 viewers exactly. They need to start booking Mr. Sandow in main events if they want a successful show ratings-wise. Kane/Bryan against Jericho and Ziggler gained 520,000 viewers, a good gain actually, though the overall viewers was low by that point. Finally Vince's segment with Heyman and Lesnar's return gained 1,946,000 viewers, a huge overrun gain and number, though overshadowed by the opening, the 10PM slot, and Mr. Sandow's brilliance.


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

edit


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_68247.shtml



> -- Monday's WWE Raw the night after the Royal Rumble scored 389,815 in social media activity, up 87 percent from the Royal Rumble lead-in show last week. It was dead-even with 20th Anniversary of Raw's social media score (389,756).
> 
> Raw ranked #1 on cable TV Monday night, topping "Catfish" on MTV. It was Raw's first #1 rank of the year and first #1 rank since Christmas Eve on December 24. [ Data Source: Trendrr.TV ]
> 
> By comparison, last year's post-Rumble show scored 187,713 for a two-hour Raw. Extrapolated over three hours, the score would have been 281,568, about 100,000 less than this year's post-Rumble show.


----------



## SrsLii

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

So we never got the quarter by quarter breakdown for last week, did we? I really did want to know how bad Cena's promo did. That's too bad.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SrsLii said:


> So we never got the quarter by quarter breakdown for last week, did we? I really did want to know how bad Cena's promo did. That's too bad.


Vince has probably paid off the network to not release it.


----------



## SrsLii

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The networks aren't the ones who release the ratings, but I wouldn't be too surprised if he called in a few favors to suppress the release a few extra days until it would be overshadowed by Rumble/Brock news.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk loses the belt and the masses return.

:troll

I'm kidding before anybody bites my head off.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

^ Might end up being true, though. :side:


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Starbuck said:


> Punk loses the belt and the masses return.
> 
> :troll
> 
> I'm kidding before anybody bites my head off.


I bet there's dozens of Punk haters circling like vultures round this thread at the moment.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Knew it. Punk was the cancer all along.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

So Punk is now busted for the rating killing? :lol unk3


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> So Punk is now busted for the rating killing? :lol unk3


That would be hilarious since it would say a lot about the guys that don't like him, seeing how he's still in the same feud he was the last few weeks, and still has more air time than The Rock.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> So Punk is now busted for the rating killing? :lol unk3


 :rock4:rock


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> Knew it. Punk was the cancer all along.





Choke2Death said:


> So Punk is now busted for the rating killing? :lol unk3


Cue the vultures.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The Punk-hating trolls are gonna have a field day with this, and if the viewership turns out to be underwhelming, they'll still have a field day claiming Punk being in two segments was what caused the numbers still being disappointing. :lmao


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

If the numbers are up then it's clearly because of Jericho. If a 'Raw is Jericho' has more viewers than a 'Raw isn't Jericho' then that means 'Ratings is Jericho'.

Numbers don't lie you guys unk2

And OMG at the ratings being high on the night after one of the main PPVs unk


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I suppose I should also bring up the rating for the Rumble fallout last year was the second highest of the year, only behind Raw 1,000.


----------



## kendoo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



D.M.N. said:


> Well at least you could acknowledge that WWE is on Sky Sports and TNA is on Challenge TV... oh, wait. Challenge is available to a lot more people than Sky Sports so this is not surprising in the slightest.
> 
> 
> 
> And this is a bit of exaggeration. Surely TNA should be growing, not falling if they are to 'challenge' WWE?


i know lots of ppl who have sky and dont have sky sports, if wwe were to have some kind of weekly show on normal tv like challenge it would totaly kill any rating tna has


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I have to say, I actually really enjoyed RAW last night. First time in a long time that I have. Jericho's back, Brock's back, Rock's back and with the belt, and finally, FINALLY, we got some momentum behind the Maddox-Shield-Heyman/Punk storyline, and now Brock's involved with it as well. See, we all just needed to have some patience for the angle to cultivate, and now we're gonna see some pay off on the R2WM.


----------



## Three Dog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



roadkill_ said:


> *TNA is 10 years old. WWE is 60 years old with 100 times the budget but only twice the rating.*
> 
> TNA: 1.1
> WWE: 2.2, just last month.


that is very fuckin telling actually, Imagainge 2 maybe 3 BIG signings that completely pick up that Disgruntled WWE fanbase they could make a real run at being competition!


----------



## dan the marino

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Numbers will probably be up. The Rock is champion for the first time in years, I'm sure that pulled in some viewers. That, and the fact that it is the RTWM.

...And I'm expecting thanks to Khali/Ryder/Hornswoggle/3MB, Tensai and the dance off, whatever you want to call that divas mess and the assorted nothingness that anyone who turned in due to interest will quickly be back to doing whatever it was aside from RAW next Monday.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> Knew it. Punk was the cancer all along.


Sounds like you on this forum.


----------



## vanboxmeer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

8:00 - 4.86
9:00 - 5.27
10:00 - 4.93

Bo Bo-ing Bo-ver Barrett equates higher volume of meat bags inspecting the television.


----------



## HankHill_85

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

From TV By The Numbers:

WWE Entertainment USA 9:00 PM 5.27 2.0
WWE Entertainment USA 10:00 PM 4.93 1.9
WWE Entertainment USA 8:00 PM 4.86 1.8

Started out damn good, second hour fantastic, dropped some in last hour. Hopefully the Lesnar/Vince segment got people talking. Damn fine numbers, I'd say. Road to WrestleMania looking great.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Let's see, only counts Nielson households, DVRs don't count (so for those who had to work or whatever else, they won't count which includes me every single week), people switching off cuz of something that sucks earlier in the show, plus plenty of people who would rather fast forward through the bullshit than sit there for 3 fuckin' hours.

All the added up, ratings aren't telling at all. There are so variables, and truth is people only brag when its their favorite wrestlers in the higher rated segments, then those same people sing a different tune when their favorite ends up in a shitty rated segment. 

Ratings don't mean shit in the long run. I only come to this thread to see the hilarious theories some of the trolling haters have when they think they actually know everything.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Cenas bit was in the 2nd hour right? 

. Obvious punk was the problem. ratings will be great with rock as champ.

cm punk cant draw


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Stad said:


> Sounds like you on this forum.


Im going to be completely honest with you.

That was a fucking awful joke m8 you irrelevant bender.


----------



## The GOAT One

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Biggest since Raw 1000?

:rock


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



TheGreatOne. said:


> Biggest since Raw 1000?
> 
> :rock


 Indeed


----------



## SrsLii

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



K.W.H. said:


> Let's see, only counts Nielson households, DVRs don't count (so for those who had to work or whatever else, they won't count which includes me every single week), people switching off cuz of something that sucks earlier in the show, plus plenty of people who would rather fast forward through the bullshit than sit there for 3 fuckin' hours.
> 
> All the added up, ratings aren't telling at all. There are so variables, and truth is people only brag when its their favorite wrestlers in the higher rated segments, then those same people sing a different tune when their favorite ends up in a shitty rated segment.
> 
> Ratings don't mean shit in the long run. I only come to this thread to see the hilarious theories some of the trolling haters have when they think they actually know everything.


I feel like we have this same discussion every week.

DVR viewers are factored in to ratings. Ratings are adjusted for "delayed viewings" up to seven days later. FFS.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



vanboxmeer said:


> 8:00 - 4.86
> *9:00 - 5.27*
> 10:00 - 4.93
> 
> Bo Bo-ing Bo-ver Barrett equates higher volume of meat bags inspecting the television.


That legit? If so then that's very good for them. If the entire hour was over 5 million then it's pretty certain that whatever the big thing was in that hour did really well, Rock, right? Same goes for the third hour. I'm expecting a big overrun number now looking at this. WWE should be pleased. I wonder if the viewers will stick around next week. With an ending like Vince/Heyman/Lesnar, you'd like to think so.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Starbuck said:


> That legit? If so then that's very good for them. If the entire hour was over 5 million then it's pretty certain that whatever the big thing was in that hour did really well, Rock, right? Same goes for the third hour. I'm expecting a big overrun number now looking at this. WWE should be pleased. I wonder if the viewers will stick around next week. With an ending like Vince/Heyman/Lesnar, you'd like to think so.


 I like your avatar pic


----------



## the fox

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

i guess the second hour pick will be quarter 5 (cena promo-shield attack)and the second half of Q8 since i am sure the start of rock segement gained alot of viewers after tensai and the divas segements in Q7 and part of Q8
also expecting Q9 to be one of the highesto the show with the last part of Q12 and the overrun


----------



## the fox

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock was in the second part of Q8 and Q9
i am sure cena promo + the shield attack in Q5 did great too


----------



## The GOAT One

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Big jump since last week. 

What changed? :rock unk2

Looks like JohnBoy played his part too, the Rumble win giving him DAT credibility again.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Did hour 2 have the Rock/Punk promo and Cena promo/Shield attack?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

5 million average for the entire show though. That's a pretty big ass jump from the barely 4 million they were getting a month ago. DAT MANIA HYPE. It always comes back to whether they can keep the audience, something they don't really tend to do. I doubt this will be any different. I mean, they'll keep the audience for certain segments but I'd be surprised if this borderline 5 million per hour kept up all the way until April 7th.


----------



## The GOAT One

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

3.68 Rating. 

Other than Raw 1000, Highest since night after WM 27. (according to PWTorch)


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Dance off between Tensia and Brodus Clay = ratings.

Hope we get more of that quality television as it did good in the ratings and viewership and shit.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

No surprises here. You put Punk in two segments and ratings skyrocket, averaging over 5 million viewers.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



purple_gloves said:


> Did hour 2 have the Rock/Punk promo and Cena promo/Shield attack?


Cena's segment was at 9PM and Rock/Punk's promo was either at 10PM or the quarter before it. I guess with both of them in the second hour, the numbers were good for that reason.

Also I really hope that stupid Tensai/Brodus segment lost viewers or something. I didn't mind last night's show but holy fuck, that left a bad taste in my mouth for the rest of the show.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The tumor is really gone. The People's Therapy was a huge success.

Congrats to the 'E. (Y) May you be Punkcer-free forever.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



TheGreatOne. said:


> 3.68 Rating.
> 
> Other than Raw 1000, Highest since night after WM 27. (according to PWTorch)


3.68?

:vince2

I'm shocked at that. I mean, that's fucking high for 3 hours and not being a special or anything like that. The People's champ bringing in DA PEOPLEZ.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

18-49 numbers look super good for WWE.


----------



## apokalypse

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Chris Ratings Jericho...


----------



## apokalypse

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

i must admit is Punk rating killer?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

WWE universe was probably in a state of shock and awe that Punk lost the belt and tuned in to see what his reaction was.

And maybe for that dude who took it from him. Maybe.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> No surprises here. You put Punk in two segments and ratings skyrocket, averaging over 5 million viewers.


:lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Where did the TNA praise disappear in last hour? unk2
3.68 to what 0.8? I feel like taped TNA will overtake Raw this week. unk2


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> Cena's segment was at 9PM and Rock/Punk's promo was either at 10PM or the quarter before it. I guess with both of them in the second hour, the numbers were good for that reason.
> 
> Also I really hope that stupid Tensai/Brodus segment lost viewers or something. I didn't mind last night's show but holy fuck, that left a bad taste in my mouth for the rest of the show.


Hopefully the good segments all did good numbers (it looks like that could be the case), and Vince takes note.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

RAW almost doubled their ratings in just a mere 5 weeks, going from the year low of 2012 (2.2) for the christmas special to the best rating in probably over 9 months (3.7). Rock is a ridiculously big draw, I doubt even WWE expected that, I certainly didn't.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

For the record, the Raw after last years Rumble, did a 3.55 rating.


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

the rock bringing in DEM ratingzzzz


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



purple_gloves said:


> For the record, the Raw after last years Rumble, did a 3.55 rating.


Wasn't that Taker's return?


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Wasn't that Taker's return?


Yes, but that was not advertised and no one expected it. The main draw was John Laurinaitis' job being on the line and HHH "reviewing" it.


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



uknoww said:


> the rock bringing in DEM ratingzzzz


By The Rock you mean Lionheart Chris Jericho? unk2


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Brock Lesnar bringing in the ratings. :brock


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



-Extra- said:


> By The Rock you mean Lionheart Chris Jericho? unk2


the rock,chris jericho and bork bringing in DEM ratingz,better?


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Starbuck said:


> 3.68?
> 
> :vince2
> 
> I'm shocked at that. I mean, that's fucking high for 3 hours and not being a special or anything like that. The People's champ bringing in DA PEOPLEZ.


And technically it should get higher because Trips and Taker have yet to make an appearance. Obviously, putting the title on a part-timer did the trick.

I am not shocked. Lots of people wanted Punk to drop the title because they were not feeling him. I know his marks don't want to hear that but it is the truth. Plus The Rock is holding the title again after 10 years. 

In the end, fans are rejecting these PG Era stars. Vince royally screwed this era's stars over by continually dangling that "Attitude Era carrot" in front of the masses. Not doing a PG Era vs. Attitude Era storyline to accompany the video game was an egregious error on his part. If he does go down the "rumored Wrestlemania" path and have John Cena defeat The Rock, without turning heel, it will cripple this company beyond repair. Right now fans are only holding on to see their favorites compete in dream matches and scenarios, and if he doesn't do anything fast, as soon as the part-timers stop being able to perform or become disinterested, this company will be in serious trouble.


----------



## TheWFEffect

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

DAT NEW WWE CHAMPION DAT BORK DOSS TWINKYTITTS DAT WORLDTITLEBURIAL SKINNYFATASSSINKS#.


----------



## Disciple514

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The AE wrestlers bringing those ratingz. If only we had Mark Henry.


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Khali's karaoke to steal the show... and numbers.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

3.68 is actually incredible when you consider that the Raw after WM 28, did a 3.42 rating on a 2 hour show.

Does this mean Rock/Punk > Rock/Cena? Or is it just a one off because the Rock has just won the title? I didn't think the title mattered that much to be honest.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I love Alberto as a face but either Trips, Jericho, or Brock need to be holding that World Heavyweight Championship in order to balance the two shows and solidify the ratings.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

ROCKY! ROCKY! ROCKY! ROCKY! Rock=RATINGS. Online fans are crying but business is BUSINESS. And yes..the highest rated hour was the Rock promo hour.

Men lie, women lie, numbers don't


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

3.68... dayum. Guess the combo of Rock/Lesnar/Vince beats Taker/HHH/Big Johnny... which isn't too surprising, but yeah. Awesome number and best one besides Raw 1000 in a long time.


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



purple_gloves said:


> 3.68 is actually incredible when you consider that the Raw after WM 28, did a 3.42 rating on a 2 hour show.
> 
> Does this mean Rock/Punk > Rock/Cena? Or is it just a one off because the Rock has just won the title? I didn't think the title mattered that much to be honest.


if rock vs punk had been that hot then why didn they pull 3.06 last week?
the rating was bigger this week because the rock is the wwe champion


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> 3.68... dayum. Guess the combo of *Rock/Lesnar/Heyman/Jericho/Vince* beats Taker/HHH/Big Johnny... which isn't too surprising, but yeah. Awesome number and best one besides Raw 1000 in a long time.


Fixed.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Shit, it's true. The Rock was only advertised on this show and he won the WWE Championship. Fans got an unexpected return from Brock Lesnar and we still have Triple H and The Undertaker making their returns soon for the Road to Wrestlemania. Ratings could jump even more as we go deeper into Wrestlemania season.

Oh, and obviously Mark RATINGZ Henry.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



LovelyElle890 said:


> Fixed.


Not really. Jericho had nothing to do with it. That number has everything to do with Rock being WWE Champion for the first time in 10 years. The other crediting factors are more than likely Cena being the Rumble winner and Vince/Heyman. Brock Lesnar wasn't advertised although he'll add big time to the overrun number imo. But this is primarily on Rock and the big tease throughout the show that something was going to happen at the end.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Starbuck said:


> Not really. Jericho had nothing to do with it. That number has everything to do with Rock being WWE Champion for the first time in 10 years. The other crediting factors are more than likely Cena being the Rumble winner and Vince/Heyman. Brock Lesnar wasn't advertised although he'll add big time to the overrun number imo. But this is primarily on Rock and the big tease throughout the show that something was going to happen at the end.


Jericho wasn't advertised but everyone saw him at the Rumble and it was blowing up on twitter. So, you could just assume he would be on Raw the next night. I am not saying that Rock didn't bring in the ratings but the WWE did spoil the Lesnar thing on twitter before he came out. I tuned in because I assumed Trips would be on the show too.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Sick rating for this current time period

Rock segment probably did huge and show started off strong with people thinkng Rock/Punk might open the show. I doubt people really wanted to see Heyman/Vince

Next week obv 3.15 rating


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



LovelyElle890 said:


> Jericho wasn't advertised but everyone saw him at the Rumble and it was blowing up on twitter. So, you could just assume he would be on Raw the next night. I am not saying that Rock didn't bring in the ratings but the WWE did spoil the Lesnar thing on twitter before he came out. I tuned in because I assumed Trips would be on the show too.


Jericho isn't a guy who moves numbers in any way. He never has been. Compared to the other guys in the discussion right now (Rock/Lesnar/Vince) he doesn't come even remotely close. 

Good call on the Lesnar twitter spoil though. I forgot about that. Since the social media activity was high, it's not unreasonable to assume that a lot of folks were expecting Brock, at least the people on twitter were expecting him. 

Overall though, everybody knew Rock was walking out there as the new champ and I think that's ultimately what led to the high interest. Nobody knew when he was going to show. When it wasn't the main event slot and Vince/Heyman was advertised I think everybody then knew that shit was going down. Cue the Brock spoiler and there you have it, 3.7 for a 3 hour Raw in 2013 lol.

:rock4


----------



## Shazayum

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

awesome rating. THANK YOU ROCK


----------



## Green Light

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

They'll be back down again next week when people realise Rock isn't there lol


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Green Light said:


> They'll be back down again next week when people realise Rock isn't there lol


Yup. But it gives :vince3 something to brag about for a week. He's starting already.



> _*USA NETWORK’S “WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW” DELIVERS BEST NUMBERS IN ALL DEMOS SINCE JULY 2012
> 
> WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW – the most-watched, regularly scheduled program on cable, airing live every Monday night, 52 weeks a year – had a great night with the best rating in all demos since July 2012 when the show aired it’s 1000th episode and debuted a new third hour of the show.
> 
> This week’s 8pm-11:10pm episode of WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW delivered its biggest audience since converting to a 3-hour format on 7/23/12 with 2.4 million (2.395MM) P18-49, 2.4 million (2.37MM) P25-54,1.3 million (1.25MM) P18-34 and 5 million (5.01MM) total viewers.
> 
> RAW delivered more M18-34 than any other program on television, broadcast or cable, and was second only to “The Following” on FOX for M18-49.
> 
> RAW made USA the #1 network in cable with double-digit margins over #2 History and was the only network to average over 2 million P18-49 (2.28MM, +58% over #2 HIST), 2 million P25-54 (2.26MM, +25%) or 4 million total viewers (4.80MM, +21%).*_


Rocky killing it in the M18-34 demo and Cena's Rumble win probably helped with the kiddies. 

Vince can smell the money already. TWICE IN A LIFETIME.


----------



## The High King

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

so all these people tuned in and they got

Vince hogging the main event
Tensai in underwear
Khali trying to sing
Cena being pushed some more


dont expect those same ratings next week


----------



## Green Light

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Lol oh god

This will just confirm in Vince's mind, THE PEOPLE WANT ROCK VS. CENA! FORGET ONCE IN A LIFETIME, LET'S MAKE IT ONCE A YEAR :vince3


----------



## TheF1BOB

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:damn Didn't expect that. DAT RATING all but confirms;

1. Giving the belt to The Rock *was* the way to go.

2. Punk will *never* again be WWE Champion.

Sorry Phil. You lose viewers. unk3

Dwayne Draws. :rock


----------



## BallinGid

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The rock winning the title plus dethroning a long term heel champion(cm punk) + cena winning rumble = Ratings. This is why the triple threat should happen at mania.


----------



## ShiftyLWO

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Green Light said:


> They'll be back down again next week when people realise Rock isn't there lol


even if he was i wouldn't be surprised that it would go back down to normal after that piss poor raw. that shit was 90 percent garbage.


----------



## the fox

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

rock isn't on raw next week?


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



TheF1BOB said:


> :damn Didn't expect that. DAT RATING all but confirms;
> 
> 1. Giving the belt to The Rock *was* the way to go.
> 
> 2. Punk will *never* again be WWE Champion.
> 
> Sorry Phil. You lose viewers. unk3
> 
> Dwayne Draws. :rock


Yeah sure, Punk will be champ at least twice before he retires.


----------



## apokalypse

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

can't stay for long...WWE will back to same old shit under 3.0 once WM is over.

Jericho-Bryan-Ziggler=Ratings

if Rock isn't on raw new weeks then WWE will focus on Brock Lesnar...


----------



## Marv95

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



purple_gloves said:


> 3.68 is actually incredible when you consider that the Raw after WM 28, did a 3.42 rating on a 2 hour show.
> 
> Does this mean Rock/Punk > Rock/Cena? *Or is it just a one off because the Rock has just won the title? *I didn't think the title mattered that much to be honest.


Myself and others have said that if the Rock was the WWE champ old school fans would return even for the short term.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Typical. A shit show gets a good rating. Fuck that.

Rock saved that shit. Can you imagine what the rating would have been without him?

Thing is though, we'll get more of those comedy segments now thanks to that rating.


----------



## The Ice King

Wait what?
Rocky won't be there next week? I love him and all but that's just stupid. The WWE champion won't be on the show.......c'mon son.


----------



## Tony Tornado

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Absolutely dreadful 3 hour RAW including John Cena squash match and subsequent lame promo, Tensai dancing and wearing women's underwear, Khali singing and the commentators going on and on about how much this show sucks - 5 millions viewers

Parks and Recreation, best comedy on TV - 3.5 million viewers

America fpalm


----------



## Marv95

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Bad shows=/=bad ratings and vice versa.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Fuck Rock/Punk/Lesnar. Tensai in lingerie = RATINGS.

My body is ready.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



the fox said:


> rock isn't on raw next week?


no, he is not advetrised to appear.

Brock is though. And probably Hunter appearance too


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:brock :rock :vince :heyman


----------



## Rocky Mark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



ShiftyLWO said:


> even if he was i wouldn't be surprised that it would go back down to normal after that piss poor raw. that shit was 90 percent garbage.


no it wasn't 

Punk's opening segment + Rock and Punk's promo + the Shield destroying the golden boys + Heyman and Vince's promo + Lesnar's return = GREAT show

I agree there was some unwatchable garbage like the Khali segment and that horrid Tensai and Clay dance off but it got overshadowed by the good parts of the shpw


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

To be honest, that Tensai segment pretty much has made me not ever want to stay awake for another 3 hour Raw unless it's a special occasion (WM go-home or the night after WM). When it felt like the end was nearing, I looked at the clock and there was still one hour to go.

Last night was actually a decent show, though. Punk did a good job as the whiny sore loser in the opener, Orton/Cesaro's match was alright, Cena cut a good promo followed by a funny six man brawl (fuck the Cody squash, though), Rock's championship segment, Jericho and obviously BORK and Heyman. Definitely enough to make up for the terrible stuff like the aforementioned Tensai segment.


----------



## Stall_19

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Bo Dallas has his first match on raw and rating skyrocket. Obviously Bo=ratings. Time to put the title on that kid.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I remember when people said that it doesn't matter for the ratings who the champion was. Well that rating puts that debate to rest.


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Didn't most people not like last night's RAW? I know the singing was terrible.


----------



## Headliner

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Human Nature said:


> Wait what?
> Rocky won't be there next week? I love him and all but that's just stupid. The WWE champion won't be on the show.......c'mon son.


They should of at least did an injury angle to explain it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



murder said:


> I remember when people said that it doesn't matter for the ratings who the champion was. Well that rating puts that debate to rest.


It really doesn't in the long-term. Short-term? Sure. Yeah, the fallout of the second biggest PPV of the year plus the end of Punk's 434 day title reign and Rock's first title reign in 10 years got a huge number overall, but as mentioned earlier the Raw after Rumble last year got a huge number as well, and then things went back to normal (and Punk was champion at that Raw). So unless Rock being champion keeps things at this level, the debate isn't put to rest.


----------



## Annihilus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Why is everyone nuthugging the Rock here as if putting the belt on him is the only reason they popped a better rating this week? Do you not know that the ratings always go up in between RR and WM every year no matter who's on the show? did any one of you even bother to look at the Raw rating after the RR last year? 

Last year's Raw rating after Royal Rumble, without Rock as champion, was a 3.55. This year's with Rock as champion and on the show was a 3.60.. virtually identical. You were saying?


----------



## deadmanwatching

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

phil got exposed.


----------



## TromaDogg

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rocky Mark said:


> Punk's opening segment + Rock and Punk's promo + *the Shield destroying the golden boys* + Heyman and Vince's promo + Lesnar's return = GREAT show


Which was ruined for me by Sheamus not selling the fact he'd been beaten up at all and coming back out for a Tables match with Sandow later and squashing him. fpalm

It's why I just can't enjoy segments like that anymore as much as I used to. fpalm

Was far from the worst episode of Raw I'm ever seen though. The Rock/Punk feud is entertaining, and Vince getting the F5 was great stuff.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

So went back and checked out the Raw viewership numbers for the Raw after the Rumble last year.
9:00-10:00 - 5.318m
10:00-11:00 - 5.124m 
(Show had HHH reviewing Laurinaitis with Taker returning in the overrun, CM Punk as champion, Cena/Kane continuing, and Sheamus as Rumble winner)

And this year was:

9:00-10:00 - 5.27m
10:00-11:00 - 4.93m
(As we know since it just happened last night, Vince reviewed Heyman with Lesnar returning in the overrun, The Rock as champion, Punk/Rock continuing, and Cena as Rumble winner)

Interesting. Of course the big difference is this year, with the first hour being different from last year's, it's not an entirely fair comparison and this year's can still be looked at as better. There wasn't that big of a difference anyway.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The difference is, last year hitting 3.X was the norm. This week's 3.6 (or however much) is miraculous after months of mostly 2s. Can't really compare them.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> So went back and checked out the Raw viewership numbers for the Raw after the Rumble last year.
> 9:00-10:00 - 5.318m
> 10:00-11:00 - 5.124m
> 
> And this year was:
> 
> 9:00-10:00 - 5.27m
> 10:00-11:00 - 4.93m
> 
> Interesting. Of course the big difference is this year, with the first hour being different from last year's, it's not an entirely fair comparison and this year's can still be looked at as better. There wasn't that big of a difference anyway.


This year is more impressive..it was 3 hours and Tensai got naked and fans stuck around.


----------



## Green Light

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Comparing a three hour show to a two hour show is pointless. We all know that's the real reason ratings are lower now.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Wait, so is 3 hours a valid excuse or not? Because I could've sworn it wasn't a couple of months ago.


----------



## Green Light

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Well I don't know what anyone else has said in the past but it should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain that the three hour format is killing the ratings


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

And once again, the combination of The Rock, CM DRAW, Rydraw, and Mark Ratings Henry brought in these great numbers. Add in BORK, and now we have viewers on top of viewers.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> Wait, so is 3 hours a valid excuse or not? Because I could've sworn it wasn't a couple of months ago.


3 hours is stupid..they're getting away with it because Rock is back. It will HIT record lows after WM 29.


----------



## cavs25

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I feel bad for all the 5 million viewers like me who watched this shit


----------



## Das Wunderberlyn

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

punk- whine whine whine and whine, even after 430+ days of title reign.

rocky gets the title and the ratings jumps abnormally. 

do the math :steiner2


----------



## KatKayson

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

So people stayed after the Khail,Tensai bullshit? I wonder how many return next week...


----------



## Tony Tornado

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> The difference is, last year hitting 3.X was the norm. This week's 3.6 (or however much) is miraculous after months of mostly 2s. Can't really compare them.


You can go check it out if you want but last year's post-rumble RAW was still a big bump. The show was doing 3.0 regularly and that show got like a 0.5 bump.


----------



## Ray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

A 3.7 for a THREE HOUR RAW? Jesus, they had trouble getting that rating for RAW back when it was 2 hours :lmao


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Huge rating. People tuned in when they learned that the greatest reign ever has ended, and wanted to see the reaction. Dat ratings machine, CM Punk.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The tumor is really gone! The People's Therapy was a huge success!

Congrats to the 'E. (Y)

May you be Punkcer-free forever.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Funny thing is Punk is still in the title scene. We ain't "Punkcer-free" yet. unk2


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> The difference is, last year hitting 3.X was the norm. This week's 3.6 (or however much) is miraculous after months of mostly 2s. Can't really compare them.


Exactly. The last few months prior to the Rock's return was almost historically bad ratings for WWE. Punk's reign tv ratings wise was pretty much the worst since Diesel. Therefore, comparing last year's rating for the raw after the royal rumble to this years is not an accurate comparison... a lot of viewers from last year bailed on the product during Punk's reign. The fact that this year's rating was higher than last year's is really impressive though.


----------



## The Main Headliner

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

....but Rock coming back hasn't helped the WWE at all, i mean gee golly. 

Back to back million dollar mania buyrates
Monster Raw 1000 rating.
Big increase in viewership the night after becoming champion. 

All thanks to the voice of the voiceless! The voices are showing up in droves to see Punk regain the title now!


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

If vince has seen those numbers then except more Cena wins.


----------



## checkcola

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



KatKayson said:


> So people stayed after the Khail,Tensai bullshit? I wonder how many return next week...


I'm willing to bet the average wrestling fan doesn't really care about filler. They just want the big angles and the big stars. This show gave them both things. I guess that's a case against bothering with a decent midcard? ho hum


----------



## Gene_Wilder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

atlanta doesn't deserve the Rock, fuck them


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> USA NETWORK’S “WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW” DELIVERS BEST NUMBERS IN ALL DEMOS SINCE JULY 2012
> 
> WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW – the most-watched, regularly scheduled program on cable, airing live every Monday night, 52 weeks a year – had a great night with the best rating in all demos since July 2012 when the show aired it’s 1000th episode and debuted a new third hour of the show.
> 
> This week’s 8pm-11:10pm episode of WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW delivered its biggest audience since converting to a 3-hour format on 7/23/12 with 2.4 million (2.395MM) P18-49, 2.4 million (2.37MM) P25-54,1.3 million (1.25MM) P18-34 and 5 million (5.01MM) total viewers.
> 
> RAW delivered more M18-34 than any other program on television, broadcast or cable, and was second only to “The Following” on FOX for M18-49.
> RAW made USA the #1 network in cable with double-digit margins over #2 History and was the only network to average over 2 million P18-49 (2.28MM, +58% over #2 HIST), 2 million P25-54 (2.26MM, +25%) or 4 million total viewers (4.80MM, +21%).


2.395 million in the demo!!!!


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

3.7? Unreal. The GOAT. The man who ended the 430 days of misery. The People's Champion. The Undisputed WWE Champion. Bow down Vince. Unlike Rock on RAW, I have **3** words that can describe the spirit of this moment, 3 words that symbolize our journey:

9:15














Electrifying.

Only problem I have with this is how WWE are booking Rock's segments on two separate quarters the last two weeks. I know it's probably a strategic placement to help two segments but you can't maximize Rock's audience if you give it 5 minutes in one quarter and 7 minutes in the other. Especially when the rest is usually filler or commercials.


----------



## Kurt 'Olympic Gold

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> 3.7? Unreal. The GOAT. The man who ended the 430 days of misery. The People's Champion. The Undisputed WWE Champion. Bow down Vince. Unlike Rock on RAW, I have **3** words that can describe the spirit of this moment, 3 words that symbolize our journey:
> 
> 9:15
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Electrifying.
> 
> Only problem I have with this is how WWE are booking Rock's segments on two separate quarters the last two weeks. I know it's probably a strategic placement to help two segments but you can't maximize Rock's audience if you give it 5 minutes in one quarter and 7 minutes in the other. Especially when the rest is usually filler or commercials.


EXACTLY.

Rock returns and instantly does great business for WWE. Undisputed GOAT.


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

What's the final rating though? Is it a 3.7 rating? If so, that's hella huge! The Rock and CM Punk bringing in them ratings like nothing! This is good to see.


----------



## Catsaregreat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

5 million people tuned in to mourn the end of CM Punks historic reign.


----------



## Green Light

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Catsaregreat said:


> 5 million people tuned in to celebrate the end of CM Punks historic reign.


Fixed that for you brother


----------



## Clique

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Yes Rock316AE! And to the person that mentioned Rock bringing WrestleMania buys up over 1 million for the last two years along with a boost in ratings & interest, let's not forget record setting gates at those WrestleManias too including this year with well over 50,000 tickets selling rapidly at much higher prices.



Rock316AE said:


> 3.7? Unreal. The GOAT. The man who ended the 430 days of misery. The People's Champion. The Undisputed WWE Champion. *Bow down Vince.* Unlike Rock on RAW, I have **3** words that can describe the spirit of this moment, 3 words that symbolize our journey:


:lol Don't worry he is and happy to.


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk was the problem............the ratings were shit during his whole title reign.


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Nimbus said:


> Punk was the problem............the ratings were shit during his whole title reign.


That would work if Cena wasn't the one booked as the headliner all the time... seriously, this is a normal post RR bump and RTWM rise. After WM it will tank. If it even manages to retain the ratings to WM. Any more of last night type shows where even the commentators are mocking the show... well, maybe they'll get numbers just because people tune in to watch a train wreck and laugh at the idiocy.


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock winning the title was bound to bring in viewers . But will they stick around? I think they have a better chance then they did at Raw1000 as its the RTWM. 


BO DALLAS BRINGING THE RATINGS


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> 3.7? Unreal. The GOAT. The man who ended the 430 days of misery. The People's Champion. The Undisputed WWE Champion. Bow down Vince. Unlike Rock on RAW, I have **3** words that can describe the spirit of this moment, 3 words that symbolize our journey:
> 
> 9:15
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Electrifying.
> 
> Only problem I have with this is how WWE are booking Rock's segments on two separate quarters the last two weeks. I know it's probably a strategic placement to help two segments but you can't maximize Rock's audience if you give it 5 minutes in one quarter and 7 minutes in the other. Especially when the rest is usually filler or commercials.


*All Hail !!*


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Post-Rumble bump. Rock ain't THAT big.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



K.W.H. said:


> Post-Rumble bump. Rock ain't THAT big.


I really feel for ya. Really been a horrible week for your Messiah.

Loses the title, then gets exposed as a rating cancer that's finally been successfully therapied.

Man, I love it. :lmao


----------



## Sam Knight

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Bad news Punk marks,after that ratings boom,CM Punk will never be given another title reign and main event.He will be demoted back to mid card.
2013-14-SUPERCENA ERA!!


----------



## Ndiech

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Salute the great one!!


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Cena will tank in the ratings too compared to Rock.

a) WM season will be over with all the big stars leaving including Rock/Lesnar/HHH/Taker

and 

b) Rock is a MUCH bigger draw than Cena anyway. It doesn't matter who you are, unless your name is Brock Lesnar you're a ratings killer compared to The Rock in 2013.

Lol at people beeing concerned about Punk never getting the title again just because he can't keep up with one of the biggest wrestling stars of all time who got his title reign after 10 years again. Punks still todays Nr.2 for a reason, take away Cena and he's the biggest star of the show. Not everybody can be Austin/Hogan/Rock.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> I really feel for ya. Really been a horrible week for your Messiah.
> 
> Loses the title, then gets exposed as a rating cancer that's finally been successfully therapied.
> 
> Man, I love it. :lmao


Your reading compensation needs some work. I am a Rock fan as well, not once have I bitched about Punk losing. Sad thing is, you Rock marks have been baiting Punk fans since the match, just proves you are just trolling for a reaction. Save your pity for yourself.

BTW, my Messiah is Steve Austin and he was bigger than Rock back in the day.


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk loses the title and ratings immidatielly skyrocket? I know it's Road to Wrestlemania, I know Rock, Vince, Brock etc. were there, but still, 3.7 is fucking unreal for 2013 standards. Damn, if I was a Punk mark I would be so mad.

Oh, and WWE should not get their hopes up. Once part-timers leave and we're back to boring full time roster carrying the show, 2.5 will say Hi once again.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



YamchaRocks said:


> Punk loses the title and ratings immidatielly skyrocket? I know it's Road to Wrestlemania, I know Rock, Vince, Brock etc. were there, but still, 3.7 is fucking unreal for 2013 standards. Damn, if I was a Punk mark I would be so mad.
> 
> Oh, and WWE should not get their hopes up. Once part-timers leave and we're back to boring full time roster carrying the show, *2.5 will say Hi once again.*


No doubt about it. Regardless of whether Punk or Cena's holding the belt. The Rock is the Rock at the end of the day. He is one of those ultra rare one man draws. Comparing Punk, or even Cena, to him, is unfair.

Is it possible for anybody to like Punk AND Rock, and just apply logic to the situation instead of definitively siding with one? (That's to everybody in general, not the guy I'm quoting)


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Yeah, when the ratings suck again, haters can't blame Punk anymore. They will probably just transfer their hate to Cena again, like before 2012.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



YamchaRocks said:


> Punk loses the title and ratings immidatielly skyrocket? I know it's Road to Wrestlemania, I know Rock, Vince, Brock etc. were there, but still, 3.7 is fucking unreal for 2013 standards. Damn, if I was a Punk mark I would be so mad.
> 
> Oh, and WWE should not get their hopes up. Once part-timers leave and we're back to boring full time roster carrying the show, 2.5 will say Hi once again.


You seem to be arguing against yourself. First you say that you'd be mad if you were a Punk mark, insinuating that he's the reason the ratings weren't this high before. Then you go on to say that the ratings will be back where they were when the part-timers are gone, which would mean that Punk isn't the reason for them.

The point that it should be bad for Punk not to be as big of a star as The Rock rather looks like an insult to the latter. I think The Rock is bigger than just being the water mark for what's OK.

The very obvious reason for this is that The Rock is a bigger star than any wrestler and brings in new people (quite likely old fans) when they hear he's champ again. If anything Punk marks would be glad that this is happening since Punk is feuding with The Rock.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Loudness said:


> Cena will tank in the ratings too compared to Rock.
> 
> a) WM season will be over with all the big stars leaving including Rock/Lesnar/HHH/Taker
> 
> and
> 
> b) Rock is a MUCH bigger draw than Cena anyway. It doesn't matter who you are, unless your name is Brock Lesnar you're a ratings killer compared to The Rock in 2013.


HHH wasn't even on the show and Lesnar only showed for like 2 minutes in the overrun. In general I agree with this post.


----------



## deadmanwatching

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Stop the excuses, Phil cant draw ratings like Rock/cena/Brock... its crystal clear now.
:rock






















Bow To The Goat


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



deadmanwatching said:


> Stop the excuses, Phil cant draw ratings like Rock/cena/Brock... its crystal clear now.
> :rock
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bow To The Goat


1. I don't think anybody is saying he can.

2. Cena can't draw like Rock or Brock.


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Evil Peter said:


> You seem to be arguing against yourself. First you say that you'd be mad if you were a Punk mark, insinuating that he's the reason the ratings weren't this high before. Then you go on to say that the ratings will be back where they were when the part-timers are gone, which would mean that Punk isn't the reason for them.


I said that because after part-timers will leave, nothing is going to change, it's going to be the same as now with Punk as the top guy. They pushed him way too hard for the last 15 months to give up on him.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



YamchaRocks said:


> I said that because after part-timers will leave, nothing is going to change, it's going to be the same as now with Punk as the top guy. They pushed him way too hard for the last 15 months to give up on him.


And that in turn is because he isn't drawing worse than the normal roster, it's just that the part-timers draw more. Meltzer reported that WWE only has two guys on the roster they feel are reliable when it comes to bringing in people and money, and those were Cena and Punk. Of course that's WWE's own fault, but that's another issue.

So I still don't see why you would be mad if you were a Punk mark. He's in as strong position as he could be.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

This thread has jumped 14 pages since I last saw it :vince3 surprised the Punk haters had time to type anything with all the frantic masturbation that must have gone on when the ratings came out. One hand doing the deed, the other on their laptop screen as they replayed Rock's promo before the title match where he told the fans to touch his hand through their TVs.

Can't wait until after Mania to see who they blame for poor ratings when Cena is champ, Rock is gone and Punk is on a deserved break unk2


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Tensai in lingerie = ratings


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk draws more than Cena nowadays, people tune out when cena comes on the tv, also every arena you can see way more Punk shirts than cena shirts, cena marks don't like the truth. Also it is a bit unfair to compare Punk to Rock in terms of drawing power, rock was a huge start during the best times in pro wrestling.


----------



## nwoattitude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

PTP and their aint noody got time for that bringing in them numbers. But really Rock is somthing else. Only Hogan was a big draw in 3 decades like that. Rock was huge in the late 90's, very big in 2000's and even did over 7 million viewers in 2011. Say what you want but he is a huge huge draw. McMahon must be counting his good graces after the way he treated Rock with the whole contract thing. Cena seems to have done well to.


----------



## Zach Gowen's Leg

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Strongside said:


> Tensai in lingerie = ratings


Can't argue with DAT THONG.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk gaining dem viewers just so they can laugh at him being so mad. CM DRAW


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk has been a ratings cancer his whole life. 
This is yet more evidence.
Why is he so overpushed? He doesn't make Vince much money. They could put the title on Tensai and he wouldnt do any worse ratings.


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Come on guyz! Ratingz don't matta!


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Bossdude said:


> Punk has been a ratings cancer his whole life.
> This is yet more evidence.
> Why is he so overpushed? He doesn't make Vince much money. They could put the title on Tensai and he wouldnt do any worse ratings.


Punk is pushed because he's, according to Meltzer, one of the two full-timers that WWE thinks they can rely on to bring in money. Sorry if that hurts your feelings.


----------



## antdvda

I don't understand how you couldn't give The Rock most of the credit for this. Ever since he's returned you have gone from dismal ratings and half empty arenas to sell outs and huge ratings. I mean, the numbers speak for themselves.






Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk was number 9 in Dave Meltzer's top 10 box office draws of all wrestling/boxing/MMA in 2012 as well. 

Thats basically an official certification that Punk is a money maker. Because Meltzer said it yo.


----------



## Chismo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The numb3rs don't lie.


----------



## Padhlala

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Annihilus said:


> Why is everyone nuthugging the Rock here as if putting the belt on him is the only reason they popped a better rating this week? Do you not know that the ratings always go up in between RR and WM every year no matter who's on the show? did any one of you even bother to look at the Raw rating after the RR last year?
> 
> Last year's Raw rating after Royal Rumble, without Rock as champion, was a 3.55. This year's with Rock as champion and on the show was a 3.60.. virtually identical. You were saying?


Are you being serious? Ratings before rumble last year were way higher than they have been these past months. Rock's highest ever rated segment is over 8. So using your argument, Rock is still way better than punk.

A lot more people tuned in because the rock being champ.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Punk was number 9 in Dave Meltzer's top 10 box office draws of all wrestling/boxing/MMA in 2012 as well.
> 
> Thats basically an official certification that Punk is a money maker. Because Meltzer said it yo.


Yes, there's something that comes from people with some actual insight, rather than being based purely in childish mark mode.

Awesome signature by the way.


----------



## Headliner

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Can't believe I'm seeing posts like this:


NearFall said:


> Punk gaining dem viewers just so they can laugh at him being so mad. CM DRAW





Cmpunk91 said:


> Punk draws more than Cena nowadays, people tune out when cena comes on the tv, also every arena you can see way more Punk shirts than cena shirts, cena marks don't like the truth. Also it is a bit unfair to compare Punk to Rock in terms of drawing power, rock was a huge start during the best times in pro wrestling.





deadmanwatching said:


> Stop the excuses, Phil cant draw ratings like Rock/cena/Brock... its crystal clear now.
> :rock
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bow To The Goat


Stop it. Punk is no where near the level of Cena. If you're name isn't Brock, Rock or Cena, you're not drawing. Before Brock and Rock came back, Cena had been the only draw for years.


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> Update: WWE and USA Network issued a rare TV ratings press release on Raw ratings. The press release highlights Raw's best performance since Raw 1,000 in July 2012, Raw outdrawing every show on television in key male demos except for "The Following" on Fox, and USA being the #1 network on cable TV Monday night.
> 
> Raw TV ratings Report
> 
> WWE Raw on Monday, January 28 scored a 3.68 rating the night after the Royal Rumble PPV, where The Rock captured the WWE Title and John Cena won the Rumble.
> 
> The rating was up 21 percent from last week's Rumble lead-in episode (3.04 rating). Other than Raw 1,000 in July 2012, this was the highest Raw rating since the night after WrestleMania 27 in 2011.
> 
> Raw drew huge numbers in the key demos of males 18-34 and males 18-49, up six-tenths of a rating compared to last week. Both were the highest since Raw 1,000.
> 
> TV Viewership Break Down
> 
> - Three-Hour Average: 5.019 million viewers, up 700,000 viewers (16 percent) from the Rumble lead-in.
> 
> This was the most total viewers since Raw 1,000. Outside of Raw 1,000, it was the first time Raw topped five million viewers since the night after WrestleMania 28 on April 2, 2012.
> 
> - Hourly Break Down: 4.863 million first hour viewers (up 500,000 vs. last week), 5.267 million second hour viewers (up 800,000 vs. last week), and 4.927 million third hour viewers (up 800,000 vs. last week).
> 
> - Raw declined in viewership from the second to third hour for the third consecutive week and 26th time out of 28 weeks during the three-hour Raw era.
> 
> 
> - Raw ranked #1 on cable TV and in the key male demos. However, the 10:00 p.m. hour trailed "Pawn Stars" on History Channel, which outdrew Raw's third hour.
> 
> - The individual hours were the most-watched in their timeslot during the current three-hour Raw era (other than Raw 1,000).
> 
> - Outside of Raw 1,000, the second hour (9:00-10:00 p.m. EST) was the most-watched hour of Raw since the same hour the night after last year's Royal Rumble.
> 
> - Last year's post-Raw Rumble averaged 5.22 million viewers for a two-hour show. January 30, 2012 Break Down: 5.31 million first hour viewers, 5.12 million second hour viewers.


http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_68251.shtml


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk may not be a big draw, but he makes money, therefore he draws. End of story. A guy who loses money doesn't become WWE Champion for a year then headlines two ppvs in a row with the Rock, not to mention beats the top star a half dozen times. People act like if you don't make money like Rock or Cena, you don't draw. Sorry, that's not what it means. They are the TOP draw, not the only draws.


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Punk was number 9 in Dave Meltzer's top 10 box office draws of all wrestling/boxing/MMA in 2012 as well.
> 
> Thats basically an official certification that Punk is a money maker. Because Meltzer said it yo.


Nope. 
Meltzer uses buyrates as his data. Punk was champion during 2012 so Meltzer credits him with the buyrates.

Punk being "the top draw of 2012" is the equivalent of Nash being "the top draw of 1995"
i.e. not impressive


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Bossdude said:


> Nope.
> Meltzer uses buyrates as his data. Punk was champion during 2012 so Meltzer credits him with the buyrates.
> 
> Punk being "the top draw of 2012" is the equivalent of Nash being "the top draw of 1995"
> i.e. not impressive


Obviously you don't know what you're talking about since Cena was the top draw of the full-timers.


----------



## Tony Tornado

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Best in the world, outstanding work = CM Punk, Paul Thomas Anderson, Queens of the Stone Age

Big money makers, ratings draw = The Rock, Michael Bay, Justin Bieber


----------



## kusksu

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Tony Tornado said:


> Best in the world, outstanding work = CM Punk, Paul Thomas Anderson, Queens of the Stone Age
> 
> Big money makers, ratings draw = The Rock, Michael Bay, Justin Bieber


Had me til QOFTSA...maybe 10 years ago


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Tony Tornado said:


> Best in the world, outstanding work = CM Punk, Paul Thomas Anderson, Queens of the Stone Age
> 
> Big money makers, ratings draw = The Rock, Michael Bay, Justin Bieber



Nah, Rock is more like Stephen Spielberg as far as directors go and like Eminem as far as musicians go. Very talented *and* huge money makers


----------



## Tony Tornado

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



kusksu said:


> Had me til QOFTSA...maybe 10 years ago


They're still the best rock band in the world.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Once Brock and Rock are done for good and dont come back anymore, WWE are in big trouble.

There is nobody else on that roster who will fill arenas and get people tuning in.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Fanboi101 said:


> Nah, Rock is more like Stephen Spielberg as far as directors go and like Eminem as far as musicians go. Very talented *and* huge money makers


Spielberg was fairly good in the past but these days he's not something I'd call quality. Raiders 4 was absolutely horrible in my opinion.


----------



## antdvda

Tony Tornado said:


> Best in the world, outstanding work = CM Punk, Paul Thomas Anderson, Queens of the Stone Age
> 
> Big money makers, ratings draw = The Rock, Michael Bay, Justin Bieber


No. Rock is more like Metallica. In their prime they were one of the greats of all time.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I don't care. I just want Brock, Taker, Trips, HBK, Rock, Jericho, Foley, and Austin all on one show before Mania. They owe it to their fans for sitting through the crap that was the latter half of 2012.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Still can't believe they got a 3.7. No way it's staying up there next week but it's still pretty darn impressive.


----------



## WWE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

3.7? Wasn't RAW always been averaging like right over or under a 3? Well I can understand it was post-rumble, but damn Rocky. People just wanted to see what happened with Rock/Punk :rock


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The highest rated segment was the Rock/Punk quarter which was a 4.03 (highest since Raw 1000)

Overrun was a 4.0

Thats the important stuff anyway.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> The highest rated segment was the Rock/Punk quarter which was a 4.03 (highest since Raw 1000)
> 
> Overrun was a 4.0
> 
> Thats the important stuff anyway.


How do you know this?

By the way that sig is horrifying


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



purple_gloves said:


> How do you know this?
> 
> By the way that sig is horrifying


On the Observer news letter bro.

I know its horrifying. The fact that were getting Rock V Cena II. Shivers man.


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

jblvdx is into that stuff, brother.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



BrosOfDestruction said:


> jblvdx is into that stuff, brother.


That aint cool yo. I'm all man over here.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:lmao

Fucking hell, that sig is incredible.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> On the Observer news letter bro.
> 
> I know its horrifying. The fact that were getting Rock V Cena II. Shivers man.


:lmao

The guy on the floor is an accurate representation of Vince's paying audience


----------



## Doc

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

That is the greatest if all Internet forum signatures sir.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> The highest rated segment was the Rock/Punk quarter which was a 4.03 (highest since Raw 1000)
> 
> Overrun was a 4.0
> 
> Thats the important stuff anyway.


Ignoring the signature, 4.0 for those two quarters is about 5.5 million viewers. Which is strange and shows how much viewership is more important as the majority of Raw 1000 was over 5.5 million.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I saw that sig a couple of days ago, creepy as fuck. :lmao

When is the full breakdown released?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



D.M.N. said:


> Ignoring the signature, 4.0 for those two quarters is about 5.5 million viewers. Which is strange and shows how much viewership is more important as the majority of Raw 1000 was over 5.5 million.


The fact that they managed to get 2 segments with that much viewership deserves credit though. I expected a bump with Rock winning the title and the Rumble fallout but not this much. It wasn't even a special like Raw 1000. It has to be said though, iirc, some segments on Raw 1000 were pushing 6 million.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Starbuck said:


> The fact that they managed to get 2 segments with that much viewership deserves credit though. I expected a bump with Rock winning the title and the Rumble fallout but not this much. It wasn't even a special like Raw 1000. It has to be said though, iirc, some segments on Raw 1000 were pushing 6 million.


You mean 7 million for Raw 1000? That show averaged just over 6m, yet failed to average a 4.0.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



D.M.N. said:


> You mean 7 million for Raw 1000? *That show averaged just over 6m, yet failed to average a 4.0*.


Why is that then?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



D.M.N. said:


> You mean 7 million for Raw 1000? That show averaged just over 6m, yet failed to average a 4.0.


Well shit. I guess what you're saying is much more legit now. Strange.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Breakdown for last week:

In the segment-by-segment, Orton vs. Cesaro lost 641,000 viewers. A Mick Foley Hall of Fame video, The Shield video interview and Big Show vs. Zack Ryder gained 196,000 viewers. Ryback vs. Heath Slater and another Rock with security outside segment gained 12,000 viewers. The C.M. Punk interview at 9 p.m. gained 66,000 viewers, less than usual growth, doing a 3.10 quarter. The Miz vs. Dolph Ziggler in the Beat the Clock match gained 33,000 viewers. The Dr. Shelby Anger Management graduation segment with Kane and Daniel Bryan lost 162,000 viewers.

Kaitlyn vs. Alicia Fox and a Paul Heyman promo gained 104,000 viewers. The Rock interview at 10 p.m. with The Shield beat down lost 109,000 viewers at 10 p.m. to a 3.01 quarter. That’s not good at all for 10 p.m. Wade Barrett vs. Sheamus in the Beat the Clock match lost 406,000 viewers. Backstage segments with Vince McMahon, Punk and Heyman, Ziggler, A.J. and Vickie Guerrero as well as Alberto Del Rio vs. Tensai gained 217,000 viewers. And the final segment with John Cena doing a lame promo and guys filling the ring gained 154,000 viewers to a 2.98.

This week:

In the segment-by-segment, it opened strong with C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman and Vince McMahon doing a 3.63 first quarter. Randy Orton vs. Antonio Cesaro with Miz as ref lost 193,000 viewers. The Make Me Laugh segment with Ryback destroying the Prime Time Players and Bob Backlund video gained 32,000 viewers. Wade Barrett vs. Bo Dallas and John Cena vs. Cody Rhodes quick matches gained 243,000 viewers.

The Cena interview followed by The Shield beatdown of Cena, Sheamus and Ryback at 9 p.m. gained 145,000 viewers to a 3.80 quarter. The Brodus Clay vs. Tensai dance contest lost 157,000 viewers, which is a hell of a lot better than they’d have done if the two would have wrestled. The Big Show beatdown of Alberto Del Rio and Ricardo Rodriguez gained 116,000 viewers. Kaitlyn vs. Tamina Snuka in a Lumberjills match and Rock coming out gained 79,000 viewers. The Rock-Punk in-ring at 10 p.m. gained 279,000 viewers. Sheamus vs. Damien Sandow in a tables match plus the Great Khali Karaoke segment and beatdown with Zack Ryder of 3MB lost 601,000 viewers. The Chris Jericho return and in-ring with Dolph Ziggler, A.J. and Big E Langston lost 342,000 viewers. Jericho & Ziggler vs. Kane & Daniel Bryan gained 134,000 viewers. And the overrun with McMahon and Heyman’s performance review and the return of Brock Lesnar gained 750,000 viewers to a 4.00 overrun.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The idea of Kaitlyn vs Tamina bringing in nearly a 4.0 rating because of its placement is quite amusing.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:brock


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> Wade Barrett vs. Bo Dallas and John Cena vs. Cody Rhodes quick matches gained 243,000 viewers."


DAT Bo RATINGZ Dallas :HHH2


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> The Cena interview followed by The Shield beatdown of Cena, Sheamus and Ryback at 9 p.m. gained 145,000 viewers to a 3.80 quarter. The Brodus Clay vs. Tensai dance contest lost 157,000 viewers, *which is a hell of a lot better than they’d have done if the two would have wrestled.* The Big Show beatdown of Alberto Del Rio and Ricardo Rodriguez gained 116,000 viewers. Kaitlyn vs. Tamina Snuka in a Lumberjills match and Rock coming out gained 79,000 viewers. The Rock-Punk in-ring at 10 p.m. gained 279,000 viewers. Sheamus vs. Damien Sandow in a tables match plus the Great Khali Karaoke segment and beatdown with Zack Ryder of 3MB lost 601,000 viewers. The Chris Jericho return and in-ring with Dolph Ziggler, A.J. and Big E Langston lost 342,000 viewers. Jericho & Ziggler vs. Kane & Daniel Bryan gained 134,000 viewers. *And the overrun with McMahon and Heyman’s performance review and the return of Brock Lesnar gained 750,000 viewers to a 4.00 overrun*


:lmao :lmao :lmao

Yeah...and...

:vince2 :heyman :brock


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> The Rock interview at 10 p.m. with The Shield beat down lost 109,000 viewers at 10 p.m. to a 3.01 quarter. That’s not good at all for 10 p.m.


lol Rock.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

BROCK


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I thought BROCK was the draw? Once again, the current champion and the wrestler he just beat for the belt who had just held the belt for 15 months gets the crossover.

CAN'T DRAW LIKE :vince3 :heyman :brock


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Damn Cena promo last week had a terrible rating ( I didn't even watch yet, worthless to watch now anyways)


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

BORK with dat gain! (Obviously Vince and Heyman get credit too)


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

DAT OVERRUN! :brock :vince2 :heyman


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Great work by vince,lesnar and heyman.

But how consistent is cena. He barely ever loses viewers. 

Hes a machine.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> The Rock interview at 10 p.m. with The Shield beat down lost 109,000 viewers at 10 p.m. to a 3.01 quarter.


I am speechless


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



kokepepsi said:


> I am speechless


Of course, nobody is going to comment on this happening, in the 10 pm quarter of all places too. But God forbid it were Punk and this thread filled up with 20 new pages of trolling hate posts.

However, Punk in the same night, gains viewers to a higher rating.

CM GOAT > THE ROCK


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Missed that part about Rocky losing viewers. Surprising to say the least since it was the final sell to the title match. Then the next night he goes and pulls a 3.7. Lol ratings.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Dang at Rock losing viewers in the 10PM slot, and the 10PM slot hasn't lost viewers in several weeks. Hell, all the big slots last week did disappointingly, but being Rock lost is what makes it incredibly disappointing.

This week though, 10PM with a 4.03 this week is awesome for Punk/Rock. Plus Rock gaining in the odd quarter before that is great as well. The strong opening with Punk/Vince/Heyman is awesome as well, and of course Brock/Vince/Heyman with a very strong overrun is great as well.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> The Rock interview at 10 p.m. with The Shield beat down lost 109,000 viewers at 10 p.m. to a 3.01 quarter.


unk2 Well, well.....well. I guess this proves that the viewers don't even know what the fuck they want. One segment Rock is bringing in viewers, another time he's losing them, same with Punk. Time to bin the ratings I'd say.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Jerichoholic4Life said:


> Breakdown for last week:
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Orton vs. Cesaro lost 641,000 viewers. A Mick Foley Hall of Fame video, The Shield video interview and Big Show vs. Zack Ryder gained 196,000 viewers. Ryback vs. Heath Slater and another Rock with security outside segment gained 12,000 viewers. The C.M. Punk interview at 9 p.m. gained 66,000 viewers, less than usual growth, doing a 3.10 quarter. The Miz vs. Dolph Ziggler in the Beat the Clock match gained 33,000 viewers. The Dr. Shelby Anger Management graduation segment with Kane and Daniel Bryan lost 162,000 viewers.
> 
> Kaitlyn vs. Alicia Fox and a Paul Heyman promo gained 104,000 viewers. *The Rock interview at 10 p.m. with The Shield beat down lost 109,000 viewers at 10 p.m. to a 3.01 quarter. That’s not good at all for 10 p.m.* Wade Barrett vs. Sheamus in the Beat the Clock match lost 406,000 viewers. Backstage segments with Vince McMahon, Punk and Heyman, Ziggler, A.J. and Vickie Guerrero as well as Alberto Del Rio vs. Tensai gained 217,000 viewers. And the final segment with John Cena doing a lame promo and guys filling the ring gained 154,000 viewers to a 2.98.
> 
> This week:
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, it opened strong with C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman and Vince McMahon doing a 3.63 first quarter. Randy Orton vs. Antonio Cesaro with Miz as ref lost 193,000 viewers. The Make Me Laugh segment with Ryback destroying the Prime Time Players and Bob Backlund video gained 32,000 viewers. Wade Barrett vs. Bo Dallas and John Cena vs. Cody Rhodes quick matches gained 243,000 viewers.
> 
> The Cena interview followed by The Shield beatdown of Cena, Sheamus and Ryback at 9 p.m. gained 145,000 viewers to a 3.80 quarter. The Brodus Clay vs. Tensai dance contest lost 157,000 viewers, which is a hell of a lot better than they’d have done if the two would have wrestled. The Big Show beatdown of Alberto Del Rio and Ricardo Rodriguez gained 116,000 viewers. Kaitlyn vs. Tamina Snuka in a Lumberjills match and Rock coming out gained 79,000 viewers. The Rock-Punk in-ring at 10 p.m. gained 279,000 viewers. Sheamus vs. Damien Sandow in a tables match plus the Great Khali Karaoke segment and beatdown with Zack Ryder of 3MB lost 601,000 viewers. The Chris Jericho return and in-ring with Dolph Ziggler, A.J. and Big E Langston lost 342,000 viewers. Jericho & Ziggler vs. Kane & Daniel Bryan gained 134,000 viewers. And the overrun with McMahon and Heyman’s performance review and the return of Brock Lesnar gained 750,000 viewers to a 4.00 overrun.


Can't wait to see what excuse ol Rocky316 will make up for this. unk2 



DwayneAustin said:


> This thread has jumped 14 pages since I last saw it :vince3 surprised the Punk haters had time to type anything with all the frantic masturbation that must have gone on when the ratings came out. One hand doing the deed, the other on their laptop screen as they replayed Rock's promo before the title match where he told the fans to touch his hand through their TVs.
> 
> Can't wait until after Mania to see who they blame for poor ratings when Cena is champ, Rock is gone and *Punk is on a deserved break* unk2


He had better not be on a break, 'cos I - and I suspect many others, have paid to see him at the London RAW.


----------



## Headliner

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

So hilarious to see Punk marks defend him to no end. Not being a draw isn't a bad thing. HBK is arguably the greatest performer of all time and he wasn't a draw. Even though part of it wasn't his fault.


----------



## Twisted14

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The ratings make even less sense than the week before last but whatever. Pretty surprising rating this week. I was expecting maybe a 3.2 or 3.3 at most but a 3.7 overall and a high of 4? Crazy. I guess the huge title change at the Rumble PPV makes people want to watch the next night. 

I'd say this is a result of giving Punk such a long reign. It makes the title mean something, especially when a heel is holding it. People desperately want to see him lose it and when he finally does, it's a huge deal. The WWE title looks better now than it has in a long time I think. It doesn't necessarily mean that every reign needs to be 6 months or more. It just needs to happen every now and then. We might know more about this when the Rumble buyrate is released.

Hope they can keep this up. Not for any reason other than I like that this shows there is still interest in the product and wrestling, particularly WWE isn't dying any time soon, because I enjoy it for the most part.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Dang, DAT GAIN by Brock/Heyman/Vince. Also fellow Punkers, that's the first time Rock has lost viewers since his return, don't be so quick to condemn!


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Headliner said:


> So hilarious to see Punk marks defend him to no end. Not being a draw isn't a bad thing. HBK is arguably the greatest performer of all time and he wasn't a draw. Even though part of it wasn't his fault.


When will people stop attributing it to the wrestler and finally get it through their damn heads that it's THE PRODUCT OVERALL! Even the Rock has had some trouble in this horrid product.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



NearFall said:


> Dang, DAT GAIN by Brock/Heyman/Vince. Also fellow Punkers, that's the first time Rock has lost viewers since his return, don't be so quick to condemn!


Sssh, just come join the trolling. It's much more fun than trying to make sense anymore. 

Plus Rock losing viewers is probably never going to happen again, so we gotta strike dem Rock marks while the iron is hot!unk5


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I expected this Rock/Shield angle a week ago. I remember looking at the quarters on PWT and seeing that Rock was booked on two separate segments. The Shield part was exactly 4 minutes out of the quarter. So that angle probably did big and then they lost everything in the 9 minutes. Rock still did the peak of the show in the parking lot segment with Vickie and Heyman which did 3.4. They opened strong and then never reached that number again, big chance that it was the Vickie angle telling people that Rock wouldn't be there.

They did the same thing this week, they booked Rock for two segments, only this time he got 10 minutes from his second quarter so it did again the peak of the show only with a huge 4.03.


----------



## Ray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

So by logic, if Lesnar was advertised for RAW, they would've done a 7.5 rating.


Right?


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



NearFall said:


> Dang, DAT GAIN by Brock/Heyman/Vince. Also fellow Punkers, that's the first time Rock has lost viewers since his return, don't be so quick to condemn!


Heyman/Vince doing a powerwalk competition alone would have drawn huge ratings, never mind letting them speak and letting magic work. Then you add the swerve (or not so swerve) videotape and you'd think WWE would be already content, little did we know that they added THE BEAST Brock Lesnar and you get your 4.0 overrun number.

Also in for the "The ratings would have magically gone up from 2.5-2.7 to 3.1-3.7 even if Rock wasn't on the show" or "Rock is a massive ratings failure, a hasbeen and a cancer to pro wrestling" arguments. Also fellow Punk/Rockbrah checking in, damn we screwed. Hating on both Punk and Rock marks due to maximum overrustle trolling. I think there's all of 5 people in this forum who actually like both and I can't figure out why lol. 

brb "Rock is overrated, repetitive, rode more bicycles than Lance Armstrong", 

brb "Punk is a vanilla midget, non drawing hack, his eyebags sag more than Flairs tits", 

brb both guys do a great buildup for RR "Punk/Rock owned dat bitch Rock/Punk on the mike lolol"

brb fat guys in their moms basement overreacting to title change on youtube

brb brb.


----------



## promoter2003

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Twisted14 said:


> The ratings make even less sense than the week before last but whatever. Pretty surprising rating this week. I was expecting maybe a 3.2 or 3.3 at most but a 3.7 overall and a high of 4? Crazy. I guess the huge title change at the Rumble PPV makes people want to watch the next night.
> 
> I'd say this is a result of giving Punk such a long reign. It makes the title mean something, especially when a heel is holding it. People desperately want to see him lose it and when he finally does, it's a huge deal. The WWE title looks better now than it has in a long time I think. It doesn't necessarily mean that every reign needs to be 6 months or more. It just needs to happen every now and then. We might know more about this when the Rumble buyrate is released.
> 
> Hope they can keep this up. Not for any reason other than I like that this shows there is still interest in the product and wrestling, particularly WWE isn't dying any time soon, because I enjoy it for the most part.



I think it goes to show that the fans are out there, but they just choose to watch when they feel it is really important. It's not surprising to me as RAW 1000 had a similar rating and that is where the whole Punk/Rock title match was set up. People just tuned in now to see the result of the title match.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> I expected this Rock/Shield angle a week ago. I remember looking at the quarters on PWT and seeing that Rock was booked on two separate segments. The Shield part was exactly 4 minutes out of the quarter. So that angle probably did big and then they lost everything in the 9 minutes. Rock still did the peak of the show in the parking lot segment with Vickie and Heyman which did 3.4. They opened strong and then never reached that number again, big chance that it was the Vickie angle telling people that Rock wouldn't be there.
> 
> They did the same thing this week, they booked Rock for two segments, only this time he got 10 minutes from his second quarter so it did again the peak of the show only with a huge 4.03.


How did i know would come in this thread n make up some bullshit excuse?? :lmao


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> The show was paced by The Rock vs. C.M. Punk confrontation which also drew the largest quarter hour (4.03) since Raw 1,000.


Higher then the overrun.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Stad said:


> How did i know would come in this thread n make up some bullshit excuse??


No. Rock did the peak of the two shows, drew the biggest quarter for a non-special RAW since probably May 2011 for his Birthday segment and almost doubled the overall rating in 3 weeks. As for the Shield angle, this is not a theory or an "excuse", that's a factual figure. As I mentioned before the breakdown came out, they're booking Rock's segments on two separate quarters to probably help the two segments, it worked this week because it wasn't a 4 minutes appearance on a 15 minutes quarter, unlike what they did with the Heyman/Shield segment.


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The main event was two people in suits talking. Of course it was going to do big on the USA network.


----------



## deatawaits

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Well if guys are really thinking that The rock losing viewer means anything just look at SD! ratings of the weeks he appeared on.I don't know how in the blue hell people are giving credit to Bork he wasn't advertised and he was there for only two minutes.Cena is consistent as hell.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



deatawaits said:


> Well if guys are really thinking that The rock losing viewer means anything just look at SD! ratings of the weeks he appeared on.I don't know how in the blue hell people are giving credit to Bork he wasn't advertised and he was there for only two minutes.Cena is consistent as hell.


Because this thread has mainly been about people trying to use the ratings to bash the people the don't like, and then in return the fans of those that get bashed sarcastically do the same thing in reverse. It's a fairly low percentage that seem to actually try to derive something useful from the ratings.

The Rock's ratings are a good lesson though. He's of course the biggest draw but he has both lost viewers in the best time slot, and been outdone by a Diva's match. The lesson is of course that you can't just look at a breakdown and say this guy was in this quarter and is therefor solely responsible for whatever the result was. There's many small factors that play in, like how big of a part that guy had of the quarter, how the commercial breaks were timed etc. As well as that the ratings are just fickle at times.

But of course most of those that just try to troll aren't even trying to make sense so this is probably pretty pointless.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

People need to get over the ratings, it don't matter atm like it once did, vince still sells out arenas, untill they start not being able to that then they'll be worried, untill then people need to relax and stop fighting with each other whilst vinny mac got his smile on laughing at you guys.


----------



## deatawaits

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Evil Peter said:


> Because this thread has mainly been about people trying to use the ratings to bash the people the don't like, and then in return the fans of those that get bashed sarcastically do the same thing in reverse. It's a fairly low percentage that seem to actually try to derive something useful from the ratings.
> 
> The Rock's ratings are a good lesson though. He's of course the biggest draw but he has both lost viewers in the best time slot, and been outdone by a Diva's match. The lesson is of course that you can't just look at a breakdown and say this guy was in this quarter and is therefor solely responsible for whatever the result was. There's many small factors that play in, like how big of a part that guy had of the quarter, how the commercial breaks were timed etc. As well as that the ratings are just fickle at times.
> 
> But of course most of those that just try to troll aren't even trying to make sense so this is probably pretty pointless.


I don't know how being a draw or not effects a wrestler's work and his quality or entertainment value.Yes it effects his status in the E but I will never know how it effects a fans perspective.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



deatawaits said:


> I don't know how being a draw or not effects a wrestler's work and his quality or entertainment value.Yes it effects his status in the E but I will never know how it effects a fans perspective.


It's because it doesn't. That's why I call the people that argue that way McMarks since they should by extension of that logic also think McDonald's makes the best food. The normal fan would just focus on what he enjoys and be happy with that and not threatened by other people's opinions.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> I expected this Rock/Shield angle a week ago. I remember looking at the quarters on PWT and seeing that Rock was booked on two separate segments. The Shield part was exactly 4 minutes out of the quarter. So that angle probably did big and then they lost everything in the 9 minutes. Rock still did the peak of the show in the parking lot segment with Vickie and Heyman which did 3.4. They opened strong and then never reached that number again, big chance that it was the Vickie angle telling people that Rock wouldn't be there.
> 
> They did the same thing this week, they booked Rock for two segments, only this time he got 10 minutes from his second quarter so it did again the peak of the show only with a huge 4.03.


You're right.

I'm just wondering why you never apply this sort of logic when Punk is in a similar position.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

People gave away Brock before he appeared on Raw. Someone even posted a pic of Brock on the party thread on here an hour or so before it happened Monday. It wasn't a huge secret to a lot of people.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I think Brock was out there for long enough for word of his appearance to spread and people to tune in before the show ended, so regardless it's fair to say he helped the overrun number, though I'm sure Vince/Heyman would've done well anyway.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk can't draw... but Rock can't either apparently so there we go.

:rock2 unk


----------



## NoyK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:brock :heyman > unk :heyman :rock

What.


----------



## yoseftigger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Can't wait to see what Cena does to the rating when he's champ again...


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



purple_gloves said:


> You're right.
> 
> I'm just wondering why you never apply this sort of logic when Punk is in a similar position.


To be fair, Punk can never claim that he sold out MSG or the Sun Life Stadium almost instantly after announcing that he'll be there, generate the biggest WM buyrate or make 1 million people tune in as soon as his music hit (Raw 1000). Therefore it's hard to defend Punk's shortcomings as anything but his inability to draw since it happens so often. Whereas for The Rock, it was his first "flop" ever since he returned.


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Who cares about who draws. Geez.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*January 28th, 2013 - Quarter Hours*
Q1 - 3.63 rating / 5.05 million
Q2 - 3.49 rating / 4.86 million
Q3 - 3.51 rating / 4.89 million
Q4 - 3.69 rating / 5.13 million
Q5 - 3.80 rating / 5.28 million
Q6 - 3.69 rating / 5.12 million
Q7 - 3.77 rating / 5.24 million
Q8 - 3.83 rating / 5.32 million
Q9 - 4.03 rating / 5.59 million
Q10 - 3.60 rating / 4.99 million
Q11 - 3.35 rating / 4.65 million
Q12 - 3.45 rating / 4.79 million
Overrun - 4.00 rating / 5.54 million


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> To be fair, Punk can never claim that he sold out MSG or the Sun Life Stadium almost instantly after announcing that he'll be there, generate the biggest WM buyrate or make 1 million people tune in as soon as his music hit (Raw 1000). Therefore it's hard to defend Punk's shortcomings as anything but his inability to draw since it happens so often. Whereas for The Rock, it was his first "flop" ever since he returned.


That's not very relevant when the arguments (which were valid) used were general ones and not at all something unique for this scenario. If someone is selective and only uses such arguments when it suits him then he pretty much forfeits any credibility in such matters, so the guy you quoted had a relevant question.

This of course also shows how ignorant it is to jump at any wrestler for having one segment that happens to lose viewers. The Rock is the biggest star on the show and if that can happen on a quarter with him in it (the 10 PM quarter to boot) then it can obviously happen to anyone. Of course that's just common sense but despite it's name that's not too common.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> To be fair, Punk can never claim that he sold out MSG or the Sun Life Stadium almost instantly after announcing that he'll be there, generate the biggest WM buyrate or make 1 million people tune in as soon as his music hit (Raw 1000). Therefore it's hard to defend Punk's shortcomings as anything but his inability to draw since it happens so often. Whereas for The Rock, it was his first "flop" ever since he returned.


Dude, nobody but the trolls actually thought Punk could outdrawn Rock, or counter trolls saying that Rock is washed up, you should be smarter than that. I don't really see your qualm here. Punk is one of the biggest guys of today, Rock is one of the biggest of all time. I don't see why you're trying to disprove Punks rating ability by comparing him to a GOAT. In fact, I'd say you're doing quite the opposite by putting him in side-by-side comparise with Rock seriously. Like I mentioned previously, not everybody can be Austin/Hogan/Rock (or Lesnar as a special case) level, and just because Punk isn't hitting 3.5s regularily doesn't make him a bad draw. I'd challenge you to find me any other current wrestlers that can even come close to The Rock, and no Cena is not one of them, his rating gains aren't even close to the the short-time bump did within three weeks.

People should learn to appreciate both guys for bringing together the best RTWM storyline so far, taking sides is totally ridiculous when the performance level is this high.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock, can't draw? Da hell you guys talking about? He gained the highest quarter rating since Raw in a segment that also involved him. Do you honestly Punk was responsible for the 3.6 and 4.0 quarter viewership exposure Vince and Rock gave him? fpalm


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Loudness said:


> Dude, nobody but the trolls actually thought Punk could outdrawn Rock, or counter trolls saying that Rock is washed up, you should be smarter than that. I don't really see your qualm here. Punk is one of the biggest guys of today, Rock is one of the biggest of all time. I don't see why you're trying to disprove Punks rating ability by comparing him to a GOAT. In fact, I'd say you're doing quite the opposite by putting him in side-by-side comparise with Rock seriously. Like I mentioned previously, not everybody can be Austin/Hogan/Rock (or Lesnar as a special case) level, and just because Punk isn't hitting 3.5s regularily doesn't make him a bad draw. I'd challenge you to find me any other current wrestlers that can even come close to The Rock, and no Cena is not one of them, his rating gains aren't even close to the the short-time bump did within three weeks.
> 
> People should learn to appreciate both guys for bringing together the best RTWM storyline so far, taking sides is totally ridiculous when the performance level is this high.


Nobody in today's roster is on Rock's level but that just proves the point. I was just responding to the poster who told Rock316AE to "use this type of logic" used for The Rock but only applied for Punk instead. Only difference is, Punk is there every week and never does anything "wow" worthy whereas Rock has done it in about every single occasion save for the Shield segment that's been the discussion for the past few pages.

And quite frankly, Punk IS a bad draw but so is the entire roster except maybe Cena. If they weren't, Rock & Brock wouldn't be asked to come back every few months for a quick ratings/buyrates fix.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Rock, can't draw? Da hell you guys talking about? He gained the highest quarter rating since Raw in a segment that also involved him. Do you honestly Punk was responsible for the 3.6 and 4.0 quarter viewership exposure Vince and Rock gave him? fpalm


I do. I don't think people tuned in to see Rock as champ, but if Punk was STILL the champ. Punk draws, probably more than Cena and Rock combined. He had the hottest merch of 2011, was selling it like hotcakes in 2012, easily headlined house shows during Cenas injury leave, no doubt Punk is the man right now. Rock feuded with Punk because Punk is the hottest commodity in the WWE. Too bad Cenas ego wont let him do it at Mania, gotta give that win back to the most overrated Superstar of all time.

:ex:


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Ultimately, WWE's current product doesn't draw very well (in comparison to previous eras) unless a proven draw from the past returns. That's the situation their in, and it's their own fault.


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I admit: I am a huuuge Punk mark, but he just cant draw shit  wich is really sad. The day after he lost the belt, the rating skyrocketd.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk's arguably the biggest full-time draw WWE has right now, which isn't saying much, and it doesn't mean he's a good draw, but it's true. Cena clearly isn't the draw he used to be, as he's been doing poorly for the past couple of months now, and I'd say it's arguable Punk is a bigger draw right now (not ALL-TIME so don't get your panties in a bunch). Ryback's the only person that may be a stronger draw than Punk right now that's full-time, but right now WWE is just going through the motions with him going into EC and we probably won't see a spotlight back on him until after Wrestlemania, so who knows. Punk has been doing well with his numbers for a while now, all except last week in the 9PM slot, which is the same week Rock's 10PM segment lost viewers, and Cena underperformed in the overrun.

Obviously Rock and Brock are far bigger draws than Punk, but nobody's saying they aren't aside from just to troll Rock marks/Punk haters who would do, and have done the same to Punk marks whenever he underperforms, which isn't as often as some think. Rock is the primary reason this week's Raw did so well, as well as the main reason Raw has gotten back up to above a 3.0, and next week we'll see if Brock can keep a hold on most of the viewers. But I think some credit can be given to the fact Punk's 434 day title reign ended and people wanted to see his reaction, some credit of course goes to the advertised Heyman/Vince segment which kept viewers past Rock for that hour from leaving to decrease the average viewership to below 5,000,000, and hell, Cena winning the Rumble, despite his weakened drawing power, probably interested people as well to see who he would choose as his opponent. Plus I'm sure even if he's not a TV draw anymore, a PPV draw is another story and a big re-match with The Rock will do really well. But that's how a show should be. Have something for every hour to interest people, not to mention it was the fallout from the Rumble which helped things a lot.


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:lol 1 Week Rock is draw Another week Rock can't draw.

Dafuq is wrong with you all.


----------



## -Skullbone-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Nimbus said:


> I admit: I am a huuuge Punk mark, but he just cant draw shit  wich is really sad. The day after he lost the belt, the rating skyrocketd.


Why would it be upsetting for you?


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Evil Peter said:


> Because this thread has mainly been about people trying to use the ratings to bash the people the don't like, and then in return the fans of those that get bashed sarcastically do the same thing in reverse. It's a fairly low percentage that seem to actually try to derive something useful from the ratings.
> 
> The Rock's ratings are a good lesson though. He's of course the biggest draw but he has both lost viewers in the best time slot, and been outdone by a Diva's match. The lesson is of course that you can't just look at a breakdown and say this guy was in this quarter and is therefor solely responsible for whatever the result was. There's many small factors that play in, like how big of a part that guy had of the quarter, how the commercial breaks were timed etc. As well as that the ratings are just fickle at times.
> 
> But of course most of those that just try to troll aren't even trying to make sense so this is probably pretty pointless.


The Rock got a standing ovation and is why people in Vegas came to that show. That buyrate will be successful and for some reason, this PART RIGHT HERE is being glossed over


> The show was paced by The Rock vs. C.M. Punk confrontation which also drew the largest quarter hour (4.03) since Raw 1,000.





> I do. I don't think people tuned in to see Rock as champ, but if Punk was STILL the champ. Punk draws, probably more than Cena and Rock combined.


You're completely out of your mind. CM Punk has been getting 2.5s..humilating 2.5s and some of the worst overruns in pro wrestling history. He did better with a Vince and Foley add on but that was it. Rock comes back and MAGICALLY we get back to the 3s and close to a 4.0 since the LAST TIME he was on Raw in Raw 1000. Get fucking real.

There is no proof whatsoever that anyone was checking for Punk's reign. If the Rock wasn't here and it was Punk vs Ziggler, you think people would be racing to see how everything came out. No. They would of checked the results on their phone and went to Hooters that night. Very simple.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



AthenaMark said:


> The Rock got a standing ovation and is why people in Vegas came to that show. That buyrate will be successful and for some reason, this PART RIGHT HERE is being glossed over
> 
> 
> 
> You're completely out of your mind. CM Punk has been getting 2.5s..humilating 2.5s and some of the worst overruns in pro wrestling history. He did better with a Vince and Foley add on but that was it. Rock comes back and MAGICALLY we get back to the 3s and close to a 4.0 since the LAST TIME he was on Raw in Raw 1000. Get fucking real.
> 
> There is no proof whatsoever that anyone was checking for Punk's reign. If the Rock wasn't here and it was Punk vs Ziggler, you think people would be racing to see how everything came out. No. They would of checked the results on their phone and went to Hooters that night. Very simple.


First of all I don't think you understood my point at all since what you responded with didn't relate to it. A good part of my point actually relies on that The Rock is the clearly biggest draw so you probably need to read it again.

The last quote you respond to is definitely not from me but you didn't show who it was from, therefor making it look like something I've said. I hope that's just a mistake but do it properly next time.


----------



## wwffans123

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

some of the CM Punk fans are crazy stupid son of bitch.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



AthenaMark said:


> You're completely out of your mind. CM Punk has been getting 2.5s..humilating 2.5s and some of the worst overruns in pro wrestling history. He did better with a Vince and Foley add on but that was it. Rock comes back and MAGICALLY we get back to the 3s and close to a 4.0 since the LAST TIME he was on Raw in Raw 1000. Get fucking real.
> 
> There is no proof whatsoever that anyone was checking for Punk's reign. If the Rock wasn't here and it was Punk vs Ziggler, you think people would be racing to see how everything came out. No. They would of checked the results on their phone and went to Hooters that night. Very simple.


It wasn't magically, it was the night after the Rumble, which always gets a big bump. People tuned in to see Punks reaction and we got an amazing promo. I give Rock some credit, but between the Rumble, Vince/Brock/Heyman, Cena picking the title at WM and then Punk, Rock really never even needed to show up.

Here are some of the best examples of the post-Rumble ratings bumps, for those who doubt it exists.

1998: 1/12/98 - 3.4;1/19/98 - 4.0
2000: 1/17/00 - 6.0;1/24/00 - 6.7
2001; 1/15/00 - 5.2; 1/22/01 - 5.6
2004: 1/19/04 - 3.6;1/26/04 - 4.0
2008: 1/21/08 - 3.5;1/28/08 - 3.9

Now, take into account we got Punk/Rock, Cena, then Brock/Vince/Heyman.

Oh, and Brock was given away on several forums, including this one, so you can't really play the "Brock wasn't advertised" card.

And as far as the title match goes, we all knew Rock was gonna win the belt, so the fact that he won probably wouldn't effect the ratings, even though Rock just being on the show might give it a slight nudge. However, Punk being on the show without a title for the first time in 435 days IS something new and interesting to see.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I haven't bothered giving any effort to a ratings post in quite some time lol but I feel that this is something worth some attention. We'll be able to tell if Punk can cut it as a draw when this is all said and done and the RTWM is over. Punk has never been able to draw on his own. I'm talking TV here. All his best performing segments are with much bigger names and proven draws. Once he wasn't working with them, less people were interested in what he was doing. When working with guys with little to no star power or value to casuals, he has has some of the worst performing segments of all time. That is a fact and the numbers prove it. 

Back to my point though. Along comes RAW 1000 and he gets mega exposure working with Rock but Rock left the next day, all the other big names left and nobody tuned in to watch CM Punk or any of the newer guys. That isn't the case any more because this wasn't a one shot deal. This time, Punk has been feuding with Rock and has been getting consistent exposure for the past few weeks. At Royal Rumble, all the people who bought it for Rock in a title match will have gotten a glimpse of CM Punk. The next night, all the people who tuned in, will have been exposed to CM Punk again. He was in 2 of the highest drawing segments of the night this week and 2 of the highest drawing segments in quite some time. That's a lot of eyeballs. The internet is always complaining about WWE not using their big names to give the spotlight to the smaller ones. Well, CM Punk is getting more exposure than any other un-made guy on the roster right now bar none by getting to work with Rock. By now, a lot more people should know who and what CM Punk is all about.

Working with Vince, HHH, Cena etc will get you noticed since they are big draws to the casual audience. Working with Rock is a different ballgame since he draws in an entire new pocket of the audience that Vince/HHH/Cena can't reach. Rock is as mainstream as it gets these days and CM Punk has been feuding with him for a month, culminating in a PPV match. He's now set to continue that feud for another month and have another PPV match. 

The true test will be that when Rock is gone, when Taker/HHH/Lesnar etc are gone, has this feud and whatever feud he ends up having at Mania, has it been enough to get the casual audience to buy into CM Punk and to want to tune in for whatever he's doing on Raw be it working with The Rock and John Cena or working with Dolph Ziggler and Antonio Cesaro. Then we'll know. It isn't always about the wins and losses. It's about using the top names to give exposure and spotlight to the guys who need it. Rock vs. Punk is the perfect example of that. Punk doesn't look set to win this feud but a lot more people, that part of the audience who don't usually watch every week, that extra million plus people who are now tuning in because Rock is back and we're on the RTWM, they're all going to know a hell of a lot more about CM Punk than they did before. Whether he can cut it on his own after all this remains to be seen.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

CM Punk has been good since he turned heel in 2009. It never did big business. Even after the shoot, that PPV only did what? 20k more buys than the year before. Wade Barrett was drawing in 2010 as leader of Nexus. Had better numbers than Punk in 2011 but no one likes to talk about that because at the end of 2010, John Cena literally buried him.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Charlie Bronson said:


> It wasn't magically, it was the night after the Rumble, which always gets a big bump. People tuned in to see Punks reaction and we got an amazing promo. I give Rock some credit, but between the Rumble, Vince/Brock/Heyman, Cena picking the title at WM and then Punk, Rock really never even needed to show up.
> 
> Here are some of the best examples of the post-Rumble ratings bumps, for those who doubt it exists.
> 
> 1998: 1/12/98 - 3.4;1/19/98 - 4.0
> 2000: 1/17/00 - 6.0;1/24/00 - 6.7
> 2001; 1/15/00 - 5.2; 1/22/01 - 5.6
> 2004: 1/19/04 - 3.6;1/26/04 - 4.0
> 2008: 1/21/08 - 3.5;1/28/08 - 3.9
> 
> Now, take into account we got Punk/Rock, Cena, then Brock/Vince/Heyman.
> 
> Oh, and Brock was given away on several forums, including this one, so you can't really play the "Brock wasn't advertised" card.
> 
> And as far as the title match goes, we all knew Rock was gonna win the belt, so the fact that he won probably wouldn't effect the ratings, even though Rock just being on the show might give it a slight nudge. However, Punk being on the show without a title for the first time in 435 days IS something new and interesting to see.



Raw ratings were like 2.7 since the summer until the Rock returned a few weeks ago and they haven't been below 3.0 since. Also, check the survivor series buyrate this year compared to last year's if you don't think Rock makes a difference


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Charlie Bronson said:


> It wasn't magically, it was the night after the Rumble, which always gets a big bump. People tuned in to see Punks reaction and we got an amazing promo. I give Rock some credit, but between the Rumble, Vince/Brock/Heyman, Cena picking the title at WM and then Punk, Rock really never even needed to show up.


A bump that big over 3 hours after mediocre ratings for months? Wake up. The Rock won the title. People checked it out. This is hard for you to understand. The Rumble numbers didn't do great before this show. LOL. Cena winning the Rumble got NO buzz. Brock showed up for 3 minutes..he was helped out by an overrun. He didn't stand on his own two feet. No one even knew he was there.

The Rock didn't need to show up? You're out of your mind. 

Here are some of the best examples of the post-Rumble ratings bumps, for those who doubt it exists.



> 1998: 1/12/98 - 3.4;1/19/98 - 4.0
> 2000: 1/17/00 - 6.0;1/24/00 - 6.7
> 2001; 1/15/00 - 5.2; 1/22/01 - 5.6
> 2004: 1/19/04 - 3.6;1/26/04 - 4.0
> 2008: 1/21/08 - 3.5;1/28/08 - 3.9


You went back to record breaking 2000? LOL. And 2008 was when Cena still used to matter and fuck all of that...it was TWO HOUR shows. This was a 3 hour show with a 5 million average. You think they kept watching to see Tensai get naked and Khali? To watch a short Miz match or Ziggler talk alot but come up short again? Come back to reality.



> Now, take into account we got Punk/Rock, Cena, then Brock/Vince/Heyman.





> Oh, and Brock was given away on several forums, including this one, so you can't really play the "Brock wasn't advertised" card.


No. He wasn't. There was no concrete evidence anywhere. The last thing anyone heard on Lesnar was that he was gonna interfere in the Rock/Punk match. That was it. Everything else was speculation from a bunch of 16 year old angry Punk fans that wanted to see him retain.



> And as far as the title match goes, we all knew Rock was gonna win the belt, so the fact that he won probably wouldn't effect the ratings, even though Rock just being on the show might give it a slight nudge. However, Punk being on the show without a title for the first time in 435 days IS something new and interesting to see.


You all knew? When did "you all KNEW" ever translate into causal watchers? Do you have ANY FUCKING IDEA how huge the Rock is on a worldwide level? Are you kidding me? Even if this entire forum of 5,000 or more KNEW the Rock was gonna win, it wouldn't mean jack shit in Las Vegas with that crowd or the MILLIONS of watchers of the show who saw the report of the Rock winning the belt on ESPN or him being on ESPN the Friday before on "Events to Watch". 

Punk without the title is new..yes..it is interesting. But that's what you wanted to say..you want to credit him and overpraise him and discredit the Rock because "everyone knew he was gonna win" which is bullshit because you wouldn't have raced to watch the Rumble or the aftermath anyway if he wasn't involved.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



AthenaMark said:


> CM Punk has been good since he turned heel in 2009. It never did big business. Even after the shoot, that PPV only did what? 20k more buys than the year before. Wade Barrett was drawing in 2010 as leader of Nexus. Had better numbers than Punk in 2011 but no one likes to talk about that because at the end of 2010, John Cena literally buried him.


Could be an indication to how (in)accurate the numbers we get are to predict who brings in the most money then. There's not much that's shown that Punk has made a ton of friends backstage, or been kissing ass, but he's still pushed now and was reported to be the one, together with Cena, that WWE felt they could depend on.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Speaking of overrated, Orton is the only Rumble winner to get such a ratings DROP after winning the Rumble, a half point I believe. People on here brag about his drawing power, yet he was a ratings killer on Smackdown and his Rumble win 4 years ago drew no buzz at all.



> No. He wasn't. There was no concrete evidence anywhere. The last thing anyone heard on Lesnar was that he was gonna interfere in the Rock/Punk match. That was it. Everything else was speculation from a bunch of 16 year old angry Punk fans that wanted to see him retain.


People were posting Brock backstage before the show. That's concrete evidence.



> You all knew? When did "you all KNEW" ever translate into causal watchers? Do you have ANY FUCKING IDEA how huge the Rock is on a worldwide level? Are you kidding me? Even if this entire forum of 5,000 or more KNEW the Rock was gonna win, it wouldn't mean jack shit in Las Vegas with that crowd or the MILLIONS of watchers of the show who saw the report of the Rock winning the belt on ESPN or him being on ESPN the Friday before on "Events to Watch".


If there was any doubt, his promo before the match got rid of that. Rock winning was not even a shock, seeing Punk no longer the champ was. Hell, Rocks reactions are the same anyways whether he wins or loses.



> Punk without the title is new..yes..it is interesting. But that's what you wanted to say..you want to credit him and overpraise him and discredit the Rock because "everyone knew he was gonna win" which is bullshit because you wouldn't have raced to watch the Rumble or the aftermath anyway if he wasn't involved.


Yes, clearly you Rock marks never overexaggerate do you? And I ordered for Rock vs. Punk, not just Rock vs. anybody. Emphasis on the Punk part. I never even ordered the last two Rock ppvs, cared nothing for him and Cena.


----------



## Ayso

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Ratings are retarded. They give you a guideline on how the show is doing, but I feel it is no where near what the numbers _usually_ are. People go to work on Mondays, some work nights, and some work days. People don't have time to tune in to Raw for 3 hours due to family - or other things they have to do. A lot of people (like me) find other ways to watch Raw. Online stream, the next day on a website that records / shows videos (Sports2Watch), and some people might get together to watch Raw. You cannot account for all of that in ratings. I doubt CM Punk is a "shitty" draw. I just feel you give ANY star a 434 day title reign, it's going to get boring to watch. CM Punk actually made those 434 days really entertaining (for me, anyway). But even give the title to Stone Cold or the Rock for 434 days, I feel the ratings would drop. Maybe I'm wrong.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Not to keep pushing, but these days most of Rocks viewers are kids while Punks are grown men who have jobs, like myself. So we gotta DVR it, which doesn't even count in the ratings. Just sayin'.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Speaking of overrated, Orton is the only Rumble winner to get such a ratings DROP after winning the Rumble, a half point I believe. People on here brag about his drawing power, yet he was a ratings killer on Smackdown and his Rumble win 4 years ago drew no buzz at all.


But a couple of weeks after, Raw got 4.1 ratings twice in a row. Not only that, but he was also the top merch seller in February. If the Rumble aftermath didn't do great, you could say it might have been because his victory was WAY too obvious and everyone knew it was coming. To add to it, Orton's LMS match with Triple H did the highest number in the commercial free Raw episode on June 22, the rating for that episode was 4.5.



> Not to keep pushing, but these days most of Rocks viewers are kids while Punks are grown men who have jobs, like myself. So we gotta DVR it, which doesn't even count in the ratings. Just sayin'.


:lol


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Laugh all you want, but every Punk fan I know is an employed adult and almost every Rock and Cena fan who bothers watching anymore is underage.


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Not to keep pushing, but these days most of Rocks viewers are kids while Punks are grown men who have jobs, like myself. So we gotta DVR it, which doesn't even count in the ratings. Just sayin'.


Most Rock fans have been watching for at least 10 years since they remember the Attitude Era

Most Punk fans are greasy stinking unemployed teenage/early 20s nerds living in their mom's basement

I mean they spend all day on the internet (as forums like these prove) so they can probably watch a TV show (at the same time, so they can complain about it as its happening).


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Not to keep pushing, *but these days most of Rocks viewers are kids while Punks are grown men who have jobs*, like myself. So we gotta DVR it, which doesn't even count in the ratings. Just sayin'.


Most kids don't even know who Rock is and those who do aren't much familiar with him enough to give him extended attention like they do with Cena.

Seriously love these Punk marks and their "got to make myself feel good" take outs in situations where he's failing so heavily, :lmao


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> Most Rock fans have been watching for at least 10 years since they remember the Attitude Era.
> 
> Most Punk fans are greasy stinking unemployed teenage/early 20s nerds living in their mom's basement
> 
> I mean they spend all day on the internet (as forums like these prove) so they can probably watch a TV show (at the same time, so they can complain about it as its happening).


Try again. Most of Rocks AE fans dont even watch anymore. And take a look at the crowd, plenty of kids wearing the Rock merch. Not to mention you can tell a lot of Rock marks are really young just by their lack or reading compensation.



> Most kids don't even know who Rock is and those who do aren't much familiar with him enough to give him extended attention like they do with Cena.
> 
> Seriously love these Punk marks and their "got to make myself feel good" take outs in situations where he's failing so heavily, :lmao


I doubt even you believe most of the shit you type sometimes.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:lmao compensation 

I don't understand why some get so riled up over this.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I dont get riled up, just stating the facts.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Try again. *Most of Rocks AE fans dont even watch anymore.* And take a look at the crowd, plenty of kids wearing the Rock merch. Not to mention you can tell a lot of Rock marks are really young just by their lack or reading compensation.


lol, that's why the ratings go up when The Rock is around. It's a new audience that returns for him. Raw 1000 was the first example and this week was second.

I don't even know why I'm explaining this, though. You're obviously moved by the fact your hero can't draw and try to find any excuse to make him look good. Including nonsense like "Punk fans are men working at night".


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> lol, that's why the ratings go up when The Rock is around. It's a new audience that returns for him. Raw 1000 was the first example and this week was second.
> 
> I don't even know why I'm explaining this, though. You're obviously moved by the fact your hero can't draw and try to find any excuse to make him look good. Including nonsense like "Punk fans are men working at night".


You're a gimmick poster, your Punk hate is phony and everyone knows it. And I said MOST, not all. Even a portion of his AE fans is enough to boost the ratings. If even half of them watched, Raw would be getting at least a 5.0.


----------



## Ayso

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Usual ICW argument.

"LOL STUPID (Enter Name Here) MARK, UR DELUSIONAL LOL. (Enter Name Here) IS SUCH A BETTER WRESTLER AND DRAWS WAY BIGGER LOLOLOLPENISFACE (Enter "Fact" that has nothing to do with the conversation)"

This is why I usually don't contribute to most conversations and just heat up the popcorn / sit back and enjoy.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

i like both, what shit should i post?

so im both a kid, an unemployed greasy teenager who is older with a job so i cant watch tv?! 

you're all idiots...


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Charlie Bronson said:


> You're a gimmick poster, your Punk hate is phony and everyone knows it. And I said MOST, not all. Even a portion of his AE fans is enough to boost the ratings. If even half of them watched, Raw would be getting at least a 5.0.


Gimmick poster? You have definitely run out of things to say.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

No, I got plenty left. You post the same old thing every day. Just put I HATE CM PUNK in your sig and be done with it.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Back to insulting wrestler's fan bases. :lol Great post by Starbuck though.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Starbuck hit the nail on the head. Rather than the moronic "Punk's a ratings fail!!1", that's what a person who dislikes Punk should be posting to get their point across, and I'm pretty sure Starbuck doesn't even dislike him. Yet people continue to troll, get trolled, and nothing gets resolved. I admit that I'm guilty of this as well. Just haters arguing with marks blindly, much like this little recent back and fourth between Choke2Death and Charlie Bronson (and it's not really a knock at either guy as an overall poster, but just saying...). At the same time, it becomes and more and more difficult for me to make a post like Starbuck's and not find myself trolling Rock marks for the fuck of it as nothing gets through to them anyway. And to be fair, Punk marks in general certainly aren't much different (marks for anyone, period aren't much different), but the Rock marks/Punk haters are far more numerous nowadays imo, and have been for over a year now, though it's gotten much worse recently. 

One thing though is for people that do go out of their way to hate Punk, why? Why focus on someone you claim to hate so much? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I really dislike Sheamus and Del Rio (Del Rio less-so since turning face) and as such, I generally avoid most topics having to do with them, and if they're brought up, I try to avoid it unless I have something new to say, even in the face of marks claiming they're awesome and all that, though of course their marks aren't as numerous as Punk's, but my point still stands. It's a free country (er... message board for those out of the US) and you can do as you wish, say what you want, hate what you want, etc., but I don't understand what you plan to accomplish by just constantly hating someone, making numerous posts A DAY about it. To show that not everyone in the world likes him? Shouldn't RATINGS speak on behalf of that anyway? And isn't it just common sense not everyone will like the same thing?

Oh well, it's just an online message board.


----------



## Perfect.Insanity

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

All I see is the same people with the same cry-baby story in every thread. 

The funny part is that they believe their own bullshit and talk about credibility in their posts without realizing that they don't have any.


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Perfect.Insanity said:


> All I see is the same people with the same cry-baby story in every thread.
> 
> The funny part is that they believe their own bullshit and talk about credibility in their posts without realizing that they don't have any.


I agree, CM Punk fans have no credibility


----------



## Perfect.Insanity

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Bossdude said:


> I agree, CM Punk fans have no credibility


Considering you have none, huh? You are hardly matched in the bias department.

You know generalizing is stupid, right?


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Perfect.Insanity said:


> You know generalizing is stupid, right?


You know thats a generalization?


----------



## Perfect.Insanity

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Bossdude said:


> You know thats a generalization?


Yeah, messed up the words a bit.


----------



## Twisted14

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Werb-Jericho said:


> i like both, what shit should i post?
> 
> so im both a kid, an unemployed greasy teenager who is older with a job so i cant watch tv?!
> 
> you're all idiots...


Yeah I'm pretty confused about my place in society too. I'm 20 years old but I'm also underage. Apparently I live in my mother's basement even though this house doesn't have a basement and is actually owned by my Dad. I'm also only a fan from the attitude era who hasn't watched in 10 years, even though I only started watching wrestling in 2005.

I guess it's just not physically possible to enjoy two wrestlers working a good feud together.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Every time I step into this thread I can feel my IQ slowly deteriorating.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Da Silva said:


> Every time I step into this thread I can feel my IQ slowly deteriorating.


:lmao :lmao


----------



## Twisted14

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Da Silva said:


> Every time I step into this thread I can feel my IQ slowly deteriorating.


Yep, it's like watching Two and a Half Men.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Alot of hurt feelings over anyone criticizing CM Punk's drawing ability. Same shit different day.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



AthenaMark said:


> A bump that big over 3 hours after mediocre ratings for months? Wake up. The Rock won the title. People checked it out. This is hard for you to understand.


its almost exactly the same bump as happened last year after the rumble

2013
jan 21........4.32 million
jan 28........5.02 million (+700,000 viewers)

2012
jan 23........4.62 million
jan 30........5.22 million (+600,000 viewers)


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

anyone know how the week after the Post Rumble show did last year?


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



JY57 said:


> anyone know how the week after the Post Rumble show did last year?


4.62 million viewers average over the 2hrs, exactly what it was the week before rumble


----------



## AJLeeFanForever

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I predict around 3.5 tonight.


----------



## Jeff Hardy Hater

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

It'll be a little lower. 3.0-3.2 sounds about right as an overall rating.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

5.0 RATINGS HERE WE COME! MARK "Ratings" [email protected][email protected]@


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



AthenaMark said:


> No. He wasn't. There was no concrete evidence anywhere. The last thing anyone heard on Lesnar was that he was gonna interfere in the Rock/Punk match. That was it. Everything else was speculation from a bunch of 16 year old angry Punk fans that wanted to see him retain.
> 
> 
> 
> You all knew? When did "you all KNEW" ever translate into causal watchers? Do you have ANY FUCKING IDEA how huge the Rock is on a worldwide level? Are you kidding me? Even if this entire forum of 5,000 or more KNEW the Rock was gonna win, it wouldn't mean jack shit in Las Vegas with that crowd or the MILLIONS of watchers of the show who saw the report of the Rock winning the belt on ESPN or him being on ESPN the Friday before on "Events to Watch".
> 
> Punk without the title is new..yes..it is interesting. But that's what you wanted to say..you want to credit him and overpraise him and discredit the Rock because "everyone knew he was gonna win" which is bullshit because you wouldn't have raced to watch the Rumble or the aftermath anyway if he wasn't involved.


Yeah really. . .

Just because some random dart was thrown at the dart board by the dirt sheets and it happened to hit Brock Lesnar for the 5th time in 5 months, and it happened to be right this time, doesn't mean "everyone knew" Brock was coming back.

I post on this forum every week. . .and didn't know Brock was gonna be back since I didn't read it on here. lol. I've seen half a dozen other "Brock's returning" dirtsheet threads where he didn't come back though. Nobody knew Brock was returning last year either. I didn't hear fuck all about that.

Only a minority of WWE fans frequent forums or dirt sheet sites. Even ones that do (like me), could easily pass over it or not go to a forum for awhile and not see a few of the random guesses happen to be right for once.


----------



## DogSaget

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

wrong thread


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_68436.shtml



> -- Monday's WWE Raw scored 294,055 in social media activity, down 25 percent from the post-Royal Rumble episode last week.
> 
> Raw retained its #1 ranking on cable TV Monday night and also topped all broadcast TV shows. [ Data Source: Trendrr.TV ]


still most watched show last night even Social Media down


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	4711	1.7
WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4857	1.7
WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4863	1.6


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...th-dallas-being-human-pawn-stars-more/168006/

Hour 1 - 4.863 million
Hour 2 - 4.857 million
Hour 3 - 4.711 million


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Good numbers, all three hours are practically identical with a small dip at the 10 PM hour, but nothing big at all. Good stuff for the 'E.


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Its not about the Rock! unk2


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

How did Hour 1 get 4.863 million? It was bordering on psychotic with the amount recaps and App nonsense.

Thank you Punk unk2


----------



## CharliePrince

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



-Extra- said:


> Its not about the Rock! unk2


expect ratings to go insane next week with THE MOST ELECTRIFYING MAN in ALLLLL OF ENTERTAINMENT returns live

LIVE

LIVE ON RAW!! 

I predict over 5 million viewers again with a 4+ rating

:rock4


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Mark 'ratings' Henry strikes again.


----------



## CharliePrince

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Karma101 said:


> Mark 'ratings' Henry strikes again.


Mark Henry and Brock Lesnar's backs are going to break pretty soon from having to carry this PG era

#truestory


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Surprised it held that much... I barely remember any of raw and I switched off to watch Lost Girl... though I missed an awesome match I hear *sigh*


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



JY57 said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...th-dallas-being-human-pawn-stars-more/168006/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.863 million
> Hour 2 - 4.857 million
> Hour 3 - 4.711 million


Impressive. Obvious dip from last week but that was to be expected. Here's the thing though, last week they ended on a pretty huge cliffhanger. This week....they didn't. On top of that, they didn't advertise anything either. No Brock, no Rock etc. It is the go home to the Chamber. I guess that's one thing they should have in their favour.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Decent. But they still did a terrible and lazy job in promoting anything for the show. Why not tell the audience that Rock is there next week? What's so hard to tell Cole and King to throw a word. Why there were no commercials for Rock and Lesnar? Ridiculous. And even this week, if I'm not mistaken, there was not one Lesnar mention in the first 90 minutes besides the video package at the start of the show. I don't know if it's laziness or stupidity.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Surprised the first hour did so well tbh. It was total fucking shit. All of it. Horribly disjointed and a complete waste of time. Not to mention, DO YOU HAVE DA WWE APP? GO GET DA WWE APP RIGHT NOW! DO YOU KNOW HOW 2 GET DA WWE APP? IF YOU DONT HERES HOW U GET DA WWE APP. HEY KING, I MADE A DEMO OF HOW 2 GET DA WWE APP. I'm not one for hyperbole but that was honestly one of the hardest hours of WWE TV I can remember trying to sift through in a_long _time. Horrible TV from start to finish.


----------



## CharliePrince

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Starbuck said:


> Surprised the first hour did so well tbh. It was total fucking shit. All of it. Horribly disjointed and a complete waste of time. Not to mention, DO YOU HAVE DA WWE APP? GO GET DA WWE APP RIGHT NOW! DO YOU KNOW HOW 2 GET DA WWE APP? IF YOU DONT HERES HOW U GET DA WWE APP. HEY KING, I MADE A DEMO OF HOW 2 GET DA WWE APP. I'm not one for hyperbole but that was honestly one of the hardest hours of WWE TV I can remember trying to sift through in a_long _time. Horrible TV from start to finish.


I totally agree but I think it speaks volumes on how many fans are TRULY interested in the WWE product right now ever since The Rock returned..

you can have that bad a segment, and yes it was horrible.. but yet draw incredibly well

I think that a lot of new-old fans have tuned in since the rock's return and are part of the show and that is truly, at its core, great for the WWE

 and to think Ziggler wasn't even on the show, that non-stop bombardment of the wwe app, the incredibly annoying non-stop barrage of commercials..

all signs are positive for the E!


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://www.prowrestling.net/artman/publish/WWE/article10029676.shtml



> Monday's WWE Raw television show drew a 3.56 rating, down from the 3.68 rating the show drew last week. Raw averaged 4.81 million viewers, as reported earlier today.


----------



## Peep4Christian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> Decent. But they still did a terrible and lazy job in promoting anything for the show. Why not tell the audience that Rock is there next week? What's so hard to tell Cole and King to throw a word. Why there were no commercials for Rock and Lesnar? Ridiculous. And even this week, if I'm not mistaken, there was not one Lesnar mention in the first 90 minutes besides the video package at the start of the show. I don't know if it's laziness or stupidity.


They were too busy spending their time promoting the stupid app, rather than the show itself. Agreed with the person that said the first hour was horrible. That was absolutely terrible, the first hour was really brutal to watch with all the video packages, recaps and them constantly talking about the app.


----------



## The XL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Thank you Mark Henry.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Bork bringing the pain and the ratings along with Henry!

No Rocky and it still held up strong. Impressive.


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The lack of a divas' match probably helped keep the ratings so steady throughout the show. There was also multiple storylines going, no AJ, and an exciting Mark Henry return as well. Not to mention a few high profiles matches taking place.

Good Raw overall. They actually managed it really well except for the lack of advertising for Rock and Brock last night. I know this isn't going to last, but it looks like Raw's going to be good for at least 2-3 months now.




DwayneAustin said:


> How did Hour 1 get 4.863 million? It was bordering on psychotic with the amount recaps and App nonsense.
> 
> Thank you Punk unk2


More like thank you Ryback and Cesaro, for keeping viewers tuned in for 3x as long as Punk did. Punk was on screen for about 10 minutes right at the opening, where everyone who's planning to watch the show after what happened last week is tuned in anyway. Ryback's enterance and match with Cesaro after that (and all the commercial breaks segmented in between), lasted nearly half an hour.

Give credit where it's due. Ryback and Cesaro's match kept people tuned in for half of the first hour despite multiple commercial breaks.


----------



## SideTableDrawer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Big Show eating in a hotel = ratings


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Could we please stop with the Mark Henry ratings joke, now? It might've been funny for about five minutes - now it's just annoying.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Could we please stop with the Mark Henry ratings joke, now? It might've been funny for about five minutes - now it's just annoying.


Not a joke if it's true.


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Could we please stop with the Mark Henry ratings joke, now? It might've been funny for about five minutes - now it's just annoying.


Can we start making CM Punk = ratings jokes instead then?:rock4


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



SJFC said:


> Can we start making CM Punk = ratings jokes instead then?:rock4


Only if you want to joke about facts. unk


----------



## Annihilus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The ratings always go up for Wrestlemania season, anyone who considers themselves a wrestling fan will tune in just because they know this is the time of year that big returns and big changes happen. wait and see what happens to the ratings after WM when SuperCena is champ again, Rock & Lesnar are gone again and they're promoting poverty PPV's that nobody cares about. I predict we will see a sub-2.5 rating before 2013 is over.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

my sig


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

CM Punk, Mark Henry, and Brock Lesnar should all join forces to make the ultimate mega-draw team. Move over nWo!


----------



## holt_hogan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Annihilus said:


> The ratings always go up for Wrestlemania season, anyone who considers themselves a wrestling fan will tune in just because they know this is the time of year that big returns and big changes happen. wait and see what happens to the ratings after WM when SuperCena is champ again, Rock & Lesnar are gone again and they're promoting poverty PPV's that nobody cares about. I predict we will see a sub-2.5 rating before 2013 is over.


And the football and pilots season is over.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Breakdown should be interesting, but really excellent numbers for WWE in this day and age, and I'm pretty sure it's leap and bounds better than what the same show did last year. Good shit.

But then that's what happens when you call Mark "I AIN'T NEVA LEFT" Henry in to tear shit up.


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

One year of Punk = TNA Ratings. Guy loses the belt and suddently we get attitude era ratings. 

I used to be a Huuuuuge punk Mark, but now that hes back to the midcard mafia hes so irrelevant.


----------



## Tony Tornado

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Great show, great rating. All is good in the world.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Nimbus said:


> One year of Punk = TNA Ratings. Guy loses the belt and suddently we get attitude era ratings.
> 
> I used to be a Huuuuuge punk Mark, but now that hes back to the midcard mafia hes so irrelevant.


Yup, right back in the mid-card feuding with Rocky. What losers.


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> Yup, right back in the mid-card feuding with Rocky. What losers.


it doesnt matter if hes feuding with The Rock or Zack ryder, hes jobbing anyway. We all know he will lose again at EC.


----------



## GOON

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I didn't know Rock's spent his time feuding with mid-carders.


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Nimbus said:


> One year of Punk = TNA Ratings. Guy loses the belt and suddently we get attitude era ratings.
> 
> I used to be a Huuuuuge punk Mark, but now that hes back to the midcard mafia hes so irrelevant.


You're not a fan of Punk anymore because of ratings? Okay.

*Slowly walks out and enters a thread with wrestling fans*


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Nimbus said:


> One year of Punk = TNA Ratings. Guy loses the belt and suddently we get attitude era ratings.
> 
> I used to be a Huuuuuge punk Mark, but now that hes back to the midcard mafia hes so irrelevant.


1. So you're not a Punk fan because of ratings? Alright then. unk2

2. 3.6 and 3.7 aren't Attitude Era numbers. Those were around the regular numbers back five, six years ago.

And I hardly doubt feuding with The Rock is a midcard feud. :rock3


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



GOON The Legend said:


> I didn't know Rock's spent his time feuding with mid-carders.


Well to be honest, those 2.2 ratings that all of the full-timers were bringing in suggests that the entire roster is made up of mid-carders. That includes Cena too. :westbrook2


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:vince3 blowing his load at DEM RATINGS!!!


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

This is so hilarious..soon as Punk loses the belt, ratings go up. You cant make this shit up.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



LovelyElle890 said:


> Well to be honest, those 2.2 ratings that all of the full-timers were bringing in suggests that the entire roster is made up of mid-carders. That includes Cena too. :westbrook2


What 2.2's? Those mid-carders were pulling in 2.7's on average.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Starbuck said:


> Impressive. Obvious dip from last week but that was to be expected. Here's the thing though, last week they ended on a pretty huge cliffhanger. This week....they didn't. On top of that, they didn't advertise anything either. No Brock, no Rock etc. It is the go home to the Chamber. I guess that's one thing they should have in their favour.


Hold on..make no mistake about it, people assumed the Rock was there. I mean the causals...nit the IWC. Hell look at all the Rock signs in Atlanta..they didnt even know know hecwasnt suppose to be there. The Rock being champion did have an effect and I think common sense told people Lesnar following up the next week.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



AthenaMark said:


> Hold on..make no mistake about it, people assumed the Rock was there. I mean the causals...nit the IWC. Hell look at all the Rock signs in Atlanta..they didnt even know know hecwasnt suppose to be there. The Rock being champion did have an effect and I think common sense told people Lesnar following up the next week.


he was never advertised for the show since his schedule came out


----------



## wwffans123

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

2.6


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



JY57 said:


> he was never advertised for the show since his schedule came out


I know but as the signs proved, several in that audience didnt know that. Even a guy from Atlanta at this board said that much. Not everyone knows what we know...


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

So glad that this week's show did a 3.56. And that's without The Rock on the show. When you got Mark "Ratings" Henry to return, you know the rating will be stay strong. Good job by Mark Henry.


----------



## wwffans123

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

after The Rock,Brock Lesnar,Vince Mamchon leave,The Rating probably around 2.5


----------



## Terminus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Nimbus said:


> One year of Punk = TNA Ratings. Guy loses the belt and suddently we get attitude era ratings.
> 
> I used to be a Huuuuuge punk Mark, but now that hes back to the midcard mafia hes so irrelevant.


I'm new here but this is all kinds of wrong


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Who needs RAWK when we got MAWK!?

Edit: ... damn I'm tired. I'm going to bed.


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Imagine a show with :brock :rock and Henry ( no fucking Henry smiley?)

Ratings be through the roof.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Most casuals were expecting for a Rocky appearance.

They don't know anything about when he's supposed to appear or not.

I expect Brock/Miz, Cena-Sheamus-Ryback/Shield to have the largest viewership gains.

And since Punk wasn't with someone who the viewers are willing to drop their remotes for, I expect his segments to go back to his regular 2.2 - 2.7 figures.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> *Most casuals were expecting for a Rocky appearance.
> *
> They don't know anything about when he's supposed to appear or not.
> 
> I expect Brock/Miz, Cena-Sheamus-Ryback/Shield to have the largest viewership gains.
> 
> And since Punk wasn't with someone who the viewers are willing to drop their remotes for, I expect his segments to go back to his regular 2.2 - 2.7 figures.


How exactly would you know this?? :lmao


----------



## Joeyontherun22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Could we please stop with the Mark Henry ratings joke, now? It might've been funny for about five minutes - now it's just annoying.


if you go back to those the NEW ECW and His Smackdown World championship run. His number were consistent across the board as champion. the SECOND he was pushed with the title. These are NOT jokes and the Numbers prove it. People actually like mark henry.


----------



## doc31

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

oops wrong thread


----------



## donalder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Mark Rating Henry in Wm 29 Mark´ll win the Whc and then in wm 30 make the unification winning the wwe.That would make a sould out on 1 min.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Why is Henry's ratingz power legit, and when did this start?


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

:lmao. At the Punk haters clutching at straws. So everybody thought Rock was going to be there and Ryback and Cesaro are the reason for the strong first hour? Jesus, some of you are so sad.

It's going to funny when the breakdown is released, especially if Punk managed to hold over 5 million viewers throughout his promo segment. Of course it will be everyone expecting to see the Rock though right? unk3


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



purple_gloves said:


> :lmao. At the Punk haters clutching at straws. *So everybody thought Rock was going to be there and Ryback and Cesaro are the reason for the strong first hour?* Jesus, some of you are so sad.
> 
> It's going to funny when the breakdown is released, especially if Punk managed to hold over 5 million viewers throughout his promo segment. Of course it will be everyone expecting to see the Rock though right? unk3


Ryback has been a viewership gaining monster in the past few weeks. He's basically been the 2nd best draw amongst the regulars behind Cena.



> It's going to funny when the breakdown is released, especially if Punk managed to hold over 5 million viewers throughout his promo segment


Never happened without Cena, Vince and a part timer legend beside him and it's not going to happen when he's virtually by himself.

Last time Punk was the viewership carrier of a segment, he lost 150k.


----------



## WWE Jaiden DBZ

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

And RAW earned those ratings. 

Very very good show, indeed.

Best RAW we've had in awhile.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Ryback has been a viewership gaining monster in the past few weeks. He's basically been the 2nd best draw amongst the regulars behind Cena.
> 
> 
> Never happened without Cena, Vince and a part timer legend beside him and it's not going to happen when he's virtually by himself.
> 
> Last time Punk was the viewership carrier of a segment, he lost 150k.


Ryback was becoming a good tv draw a while back. He still seems to do decent numbers, but I think they've ruined his momentum by not giving him the title, having him lose on consecutive ppvs, and not having him win the rumble. I'm not denying Ryback can draw though. It's just highly unlikely that his match will have outdrawn Punk's promo.

As for Punk not being able to draw over 5 mill on his own. How many people can? Punk's not in the same league as Rock, Lesnar etc. (There's a chance he will reach Cena's level though). One man draws are extremely rare and I'm not claiming that Punk is one. But I just find it hilarious seeing the desperate attempts of Punk haters like yourself, who will twist and manipulate facts, just to discredit him as much as you possibly can.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk draws ratings, does mark henry, haters gon' hate


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

No Breakdown yet unk3

Good numbers, should be interesting to see what the ending of the show does, DAT WHOOP ASS SEASON :cena3


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Could we please stop with the Mark Henry ratings joke, now? It might've been funny for about five minutes - now it's just annoying.


It is not a joke though. He brought SmackDown! ratings up by about 0.3-0.5 points on average during his title run.


----------



## LKRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

>Wrestling fans discussing ratings


----------



## Duke Silver

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Joeyontherun22 said:


> if you go back to those the NEW ECW and His Smackdown World championship run. His number were consistent across the board as champion. the SECOND he was pushed with the title. These are NOT jokes and the Numbers prove it. People actually like mark henry.


Exactly. 

The Mark 'Ratings' Henry joke gets thrown around a lot but there's truth to it. Mark Henry is a legit draw. Has been since his days as the ECW Champ.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Never happened without Cena, Vince and a part timer legend beside him and it's not going to happen when he's virtually by himself.
> 
> Last time Punk was the viewership carrier of a segment, he lost 150k.


Please. That bullshit already got pwned the first time you folks tried(& failed) to use it. Hence you've reworked it with "safe" words to leave yourself a hole to weasel out of when you inevitably get called on for trying to use this bullshit yet again, as you are now, words such as "virtually" and "viewership carrier" because you know damn well the last two segments he had _*actually by himself*_ both _GAINED_- 
post12749114 



SerapisLiber said:


> deadmanwatching said:
> 
> 
> 
> when the ratings increases its phill the draw , when they loses its Brodus clay
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hawksea said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can you?
> Take out the real viewership magnets around his vicinity and they won't sit around for his 97 lbs pizza hut delivering ass.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cookie Monster said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you see how stupid it is?
> 
> So because a segment gained in which CM Punk was in, it's not down to him but The Rock and Ryback. Yet when they lose viewers, it's not because of the likes of Brodus Clay, it is in fact CM Punk.
> 
> Shits hilarious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Choke2Death said:
> 
> 
> 
> Right, so when he has segments with others and it gains viewers, the credit goes to him. But if it's the same scenario and viewers go away, it's all down to however he was in the ring with.
> 
> Totally makes sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, let's check the data and see...
> 
> 
> 
> JY57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Punk interview _*before*_ Rock came out did a 3.17 rating
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JY57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Brodus Clay vs. CM Punk lost 149,000 viewers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JY57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Punk's post-match interview ... gained 142,000 viewers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Punk by himself- _*gains*_ to 3.17 (after Kofi-Show losing _OVER A MILLION_ goddamn viewers).
> 
> Punk _*with Funkasaurus*_- loses.
> 
> Punk by himself again- _*gains*_ again.
> 
> So what's the catalyst here?
> 
> Brodus Clay.
> 
> So yes, when Punk's segments gain it's him (or _partly_ him if he's with someone else), and when it loses, it's clearly the other guy. The data here affirms it.
> 
> So-
> 
> 
> Amuroray said:
> 
> 
> 
> punk still cant draw on his own lolololol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> =FAIL. Punk wasn't on his own. He had 400 lbs of talentless fat weighing him down on that one.
> 
> When Punk was on his own, those two segments gained. /discussion
Click to expand...


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Casuals thought Rock was going to be there.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Bork Laser = Ratings.


----------



## LastDamnation

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



NearFall said:


> It is not a joke though. He brought SmackDown! ratings up by about 0.3-0.5 points on average during his title run.


To be fair, this is more of a testament to the fact that a champion will draw if he is booked well.


----------



## joeisgonnakillyou

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The Rock vs Mizark Henry feud, RAW goes right back to 5.0's.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



roadkill_ said:


> Casuals thought Rock was going to be there.


Prove it.



joeisgonnakillyou said:


> The Rock vs Mizark Henry feud, RAW goes right back to 5.0's.


Get real...6.5 at least.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Prove it.


Something called...I don't know..."COMMON SENSE"


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Yep, casuals don't read dirtsheets so it's kind of expected automatically to have The Rock there because he is, y'know, the CHAMPION. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

MIZARK and BORK definitely kept the numbers afloat, though.


----------



## CharliePrince

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

they weren't chanting the rock's name

no no no no no no no no NO

monday night

LIVE

LIVE on MONDAY NIGHT RAW

...they were chanting.. HIS name

Sexual Cho-co-late!

Sexual Cho-co-late!!

Sexual cho-colate!!!

:


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

WWE is burying CMPunk because of the low ratings he was getting as a champ.

Mark my words, in 4-5 months he willbe Saturday Morning Slam material.


----------



## KuritaDavion

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Nimbus said:


> WWE is burying CMPunk because of the low ratings he was getting as a champ.
> 
> Mark my words, in 4-5 months he willbe Saturday Morning Slam material.


Like John Cena?


----------



## Annihilus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Did you all forget that the ratings always go up around this time every year no matter who's on the show? its wrestlemania season so more fans tune in on a regular basis because this is when big returns usually happen. go look at ratings from one episode of raw from the last 4 years, they're pretty similar to what they are now, so why is it you believe that Rock as champion is such a "ratings surge"? Just because he said so? Mark much? 

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/

Raw after rumble 2013: 3.68 (Rock as champion)
raw after rumble 2012: 3.55 
Raw after rumble 2011: 3.48
Raw after rumble 2010: 3.63 (Rock not even on the roster)

The ratings are almost identical to what they in 2010 when Rock wasn't even on the roster and that was when SHAEMUS was WWE champion when he was completely not over as a heel. That was a bad time to be watching wrestling, yet the ratings are identical to what they are now, what does that tell you? they're also benefiting from Lesnar being here which probably more than makes up that difference. If rock as champ is such a ratings surge why is the rating identical to 2010 ratings?


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> *Yep, casuals don't read dirtsheets *so it's kind of expected automatically to have The Rock there because he is, y'know, the CHAMPION. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
> 
> MIZARK and BORK definitely kept the numbers afloat, though.


:lol Dirtsheets? Why would they need to look at dirtsheets to know Rock wasn't going to be there? I assume you've never heard of Facebook and twitter? He was never advertised for the show. It was common knowledge that he wasn't going to be there. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

The Punk haters must literally have dozens of excuses ready to trot out after every Raw. When the show does a decent rating, it's everybody but Punk. And when it does a poor rating, it's obviously all Punk's fault.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock covered this week's RAW because he's the WWE Champion, which always on the show. He also had a lot of buzz from his 3 SuperBowl ads the night before and the exposure he's giving the product currently. The problem here is next week, because this week everyone assumed that Rock is there because he's the champion, that's why I said how stupid they were not to announce that Rock is there live next week. Instead of taking advantage of the opportunity and the big audience Rock attracted, they're doing their lazy promotion without even a 15 seconds mention or commercial. Let's hope that this big audience is there next week and not just gave up because Rock wasn't on the show. But after the horrible program WWE put on and the lack of promotion, I doubt it. The drop in viewers for every hour is not a good sign.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Annihilus said:


> The ratings are almost identical to what they in 2010 when Rock wasn't even on the roster and that was when SHAEMUS was WWE champion when he was completely not over as a heel.


Your basically right. Raw almost always spikes in ratings in January. The good ratings are a little overrated around the net.

But there's big difference between a 3.7 in 2010 and a 3.7 in 2013. In 2009 the average rating was in the 3's including some 4's. In 2012 ratings were as low as a 2.5. Sheamus just got the average rating while Rock won back viewers.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



purple_gloves said:


> :lol Dirtsheets? Why would they need to look at dirtsheets to know Rock wasn't going to be there? I assume you've never heard of Facebook and twitter? He was never advertised for the show. It was common knowledge that he wasn't going to be there. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.


When you are the champion, you are EXPECTED to appear because it just makes sense that way. People don't assume Punk or Cena aren't going to be there just because they aren't promoted on FB or twitter. The Rock may be a part-timer, but as champion, he's EXPECTED to appear since he has the top prize in his possession.

And in regards to your second paragraph which I removed from the quote, what does it even have to do with Punk? It's funny how you bring him into the conversation even though I didn't say a word about him.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Rock316AE said:


> Rock covered this week's RAW because he's the WWE Champion, which always on the show. He also had a lot of buzz from his 3 SuperBowl ads the night before and the exposure he's giving the product currently. The problem here is next week, because this week everyone assumed that Rock is there because he's the champion, that's why I said how stupid they were not to announce that Rock is there live next week. Instead of taking advantage of the opportunity and the big audience Rock attracted, they're doing their lazy promotion without even a 15 seconds mention or commercial. Let's hope that this big audience is there next week and not just gave up because Rock wasn't on the show. But after the horrible program WWE put on and the lack of promotion, I doubt it. The drop in viewers for every hour is not a good sign.


Whilst I agree completely with you here and they are inept for trotting out an underhyped and underpromoted RAW just one week removed from the rumble, I don't think the show itself this week wasn't horrible imo. Punk/Jericho was a very engaging match as was Bryan/Rey, Punk's opening segment was a nice touch, Bork obliderated Miz, Mark 'Ratings' Henry returned, and we got a very entertaining final segment with the Shielf brawling with all the top faces (outside of Orton) in the company. The show had it's share of crap and filler (Another Orton/Barrett match fpalm, and that crappy wwe app promoting) but there was good elements.


----------



## alliance

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The Rock gets ratings even when hes not there, thank you Rock once again for SAVING the pg cartoon era and carrying punk and cena..


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Guess they're even for when they carried Rock in the ring.


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The Rock is the champion, so people think he will appear in the show, thats why the ratings are high.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Nimbus said:


> The Rock is the champion, so people think he will appear in the show, thats why the ratings are high.


All that needs to be said.


----------



## Serpent01

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



AthenaMark said:


> Something called...I don't know..."COMMON SENSE"


Except common sense says that Rock almost never appears on Raw and ratings are usually this high around this time of year.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



purple_gloves said:


> :lol Dirtsheets? Why would they need to look at dirtsheets to know Rock wasn't going to be there? *I assume you've never heard of Facebook and twitter? He was never advertised for the show.* It was common knowledge that he wasn't going to be there. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
> 
> The Punk haters must literally have dozens of excuses ready to trot out after every Raw. When the show does a decent rating, it's everybody but Punk. And when it does a poor rating, it's obviously all Punk's fault.


Official WWE FB and Twitter feeds don't specify on who and who won't appear on a particular house or TV show. 

Only local arena organizers, and that only affects how many people will attend the show live, not how many people will watch the it on TV. 

And only a limited amount of people usually have info to the local arena organizer's promotion of the event other than the locals, specifically the IWC.

So there, you failed again at patronizing your fallen hero again.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Serpent01 said:


> Except common sense says that Rock almost never appears on Raw and ratings are usually this high around this time of year.


Except this year's first 2 RTWM Raws are way more watched than last year's.


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Except this year's first 2 RTWM Raws are way more watched than last year's.


Bullshit good sir! They have been doing the same post Rumble numbers for years. No matter who is champion.
If you wanna be really specific, its the least watched two post Royal Rumble shows in the last 5 years.
BUT, I think its kinda unfair to compare 2 hour shows to 3 hours. They have done good numbers, in line with previous years. Pretty good when adding a extra hour.

2013:
First show after RR: 5.02 million viewers
Second show: 4.78 million viewers

2012:
First: 5.22 million viewers
Second: 4.62 million viewers

To compare even further:

2011:
First: 5.28 million viewers
Second: 4.93 million viewers

2010:

First: 5.10 million viewers
Second: 5.27 million viewers

2009:
First: 5.17 million viewers.
Second: 5.30 million viewers.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rating is big because of Lesnar's surprise return past week against Vince. Nothing to do with the Rock or the championship. I thought that would be obvious to everyone


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Breakdown:
Ryback vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 526,000 viewers. 
The Rey Mysterio promo and Shield video, along with a replay of the Trish Stratus Hall of Fame video gained 373,000 viewers. 
Jack Swagger vs. Santino Marella lost 302,000 viewers. 
Alberto Del Rio vs. Cody Rhodes and the Del Rio/Big Show interview segment at 9 p.m. gained 243,000 viewers. (3.64 Household rating) 
Rey Mysterio vs. Daniel Bryan lost 93,000 viewers. 
Bryan & Kane arguing backstage and Big Show’s second segment in the hotel room lost 87,000 viewers. 
Sheamus vs. Kane lost 167,000 viewers. 
The Miz TV segment with Heyman which ended up with Vickie Guerrero and Lesnar gained 600,000 viewers at 10 pm. (3.82 HH rating) 
Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett lost 683,000 viewers. 
Chris Jericho vs. C.M. Punk gained 137,000 viewers. 
The Bruno Sammartino video gained 34,000 viewers. 
The Show/Del Rio brawl, Brad Maddox cutting a promo and getting killed, and finally John Cena, Ryback and Sheamus attacking The Shield gained 255,000 viewers. (3.63 HH rating)


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Damn, looks like people understand the booking of the show now and know which points to watch.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Not surprising peak of the show involves Lesnar. Clearly his return drew the viewership number. 




> Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett lost 683,000 viewers.


Why do they keep booking this match over and over? And it makes no sense with the wins and loses. One week barrett beats him clean, next week he loses clean wtf?


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Show opened strong with Punk and he gained in a random time in the 3rd hour (or was it the ME? I can't remember. If so ignore second part).


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I'd say Jericho was responsible for that gain more than Punk since he was hot with the fans after his rumble return. He even won the poll by a landslide, one that involved two huge babyfaces Orton and Rey. Jericho really shouldn't have lost that match, atleast not clean.. he was finally gaining some momentum back since his jobber streak. Stupid move to have him lose tbh. Atleast he is in a better position than christian, who got squashed by Sandow of all people iirc?


----------



## Heel

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

CM Punk bringing dem ratings again.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Heel said:


> CM Punk bringing dem ratings again.


You spelled Brock Lesnar wrong.

The crowd was obviously expecting a Rocky interruption in the opening seg as they are still technically feuding.

Brock, Cena, Rock (in person and in spirit) and Vince had been the ones carrying the post-Rumble viewership boom.

And with Undertaker and HHH's impending returns, this could sky rocket into weekly 4.5's............. :mark: :mark: :mark:


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

They had a good hook to tune in last week , with the Lesnar return/Heyman reveal . So that was bound to attract viewers.

There was no hook this week so it will be interesting if they can maintain the viewers.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> he show did a 2.7 in Males 12-17 (up 4%), 2.7 in Males18-49 (down 13%), 1.1 in Girls 12-17 (up 10%) and 1.1 in Women 18-49 (down 15%). The audience was 67.3% male.
> 
> The show opened huge, with a 3.79 first quarter, probably the biggest first quarter in months, for the C.M. Punk promo with Booker T coming out. Ryback vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 526,000 viewers. The Rey Mysterio promo and Shield video, along with a replay of the Trish Stratus Hall of Fame video gained 373,000 viewers. Jack Swagger vs. Santino Marella lost 302,000 viewers. Alberto Del Rio vs. Cody Rhodes and the Del Rio/Big Show interview segment at 9 p.m. gained 243,000 viewers to a 3.64 quarter. Rey Mysterio vs. Daniel Bryan lost 93,000 viewers. Bryan & Kane arguing backstage and Big Show’s second segment in the hotel room lost 87,000 viewers. Sheamus vs. Kane lost 167,000 viewers. The Miz TV segment with Heyman which ended up with Vickie Guerrero and Lesnar gained 600,000 viewers at 10 p.m. to a to a show high 3.82 quarter. Virtually all the gains were Males 18-49 in that segment as opposed to across the board. Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett lost 683,000 viewers. Chris Jericho vs. C.M. Punk gained 137,000 viewers. The Bruno Sammartino video gained 34,000 viewers. And the Show/Del Rio brawl, Brad Maddox cutting a promo and getting killed, and finally John Cena, Ryback and Sheamus attacking The Shield gained 255,000 viewers, which is a weak overrun gain, to a 3.63.


Yep


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk proving again he brings ratings, and no people knew rock weren't gonn be there so no need to say that was the reason he drew the ratings, lesnar proving he is the biggest star atm wow, them ratings!


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



wb1899 said:


> Breakdown:
> Ryback vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 526,000 viewers.
> The Rey Mysterio promo and Shield video, along with a replay of the Trish Stratus Hall of Fame video gained 373,000 viewers.
> Jack Swagger vs. Santino Marella lost 302,000 viewers.
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Cody Rhodes and the Del Rio/Big Show interview segment at 9 p.m. gained 243,000 viewers. (3.64 Household rating)
> Rey Mysterio vs. Daniel Bryan lost 93,000 viewers.
> Bryan & Kane arguing backstage and Big Show’s second segment in the hotel room lost 87,000 viewers.
> Sheamus vs. Kane lost 167,000 viewers.
> The Miz TV segment with Heyman which ended up with Vickie Guerrero and Lesnar gained 600,000 viewers at 10 pm. (3.82 HH rating)
> Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett lost 683,000 viewers.
> Chris Jericho vs. C.M. Punk gained 137,000 viewers.
> The Bruno Sammartino video gained 34,000 viewers.
> The Show/Del Rio brawl, Brad Maddox cutting a promo and getting killed, and finally John Cena, Ryback and Sheamus attacking The Shield gained 255,000 viewers. (3.63 HH rating)


Hilarious how people are still trying to put down Punk when his solo segment was the second most viewed of the entire show, just a mere 41 000 viewers less than Lesnar's segment. I don't care much where my favorites rank in terms of drawing but this thread is always fun because it's so obvious that the detractors rely on emotion rather than logic.


----------



## Heel

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> The show opened huge, with a 3.79 first quarter, probably the biggest first quarter in months, for the C.M. Punk promo. Chris Jericho vs. C.M. Punk gained 137,000 viewers.


THE G.O.A.T.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Heel said:


> THE G.O.A.T.


BEST IN THE WORLD


----------



## Duke Silver

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Cash Machine Phil


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The viewers were expecting for The Rock and when they got Punk instead, they were expecting for an interruption. 

That would have been a 2.8 during his reign pre-Rock comeback, like most his segments were.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...zTV_Barrett_vs_Orton_Loses_Big_Punk_More.html



> - As noted before, the February 4th WWE RAW did a strong 3.54 rating with 4.80 million viewers.
> 
> The show opened huge with a 3.79 quarter rating with CM Punk's promo. Ryback vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 526,000 viewers. Rey Mysterio's promo with The Shield video along with a Trish Stratus Hall of Fame video gained 373,000 viewers. Santino Marella vs. Jack Swagger lost 302,000 viewers. Cody Rhodes vs. Alberto Del Rio and then a Big Show/Del Rio interview segment at 9pm gained 243,000 viewers for a 3.64 quarter rating.
> 
> Mysterio vs. Daniel Bryan lost 93,000 viewers. Kane and Bryan arguing plus another Big Show segment in his hotel room lost 87,000 viewers. Kane vs. Sheamus lost another 167,000 viewers. The MizTV segment with Paul Heyman and Brock Lesnar gained 600,000 viewers at 10pm for a 3.82 quarter rating - the high point of the show.
> 
> Wade Barrett vs. Randy Orton lost 683,000 viewers. Chris Jericho vs. CM Punk gained 137,000 viewers. Bruno Sammartino's Hall of Fame video gained 34,000 viewers. Big Show and Del Rio's brawl plus the Brad Maddox promo and brawl with The Shield, John Cena, Ryback and Sheamus gained 255,000 viewers for a 3.63 overrun rating - a weak gain for the overrun.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> The viewers were expecting for The Rock and when they got Punk instead, they were expecting for an interruption.
> 
> That would have been a 2.8 during his reign pre-Rock comeback, like most his segments were.


From the man that thought these two Raws had far higher viewership than previous year but quickly became very quiet when the evidence was brought out. That's probably the source we'll decide to take our information from. :lmao


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> The viewers were expecting for The Rock and when they got Punk instead, they were expecting for an interruption.
> 
> That would have been a 2.8 during his reign pre-Rock comeback, like most his segments were.


Nice excuse. :lmao


----------



## Duke Silver

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

If Punk does a good rating, it's because of someone else. If Punk does a bad rating, it's because he doesn't draw. If Rock does a good rating, it's because of how amazing he is. If Rock does a bad rating, it's because there was something else on TV or how the segment was booked. 

If Raw does a good rating and Lesnar returns and Henry returns and Jericho returns and we're on the RTWM and the Rumble PPV just occured and the show is much more consistent than usual with some good matches, promos and storyline development, the number is because people were expecting The Rock to show up. 

What a wonderfully convenient "fact" for those that simultaneously hate Punk and love Rock.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

CM DRAW.


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I'm sure TNA will draw 3.5 because people "might expect the Rock to show up in the Impact Zone". unk2 Awesome logic.

#BITWdraws unk3


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

CM Punk with dem numbers. Does huge in the opening promo and gains 137k in a random segment. GOAT.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> When you are the champion, you are EXPECTED to appear because it just makes sense that way. People don't assume Punk or Cena aren't going to be there just because they aren't promoted on FB or twitter. The Rock may be a part-timer, but as champion, he's EXPECTED to appear since he has the top prize in his possession.
> 
> And in regards to your second paragraph which I removed from the quote, what does it even have to do with Punk? It's funny how you bring him into the conversation *even though I didn't say a word about him*.


That makes a change.

2nd paragraph obviously wasn't aimed directly at you.


Hawksea said:


> You spelled Brock Lesnar wrong.
> 
> *The crowd was obviously expecting a Rocky interruption *in the opening seg as they are still technically feuding.
> 
> Brock, Cena, Rock (in person and in spirit) and Vince had been the ones carrying the post-Rumble viewership boom.
> 
> And with Undertaker and HHH's impending returns, this could sky rocket into weekly 4.5's............. :mark: :mark: :mark:


Every man and his dog knew the Rock wasn't go to be there. Weak argument.

Do you think that maybe, just maybe, they managed to hook people in with the potential fallout from Punk/Heyman/Shield and Vince/Lesnar? 

Of course that may be difficult for you to understand as it is logical.



Defei said:


> *I'd say Jericho was responsible for that gain more than Punk* since he was hot with the fans after his rumble return. He even won the poll by a landslide, one that involved two huge babyfaces Orton and Rey. Jericho really shouldn't have lost that match, atleast not clean.. he was finally gaining some momentum back since his jobber streak. Stupid move to have him lose tbh. Atleast he is in a better position than christian, who got squashed by Sandow of all people iirc?


Jericho lost around 300k viewers last week with his promo. So I don't think he's as hot as you think.

No real surprises with the breakdown. Lesnar's a huge draw and bound to be in the most viewed segment.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The Paul Heyman Guys are saving this company with their NUMBERS~.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

punk is doing well.

Cena is super consistent with the ratings. ALWAYS DRAWING.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Like I said, if he isn't still feuding with The Rock, that would had been 2.7 - 2.8 tops like most of his segments were before The Rock came back. 

Remember that the threat of a Rocky appearance is still present when ever Punk's on because they are still in a feud.

So yes, The Rock, in spirit, was largely responsible for that opening number.


----------



## denias9301

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

the rock makes cm punk FAMOUS.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Like I said, if he isn't still feuding with The Rock, that would had been 2.7 - 2.8 tops like most of his segments were before The Rock came back.
> 
> Remember that the threat of a Rocky appearance is still present when ever Punk's on because they are still in a feud.
> 
> So yes, The Rock, in spirit, was largely responsible for that opening number.


Once again, nice excuse.

CM DRAW.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> The Paul Heyman Guys are saving this company with their NUMBERS~.


Pretty much this! Paul Heyman and his guys are currently saving wwe


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Pretty much this! Paul Heyman and his guys are currently saving wwe


Last time I checked, The Rock and Cena weren't "Paul Heyman Guys".


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...tats_on_RAW_s_Switch_to_Three_Hours_More.html



> - With RAW going from two hours to three, matches now get 33% more time and there are 33% more matches per show. The amount of wrestling per show has doubled to 78%. Those benefiting with more TV time include Heath Slater, Alberto Del Rio, Primo, Epico, Sheamus, Cody Rhodes, Damien Sandow, John Cena, The Miz, Big Show and Dolph Ziggler. Those who have received less TV time with the switch are Tensai, Zack Ryder, David Otunga, The Great Khali and Santino Marella.
> 
> Source: F4Wonline.com


some stats since RAW went to 3 hours


----------



## Honey Bucket

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



JY57 said:


> http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...tats_on_RAW_s_Switch_to_Three_Hours_More.html
> 
> 
> 
> some stats since RAW went to 3 hours


Yeah, pity those matches mean absolutely fuck all and it's fine for some guys getting more TV time but it means absolutely nothing unless you put them into some intriguing storyline, which the WWE can't do with ANYBODY outside of the main event.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Defei said:


> Why do they keep booking this match over and over? And it makes no sense with the wins and loses. One week barrett beats him clean, next week he loses clean wtf?


I was just about to post the same thing until I scrolled down and saw you took the words right off my keyboard. Damn straight, man. Kudos.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

CM Punk can't draw, huh? unk2

BORK bringing in that 18-49 demo too. :brock


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk drawing in and keeping them viewers on his own in the opening segment, and then doing a great gain in an odd quarter with Jericho is all great for Punk. Of course some will try to put it on The Rock and people expecting him to be there, but then if the segment bombs/doesn't do that well, that's not the case anymore and it's all Punk. What Rock has done is gotten people on a week-to-week basis to notice Punk and maybe turn Punk into a proven draw. One segment on his own doing extremely well doesn't prove anything however, and we'll have to wait and see how his segments do after Mania, as Starbuck pointed out, though if he's out of the title picture and isn't feuding with Taker, we can use his numbers at that point to gauge how big of a draw he is. 

Cena disappoints in the overrun for the second time this year to make it two for two. Now in all fairness, the overrun has been hit or miss. Punk/Rock the first Raw of the year did well, Rock concert and the brawl afterwards with Punk the next week didn't do well. Cena's promo before the Rumble with the brawl did terribly considering the hype, Heyman/Vince with Lesnar returning did amazingly well. So who knows. Then again, that applies to the 9PM and 10PM segments as well. 

But anyway, MizTV gaining is great and doing top of the show isn't surprising with the Lesnar appearance incoming, plus Heyman seems to be a bit of a draw himself. Great number for that.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

It took a while but good to see that more casuals are starting to see the talent that is CM Punk. He may not be a proven draw as of right now, but if he keeps this up he might be soon.

Oh and them Paul Heyman guys bringing in them highest RATINGZ.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

BROCK with the highest segment. Throwing chairs @ dipshits = ratings. :brock


----------



## the fox

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

wasn't the miz tv with Paul Heyman advertised to start the show?
also why CM Draw is only drawing now?
so who was the one getting 2.5 most of his title Reign?


----------



## The Dazzler

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

^ They were probably waiting for Rock to interrupt his promo. Even so, Rock/Punk is obviously drawing. So is Brock. How do they fuck that up? Enter Triple H and Cena. fpalm


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Hopefully that big viewership dip will teach WWE a lesson: fans are sick and tired of seeing repetitive matches between the same two guys week after week, often with the same damn outcome every time!


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The show opened strong and that's almost certainly to do with the fact that WWE left everybody on a cliffhanger last week and a lot of people were expecting something big to kick things off. It was advertised that it would be MizTV w/Heyman to open the show but instead we got a CM Punk promo. Was Punk the initial reason so many people decided to watch at the beginning of the show? No. Was he the reason that they stayed regardless of that? Yes. Score one for Punk. His match with Jericho gaining in a random quarter equals score two for Punk. Hey, guess what? Maybe the Rock feud is working and all the people exposed to Punk for the past month like what they see and now want to start watching him? Just a thought for the hater parade. 

MizTV doing the highest of the night isn't surprising. It was a great segment and of course BORK was there along with Heyman. Brock is more than likely the reason for the overall higher viewership of the show because his storyline with Vince was the hook from last week. People obviously tuned in again to see what would happen. Here's the thing though and it's to do with that is said below...



BANKSY said:


> They had a good hook to tune in last week , with the Lesnar return/Heyman reveal . So that was bound to attract viewers.
> 
> There was no hook this week so it will be interesting if they can maintain the viewers.


Like *BANKSY *has said, last week there was a great hook to get people to tune in again this week. But there wasn't really any hook or big reason promoted to watch the show next week. Notching really advanced or furthered. The good thing is that it's the go home for Elimination Chamber so maybe they can expect a boost from that and will be bale to maintain this level of viewership. 

I have to say though, it's rather strange to be talking about 3.8 quarter hours when just a month ago they couldn't even hit 3.2 quarter hours lol. DAT RAWK, DAT BORK, DAT RTWM.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Starbuck said:


> The show opened strong and that's almost certainly to do with the fact that WWE left everybody on a cliffhanger last week and a lot of people were expecting something big to kick things off. It was advertised that it would be MizTV w/Heyman to open the show but instead we got a CM Punk promo. Was Punk the initial reason so many people decided to watch at the beginning of the show? No. Was he the reason that they stayed regardless of that? Yes. Score one for Punk. His match with Jericho gaining in a random quarter equals score two for Punk. Hey, guess what? Maybe the Rock feud is working and all the people exposed to Punk for the past month like what they see and now want to start watching him? Just a thought for the hater parade.
> 
> MizTV doing the highest of the night isn't surprising. It was a great segment and of course BORK was there along with Heyman. Brock is more than likely the reason for the overall higher viewership of the show because his storyline with Vince was the hook from last week. People obviously tuned in again to see what would happen. Here's the thing though and it's to do with that is said below...
> 
> 
> 
> Like *BANKSY *has said, last week there was a great hook to get people to tune in again this week. But there wasn't really any hook or big reason promoted to watch the show next week. Notching really advanced or furthered. The good thing is that it's the go home for Elimination Chamber so maybe they can expect a boost from that and will be bale to maintain this level of viewership.
> 
> I have to say though, it's rather strange to be talking about 3.8 quarter hours when just a month ago they couldn't even hit 3.2 quarter hours lol. DAT RAWK, DAT BORK, DAT RTWM.


Good post


----------



## Padhlala

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> You spelled Brock Lesnar wrong.
> 
> The crowd was obviously expecting a Rocky interruption in the opening seg as they are still technically feuding.
> 
> Brock, Cena, Rock (in person and in spirit) and Vince had been the ones carrying the post-Rumble viewership boom.
> 
> And with Undertaker and HHH's impending returns, this could sky rocket into weekly 4.5's............. :mark: :mark: :mark:


Exactly, these CM Punk fanboys make me laugh. I like the guy, but do they honestly think casual fans look at dirtsheets and find out that rock isn't gonna turn up?


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Strongside said:


> Hopefully that big viewership dip will teach WWE a lesson: fans are sick and tired of seeing repetitive matches between the same two guys week after week, often with the same damn outcome every time!





Honestly I don't think they care.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Rock as champion+Lesnar coming back certainly helped things more than I thought they would. I knew Raw last week, being the fallout from the Rumble, would do a great number but it did even better than I thought. This week though, even with Lesnar returning and the hook they had, I thought they'd struggle to get around a 3.3, let alone a 3.5whateveritwas. Impressive that they've kept some great numbers up and look to be continuing with that. I mean really by logic, once Taker and HHH return, coupled with Rock and Lesnar being there, they should be getting more segments in the high 3.0's and maybe even 4.0. 3.7's-4.0's should become a normal thing in theory based on these last two weeks. However who knows? Could be that only those guys get high ratings but the rest of the show bombs terribly, moreso than usual, and that brings the average down.

Next week they should be fine. We know they'll have Rock. Lesnar should be there as well. I wouldn't be surprised if HHH makes an appearance as well... though they'll probably save him for EC or the Raw after EC. Maybe Stephanie will make an appearance and announce HHH will make a statement regarding Lesnar at the EC PPV to help out buys, or for Raw the next week. But Lesnar and Rock alone should (once again in theory) be enough to keep ratings in the 3.5 range at least, even with the lack of a hook and promotion. If what Rock marks say is true and that fans tuned in expecting Rock to show up as champion, that should apply for next week as well, right? So all should be good. Put Cena/Ryback/Sheamus/Shield in the opening, 9PM should go to Punk or Rock, 10PM goes to Lesnar/Heyman again, and overrun goes to both Punk and Rock. Have a Punk match, Cena match, Ryback match, and Sheamus match spread out throughout. Hell, they could put make singles matches between Cena, Sheamus, Ryback, and The Shield. Have say, Cena vs. Reins, Rollins vs. Ryback, and Ambrose vs. Sheamus. Have Ambrose beat Sheamus due to Shield interference, have Ryback end up beating Rollins, and then have Cena/Reins end in a no-contest with a big brawl between all the men involved in the 6-man tag, leaking backstage and into the parking lot, where The Shield make their escape and/or come up with something clever to knock out Cena, Ryback, and Sheamus and end up on top.

Plus have Jericho/Ziggler doing some stuff, maybe have some stuff go down for the World Title #1 contendership EC, maybe some final announcements, Del Rio/Show, keep bullshit like Tensai/Clay off the show, and ratings should be good. 

Oh, and don't do Barrett/Orton again.

Hell, fuck it, I'll even make a basic outline for the show:

8-8:15- Cena starts off, followed by Sheamus and Ryback to cut promos. Shield comes out and they go back and fourth a bit on the mic (Shield will within the crowd). Then have Vickie or someone make the announcement of the matches I stated above, with Ambrose/Sheamus starting now.
8:15-8:30- Ambrose vs. Sheamus, with Ambrose beating Sheamus due to The Shield interfering.
8:30-8:45- Have a moderate level match here. Maybe do Henry vs. Bryan since I believe they're both in the chamber and they interacted last week.
8:45-9:00- Have a Sandow segment and/or Sandow/Orton match, Orton wins
9:00-9:15- Have Rock advertised to appear here and talk about Punk, and call out Punk. It gets revealed Punk isn't at the arena yet or something like that, and he'll call Punk out later. Doesn't have to be exactly like that.
9:15-9:30- Ryback vs. Rollins with Ryback beating Rollins to even up the score. At one point The rest of The Shield will try to interfere, but Cena/Sheamus will cut them off and they'll back down.
9:30-9:45- Do something with Jericho/Ziggler. Either a promo between the two or Jericho vs. Rhodes with Jericho going over, followed by Jericho getting laid out by Ziggler
9:45-10:00- Have another match between chamber participants if possible, or make final announcements for the chamber match if all 6 spots aren't filled (not sure if they've been yet or not)
10:00-10:15- Brock Lesnar/Heyman/Stephanie McMahon. Maybe announce HHH for EC as I mentioned above and if they want to go a step further, have Lesnar F-5 Stephanie.
10:15-10:30- Del Rio against Barrett. It's a fresh match-up, and can be promoted well as a champion vs. champion match. Have Show cost Del Rio the match, which helps out Barrett and the IC Title, as well as furthers the Show/Del Rio feud. (Which I know is very wishful thinking since it's Barrett, but oh well).
10:30-10:45- Cena/Reins with the scenario I posted above.
10:45-11:00- After video packages/HOF announcement and commercials, put something in here to bring us to around 10:55 or as close to 11:00 as possible and advertise Rock calling out Punk.
10:55-Overrun end- Rock's entrance, but Punk assaults Rock from behind on the ramp and beats the crap out of him with a chair/lead pipe/something, attacking the ribs and trying to re-injure them to give him an advantage going into WM. This goes into the ring with Punk just pounding on the mid-section of Rock. This lasts for a few minutes until referees pull Punk off. The show ends with Punk on the ramp smirking, maybe even taking the WWE Title belt to hold up, and a stretcher comes out, but Rock refuses the medical attention and while hanging on the second rope trying to balance himself stares down Punk to end the show.

Commercials will have to be put in matches/empty spots in those time slots, like I'm sure Henry/Bryan won't go the full 15 minutes, and same with Del Rio/Barrett.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The huge first quarter was a result of two things, Rock's buzz as WWE Champion with the exposure he's giving the product in the media, and the end of RAW last week with Lesnar's return. Punk and Booker were just there. No other reason. These two reasons were also the reason for the big rating, next week is where the problem begins because 1. They didn't announce Rock after he wasn't on the show this week. And 2. Lesnar's segment didn't do anything to keep anticipation for next week unlike the Vince angle. The company ruined any chance they had of keeping this audience on this week's show IMO. Also, it's safe to say now that the 10pm segment is becoming the strongest timeslot on the show because it's just before they're starting to lose viewers due to the 3 hours concept.


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Seriously, only indie marks care about Punk.....also the gain was for Jericho, it wasnt a huge gain anyway....


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Nimbus said:


> Seriously, only indie marks care about Punk.....also the gain was for Jericho, it wasnt a huge gain anyway....


You really think there are only indy Punk marks after what 7 years in WWE? Add 2 more years and you could talk about indy Cena marks. :cena2


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Interesting breakdown. Great opening. We were advertised Miz TV and Brock. Also, last weeks hook of Brock returning made a big impact. Not to mention Rock being the WWE Champion also drew in people expecting him. We got Punk to open instead, however he can be credited for keeping viewers during this time and gaining during his random quarter with Jericho. This could be a positive sign for Punk due to the current massive exposure while feuding with The Rock. Miz TV being the top of the show is obvious. Brock fucking shit up with a segment that has had big stars on it in the past is bound to do well. A poor over-run is the odd thing. Especially with the names there and how the idea of Cena calling out the Shield and other teasers were in the show with it. Still, Cena's consistency pulls through. Next week will be interesting to see.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I'll go out on a limb and say that the Punk/Jericho match gained a) because of the Raw Active aspect, people wanted to know who the opponent would be and b) because it was a great match.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

^ Not to mention "DID YOU GET THE WWE APP YET FOLKS?" plugs every few minutes.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk/Jericho did very well ratings wise last year in segments and the like, and I'm guessing some of the fans after hearing Jericho was chosen were drawn in due to their history. As for Punk in the opening, the hook from last week brought the viewers in, Punk kept them tuned in.


----------



## Heel

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Haters can't just accept that Punk is not only the Best In The World and The People's Champion, but also a MASSIVE ratings draw.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Heel said:


> Haters can't just accept that Punk is not only the Best In The World and The People's Champion, but also a MASSIVE ratings draw.


Even though you are probably being sarcastic..I am a massive Punk fan, but I really wouldn't say that yet. He has shown positives recently and is a consistent merchandise seller. However on week to week on RAW he has failed to show any major consistency of drawing.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



NearFall said:


> Even though you are probably being sarcastic..I am a massive Punk fan, but I really wouldn't say that yet. He has shown positives recently and is a consistent merchandise seller. However on week to week on RAW he has failed to show any major consistency of drawing.


Dude, just embrace your inner-Punk mark and admit Punk is the BITW, not only as a performer, but as a draw. Hell, just admit he's the BITW at everything and you'll be on the right track.

Jesus Punk will tell you that if you need further validation.unk5

Oh, and also, even though the quarter Henry was in lost viewers, it should be noted it probably actually lost about a million viewers, but Henry brought 900,000 back in. Henry's close to Punk's drawing power.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*Ratings and drawing isn't even the same thing. WWE already got their money from the network.*


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Charlie Bronson said:


> *Ratings and drawing isn't even the same thing. WWE already got their money from the network.*


^This.

And as has been said before here, but probably overlooked because of the TLDR syndrome, if the opening bombed, haters would still be using that to bolster Rock.

If the segment had lost- "See, Rock's not there and ratingz bomb! LOL"
The segment actually gained- "See, Rock's not there and he still drawz! LOL"

I have to agree with an earlier post that the Rock giving Punk the extra exposure with casuals and mainstream looks to be working, for now at least.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Ever since Punk turned heel, he really hasn't had many ratings blunders. His segment gains have always been above average, even in non-transitional time periods. This isn't another fluke; he is doing his job, and he is doing his job very well.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

considering Jericho never gains out side of the opener/10pm/overrun and same for Punk, kind of shocking that their match gained that well.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> Dude, *just embrace your inner-Punk mark and admit Punk is the BITW, not only as a performer, but as a draw*. Hell, just admit he's the BITW at everything and you'll be on the right track.
> 
> Jesus Punk will tell you that if you need further validation.unk5
> 
> Oh, and also, even though the quarter Henry was in lost viewers, it should be noted it probably actually lost about a million viewers, but Henry brought 900,000 back in. Henry's close to Punk's drawing power.


Raw ratings average when he was the champion = 2.7 fpalm

Only started gaining viewers when The Rock returned to carry his 97 lbs ass in viewership department. fpalm

Had the worst quarter rating ever for a WWE champion since Diesel. 2.2 with Kane. fpalm

Sounds like a draw alright..........


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

*Ratings ain't got nothing to do with drawing.*


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

In for my weekly input on ratings discussion:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Raw ratings average when he was the champion = 2.7 fpalm
> 
> Only started gaining viewers when The Rock returned to carry his 97 lbs ass in viewership department. fpalm
> 
> Had the worst quarter rating ever for a WWE champion since Diesel. 2.2 with Kane. fpalm
> 
> Sounds like a draw alright..........


 :lmao


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The Rock has really put Punk over despite losing the match. Good for Punk.


----------



## CharliePrince

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Charlie Bronson said:


> *Ratings ain't got nothing to do with drawing.*


....... :no:

WHAT?!


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



CharliePrince said:


> ....... :no:
> 
> WHAT?!


*Do a little research, it might help.*


----------



## ShiftyLWO

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Ratings are higher during wrestlemania season. Doesn't matter who is champ.


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Dwayne Johnson @TheRock

The People's Era - highest #RAW ratings in over a year. @WWE Universe's powerful voice. #WeBringIt pic.twitter.com/GlsA8jl9


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

February 4th, 2013 - Quarter Hours
Q1 - 3.79 rating / 5.15 million
Q2 - 3.40 rating / 4.62 million
Q3 - 3.68 rating / 5.00 million
Q4 - 3.46 rating / 4.70 million
Q5 - 3.64 rating / 4.94 million
Q6 - 3.57 rating / 4.85 million
Q7 - 3.51 rating / 4.76 million
Q8 - 3.38 rating / 4.59 million
Q9 - 3.82 rating / 5.19 million
Q10 - 3.32 rating / 4.51 million
Q11 - 3.42 rating / 4.65 million
Q12 - 3.44 rating / 4.68 million
Overrun - 3.63 rating / 4.93 million


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Wow, they never broke a 4 rating all night.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Lesnar won't be on next weeks show? When Rock returns? They're not allowed to be on the show together lol.



> Listed below is the updated list of Lesnar’s confirmed WWE RAW appearances heading into WrestleMania 29:
> * February 25th from Dallas, Texas
> * March 11th from Indianapolis, Indiana
> * March 18th from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
> * April 1st from Washington, DC


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Lesnar won't be on next weeks show? When Rock returns? They're not allowed to be on the show together lol.


Bu... bu... BUT LESNAR SAID HE WAS NEVER LEAVING! :cena2

Oh wait, no he didn't.:brock


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Makes sense. They need to spread out the wealth.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Lesnar won't be on next weeks show? When Rock returns? They're not allowed to be on the show together lol.


Lesnar will be in Indy. :mark: :mark:

I might try to go to that show.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> Bu... bu... BUT LESNAR SAID HE WAS NEVER LEAVING! :cena2
> 
> Oh wait, no he didn't.:brock


LOL Brock can tell anybody he doesn't give a shit.

Thought they would have 2 big attractions next week, wonder if they'll replace Lesnar with someone equally as popular. We have a slightly big angle that now has to take a halt for a bit?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

That's too bad. Would love to see a Rock/Brock on screen confrontation. Even if they just walk past eachother backstage and have a stare-down. Oh well.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_68591.shtml



> -- Monday's WWE Raw scored 268,154 in social media activity, down nine percent from last week. Raw retained its #1 ranking on cable TV for the third consecutive Monday. (Data Source: Trendrr.TV ]


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



JY57 said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_68591.shtml


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

WWE Entertainment-	USA	8:00 PM	4.35	1.5
WWE Entertainment-	USA	10:00 PM	4.18	1.5
WWE Entertainment-	USA	9:00 PM	4.25	1.5

Lower viewership, unusually low demographic demo too...


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

LOZ ROCK CANT DRAW BECAUSE TEH RATINGS HAZ DROPPED AGAIN WHEN HE IZ CHAMP!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



D.M.N. said:


> WWE Entertainment-	USA	8:00 PM	4.35	1.5
> WWE Entertainment-	USA	10:00 PM	4.18	1.5
> WWE Entertainment-	USA	9:00 PM	4.25	1.5
> 
> Lower viewership, unusually low demographic demo too...


lolrock


----------



## HankHill_85

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Downward spiral as the night went on, true, but at least for now they're out of that 3-3.9 purgatory from the past year or so.

Sadly, that won't last. These permanent 3-hour Raws have to go. Sometimes it's a fucking marathon.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> WWE Entertainment-USA 8:00PM 4.35 1.5


unk2 :heyman Hour 1 was very good


:rock3


----------



## CenaSux84

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

How is it "lolrock" Rock's promo was in the overrun... Idiots.


More like your shitty wrestlers like Sandow and Cesaro that you all seem to get hard for can't draw for shit.


----------



## Proc

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

From the Observer



> Things fell back to normal levels last night after big ratings for Raw and Smackdown last week.
> 
> Raw averaged 4.26 million viewers, the lowest number of 2013. The three hours did a
> 
> 8 p.m. 4.35 million
> 
> 9 p.m. 4.25 million
> 
> 10 p.m. 4.18 milion
> 
> It was down 11% from last week as far as total viewers.
> 
> The rating should fall between a 2.9 and 3.1.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

And "people"(if I could call them that) are gonna blame it on The Rock. Was he promoted for this show beforehand?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Marv95 said:


> And "people"(if I could call them that) are gonna blame it on The Rock. Was he promoted for this show beforehand?


I don't know, but according to people last week it didn't matter as he was WWE Champion and the champion is expected to appear advertised or not.

The lack of BORK certainly didn't help things. And hour 1 doing the best isn't due to Punk. It ain't due to Heyman. I think we all know the man responsible.










Overrun with Rock and Punk still probably did the best.


----------



## Expectnomercy316

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

cm punk can't draw for shit.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Expectnomercy316 said:


> cm punk can't draw for shit.


Except, yes. He can. In fact, he's one of the very few last remaining draws in the wrestling world. 

It's 2013, shit's getting old.


----------



## CenaSux84

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Except, yes. He can. In fact, he's one of the very few last remaining draws in the wrestling world.
> 
> It's 2013, shit's getting old.


Prove it. Show me that he is draw?


Oh wait 2.2 RATINGS!!!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

You mean that one show on Christmas Eve? lol. Those silly families, choosing to spend their time with loved ones over pro wrasslin'~.

Just look at the rating breakdowns every week. It's rare that Punk loses viewers in his segments. He does well much more often than not. Of course, the overall numbers would be put solely on him because he's the champion, and ignore that it's a three hour show. Cena and co. don't exist, and the overall number will always lie on Punk. However, I'm willing to bet that logic gets thrown out of the window when discussing this week's decline. Shocking!


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

There seems to be a bit of a trend in the WWE at the moment, where the go home show before a ppv, fails to deliver a decent rating. Recent history shows though, that this doesn't seem to affect the buyrate.


----------



## CenaSux84

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> You mean that one show on Christmas Eve? lol. Those silly families, choosing to spend their time with loved ones over pro wrasslin'~.
> 
> Just look at the rating breakdowns every week. It's rare that Punk loses viewers in his segments. He does well much more often than not. Of course, the overall numbers would be put solely on him because he's the champion, and ignore that it's a three hour show. Cena and co. don't exist, and the overall number will always lie on Punk. However, I'm willing to bet that logic gets thrown out of the window when discussing this week's decline. Shocking!


OK.. OK you got me there it was Christmas and...



2.3 RATINGS THEN!!! OCTOBER 15TH! 2.3 2.3 2.3 No Christmas then?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I think as long as the casual fans who used to watch during the Attitude Era know that WWE is PG and centered around Cena, that they aren't going to be enticed to watch. I have plenty of friends who used to watch religiously during the Attitude Era who still won't watch now even with Rock being champ because they know that even though Rock is champ that the show is still based around Cena and based around a younger fanbase, and it doesn't interest them in the least. I think until WWE demonstrates they are going in a more mature direction for a good period of time, the ratings will stay in the range they've been in for quite a while now.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

October 15th got a 2.81. Try again.

2.81 still isn't good, but is closer to the average Raw was getting between Brock leaving and Rock coming back than the dreaded 2.2 people keep blabbering on about, when there was no show that got a 2.2. Christmas Eve got a 2.3.

Edit: My mistake, Christmas Eve did get a 2.2, but my point still stands.


----------



## CenaSux84

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> October 15th got a 2.81. Try again.
> 
> 2.81 still isn't good, but is closer to the average Raw was getting between Brock leaving and Rock coming back than the dreaded 2.2 people keep blabbering on about, when there was no show that got a 2.2. Christmas Eve got a 2.3.
> 
> Edit: My mistake, Christmas Eve did get a 2.2, but my point still stands.


Okay smart ass. I will try again because it was a typo I meant the October 1st 2012 RAW. 


2.3 RATING 2.3 RATING LOL! Nice drawing Phil.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Nope, that got a 2.54. Only two Raws got below a 2.4 last year, and they didn't happen in October.


----------



## CenaSux84

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> Nope, that got a 2.54. Only two Raws got below a 2.4 last year, and they didn't happen in October.


Well these dirtsheets need to be fired for false info.

Still 2.5 ratings suck! Good thing Rocky saved us.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



CenaSux84 said:


> Well these dirtsheets need to be fired for false info.
> 
> Still 2.5 ratings suck! Good thing Rocky saved us.


Oh yeah, thank Rocky for saving us from the dreadful occasional 2.5 rating and only giving us an occasional not-as-dreadful 3.0. THANK YOU GAWD... I MEAN RAWK!


----------



## CenaSux84

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> Oh yeah, thank Rocky for saving us from the dreadful occasional 2.5 rating and only giving us an occasional not-as-dreadful 3.0. THANK YOU GAWD... I MEAN RAWK!


Occasional lol?

RAW didn't go past 3.0 in 3 months and then Rock comes back and boom 3.1 then it goes up to 3.7 and 3.6. Don't see any 3.0's though? Only high 3's while Punk got several mid 2's and 2 low 2's.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



CenaSux84 said:


> Occasional lol?
> 
> RAW didn't go past 3.0 in 3 months and then Rock comes back and boom 3.1 then it goes up to 3.7 and 3.6. Don't see any 3.0's though? Only high 3's while Punk got several mid 2's and 2 low 2's.


January 21st got a 3.0. 3.2 the previous week, and 3.1 on Rock's return, plus this week has to be in the low 3.0's based on viewership me thinks. Punk got for the most part mid-high 2.0's (generally 2.7-2.9) with the occasional 2.5 or lower, which only happened twice outside of Christmas and NYR Eve.


----------



## holt_hogan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

It was *Raw 3.16* for one night only last night.

Last night's episode of WWE Raw scored a 3.16 rating with 4.26 million viewers, down 11% from a 3.56 and 4.81 million viewers last week. The show did hours of 4.35 million, 4.25 million and 4.18 million, making it the fifth straight week that viewership dropped from the second to third hour and the twenty-eighth time in the last thirty weeks.

The show ranked #2 among cable shows for the night in overall viewers and #1 in all male demos except teen males. It was still a higher rating than last year, when the show got a 2.99.
Read more at http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/273320#3akLfBOSwVYVymcm.99


----------



## Gurter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

LMAO @ ROCK MARKS
Lesnar is the man who brings in the ratings.
not the overrated cRock a shit.


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



holt_hogan said:


> It was *Raw 3.16* for one night only last night.
> 
> Last night's episode of WWE Raw scored a 3.16 rating with 4.26 million viewers, down 11% from a 3.56 and 4.81 million viewers last week. The show did hours of 4.35 million, 4.25 million and 4.18 million, making it the fifth straight week that viewership dropped from the second to third hour and the twenty-eighth time in the last thirty weeks.
> 
> The show ranked #2 among cable shows for the night in overall viewers and #1 in all male demos except teen males. It was still a higher rating than last year, when the show got a 2.99.
> Read more at http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/273320#3akLfBOSwVYVymcm.99


so the final rating is 3.16?


----------



## holt_hogan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



uknoww said:


> so the final rating is 3.16?


Yes.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> It was Raw *3.16* for one night only last night.


:austin


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

It's obvious isn't it? The people realise that the true champion has been screwed and Rock is a has been in 2013. Get the title back on CM 'buyrates' Punk now please.

At least the EC PPV will draw a great buyrate, everybody wants to see Punk win back what is rightfully his after all.


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I honestly thought Rock being champion would be amazing.

It's been quite boring so far! 

They can't keep turning back to older stars for ratings


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Karma101 said:


> It's obvious isn't it? The people realise that the true champion has been screwed and Rock is a has been in 2013. Get the title back on CM 'buyrates' Punk now please.
> 
> At least the EC PPV will draw a great buyrate, everybody wants to see Punk win back what is rightfully his after all.


But numbers were a lot lower when Punk was champion?

Going back to Punk as champion leading into Mania would be company suicide.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Falkono said:


> But numbers were a lot lower when Punk was champion?


without nfl competition numbers were not lower with punk as champion, if rock was champion between september-december raw would be doing the exact same viewership as it did with punk as champion


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



validreasoning said:


> without nfl competition numbers were not lower with punk as champion, if rock was champion between september-december raw would be doing the exact same viewership as it did with punk as champion


And where are your facts to prove that? You can't say "_____ would do the same numbers at that time" when it didn't happen.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Damn seems people didn't want to hear Rock ramble on about crackheads and Nashville.


----------



## Tony Tornado

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Falkono said:


> But numbers were a lot lower when Punk was champion?
> 
> Going back to Punk as champion leading into Mania would be company suicide.


That's because Punk was champion all year round, including the low-season with PPV's like OTL and MITB. It's easier to do big ratings on the RTWM. Rock does bring in viewers but he's not the almighty savior some of you make him out to be.


----------



## Oakue

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> And where are your facts to prove that? You can't say "_____ would do the same numbers at that time" when it didn't happen.


No, that is true. But it's not some illogical leap to make that hypothetical statement either.

Rock or no Rock, Monday Night Football is a Raw killer.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



moonmop said:


> No, that is true. But it's not some illogical leap to make that hypothetical statement either.
> 
> Rock or no Rock, Monday Night Football is a Raw killer.


How come the ratings were not as low as last year during the years before that then? I understand 3 hours is exhausting but recently, it's been proven that they can still reach the 3s even with 3 hours.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Bryan D. said:


> :austin


Loved it




Expectnomercy316 said:


> cm punk can't draw for shit.


Can draw better than anyone except Brock,Rock,Cena and ofcourse Mark Henry



ShowStopper '97 said:


> That's too bad. Would love to see a Rock/Brock on screen confrontation. Even if they just walk past eachother backstage and have a stare-down. Oh well.


I don't want to see Rock vs Brock.I rather see Brock face Taker



hazuki said:


> The Rock has really put Punk over despite losing the match. Good for Punk.


Rock never put Punk over.

The longest reigning champion lost to a guy that has had one match in 8 years.BURIED





ShiftyLWO said:


> Ratings are higher during wrestlemania season. Doesn't matter who is champ.


Somewhat true.

But can't deny the fact Rock would move ratings better than anyone(Maybe Lesnar is an exception)


----------



## Oakue

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> How come the ratings were not as low as last year during the years before that then? I understand 3 hours is exhausting but recently, it's been proven that they can still reach the 3s even with 3 hours.


Well, I'm not in the fight between who draws more, so I don't know who got better numbers or what not, but that wasn't what I was trying to say. My only point was WWE is up against it in the ratings department from September-December because of football, especially in the male demos.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

WWE does a poor job in promoting Rock or Lesnar's appearances.

They didn't even promote his appearance for SD this week. fpalm


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



CHIcagoMade said:


> WWE does a poor job in promoting Rock or Lesnar's appearances.
> 
> They didn't even promote his appearance for SD this week. fpalm


Agree. If I was WWE, I would promote the shit out of Rock and Brock being on the shows. Especially Rock. It's stupid not to.


----------



## Joeyontherun22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Dec_619 said:


> I honestly thought Rock being champion would be amazing.
> 
> It's been quite boring so far!
> 
> They can't keep turning back to older stars for ratings


LMAO!!! This blows my mind about wrestling fans. the man just became champion.


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

the janitor fan club is on a roll here.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Choke2Death said:


> How come the ratings were not as low as last year during the years before that then? I understand 3 hours is exhausting but recently, it's been proven that they can still reach the 3s even with 3 hours.


raw has been stuttering up against mnf for years, between 2008-10 they tried to mask this by bringing in special guests to boost ratings up against the nfl e.g ben roethlisberger, chad ochocinco would both brought in to go head to head with the football game and even then raw had still struggled

in 2011, 2.7 on september 12, 2.8 on november 7, 2.8 on december 12
in 2010, 2.8 on september 20, 2.7 on september 27

look at raw viewership in august last year when raw was 3hrs and had competition from pre season nfl games, i don't care who is champion come the first week in september, raw is going to struggle to hit a 3, 4.25 million viewers like last monday night would be below a 3 in september


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



validreasoning said:


> raw has been stuttering up against mnf for years, between 2008-10 they tried to mask this by bringing in special guests to boost ratings up against the nfl e.g ben roethlisberger, chad ochocinco would both brought in to go head to head with the football game and even then raw had still struggled
> 
> in 2011, 2.7 on september 12, 2.8 on november 7, 2.8 on december 12
> in 2010, 2.8 on september 20, 2.7 on september 27
> 
> look at raw viewership in august last year when raw was 3hrs and had competition from pre season nfl games, i don't care who is champion come the first week in september, raw is going to struggle to hit a 3, 4.25 million viewers like last monday night would be below a 3 in september


cm punk can't draw and that is a fact


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



validreasoning said:


> raw has been stuttering up against mnf for years, between 2008-10 they tried to mask this by bringing in special guests to boost ratings up against the nfl e.g ben roethlisberger, chad ochocinco would both brought in to go head to head with the football game and even then raw had still struggled
> 
> in 2011, 2.7 on september 12, 2.8 on november 7, 2.8 on december 12
> in 2010, 2.8 on september 20, 2.7 on september 27
> 
> look at raw viewership in august last year when raw was 3hrs and had competition from pre season nfl games, i don't care who is champion come the first week in september, raw is going to struggle to hit a 3, 4.25 million viewers like last monday night would be below a 3 in september


This post and your username go perfectly together.


----------



## -Skullbone-

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



uknoww said:


> cm punk can't draw and that is a fact


Geez. Can you at least f'n try and rebut _any_ of the stuff he said?


----------



## The Tony

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

It's not about who fucking draws and who doesn't. The show is NOT good. The show is WAY TOO LONG. People get bored and go to bed. It's that simple.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

CM Punk couldn't draw X on a whiteboard. I can't stand his boring vanilla ass with his 157 fans. Get off my TV, bartender!


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



moonmop said:


> Well, I'm not in the fight between who draws more, so I don't know who got better numbers or what not, but that wasn't what I was trying to say. My only point was WWE is up against it in the ratings department from September-December because of football, especially in the male demos.


I wasn't watching raw at the time. And if Rock was there, I certainly would've tuned in. I'm sure i'm not the only one either.


----------



## FreakyZo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> I wasn't watching raw at the time. And if Rock was there, I certainly would've tuned in. I'm sure i'm not the only one either.


Lol I just read your sig lol fucking troll


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



FreakyZo said:


> Lol I just read your sig lol fucking troll


How does my sig = troll?


----------



## AussieBoy97

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Add CM Punk to the list of Wrestlers people on this forum are hating on.............


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Ridiculous how they're not promoting Rock for RAW or SD, laziness or stupidity, either way they did the damage and ruined their opportunity to get a blockbuster audience every week with it. Last week with Rock not on the show, they should have told viewers that he's back live next week, they didn't do it and more than that, didn't even do a little mention or a 30 seconds commercial for his rare SD appearance this week. 

Anyway, Storytime with The Rock did the peak of the show with a 3.5.

On another note, SD last week had strong competition from the NBA game and Rock's movie "The Game Plan" on the Disney channel which did much bigger than their usual audience with over 4.2 million viewers. The most interesting thing about it was that The Game Plan on Disney, did the same viewership in the 18-49 demo as the NBA and SD.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Breakdown:
First quarter did a 3.33 Household rating.
Mark Henry vs. Great Khali lost 328,000 viewers. 
Chris Jericho vs. Daniel Bryan gained 84,000 viewers. 
John Cena & Sheamus & Ryback vs. 3MB at 9 p.m. gained 267,000 viewers (3.34 HH rating). 
Jack Swagger vs. Zack Ryder lost 253,000 viewers. 
Cody Rhodes vs. The Miz lost 19,000 viewers. 
Brodus Clay & Tensai vs. Primo & Epico lost 242,000 viewers. 
The Shield promo and the brawl with Cena, Sheamus and Ryback gained 392,000 at 10 p.m. (3.25 HH rating). 
Alberto Del Rio vs. Damien Sandow lost 419,000 viewers. 
Kofi Kingston vs. Wade Barrett lost 37,000 viewers. 
Kane vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 186,000 viewers. 
The final segment with the Rock promo and C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman coming out and the final brawl gained 578,000 viewers (3.48 HH rating).


----------



## VINT

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



> Mark Henry vs. Great Khali lost 328,000 viewers.





> Jack Swagger vs. Zack Ryder lost 253,000 viewers.





> Cody Rhodes vs. The Miz lost 19,000 viewers.





> Brodus Clay & Tensai vs. Primo & Epico lost 242,000 viewers.





> Alberto Del Rio vs. Damien Sandow lost 419,000 viewers.





> Kofi Kingston vs. Wade Barrett lost 37,000 viewers


Jesus christ. How much more can they lose?




Rock316AE said:


> Ridiculous how they're not promoting Rock for RAW or SD, laziness or stupidity, either way they did the damage and ruined their opportunity to get a blockbuster audience every week with it. Last week with Rock not on the show, they should have told viewers that he's back live next week, they didn't do it and more than that, didn't even do a little mention or a 30 seconds commercial for his rare SD appearance this week.
> 
> Anyway, Storytime with The Rock did the peak of the show with a 3.5.



The same reason why Punk wasn't Main Eventing PPVs and getting promoted, WWE's stupid. 

I actually don't really know what goes on in their marketing department. Nevermind Punk's 434 reign as champion, but Rock who is possibly the biggest draw on the show, who gets paid by appearances doesn't get promoted? 

It actually shows that WWE don't really care about the ratings or the promotion itself. 

PPV AND BUYRATEZ ONLY! :vince2


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

The Rock´s drawing power is starting to fade. 

But soon Triple H is back and hopefully in the overrun so we can go back to that 1 million viewer gain each week. And for extra security, add CM Punk in there so it will be an instant success unk5


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Henry's drawing power is so great, people had to tune out as they couldn't handle the awesomeness of him!

Great opening number, very good 9PM, 10PM is a bit underwhelming considering the feud, and great overrun number.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

lol at the Rock marks using the excuse "they should have promoted him." When last week it was "The audience were expecting him, that's why Punk's segment did a 3.9." Incredible. You don't have to promote him so much anymore, he's the fucking WWE champion.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Cena is the only consistent draw the wwe have.


----------



## Clique

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



VINT said:


> Jesus christ. How much more can they lose?
> 
> It actually shows that WWE don't really care about the ratings or the promotion itself.
> 
> PPV AND BUYRATEZ ONLY! :vince2


I think it is primarily PPV buys, the live gates, and merchandise that are the main driving forces. Ratings do matter because this a TV show after all and they will book certain stars and segments at certain time slots but WWE is in a comfortable position as the #1 wrestling promotion so the biggest point of argument I see here in this thread is who's getting into those important 8PM, 9PM, and 10PM/overrun spots. Also to your point, Rock/Cena didn't set the ratings on fire last year but they broke PPV buys and the live gate record. That's why we are getting it again and not only based on ratings.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> lol at the Rock marks using the excuse "they should have promoted him." When last week it was "The audience were expecting him, that's why Punk's segment did a 3.9." Incredible. You don't have to promote him so much anymore, he's the fucking WWE champion.


When Rock cuts a great promo,it is due to his charisma

When Rock's promo is bad,he is being held back 




Amuroray said:


> Cena is the only consistent draw the wwe have.


Lesnar-Rock-Cena-HHH are the draws 

I know many won't accept it but HHH is a huge draw too.Almost every single segment he is in gets great gains


----------



## Bel Air

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

This thread is fucking hilarious.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

I like The Rock, but his fans seriously have an issue of confirmation bias more than any other fanbase.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



wb1899 said:


> Breakdown:
> First quarter did a 3.33 Household rating.
> *Mark Henry vs. Great Khali lost 328,000 viewers. *
> Chris Jericho vs. Daniel Bryan gained 84,000 viewers.
> John Cena & Sheamus & Ryback vs. 3MB at 9 p.m. gained 267,000 viewers (3.34 HH rating).
> Jack Swagger vs. Zack Ryder lost 253,000 viewers.
> Cody Rhodes vs. The Miz lost 19,000 viewers.
> Brodus Clay & Tensai vs. Primo & Epico lost 242,000 viewers.
> The Shield promo and the brawl with Cena, Sheamus and Ryback gained 392,000 at 10 p.m. (3.25 HH rating).
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Damien Sandow lost 419,000 viewers.
> Kofi Kingston vs. Wade Barrett lost 37,000 viewers.
> Kane vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 186,000 viewers.
> The final segment with the Rock promo and C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman coming out and the final brawl gained 578,000 viewers (3.48 HH rating).


Now can we stop with the lame Mark Henry is ratings joke? Shit's getting annoying now. And judging by recent breakdowns, it appears people have worked out which stuff they need to skip, and which stuff they should watch.


----------



## VINT

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> Now can we stop with the lame Mark Henry is ratings joke? Shit's getting annoying now. And judging by recent breakdowns, it appears people have worked out when they should skip, and when they should watch.


You really expect people to sit through a match that includes Khali? 

He returned only last week and drew more than 3-million viewers on SmackDown and he's been the focus and the star of last week. Main evented and closed the show with a good rating.



Clique said:


> I think it is primarily PPV buys, the live gates, and merchandise that are the main driving forces. Ratings do matter because this a TV show after all and they will book certain stars and segments at certain time slots but WWE is in a comfortable position as the #1 wrestling promotion so the biggest point of argument I see here in this thread is who's getting into those important 8PM, 9PM, and 10PM/overrun spots. Also to your point, Rock/Cena didn't set the ratings on fire last year but they broke PPV buys and the live gate record. That's why we are getting it again and not only based on ratings.


Yeah but WWE's aim should be to gain more and more viewers in order for it to have better sales and buyrates. Cena/Rock last year was bringing the fans of 2 eras together plus some new audience watching only because of DWAYNE JOHNSON. But if they actually promote these guys and be like "hey, we have this wrestler named CM Punk and he's pretty good, check us out on RAW 8/7c..." Punk's just an example. In my eyes when Punk was champ they didn't do shit and I consider his reign to be pretty good(mostly a step-up from the recent WWE title reigns.) but he was THE CHAMPION and they chose to put the belt on HIM but yet they didn't promote him properly and failed to display the COMPANY CHAMPION.

The only reason Cena is popular ALL AROUND THE WORLD is because he's been featured on the show, talked about A LOT on the show, advertised as the main focus point of the show and WWE wants everyone to believe he's this strong FUNNY dude who is the best man on the planet. 

-

I have a question, why is Henry such a huge draw? I mean this guy's career in WWE has been pathetic and the only noteworthy things they've done with him was turning him heel and having one of the best heel-runs in the WWE. But how did he attract such a large amount of audience in a short period of time?


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Everyone here are experts in tactics to gain ratings for tv clearly.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

lol at calling Cena the only consistent draw WWE have... his drawing ability has diminished to nothing. Cena's been disappointing more than Punk the last few months, and Punk isn't consistent either. The only full-time guy who has been a consistent draw is Ryback... well for the most part, because while he's had some great gains where he was the one with the most starpower, he's also had some bad quarters, like last week, and some disappointing ones throughout his run. Right now though I'd say this is the order for guys WWE have in their arsenal as far as draws go (both full-time and part-time):

1) Rock
2) Lesnar
3) Taker
4) HHH
5) Maybe Ryback and Henry come next

And the first four all aren't there every week, and in Taker's case, he's barely there at all and may not even be for Mania this year. Ryback I explained above, and Henry's in the same boat when I come to think of it. On one hand, he's never really impressed in the quarter ratings on Raw off the top of my head besides against Punk back in April, so that works against him, but it can't be a coincidence that when he won the ECW Title, ratings went from on average a 1.1-1.2 to 1.4-1.5, when he won the World Title, SD started getting over 3,000,000 viewers consistently and went from ratings around 1.7 to 2.0+, and just last week when he returned to SD, SD got it's first over 3,000,000 viewer non-Rock show in forever, since amazingly enough, his last reign (bar a few SD's on the road to WM28 I think, though I don't know for sure). I mean, I don't normally believe one man can influence the rating of the whole show except maybe the part-timers I mentioned above, but in Henry's case, their is sufficient evidence that points to him having an impact. Keep in mind on Raw, he was in a match with Khali, that wasn't longer than 5 minutes. If they ever dedicated a big Raw storyline around him, that would be a true test there.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> When Rock cuts a great promo,it is due to his charisma
> 
> When Rock's promo is bad,he is being held back
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lesnar-Rock-Cena-HHH are the draws
> 
> *I know many won't accept it but HHH is a huge draw too.Almost every single segment he is in gets great gains*


This is true. When 5 million+ tune in to watch your 10min tear promo, that it is pretty impressive. Keep in mind he is also doing these type of gains while not playing to the true strength of his character, that being his true nature as a heel.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> lol at calling Cena the only consistent draw WWE have... his drawing ability has diminished to nothing. Cena's been disappointing more than Punk the last few months, and Punk isn't consistent either. The only full-time guy who has been a consistent draw is Ryback... well for the most part, because while he's had some great gains where he was the one with the most starpower, he's also had some bad quarters, like last week, and some disappointing ones throughout his run. Right now though I'd say this is the order for guys WWE have in their arsenal as far as draws go (both full-time and part-time):
> 
> 1) Rock
> 2) Lesnar
> 3) Taker
> 4) HHH
> 5) Maybe Ryback and Henry come next
> 
> And the first four all aren't there every week, and in Taker's case, he's barely there at all and may not even be for Mania this year. Ryback I explained above, and Henry's in the same boat when I come to think of it. On one hand, he's never really impressed in the quarter ratings on Raw off the top of my head besides against Punk back in April, so that works against him, but it can't be a coincidence that when he won the ECW Title, ratings went from on average a 1.1-1.2 to 1.4-1.5, when he won the World Title, SD started getting over 3,000,000 viewers consistently and went from ratings around 1.7 to 2.0+, and just last week when he returned to SD, SD got it's first over 3,000,000 viewer non-Rock show in forever, since amazingly enough, his last reign (bar a few SD's on the road to WM28 I think, though I don't know for sure). I mean, I don't normally believe one man can influence the rating of the whole show except maybe the part-timers I mentioned above, but in Henry's case, their is sufficient evidence that points to him having an impact. Keep in mind on Raw, he was in a match with Khali, that wasn't longer than 5 minutes. If they ever dedicated a big Raw storyline around him, that would be a true test there.


Cena barely ever loses viewers in his segments. And this is over a 6 year span that ve been tracking the ratings wek by week. He something else.

In fact last year he was drew farrrrrrrrr more viewers then punk.

Punk has started doing well for about 2 months.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

It's not a matter of losing, it's a combination of gaining a low number amounting to a disappointing rating. Cena doesn't do any better than Punk right now. Last week's overrun and the overrun going into the Rumble are prime examples of this. The 10PM segment for this week is another. That's the kind of hit-or-miss Punk was dealing with from February-June last year, though since he's turned heel he's done much better, especially in these last 2 months as you pointed out. 

Anyway, I'm not saying Punk is a bigger draw than Cena was in his peak, or even going back to early 2012, but Cena's drawing-power has diminished so much that his numbers have taken a hit. Hell, one of Punk's most disappointing overruns in the last several months was with Cena himself in a match before SVS, and Cena's had plenty worse since, while that might be Punk's worst (I'd need to check on that).


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Lesnar-Rock-Cena-HHH are the draws


You can add Foley, Flair, Taker and HBK to that list.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Rawk said:


> It's not a matter of losing, it's a combination of gaining a low number amounting to a disappointing rating. Cena doesn't do any better than Punk right now. Last week's overrun and the overrun going into the Rumble are prime examples of this. The 10PM segment for this week is another. That's the kind of hit-or-miss Punk was dealing with from February-June last year, though since he's turned heel he's done much better, especially in these last 2 months as you pointed out.
> 
> Anyway, I'm not saying Punk is a bigger draw than Cena was in his peak, or even going back to early 2012, but Cena's drawing-power has diminished so much that his numbers have taken a hit. Hell, one of Punk's most disappointing overruns in the last several months was with Cena himself in a match before SVS, and Cena's had plenty worse since, while that might be Punk's worst (I'd need to check on that).



Punk has 5 of the worst overruns since 96 lol. com on mate.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Amuroray said:


> Punk has 5 of the worst overruns since 96 lol. com on mate.


And Cena's had THE worst. What overruns are those 5 worst though of Punk's? 

5 worst in 2012 were (based purely on the rating):

1) 12/24: 140,000 (2.3)- Cena/Del Rio
2) 11/26: 592,000 (2.66)- Punk/Kane and Shield/Ryback
3) 10/1: 532,000 (2.7)- Punk-Ziggler/Bryan-Kane
4) 9/24: 428,000 (2.74)- Punk/Cena/Heyman
5) 1/9: 640,000 (2.84)- Cena/Ziggler plus Cena/Kane/Ryder parking lot

Top 5 worst in 2012 (based on gains/losses):

1) 5/7: -105,000 (2.94)- Punk/Bryan-Tensai
2) 12/24: 140,000 (2.3)- Cena/Del Rio (Gain is an estimate)
3) 6/4: 299,000 (3.14)- Cena/Cole
4) 4/9: 301,000 (3.42)- Cena/Otunga w/ Lesnar attacking Cena
5) 4/16: 319,000 (3.42)- Cena/Tensai 

As far as figuring out which were the worst in relationship to the show rating/other factors, meh, too much work for me for right now.


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Glad The Shield segments have done well. :mark:


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Punk proves once AGAIN he is a draw. End of discussion hater.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Good to see some people tuned in to see Chris Jericho vs Daniel Bryan. It was a good match.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

Jericho/Bryan bringing in ratings. Who would've thought that people want to see wrestling on WWE programming? :vince2


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

you can put Hornswoggle or great khali against Rock and there gonna gain viewers.

hell TAKA Michinoku vs. Triple H gained more viewers than punk/heyman twilight story.


----------



## Jeff Hardy Hater

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



The Tony said:


> It's not about who fucking draws and who doesn't. The show is NOT good. The show is WAY TOO LONG. People get bored and go to bed. It's that simple.


Completely correct. Though The Rock does draw a bit, despite being pretty damn boring.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



VINT said:


> You really expect people to sit through a match that includes Khali?
> 
> *He returned only last week and drew more than 3-million viewers on SmackDown* and he's been the focus and the star of last week. Main evented and closed the show with a good rating.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but WWE's aim should be to gain more and more viewers in order for it to have better sales and buyrates. Cena/Rock last year was bringing the fans of 2 eras together plus some new audience watching only because of DWAYNE JOHNSON. But if they actually promote these guys and be like "hey, we have this wrestler named CM Punk and he's pretty good, check us out on RAW 8/7c..." Punk's just an example. In my eyes when Punk was champ they didn't do shit and I consider his reign to be pretty good(mostly a step-up from the recent WWE title reigns.) but he was THE CHAMPION and they chose to put the belt on HIM but yet they didn't promote him properly and failed to display the COMPANY CHAMPION.
> 
> The only reason Cena is popular ALL AROUND THE WORLD is because he's been featured on the show, talked about A LOT on the show, advertised as the main focus point of the show and WWE wants everyone to believe he's this strong FUNNY dude who is the best man on the planet.
> 
> -
> 
> I have a question, why is Henry such a huge draw? I mean this guy's career in WWE has been pathetic and the only noteworthy things they've done with him was turning him heel and having one of the best heel-runs in the WWE. But how did he attract such a large amount of audience in a short period of time?


LOL, no he didn't.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Punk proves once AGAIN he is a draw. End of discussion hater.


Why wasn't he getting these numbers before The Rock came back though?

After The Great One's done with his 97 lbs ass, he'll go back to getting 2.8's, 2.7's, 2.2's with Kane etc.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



wb1899 said:


> Breakdown:
> First quarter did a 3.33 Household rating.
> Mark Henry vs. Great Khali lost 328,000 viewers.
> Chris Jericho vs. Daniel Bryan gained 84,000 viewers.
> John Cena & Sheamus & Ryback vs. 3MB at 9 p.m. gained 267,000 viewers (3.34 HH rating).
> Jack Swagger vs. Zack Ryder lost 253,000 viewers.
> Cody Rhodes vs. The Miz lost 19,000 viewers.
> Brodus Clay & Tensai vs. Primo & Epico lost 242,000 viewers.
> The Shield promo and the brawl with Cena, Sheamus and Ryback gained 392,000 at 10 p.m. (3.25 HH rating).
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Damien Sandow lost 419,000 viewers.
> Kofi Kingston vs. Wade Barrett lost 37,000 viewers.
> Kane vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 186,000 viewers.
> The final segment with the Rock promo and C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman coming out and the final brawl gained 578,000 viewers (3.48 HH rating).


LOL Khali is a joke, no wonder viewers were lost, peeps still know which shit to watch, and what to look out for.


----------



## VINT

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



mblonde09 said:


> LOL, no he didn't.





> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/smackdown/686225-smackdown-draws-over-3-million-viewers.html



Whoops. Guess Khali and Hornswoggle draw the biggest SD rating in a long time.


----------



## IRISHwhip78

*TV Ratings*

These posts pointing out how the WWE Ratings are down as compared to the Additude ERA are so wrong.

Ratings everywhere are down because there are more TV options. Ten years ago you had 60 to 100 channels, twenty years you had 20 to 30 channels, and 40 years ago you had 4 or 5 channels. Now you have 100 to 300 channels. 

The less options mean more people watch the same programming. The more options more people watch different things.

The WWE continues to dominate the Cable Ratings and they share the top spot with Walking Dead and Pawn Stars.

Just two weeks ago the WWE was once again the top program on Cable

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...p-for-the-week-ending-february-3-2013/167894/

Also TV's are in every room in the house which brings down the share the WWE receives. 

Just look at the TV ratings (below) for the SuperBowl they've declined for the most part since 1982. The WWE Ratings will continue to plummet as more channels are added and people like myself use TIVO or HULU to watch programming.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2009/01/18/historical-super-bowl-tv-ratings/11044/


----------



## BreakTheWallsDown.

*Re: TV Ratings*

"WWE Raw topped cable viewership for the week with 5.267 million viewers. Jessie was the top live action scripted program with 3.838 million viewers."

WRESTLING IS REAL?


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*



Hawksea said:


> Why wasn't he getting these numbers before The Rock came back though?
> 
> After The Great One's done with his 97 lbs ass, he'll go back to getting 2.8's, 2.7's, 2.2's with Kane etc.


He weighs 218.


----------



## mvpsuperstar

*Re: TV Ratings*

Viewership is the key statistic. The last 3 Super Bowls have had over 100 million viewers, while 2008-09 SBs were close to 100 mil too 

http://m.prnewswire.com/news-releases/wwf-raw-is-war-reaches-new-heights-on-tnn-76216467.html

http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe-ra...age-3-76-million-viewers-for-tlc-go-home-show

RAW on December 12, 2000 reached 7.2 million viewers compared to 3.76 million for the 12/10/12 edition of RAW. I don't know what the point in this thread was because it is basic knowledge wrestling's popularity has been down since the Attitude Era.


----------



## IRISHwhip78

*Re: TV Ratings*



mvpsuperstar said:


> Viewership is the key statistic. The last 3 Super Bowls have had over 100 million viewers, while 2008-09 SBs were close to 100 mil too
> 
> http://m.prnewswire.com/news-releases/wwf-raw-is-war-reaches-new-heights-on-tnn-76216467.html
> 
> http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe-ra...age-3-76-million-viewers-for-tlc-go-home-show
> 
> RAW on December 12, 2000 reached 7.2 million viewers compared to 3.76 million for the 12/10/12 edition of RAW. I don't know what the point in this thread was because it is basic knowledge wrestling's popularity has been down since the Attitude Era.


Viewership is not the key statistic. 

First how come your comparing the last 3 superbowls (2013, 2012, and 2011) to 2008 & 2009 and you're comparing a 2000 Raw vs. 2012 Raw. The 2000 raw numbers was during the Monday Night Wars.

You do realize RAW's position as the number show on Cable still stands (although Pawn Stars & Walking Dead are coming on strong).

What was RAW's Cable RANKING on December 12, 2000? I'm guessing it was #1 program on cable that week.

What was RAW's cable RANKING on the December 10, 2012 edition of RAW? 

It was the number 1 rated show on cable TV

http://www.thefutoncritic.com/ratin...stmas-eve-with-wwe-raw-788210/cable_20121224/


----------



## mvpsuperstar

*Re: TV Ratings*



IRISHwhip78 said:


> How come your comparing the last 3 superbowls (2013, 2012, and 2011) to 2008 & 2009 and you're comparing a 2000 Raw vs. 2012 Raw. The 2000 raw numbers was during the Monday Night Wars.
> 
> You do realize RAW's position as the number show on Cable still stands (although Pawn Stars & Walking Dead are coming on strong).
> 
> What was RAW's Cable RANKING on December 12, 2000? I'm guessing it was #1 program on cable that week.
> 
> What was RAW's cable RANKING on the December 10, 2012 edition of RAW?
> 
> It was the number 1 rated show on TV
> 
> http://www.thefutoncritic.com/ratin...stmas-eve-with-wwe-raw-788210/cable_20121224/


The first line in your first post claims that it is wrong to say ratings (popularity indicator) are down compared to the AE. You also mentioned how the Super Bowl ratings are down. I just showed you that ratings are only half the story considering WWE's popularity is half of what it used to be and NFL's popularity is still surging to record highs despite the "decline in ratings since 1982." (2009 SB had nearly 12 million more viewers than the 1982 edition)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: TV Ratings*



mvpsuperstar said:


> Viewership is the key statistic. The last 3 Super Bowls have had over 100 million viewers, while 2008-09 SBs were close to 100 mil too
> 
> http://m.prnewswire.com/news-releases/wwf-raw-is-war-reaches-new-heights-on-tnn-76216467.html
> 
> http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe-ra...age-3-76-million-viewers-for-tlc-go-home-show
> 
> RAW on December 12, 2000 reached 7.2 million viewers compared to 3.76 million for the 12/10/12 edition of RAW. I don't know what the point in this thread was because it is basic knowledge wrestling's popularity has been down since the Attitude Era.


This.

It's all about number of viewers and it is drastically down.


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This thread should be renamed to * Official Cable guys thread*


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-...lk-hogan-signing-over-mania-weekend-tons-more



> -- We're told at this point the working plans are for Raw to be three hours at least through SummerSlam.


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Excepting Rating to fly like jimmy snuka.


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-...lk-hogan-signing-over-mania-weekend-tons-more


Good God.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Raw during the post-Wrestlemania lull is going to be hard to sit through.


----------



## Flamyx

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Havent been watching for few months. Is Vickie a face now?


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-...lk-hogan-signing-over-mania-weekend-tons-more


The best part of it is that this article suggests that 3 hours MIGHT die at some point. I really hope they do it because the shows are unbearable to watch. I've only seen two or three shows live and when it feels like it's about to end, I see there's still one hour left.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_68767.shtml



> -- Monday's WWE Raw inched up seven percent in social media activity compared to the Elimination Chamber lead-in show. Raw scored 286,986 in activity, up slightly from 268,154 last week, but below the 2013 average of 311,964.
> 
> On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #1 for the fourth consecutive week, edging out "Catfish: The TV Show" on MTV. Raw also topped all shows on broadcast TV. [ Data Source: Trendrr.TV ]


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Show will go back to 2 hours and ppl will still complain.


----------



## Bel Air

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Soupman Prime said:


> Show will go back to 2 hours and ppl will still complain.


True.


----------



## Mister Hands

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Soupman Prime said:


> Show will go back to 2 hours and ppl will still complain.


Well, a bad 2 hour show is still a bad show. Just a shorter one.


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Mister Hands said:


> Well, a bad 2 hour show is still a bad show. Just a shorter one.



People complained when it was 2 hours.


----------



## dan the marino

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE has a roster that could fit in to 3 hours easily.

But the writers don't, you know, write. Which is why instead of actual storylines, Wade Barrett comes out promoting a movie he's not in followed by playtime with the commentators. And why R-Truth and Kofi and probably Sandow and Rhodes are about to rejoin tag teams, because it's easier tossing midcarders together in tag matches instead of letting them do anything potentially useful.


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Soupman Prime said:


> Show will go back to 2 hours and ppl will still complain.


It could be 10 mins long or 35 hours long. If the show is shit then people are right to complain. The ratings reflect the shows quality and right now it is very poor.


----------



## WWE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

the show could only be 5 minutes long with a damn punk promo and people would still complain.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well, people complained every week when it was 2 hours. 3 hours made it worse, not bad. It's been bad for years.


----------



## Alim

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

As a WWE fan, I hope Raw doesn't go back to 2 hours. As bad as the product may be at times, wrestling is wrestling and I would rather have more of it than less.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Alim said:


> As a WWE fan, I hope Raw doesn't go back to 2 hours. As bad as the product may be at times, wrestling is wrestling and I would rather have more of it than less.


To bad more ppl don't think like that. As a wrestling fan I'd like it to stay 3 hours even If its bad at times. but these days ppl complain about alot, im almost positive if we got Brock vs Orton on Raw unannounced there will be a ton complaining about it being on free TV.


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Alim said:


> As a WWE fan, I hope Raw doesn't go back to 2 hours. As bad as the product may be at times, wrestling is wrestling and I would rather have more of it than less.


Agreed. More wrestling the better for me. If I don't like it I'll watch something else but I grew up watching wrestling so its my shit. I'll find something to like about it.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



bigdog40 said:


> People complained when it was 2 hours.


umm...they didn't complain about how long the show was, they complained about the quality of the show. If they shorten the show by an hour, the quality will obviously improve (less filler, more important worth-watching stuff) Also it will be structured much better, its been a while since WWE has done a well-structured Raw that properly builds up a feud/PPV. Right now it's the most unorganized show it's ever been.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2 hours or 3 hours, it doesn't matter. The problem isn't how long the show is, the problem is the product itself. Even with three hours, we still getting the same product from when it was 2 hours just with more ads, recaps and pointless segments with less wrestling.

The divas still can't get a 5-7 minute match on Raw


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



I-Am-DashingRKO said:


> 2 hours or 3 hours, it doesn't matter. The problem isn't how long the show is, the problem is the product itself.


Amen.

Raw 1000 was three hours and a great show. Nitro used to be three hours and was a great show for some time. In fact, Nitros best ratings were all with three hours shows. And of course, Wrestlemania is four hours and Mania 20 was five hours. And even with much more content because of no breaks, they have been great.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Funny how times change.

There was a time when most of the pay per views were 2 hours, Raw was only one hour and Mania was only 3. Now every other ppv is 3 hours, Mania is 4 hours and Raw is 3 hours. Coming soon...Smackdown moves to 3 hours. I call it.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE Raw and Teen Mom 2 tied for number 1 among Monday's cable programs, with both earning a 1.6 adults 18-49 rating. WWE Raw was up from last week's 1.5 adults 18-49 rating, while Teen Mom 2 was up from last week's 1.1.

WWE Entertainment - 8:00 PM - 4,818,000 - 1.6
WWE Entertainment - 10:00 PM - 4,493,000 - 1.6
WWE Entertainment - 9:00 PM - 4,674,000 - 1.6

tvbythenumbers


----------



## sharkboy22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So when Punk's the champion he's the reason for the crappy ratings but when The Rock's champion, it's because of the overall product?


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



sharkboy22 said:


> So when Punk's the champion he's the reason for the crappy ratings but when The Rock's champion, it's because of the overall product?


Ratings haven't been crappy since the Rock became champion. At least not the way they were when Punk was champion


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Great numbers. Next week's should be interesting to see if it holds up as it's pretty much all on Punk/Cena, which is one of the two biggest matches they could make on the full-time roster. 

Of course if it does well, it's going to be because of Rock. If it does poorly, it's going to be because of Punk and Cena. lol, oh well. We'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

I assume we won't get the breakdown for this week's show until next week. Wonder if the opening or closing segment got over a 4.0.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.30 rating


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh wow, lol, thought the 10PM hour said 4,993,000... :lmao, numbers not as great as I thought in that case, but still very good. 3.30 is still higher than any Raw on the RTWM last year except the night after the Rumble.


----------



## Annihilus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The relevant thing is that ratings are about equal to what they were 2, 3, 4 years ago this same time period. ratings ALWAYS get a bump for the road to WM whether The Rock is appearing or not, because this is the time of year most wrestling fans commit to watching the product most. Rock being champion and making his token appearances is not helping the ratings get above what they were 4 years ago when he wasn't even a part of the company, thats a fact.

The 2nd and 3rd hour are still losing ratings over the first hour, because people suffer wrestling fatigue, nobody really wanst to sit through 3 hours of that every week, let alone 2 hours of smackdown, main event, etc. If you wanted to actually watch every WWE show right now, it would be about the equivalent of watching the entire LOTR trilogy every week. Who wants to do that?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://www.ringsidenews.com/article...wm-xxx-news-on-the-age-of-wwe-039-s-audience/



> - An interesting statistic about the age of WWE's audience is that only 21% of their US audience is under the age of 18, despite the PG product. During the Attitude Era, that number was almost 40%. Back then, 4.5 million kids under age 18 were watching WWE TV each week, compared to only 1.5 million now.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's not that "interesting" first of all, painting 0-18 year olds with the same brush is always clever isn't it? Secondly, the WWE does not cater to teenagers. Teenagers are shit, they never have money. And lastly, the product was bigger and had more mainstream attention then, so the two figures are hardly comparable.


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

the rock bringing in DEM ratingz like always :rock4


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://www.ringsidenews.com/article...wm-xxx-news-on-the-age-of-wwe-039-s-audience/


I would love to know how they got that exact number, cuz I call :bs:


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



uknoww said:


> the rock bringing in DEM ratingz like always :rock4


Nah, it was Wade Barrett movie promo bringing in DEM ratingz :lmao


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Where are the numbers? Can't see the post with real ratings (not counting demo/social media ratings) but general numbers for the three hours.


----------



## Joe E Dangerously

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> It's not that "interesting" first of all, painting 0-18 year olds with the same brush is always clever isn't it? Secondly, the WWE does not cater to teenagers. Teenagers are shit, they never have money. And lastly, the product was bigger and had more mainstream attention then, so the two figures are hardly comparable.


But 7 year olds do have money? Oh let me guess, you're going to tell me their parents have money...but teenagers parents have money too, so go finger yourself, Bo dallas mark.


----------



## Joe E Dangerously

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> Ratings haven't been crappy since the Rock became champion. At least not the way they were when Punk was champion


WWE product always gets better from around december-may, then sucks the rest of the year. The rock just happens to show up near wrestlemania, so don't be fooled.

Plus, punk wasn't even booked as a real champion. Why don't people ever assume Cena was the problem? He was main eventing PPVS vs big show and John Laurinitis. That ain't cm punks fault. Just cause he was champion doesn't mean much since he was never the focus


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*Segment Breakdown*


> Mark Henry vs. Sin Cara lost 332,000 viewers.
> 
> The Miz vs. Antonio Cesaro and the first Zeb Colter & Jack Swagger promo lost 210,000 viewers.
> 
> Backstage with Kane, Daniel Bryan and Randy Orton, and Heyman and Vickie Guerrero lost 194,000 viewers.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Dolph Ziggler at 9 p.m. gained 326,000 viewers to a 3.42 quarter.
> 
> Brodus Clay & Tensai & Naomi vs. Primo & Epico & Rosa Mendes plus the second Swagger & Colter promo lost 226,000 viewers.
> 
> Daniel Bryan vs. Jack Swagger lost 171,000 viewers.
> 
> The Vickie Guerrero, Paul Heyman, Brad Maddox and Vince McMahon in-ring segment gained 200,000 viewers.
> 
> The Shield vs. Chris Jericho & Ryback & Sheamus gained 277,000 at 10 p.m. and did a 3.48 quarter.
> 
> The Damien Sandow vs. Kofi Kingston brawl where the match never got started and return of R-Truth lost 393,000 viewers.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Kane lost 506,000 viewers to a 2.85 quarter.
> 
> And the Rock celebration with Cena and Punk out gained 773,000 viewers to a 3.39 overrun.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kokepepsi said:


> *Segment Breakdown*


Mark Henry lost viewers? No way. This breakdown must be wrong.


----------



## TheGreatBanana

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I blame Sin Cara. There are certain wrestlers the fan base could careless about and end up changing the channel. Sin Cara is just one those boring characters on TV.


----------



## holt_hogan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This could be good news for WWE. I suppose come September the question will be do more viewers watch football on these devices more than they do WWE?



> The Nielsen Media Research company plans to expand how they will measure TV ratings. Their definition of TV viewing will include all devices like iPads, X-Box, Netflix and more.
> 
> The decision to expand beyond traditional TV happened after a meeting last Tuesday by the What Nielsen Measures Committee. They have been meeting for almost a year and the group is made up of representatives for major TV networks, local stations, cable networks, advertising agencies and some big brand advertisers.
> 
> The plan is set to begin by September when the new TV season begins.
> 
> Currently, if you watch RAW on tablet, Xbox or Hulu Plus, Nielsen doesn't have a way to measure that. The new plan will correct that problem and will change how TV ratings are measured in the future.


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Mark Henry vs. Sin Cara lost 332,000 viewers.
> 
> The Miz vs. Antonio Cesaro and the first Zeb Colter & Jack Swagger promo lost 210,000 viewers.
> 
> Backstage with Kane, Daniel Bryan and Randy Orton, and Heyman and Vickie Guerrero lost 194,000 viewers.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Dolph Ziggler at 9 p.m. gained 326,000 viewers to a 3.42 quarter.
> 
> Brodus Clay & Tensai & Naomi vs. Primo & Epico & Rosa Mendes plus the second Swagger & Colter promo lost 226,000 viewers.
> 
> Daniel Bryan vs. Jack Swagger lost 171,000 viewers.
> 
> The Vickie Guerrero, Paul Heyman, Brad Maddox and Vince McMahon in-ring segment gained 200,000 viewers.
> 
> The Shield vs. Chris Jericho & Ryback & Sheamus gained 277,000 at 10 p.m. and did a 3.48 quarter.
> 
> The Damien Sandow vs. Kofi Kingston brawl where the match never got started and return of R-Truth lost 393,000 viewers.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Kane lost 506,000 viewers to a 2.85 quarter.
> 
> *And the Rock celebration with Cena and Punk out gained 773,000 viewers to a 3.39 overrun.*


unk6


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

putting your best 3 stars in the same segmant would naturally cause the segment to do wonders.


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I give Rock credit for last segment since he was the only one advertised.


----------



## xerxesXXI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

wow, look at that segment with kane and rko


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk and rock and cena triple threat at wm will draw, dunno what people are talking about saying it won't draw interest.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Dat breakdown... wasn't expecting it this week due to President's Day, but cool that it's up. 

As far as Rock's segment, which was advertised throughout the show and did a great gain... based on my calculations, it's the weakest of the "start-of-the-hour" segments and actually can be considered a bit disappointing considering not only did they have Rock advertised for it throughout and by the time it was coming up people should've realized by then Rock was going to be there, but Cena and Punk in the overrun didn't help things either. 3.39 is a good rating, gaining 700,000 is a great gain, but being in only the 5th most watched segment of the night is pretty disappointing for a segment completely centered around Rocky. Obviously the opener had the advantage of being the direct fallout from EC and therefore it's understandable if Rock's segment wouldn't beat they, but Henry/Sin Cara, Del Rio/Ziggler, and The Shield match did better than Rock as well.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Alberto Del Rio vs. Dolph Ziggler at 9 p.m. gained 326,000 viewers to a 3.42 quarter. 

:vince


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Punk and rock and cena triple threat at wm will draw, dunno what people are talking about saying it won't draw interest.


Cena Rock II will draw more interest

CM Punk adds nothing to the match


----------



## Padhlala

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Joe E Dangerously said:


> But 7 year olds do have money? Oh let me guess, you're going to tell me their parents have money...but teenagers parents have money too, so go finger yourself, Bo dallas mark.


Teenagers tend to stream the shows/PPVs.

When you watch WWE, you mostly see older guys, and kids/women. There's not many teens there.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Judging by that breakdown, the Cena/Punk segment that kicked things off must have done a really big number. If I'm not mistaken, the best number of the show. Anybody know what the quarter rating was for it?

And the closing segment was a pretty good gain, but not that impressive of a rating. The Cena/Punk segment did better.

lol, Cena and Punk > Rock. DEM CURRENT STARS.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Rawk said:


> Dat breakdown... wasn't expecting it this week due to President's Day, but cool that it's up.
> 
> As far as Rock's segment, which was advertised throughout the show and did a great gain... based on my calculations, it's the weakest of the "start-of-the-hour" segments and actually can be considered a bit disappointing considering not only did they have Rock advertised for it throughout and by the time it was coming up people should've realized by then Rock was going to be there, but Cena and Punk in the overrun didn't help things either. 3.39 is a good rating, gaining 700,000 is a great gain, but being in only the 5th most watched segment of the night is pretty disappointing for a segment completely centered around Rocky. Obviously the opener had the advantage of being the direct fallout from EC and therefore it's understandable if Rock's segment wouldn't beat they, but Henry/Sin Cara, Del Rio/Ziggler, and The Shield match did better than Rock as well.


Rock lost it weeks ago when he did that 300k gain 
Plus he came out to zero pop on monday which I am shocked no one mentioned.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Jericho is legit, can't believe so many people would tune out of Orton.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_SMOKES said:


> Jericho is legit, can't believe so many people would tune out of Orton.


Not surprising when he's had no direction in over a year now. What reason would fans have to stick around for a meaningless match with Kane? Whether he loses or wins, it doesn't make a difference. It's just one of many random, meaningless matches.

Not surprising that ratings have gone up this week. ROCK and Cena deliver as usual even if ROCK is not quite as good as when he first returned.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Not surprising when he's had no direction in over a year now. What reason would fans have to stick around for a meaningless match with Kane? Whether he loses or wins, it doesn't make a difference. It's just one of many random, meaningless matches.
> 
> Not surprising that ratings have gone up this week. ROCK and Cena deliver as usual even if ROCK is not quite as good as when he first returned.


Yeah, true, but it's a considerable amount, and was a considerable amount last week too? I mean, it's like I said, people have truly gotten the viewing ways on point now. Not if it's because of the time the match happened, not a wiz when it comes to ratings, just curious.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Next week we need a segment showing raw footage Swagger's car/drug bust, followed up by some Mark Henry/Zeb Colter promoing, ending with Henry destroying both of them. RATINGZ


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bossdude said:


> *Cena Rock II will draw more interest*
> 
> CM Punk adds nothing to the match


No it won't.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Rock vs CM Punk vs John Cena is more entertaining than Rock vs Cena 2.

Who gives a shit about ratings as along as you are entertained.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nice to see that the match with The Shield did so well. Second most viewed segment after Punk/Cena and hopefully interest in them continues from perhaps being the guys with the smartest booking right now. Surprising to see The Rock's segment being only the fourth most viewed but I guess it's a sign of health for the product when several other segments can compete with him.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Who gives a shit about ratings as along as you are entertained.


Yeah, who cares about ratings, buyrates, tickets and all that other unimportant BS. It never crossed your mind that without those things, WWE would be out of business, thus they could not entertain you to begin with!

Maybe that's why people care about ratings and who draws or doesn't in general. If you don't care whether or not WWE makes any money and can provide you with seven hours of TV each week so that you can be entertained, then go ahead and stay out of the ratings thread.


----------



## Sam Knight

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RAW generally scores strong during opening segments/matches.Had the opening segment been Miz/Shaemus or something like that,still it would've have done 3.7 or whatever it did.Had CM Punk been a part of second quarter he may had gained very few viewers.
And as for Rock's segment being the 4th most watched,Rock is here to save the third hour from being absolutely horrible as it was before he returned.Had Rock's segment been in the first or second hour,it would've been most watched.
And Rock did not receive zero pop,it was drowned by the band music.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> Yeah, who cares about ratings, buyrates, tickets and all that other unimportant BS. It never crossed your mind that without those things, WWE would be out of business, thus they could not entertain you to begin with!
> 
> Maybe that's why people care about ratings and who draws or doesn't in general. If you don't care whether or not WWE makes any money and can provide you with seven hours of TV each week so that you can be entertained, then go ahead and stay out of the ratings thread.


None of that effects you or fans, which I think was his point. It's not on you or any fans to worry about the state of their business. Do you only watch the wrestlers who draw? If your favorite wrestler flopped, would he hate him? If so, I feel sorry for you.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> Yeah, who cares about ratings, buyrates, tickets and all that other unimportant BS. It never crossed your mind that without those things, WWE would be out of business, thus they could not entertain you to begin with!
> 
> Maybe that's why people care about ratings and who draws or doesn't in general. If you don't care whether or not WWE makes any money and can provide you with seven hours of TV each week so that you can be entertained, then go ahead and stay out of the ratings thread.



So you watch Raw based on who draws and not who entertained you?

So you watches movies because it drew money?



The ratings are always between 3-3.5 on the RTWM and between 2.5-3 most of the times.


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Opening was a 3.7

Rock's rating influence will deteriorate the more he is on the show . Just like last year.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> The ratings are always between 3-3.5 on the RTWM and between 2.5-3 most of the times.


 I can't remember 2007-11 doing very bad (getting 2.2-2.8) during the Sept-December time like 2012. I know they were competing against Football but if a big draw was there then I'm sure those numbers would have been increased. Also can we compare what WWE got in ratings this time last year?


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kokepepsi said:


> *Segment Breakdown*


Shield and Jericho gain ratings? Awesome.

And Randy Orton is just so boring to watch that the ratings reflect it. The WWE needs to do something about him quickly.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bossdude said:


> Cena Rock II will draw more interest
> 
> CM Punk adds nothing to the match


Really? Cause everyone in the world knows Cena would go over Rock in 1on1. At least with Punk involved it is just slightly less certain.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk Rock Cena all being in a feud together = ratings and interest. Poor Randy. Shield drawing them numbers!


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow, almost a million gain, the Rock is the shit.

I give credit to him because he was the only one advertised for that segment, Cena joined until the very end of the show.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> So you watch Raw based on who draws and not who entertained you?
> 
> So you watches movies because it drew money?


Let's put it that way. WCW can not entertain us anymore. Why? Because they are out of business. Why? Because they made the wrong business decisions. Decisions, as you said, should not cncerns us. But they do, because if the company fails there are no more TV shows and no more PPVs that can entertain us.

You compared this to movies. That's a great example actually. What happens to a franchise, if the wrong decisions are being made? It is killed off which means no more sequels to entertain us.

Take "fast and Furious" for example. If they killed of DOM, the franchise would be dead. No matter how entertaining his death scene might be, it didn't matter. The franchise would be dead and buried.


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rip Austin316 G.O.A.T


----------



## kiguel182

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The rock drew 700.000 people but the last two segments lost more than 800.000. He couldn't regain the ones lost so overall is bad for the show.

And this doesn't bound well for when he goes back to HollyWood. Punk and Cena are the only full-timers who are not losing viewers. Not a good sign.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> Let's put it that way. WCW can not entertain us anymore. Why? Because they are out of business. Why? Because they made the wrong business decisions. Decisions, as you said, should not cncerns us. But they do, because if the company fails there are no more TV shows and no more PPVs that can entertain us.
> 
> You compared this to movies. That's a great example actually. What happens to a franchise, if the wrong decisions are being made? It is killed off which means no more sequels to entertain us.
> 
> Take "fast and Furious" for example. If they killed of DOM, the franchise would be dead. No matter how entertaining his death scene might be, it didn't matter. The franchise would be dead and buried.


Good post

You are right that decisions shouldn't concern us.But There is a difference between going bankrupt but arguing over whether ratings is 2.8 or 3 is ridiculous.It is quite negligible.

I personally believe even if Rock and Lesnar(the two biggest draws as of now) come back full time,ratings would still not change in the long run.

Some franchises should stay 'dead',IMO.Take Star Wars/Indiana Jones for example.I believed the franchise should have ended with 3 parts.Atleast IJ 4 was ok to me.But the last 3 releases of SW wasn't good at all for me


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> *Let's put it that way. WCW can not entertain us anymore. Why? Because they are out of business. Why? Because they made the wrong business decisions. Decisions, as you said, should not cncerns us. But they do, because if the company fails there are no more TV shows and no more PPVs that can entertain us.*
> 
> You compared this to movies. That's a great example actually. What happens to a franchise, if the wrong decisions are being made? It is killed off which means no more sequels to entertain us.
> 
> Take "fast and Furious" for example. If they killed of DOM, the franchise would be dead. No matter how entertaining his death scene might be, it didn't matter. The franchise would be dead and buried.


I don't know why it must be said that WCW isn't dead because of TV ratings, its dead because its owner merged with a company that didn't want to be in the wrestling business. Had nothing to do with ratings, buyrates etc. Nothing anyone could have done on screen to save it. Nobody hands on with WCW was at fault...even if the on-screen product was shit.



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Good post
> 
> You are right that decisions shouldn't concern us.But There is a difference between going bankrupt but arguing over whether ratings is 2.8 or 3 is ridiculous.It is quite negligible.
> 
> *I personally believe even if Rock and Lesnar(the two biggest draws as of now) come back full time,ratings would still not change in the long run.*
> 
> Some franchises should stay 'dead',IMO.Take Star Wars/Indiana Jones for example.I believed the franchise should have ended with 3 parts.Atleast IJ 4 was ok to me.But the last 3 releases of SW wasn't good at all for me


It won't. Nothing will change. Like I said in a different topic from May-Dec speaks more to how the company operates than Jan-Apr does. A 7.0 (exaggeration) this Monday has no bearing on a Monday in June or September.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



jonoaries said:


> I don't know why it must be said that WCW isn't dead because of TV ratings, its dead because its owner merged with a company that didn't want to be in the wrestling business. Had nothing to do with ratings, buyrates etc. Nothing anyone could have done on screen to save it. Nobody hands on with WCW was at fault...even if the on-screen product was shit.


If WCW didn't lose over 100 million dollar in 2000, said person might not have had a problem with WCW. Even the biggest wrestling mark would shut that company down, if it would cost you that amount of money.

And since PPV is where the most money is being made in a wrestling company, it's safe to say that the abysmal buyrates, after horrible television shows, played a major role in the "death of WCW".


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> If WCW didn't lose over 100 million dollar in 2000, said person might not have had a problem with WCW. Even the biggest wrestling mark would shut that company down, if it would cost you that amount of money.
> 
> And since PPV is where the most money is being made in a wrestling company, it's safe to say that the abysmal buyrates, after horrible television shows, played a major role in the "death of WCW".


They were losing money before it became popular. When Turner bought the company it bled money even back from the Crockett days. You'd think more effort would have been put into maintaining the #2 wrestling company on the planet IF there were people willing to put forth that effort. But they (the executives) didn't care about it at all, and thus he (Turner)was willing to sacrifice it. From a business perspective Turner looked to gain more from sacrificing WCW than he did from keeping it open at any point during its successful period.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_68939.shtml



> -- Big hype for Monday's WWE Raw led to a big jump of 26 percent in social media activity compared to last week's Raw following the Elimination Chamber PPV.
> 
> Raw scored 360,794 in social activity, which beat the 2013 average by 17 percent. Raw also retained its #1 ranking on cable TV for the fifth consecutive week. [ Data Source: Trendrr.TV ]


----------



## LKRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

SO Punk and Cena are the only full timers not losing viewers huh.

You sure did a great job building stars Vince


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Trips/Lesnar and the Punk/Cena match.

Blood does get everyone talking it seems.:steebiej


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Blood and a pile-driver.


----------



## kiguel182

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This should give some confidence to try to use less part-timers as a focal point of the show and trying to focus on the guys that are there all year. Trying to build epic moments with the current stars.

Of course Lesnar helps the numbers but the build up was spent on Cena vs Punk, like it should. Let's see if post-Wrestlemania they can start bulding up the other guys and keep the momentum going.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

H1 - 4.818m
H2 - 4.674m
H3 - 4.493m

1.6 18-49 rating, low again in that demo.


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That 3rd hour still isnt pretty. But considering how mediocre the middle part of Raw was its not really suprising.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...n-stars-catfish-american-pickers-more/170857/

Hour 1 - 4.86 million
Hour 2- 4.70 million
Hour 3- 4.56 million


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> H1 - 4.818m
> H2 - 4.674m
> H3 - 4.493m
> 
> 1.6 18-49 rating, low again in that demo.


Wow another big dip in the third hour ! You would think it would be pretty high with Punk/Cena capping it! What else was in that hour anyway?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...s-more/170857/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.86 million
> Hour 2- 4.70 million
> Hour 3- 4.56 million


A slight bit more than last week's pound for pound in each hour. The hook of Punk/Cena and Heyman/Vince from last week seems to have worked, not to mention Lesnar appearing certainly helped things, and HHH's surprise return probably added a bit on top of that. I also believe the possibility of Taker returning with the video on the youtube page, both during the opener all the way to the closer helped keep things afloat. At least they're consistent and heading in the right direction (for now).


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> *H1 - 4.818m*
> H2 - 4.674m
> H3 - 4.493m
> 
> 1.6 18-49 rating, low again in that demo.


:brock :HHH :vince3 :heyman


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just fyi, DMN's numbers are from last week. JY57 has this week's. 

Adults 18-49 this week got:

1.8 for 10:00
1.7 for 8:00 and 9:00.


----------



## Mqwar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> H1 - 4.818m
> H2 - 4.674m
> H3 - 4.493m
> 
> 1.6 18-49 rating, low again in that demo.


These are last week's numbers? 

This week 18-49 rating is 1.8, up from 1.7 last week.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's really confusing, I posted those 3 numbers as soon as the article was posted via their Twitter. Clearly it was edited since.


----------



## Awesome22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I was expecting a much better viewership to be honest.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The RTWM bringing in them ratings. :lol

You mean to tell me people aren't interested in watching the "ultimate underdog" John Cena overcome the odds in year 9 of his run? I'm shocked.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> The RTWM bringing in them ratings. :lol
> 
> You mean to tell me people aren't interested in watching the "ultimate underdog" John Cena overcome the odds in year 9 of his run? I'm shocked.


Wwe and cena marks will somehow find a way to blame miz or punk or someone else


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> H1 - 4.818m
> H2 - 4.674m
> H3 - *4.493m*
> 
> 1.6 18-49 rating, low again in that demo.


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wrestling matches don't draw tv ratings.


----------



## Awesome22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


>


:lmao


----------



## Huganomics

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Brock unadvertised gets higher ratings than Rock advertised.

DA RATINGS GOAT :brock > :rock3


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



BANKSY said:


> Wrestling matches don't draw tv ratings.


What a coincidence, neither does WWE.


----------



## AntUK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



BANKSY said:


> Wrestling matches don't draw tv ratings.


Its hour 3, in every single week of raw 3 hours bar one i believe hour 3 has had the worst viewers, and thats with the rock/Heyman/Cena and punk being exclusively in those places. People just dont want to sit through 3 hours of Raw.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*3.46* rating.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.46 rating up 5 % from 3.30 last week


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

ratings improved alot since punk lost the belt


----------



## Padhlala

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings were good. Weird that Punk vs Cena was hyped, yet 3 hour got the lowest viewing.

Next week will be low, I'm guessing that casuals are tuning in to see the rock, but aren't getting him. Although The good star to this weeks raw must have kept a lot of people viewing (HHH/Lesnar).


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Woah Rock is such a draw amirite?


----------



## Chismo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


>


WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK?!

:lmao


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lesnar bringing more ratings than The Rock. :brock


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good to see the show pulling a half decent rating. It was pretty solid!


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> Lesnar bringing more ratings than The Rock. :brock


Lesnar is a bigger draw than rocky


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


>


What the fuck IS that thing? :lmao

3.46 is impressive. The opener should be well into 5 million viewers based on that and close to a 3.7 or 3.8 I think. There's your hook for next week along with the WWE title match finally being decided. Is Rock set to be on the show next week? Not like it matters when they have DA GOATS to carry DA RATINGZ.

:brock :HHH :vince3 :heyman

Throw on :cena2 :taker :rock4 and they should be set for some BIG NUMBAHS.

unk3


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> What the fuck IS that thing? :lmao
> 
> 3.46 is impressive. The opener should be well into 5 million viewers based on that and close to a 3.7 or 3.8 I think. There's your hook for next week along with the WWE title match finally being decided. Is Rock set to be on the show next week? Not like it matters when they have DA GOATS to carry DA RATINGZ.
> 
> :brock :HHH :vince3 :heyman
> 
> Throw on :cena2 :taker :rock4 and they should be set for some BIG NUMBAHS.
> 
> unk3


The Rock is there next week. But Brock is not.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> The Rock is there next week. But Brock is not.


Isn't the Raw before WM the only time all the big guns are advertised?

That show should do a huge number.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No Brock? Fuck sake. This is what gets annoying. They have all this momentum from yesterday and won't be able to capitalise on it because half the match isn't there. Incoming GAME promo then. I sincerely hope Brock is scheduled to appear the week after, not only for my own personal enjoyment but for the program as a whole. The Summerslam feud suffered badly as a result of him hardly ever being there. I'm not completely sold on round 2 just yet but Brock not appearing certainly isn't going to help things. I guess they're taking things in turns. Rock/Cena one week, HHH/Brock the next with all these staggered appearances.


----------



## Gang

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


>


:lmao


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


>


:HHH2


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Huganomics said:


> Brock unadvertised gets higher ratings than Rock advertised.
> 
> DA RATINGS GOAT :brock > :rock3



Brock is more entertaining than Rock nowdays



BANKSY said:


> Wrestling matches don't draw tv ratings.


Highest Rated Tv Segment:Austin vs Undertaker according to Meltzer

According to WWE:This is Your Life

WWE wants people to believeromos>Matches



uknoww said:


> ratings improved alot since punk lost the belt


Rock/Brock can lose the belt and ratings would still improve on the RTWM




Bryan D. said:


> Lesnar bringing more ratings than The Rock. :brock


Because BORK LESNAR brings legitimacy back to the WWE


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour one: Lesnar and Punk segments.

The Paul Heyman Guys do it again. GODS.


----------



## Ray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.46 is a solid rating. Good for WWE.


----------



## MoveMent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



uknoww said:


> ratings improved alot since punk lost the belt


Amazing that Punk losing the belt can make people care about the Road to Wrestlemania


----------



## fabi1982

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE Entertainment 10:00 PM	4.56
WWE Entertainment 9:00 PM 4.70
WWE Entertainment 8:00 PM 4.86

Tvbythenumbers

Edit: already posted, must have missed it...anyways, good ratings especially for the first two hours, really interested in the breakdown.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

A18-49 ratings
8:00: 1.71
9:00: 1.71
10:00: 1.75

2013 average
8:00: 1.60
9:00: 1.63
10:00: 1.67


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> No Brock? Fuck sake. This is what gets annoying. They have all this momentum from yesterday and won't be able to capitalise on it because half the match isn't there. Incoming GAME promo then. I sincerely hope Brock is scheduled to appear the week after, not only for my own personal enjoyment but for the program as a whole. The Summerslam feud suffered badly as a result of him hardly ever being there. I'm not completely sold on round 2 just yet but Brock not appearing certainly isn't going to help things. I guess they're taking things in turns. Rock/Cena one week, HHH/Brock the next with all these staggered appearances.


Appearances for Rock and Lesnar leading up to WM

3/4/13 - Rock advertised, no Lesnar
3/11/13 - Lesnar advertised, no Rock
3/18/13 - Lesnar advertised, no Rock
3/25/13 - Rock advertised, no Lesnar
4/01/13 - Rock advertised, Lesnar advertised

I guess it's to spread out the drawing power leading up to WM, with WWE going all out for the go-home show.


----------



## Padhlala

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Brock is more entertaining than Rock nowdays





austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Because BORK LESNAR brings legitimacy back to the WWE


More people started to watch Raw because Rock became champion, but are staying for Lesnar when Rock isn't there. If you see a good show, you wanna see it again next week. Opening segments can show a bit of what people thought about the previous week's show, as well as the build up/advertising for the current weeks.




austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Highest Rated Tv Segment:Austin vs Undertaker according to Meltzer
> 
> According to WWE:This is Your Life
> 
> WWE wants people to believeromos>Matches


Or Meltzer wants you to believe matches>Promos




austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Because BORK LESNAR brings legitimacy back to the WWE


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Highest Rated Tv Segment:Austin vs Undertaker according to Meltzer
> 
> According to WWE:This is Your Life
> 
> WWE wants people to believeromos>Matches



They are both right

UT v Austin *overrun* drew the highest rating ever

but if you look at the entire segment it was This is Your Life


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


>


:lol


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

SEGMENT BREAKDOWN


> The show opened strong with the Vince McMahon segment with Paul Heyman, Brock Lesnar and HHH doing a 3.6 quarter.
> 
> We only have estimates on the gains and losses.
> 
> Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler lost about 285,000 viewers.
> 
> The C.M. Punk promo and trailer for “The Call” gained about 420,000 viewers which is huge for that time slot.
> 
> Mark Henry vs. Great Khali lost about 285,000 viewers.
> 
> The 9 p.m. in-ring with Jack Swagger, Zeb Colter and Alberto Del Rio gained about 285,000 viewers and did a strong 3.7 quarter.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Antonio Cesaro lost about 430,000 viewers.
> 
> R-Truth vs. Cody Rhodes stayed even.
> 
> Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. Prime Time Players with Bryan blindfolded and Kane having his hand tied behind his back lost another 285,000 viewers.
> 
> The Shield promo at 10 p.m. with Randy Orton and Sheamus involved gained about 285,000 viewers to a 3.4.
> 
> Jack Swagger vs. The Miz was the big drop losing 450,000 viewers.
> 
> The John Cena promo gained 140,000 viewers.
> 
> And John Cena vs. C.M. Punk gained about 1,002,000 viewers and finished with a 3.9 overrun. That’s a huge success.


Yeah Wrestling>Promos


----------



## checkcola

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow. Good for Cena and Punk.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

their 3 main story lines having the highest rating slots of the show is no shock;.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The C.M. Punk promo and trailer for “The Call” gained about *420,000* viewers which is huge for that time slot.
> 
> And John Cena vs. C.M. Punk gained about *1,002,000* viewers and finished with a 3.9 overrun. That’s a huge success.


Dat Punk. Dat Cena. :vince2


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DwayneAustin said:


> Dat Punk. Dat Cena. :vince2


But you're forgetting that PUNK IZ DA RATINGZ KILLA... he's also single-handedly killing the business, nearly bankrupted the company, only has 157 fans, and nobody wants to watch his 97lb Pizza-Hut, delivering arse, remember?
unk2


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It would be pretty bad if the main event didn't get a boost, considering it determined the main event of Mania.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> It would be pretty bad if the main event didn't get a boost, considering it determined the main event of Mania.


last time Cena/Punk had a main event match on RAW they only did a 2.6.

So I would think With this with higher stakes and a shot to face the WWE Champion @ Mania in the Main Event., its only natural it did really good. And it did good for the E


----------



## Clique

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> last time Cena/Punk had a main event match on RAW they only did a 2.6.
> 
> So I would think With this with higher stakes and a shot to face the WWE Champion @ Mania in the Main Event., its only natural it did really good. And it did good for the E


This also may be the momentum to really boost the interest in the audience buying Mania in huge numbers this year. Not that Rock/Cena did great TV ratings last year and still achieved the most bought PPV in wrestling history, but this is an opportunity to ride high off such a highly viewed main event.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Big time TV match, damn people's interest was insane for that one. Nice. Orton lost another significant amount. Dude is definitely in need of some direction. It's fairly obvious that anybody who has the hype and the ME spot is gonna gain the most, but that gain was pretty damn huge so props to the 2 for putting on an amazing ME match. (Y)


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM DRAW.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Holy shit at Punk gaining that much in a random segment, doing even better than the Lesnar/HHH segment. I dare anybody to talk shit now. unk2

GOD.

The main event also did fucking great. I truly hope they don't fuck up Punk between now and Wrestlemania but because he's beginning a program with Undertaker, I don't think there's any other outcome. Shame. The rest of the breakdown isn't much to discuss, really.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LOL people probably thought the match was happening at that point. JK Punk went in on RAW drawing so hard he can become an artist.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Holy shit at Punk vs Cena. My reaction was literally this










It proves that a heavily hyped match, even a nearly 30 minutes long one can draw HUGE numbers and keep the viewers interested throught the whole time without changing channels. It was one of the best TV matches of the year so far (can't recall any better ones from the top of my head) and bar Cenas shortcommings in the selling department it was high quality material and fully deserves its number. Of course it also has something to do with Cena and Punk, but if at least half the matches got some build up they wouldn't get those horrid numbers as often.

Also great numbers for Lesnar, Punks promo, and surprisingly enough the heavily political Swagger/Del Rio storyline seems to be pretty well received, thanks to Zed Coulter, although I don't care much about it at all (no US resident here). 

Henry doesn't draw at all atm, I think fans are disagreeing with him beeing heel. He got a HUGE pop when he returned, a decent one the week after and ever since he stopped getting any kind of reaction. I think the casual fans want him back as face, preferably badass face.

Orton is doing terrible numbers week after week. Can't believe a 9 time World Champion is tanking so bad in the ratings, he should have never been in irrelevant storylines for that long, killed all of his drawing power off.


----------



## takerfan88

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It’s nice to see a match of that caliber draw that number. It’ll be interesting if people come back next week to see the official start to Rock/Cena build up and presumably Punk/Taker.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kokepepsi said:


> SEGMENT BREAKDOWN
> 
> 
> Yeah Wrestling>Promos


John Cena and CM Punk draw.

I have always said John Cena is a great draw in today's time.Yet people gave him zero credit to him for WM 27 and 28 PPV numbers.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock no shows, ratings go up. Go figure.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:brock unk :cena2



Loudness said:


> Henry doesn't draw at all atm, I think fans are disagreeing with him beeing heel. He got a HUGE pop when he returned, a decent one the week after and ever since he stopped getting any kind of reaction. I think the casual fans want him back as face, preferably badass face.


Interesting you bring this up. I think Mark Henry as a babyface, while keeping the exact same character, would get over huge with the fans. He's also directionless right now on this Road to Wrestlemania, and putting a babyface Henry in a program with heel Big Show wouldn't be too bad. They have good chemistry with each other and it'd give them something to do for Wrestlemania. Play their history into the program if it is.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Rock no shows, ratings go up. Go figure.


"But the casuals thought he would be there because hes the Champion"


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Stad said:


> "But the casuals thought he would be there because hes the Champion"


But when the ratings were down-The Rock wasn't advertised so ratings went down


Rock draws.No one is going to dispute it.But stop exaggerating


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The show opened strong with the Vince McMahon segment with Paul Heyman, Brock Lesnar and HHH doing a 3.6 quarter. We only have estimates on the gains and losses. Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler lost about 285,000 viewers. The C.M. Punk promo and trailer for “The Call” gained about 420,000 viewers which is huge for that time slot. Mark Henry vs. Great Khali lost about 285,000 viewers. The 9 p.m. in-ring with Jack Swagger, Zeb Colter and Alberto Del Rio gained about 285,000 viewers and did a strong 3.7 quarter. Randy Orton vs. Antonio Cesaro lost about 430,000 viewers. R-Truth vs. Cody Rhodes stayed even. Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. Prime Time Players with Bryan blindfolded and Kane having his hand tied behind his back lost another 285,000 viewers. The Shield promo at 10 p.m. with Randy Orton and Sheamus involved gained about 285,000 viewers to a 3.4. Jack Swagger vs. The Miz was the big drop losing 450,000 viewers. The John Cena promo gained 140,000 viewers. And John Cena vs. C.M. Punk gained about 1,002,000 viewers and finished with a 3.9 overrun. That’s a huge success.


When it all comes down to it. People want too see wrestling matches with outcomes that matter then random "entertainment" skits.

CM Punk promo during random quarter doing better then the opening segment involving Vince, HHH and Lesnar. GOD.


----------



## kiguel182

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

When WWE makes an awesome match with their two biggest full timers and high stakes people will show up, go figures...

And people still doubt that a triple-threat will draw.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk feuding with rock gave him that much needed exposure to a much wider audience. When cena was up and coming he was having feuds with big draws and the best like kurt angle y2j hbk hhh edge and so on. Punk sadly for him the only one that was a big star that he feuded with was cena, and for a bit hhh. But now his feud with rock has helped elevate punk. For that case I thank rocky.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The John Cena promo gained 140,000 viewers. And John Cena vs. C.M. Punk gained about 1,002,000 viewers and finished with a 3.9 overrun. That’s a huge success.

wow. Cena and punk are bringing it.

Cena always gains but punk is doing good recently.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And CM Punk is not a draw, they said.


----------



## Twisted14

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Punk feuding with rock gave him that much needed exposure to a much wider audience. When cena was up and coming he was having feuds with big draws and the best like kurt angle y2j hbk hhh edge and so on. Punk sadly for him the only one that was a big star that he feuded with was cena, and for a bit hhh. But now his feud with rock has helped elevate punk. For that case I thank rocky.


Totally agree with this. I'm a Punk fan, but I like The Rock too. Rock's return has certainly added a lot of value to Punk's name, as well as Cena's. People always complain about him being in the spotlight, but it's not for no reason. It's to elevate the current superstars, and it has worked pretty well so far.

Great to see the match pull in so many viewers. The build started from the week before and was heavily promoted during both Raw episodes. The stakes were also high, it's no surprise that the segment would draw well, though I didn't expect it to do THAT well.

Also, people have complained that they have seen enough of Punk vs. Cena. I know I haven't yet, and I don't think viewers have either. Either way it was an excellent and satisfying match to end their rivalry, for now at least. I won't need to see another match from them for a while.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk's solo promo drew more than the opening segment with Heyman, Vince, Lesnar and HHH? Isolated incidents don't mean that much but since his segments have been among the highest rated for a long time it shows that people have caught on to the quality he brings, something that likely escalated when he feuded with The Rock. Hopefully WWE has the presence of mind to capitalize further on it with good booking.

Also great to see that Punk vs Cena did so great, and both wrestlers certainly did what they could to deserve it.

SHIELD also did well with their promo, even better than Cena's, which is promising. It shows that good booking does a lot (although there's of course tons of talent in that group as well).

Ratings mean nothing to what I like but it's nice to see that things I like can be popular, which helps make those things more high profile.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Massive gains for Punk. Wow.

Maybe I was wrong. Maybe Rock just feuding with him was enough of a rub. 

Good to see such a huge gain for the main event. Cena and Punk really showed why they are the top 2 guys.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Gained a million!?

I'm not a regular ratings follower but that sounds like a massive gain in this day and age for wrestling?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> Gained a million!?
> 
> I'm not a regular ratings follower but that sounds like a massive gain in this day and age for wrestling?


sometimes it happens. I remember it happened a couple times last Fall


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> sometimes it happens. I remember it happened a couple times last Fall


Is it rare nowadays though?

Do you remember what happened last fall or who it involved. I imagine Raw 1000 gained a million on a section of the show?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> Is it rare nowadays though?
> 
> Do you remember what happened last fall or who it involved. I imagine Raw 1000 gained a million on a section of the show?


*Vince McMahon vs. CM Punk in the main event gained 1,233,000 viewers for a 3.46 overrun rating. This is the best growth segment in a long time.* (10/10)

was one of them. I can't remember what exactly else, but I do remember a few more


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I remember that match, night Punk punched a fan if I remember correctly. Damn, if that was the last time it happened, that is unbelievable gains from Punk.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

People want to watch good matches with characters they are hooked to. A lot was at stake and it featured two of their biggest full time guys. The Taker hype helped beforehand but the majority was down to people genuinely wanting to see the good bout.


They gave something for people to care about, and BAM


As for Rock helping Punk. It really has. Punk has shined working with Rock. He got to showcase himself In the ring and on the stick, even greater. He didn't go voer in the feud but he didnt need to. Its more to it than that. Ive seen some folks get hooked to the guy, even some sympathizing with him. Good stuff.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Gotta give it to Punk and Cena. They put on a clinic, and are rewarded as such. THIS is the direction that wrestling should move to, not idiotic segments.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM DRAW been drawing like a 4 year old for a couple months now


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk can't draw on his own, so he's decided to bring GOD with him unk2


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



YoungGun_UK said:


> Punk can't draw on his own, so he's decided to bring GOD with him unk2


Maybe he actually prayed to God to become a draw and got his prayer granted?

:shock


Good for him though. Now him and Cena can start to carry their own Era.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Looks like Punk's feud with Rock really has helped him. Second segment on his own he's done well in, not to mention the hyped match with Cena which did a huge gain and a huge rating. Now the match did have a couple of things going for it. First of all it was a very hyped match with huge implications on the Wrestlemania main event that casuals should be interested in watching (and they were). Second thing and something that may not be as obvious, but with the Taker video on WWE's youtube page and tweets regarding Taker, fans knew Taker could very well appear on Raw. When he didn't for the opening segment after Lesnar came out (which I'm sure he helped out that a bit as well), most probably figured he'd be back to cost Punk the match or appear after the match. 

Next week must be returned. I'm not sure they can really push it back anymore if they want to do some proper build-up for him and Punk.

That all being said, the fact it gained a million and ended up at a 3.9 rating is incredible and shows not only that Punk has possibly become a proven draw, but Cena's drawing power may not have diminished as much as I thought. Of course we won't really know until after Wrestlemania is over in both cases.

On Vince/Heyman and Lesnar/HHH, it was a very good number in general, it's pretty disappointing when you consider who was in it, how many other segments did better than it, the fact Taker's return was still a possibility until Trips came out, and with the 8PM hour number we saw. You would've thought they'd do at the very least a 3.8 rating. There was plenty of time during the brawl where people could've tuned in if they were interested by word of mouth/internet, but the number didn't get quite as high as one would expect. Nevertheless, a 3.6 opener is far from bad, but just not what I'd expect when you have 4 draws in there (one of which being a return).


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No surprise on the main event gaining huge. Cena specially has proven to draw huge in the past and the stakes were high on this one as the winner would face The ROCK.


----------



## Clique

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> sometimes it happens. I remember it happened a couple times last Fall


Didn't Taker/HHH/Shawn hit a million a couple times in the 2011 and 2012 angle?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Last fall Punk and Ziggler vs. Ryback and Cena tag did gain 1,084,000 to a 3.22 rating. Punk vs. Sheamus gained 1,058,000 viewers to a 2.89 rating.

Here are all the segments that gained 1,000,000+ viewers:

(Overrun)
4/2: 1,036,000 (3.9)- Lesnar Return, attacking Cena
7/30: 1,181,000 (3.86)- Cena vs. Show w/ Punk on commentary
10/8: 1,233,000 (3.46)- Punk/McMahon
10/22: 1,058,000 (2.89)- Punk vs. Sheamus Lumberjack match
11/5: 1,084,000 (3.22)- Punk and Ziggler/Cena and Ryback

(10PM)
2/20: 1,122,000 (3.85)- Taker/HHH
5/14: 1,033,000 (3.37)- Kane vs. Show with Laurinaitis firing Show

And Taker/HBK/HHH 3/28/2011 promo (before WM27) gained 1,346,000 viewers, making the rating go from 3.5 to 4.5 in the Males 18-49 demographic and from 4.5 to 5.4 in the teenagers demo.

On that same show though, Rock/Cena/Miz out-did that, gained 1,539,000.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



YoungGun_UK said:


> Punk can't draw on his own, so he's decided to bring GOD with him unk2


Austin wasn't there.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Amuroray said:


> The John Cena promo gained 140,000 viewers. And John Cena vs. C.M. Punk gained about 1,002,000 viewers and finished with a 3.9 overrun. That’s a huge success.
> 
> wow. Cena and punk are bringing it.
> 
> Cena always gains but punk is doing good recently.


Great to see you giving credit where it's due! It fresh to see, and, hopefully, other posters like Hawksea come around as well. Those gains you mentioned and Punk's solo promo in the weird timeslot getting a better rating then the opening segment with HHH/Lesnar/Vince/Heyman is insane, and really is a testament to how much working with the Rock has helped Punk's star power. Like that one poster mentioned, the way to make Punk draw all along was to give him big stars to work with and build him up instead of guys lower of the totem pole then him. WWE should sign Sting, Angle, Steiner, and Goldberg when they are all available and have them work with Punk as well to further cement him as a megastar so he can then put over the likes of Bryan, Cesaro, Sandow, Ambrose, Wyatt, Ohno, etc..


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Great to see you giving credit where it's due! It fresh to see, and, hopefully, other posters like Hawksea come around as well. Those gains you mentioned and Punk's solo promo in the weird timeslot getting a better rating then the opening segment with HHH/Lesnar/Vince/Heyman is insane, and really is a testament to how much working with the Rock has helped Punk's star power. Like that one poster mentioned, the way to make Punk draw all along was to give him big stars to work with and build him up instead of guys lower of the totem pole then him. WWE should sign Sting, Angle, Steiner, and Goldberg when they are all available and have them work with Punk as well to further cement him as a megastar so he can then put over the likes of Bryan, Cesaro, Sandow, Ambrose, Wyatt, Ohno, etc..


Exactly, I it proves the fact that wrestling huge stars like The Rock is enough to make other guys bigger stars than ever before, even when losing twice like Punk did. He had long, competitive matches (actually dominated most of them) and since Rock doesn't have the reputation of getting beatdown 85% of the time like Cena until the finish it (where he overcomes the odds and no-sells everything and smiles) it isn't predictable and it actually matters when you're dominating him throughout the match. 

On top of that, the match got a lot of build up promo-wise so people are now used to seeing Punk with top-tier legends. Add to that that the Rock added a huge ratings boost since he came in (more than half a million per episode IIRC, maybe even 750k) there's certainly a decent sum of those fans that are now also interested in what Punk is going to do. The match with Cena proves that, Cena wouldn't get such numbers with any other guy (except The Rock or Lesnar aka superstars).

Angle won't return to WWE unless maybe for one WM payday I believe, only to be inducted in their HOF, if at all so he's probably the least likely of the names you mentioned to feud with Punk. Goldberg sounds like a good choice with heel Punk, but Goldberg sounds like those kind of guys that would only return if he goes over, he's set for life and doesn't really seem like the guy that cares about putting over the current generations wrestlers. If he did though it would be great. Steiner is available, he's doing nothing atm. He can't wrestle well anymore but I don't care (and Punk is good enough to carry him anyway), I'd mark out with the force of 141 2/3 torpedos, I'd probably need my blood pressure checked if I'd seen those two guys promo/shoot with each other (no scripts and goodbye sweet PG).


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Jackswaggers new gimmick is the hottest thing in the wwe atm and drew well.

Swagger/del rio feud is the best thing going atm.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


> Exactly, I it proves the fact that wrestling huge stars like The Rock is enough to make other guys bigger stars than ever before, even when losing twice like Punk did. He had long, competitive matches (actually dominated most of them) and since Rock doesn't have the reputation of getting beatdown 85% of the time like Cena until the finish it (where he overcomes the odds and no-sells everything and smiles) it isn't predictable and it actually matters when you're dominating him throughout the match.
> 
> On top of that, the match got a lot of build up promo-wise so people are now used to seeing Punk with top-tier legends. Add to that that the Rock added a huge ratings boost since he came in (more than half a million per episode IIRC, maybe even 750k) there's certainly a decent sum of those fans that are now also interested in what Punk is going to do. The match with Cena proves that, Cena wouldn't get such numbers with any other guy (except The Rock or Lesnar aka superstars).
> 
> Angle won't return to WWE unless maybe for one WM payday I believe, only to be inducted in their HOF, if at all so he's probably the least likely of the names you mentioned to feud with Punk. Goldberg sounds like a good choice with heel Punk, but Goldberg sounds like those kind of guys that would only return if he goes over, he's set for life and doesn't really seem like the guy that cares about putting over the current generations wrestlers. If he did though it would be great. Steiner is available, he's doing nothing atm. He can't wrestle well anymore but I don't care (and Punk is good enough to carry him anyway), I'd mark out with the force of 141 2/3 torpedos, I'd probably need my blood pressure checked if I'd seen those two guys promo/shoot with each other (no scripts and goodbye sweet PG).


As always great post! I agree with it all and laughed at your prediction for how a Steiner/Punk feud would go which would be insanely entertaining and hilarious if it were ever to happen lol! Steiner is freakin amazing when shooting and it would be funny to see what he'd come up with to insult Punk! I understand the chances of getting guys like Sting and Angle to sign will be difficult but I have read comments from both saying they would like to be in the wwe/wwe again one day! Steiner would be easy to bring and you're probably right about Goldberg, but might I suggest a replacement?

How about wwe bring back Batista and have him put over Punk at some point in his run which could be very possible since they are good buddies!


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> As always great post! I agree with it all and laughed at your prediction for how a Steiner/Punk feud would go which would be insanely entertaining and hilarious if it were ever to happen lol! Steiner is freakin amazing when shooting and it would be funny to see what he'd come up with to insult Punk! I understand the chances of getting guys like Sting and Angle to sign will be difficult but I have read comments from both saying they would like to be in the wwe/wwe again one day! Steiner would be easy to bring and you're probably right about Goldberg, but might I suggest a replacement?
> 
> How about wwe bring back Batista and have him put over Punk at some point in his run which could be very possible since they are good buddies!


Steiner: "You're not big enough, man enough to go one on one with me. If you need proof, ask your girlfriend Lita. While you were wrapping yourself in your pyjama, reading comic books from toys r us and tweeting your status arguing with internet dweebs, where do you think she was sleeping? She was sleeping on the largest arms in the world. And she doesn't have to wait for the earth to rotate on a 47° axis so the stars can hit the sky and create an equinox, so she can see the big differ between you and me. Cm Toothpick, I'm gonna crush you like the skinny nerd you are." 

Punk: "How funny. You're right I may be a toothpick, but guess what, at least I can clean my ass myself, and am not a walking libido that makes a drunk Roddy Piper sound coherent. I am the Best in The World. I am the best in the ring, on the microphone, even on commentary! The only thing you're better at than me is pissing Triple H off. You're better at it than Ric Flair was when he joined TNA. You're better at it than Billy Gunn when he did a shoot on him. I'm not sure if you're better than Ultimate Warrior though, he was pretty good at pissing Triple H off when he buried him at the greatest stage of em all. I am going to kick your ass, you grumpy old man."

:mark: :mark: :mark:

As far as Batista, again not sure. He said he got tired of the PG direction and he's in MMA right now. I think he would return if he got right back into ME position (he'd probably sign a full-time contract) and probably as a babyface so they would definitely face each other down the line. Also, just like Goldberg he's very well off so he can be pretty picky about his status, but I'm sure that if he ever returned that Punk vs Batista would happen. But honestly, he only needs a few guys out of all those mentioned to feud, the ratings are proof that he's doing well (and the fact that he gets CM Punk instead of Cena sucks chant during his match, which prove his overness in the audience), but I definitely want to see him going over against some established talent after WM, since he's obviously losing to Taker so he needs a win against a big name to get his momentum back. Would be a mistake to not make use of his rising starpower and go back to the same old where Cena is the only guy allowed to be in major storylines.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No thanks to Steiner, dudes last run here was awful. Steiner is overrated anyway, some of the same people who brag about his shoots put down Punk for doing a shoot here and there to get over. Nice double standard.

Angle/Punk seems likely to me, that would make a great match. I doubt Angle cares if he wins or loses, just wants the best match on the card.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> No thanks to Steiner, dudes last run here was awful. Steiner is overrated anyway, some of the same people who brag about his shoots put down Punk for doing a shoot here and there to get over. Nice double standard.
> 
> Angle/Punk seems likely to me, that would make a great match. I doubt Angle cares if he wins or loses, just wants the best match on the card.


He was injured + he got scripted promos handed to him which goes totally against his Big Poppa Pump character. That's like turning Rock, Undertaker and Austin back to Rocky Maivia, Mean Mark and The Ringmaster, having them working matches with injuries and saying they're overrated, he only got there to be buried like most ex-WCW guys. His WCW and TNA run were awesome, the promos between Punk and him would be amazingly entertaining. And he would put Punk over unlike Kevin Nash, who did nothing for him.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM Punk is ratings cancer! Everyone knows that it was the trailer for 'The Call' that drew those numbers!

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

He draws. Deal with it.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

All this investment into Punk is starting to pay off. NOW Punk marks are beginning to have a leg to stand on when it comes to him drawing. Last year? Nope. 2011? Nope. He was WAY too inconsistent and couldn't do anything impressive without the help of a bigger star in the same segment to help. 2013? Well, I think it's obvious what has happened here. The Rock feud exposed Punk to a new audience who wouldn't have seen him before and so far, they seem to be interested. NOW the argument can be made that it has paid off and is working. He went out there on his own, without the benefit of a hot timeslot and delivered the goods. You don't always have to go over to get put over. It will be interesting to see if this keeps up. 

The success of the main event is obvious. You raise the stakes and I mean _really _raise the stakes, people are going to watch. It also doesn't hurt to tease an Undertaker appearance right before the match begins either. That's a fantastic number and they should be very pleased with that. 

The Swagger angle also performs well and is drawing in the numbers. That's great for a WHC feud in 2013. The title actually seems halfway important for a change. Amazing what giving a little bit of spotlight and focus can do for something, eh?

The opener is the most surprising result of the night I suppose. Strange. Not that 3.6 is bad. You just would have expected it to do better considering the names involved. The only thing I can think of is the fact that nobody was expecting it to go on first which probably explains the bazillion recaps throughout the show for anybody who might have missed it and it wasn't the first show after a PPV which usually sees a higher number for the first segment because people want to know what's up. Other than that, I got nothing. 

Overall though, some impressive stats for :vince3 to tell the world. Will be interesting to see how things go next week. Rock/Cena is set and HHH/Brock is almost set. I think we're all expecting Taker to finally show as well. INTERDASTING TIMEZ.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Halle Berry bringing dem ratingz unk2


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't know why some are making a big deal about opening. You have some instances where The Rock over-run only did 3.3 (like last week) and he had a segment or two where he even lost viewers in past shows. These guys are human ya know regardless of who they are..


----------



## SteenIsGod

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> All this investment into Punk is starting to pay off. NOW Punk marks are beginning to have a leg to stand on when it comes to him drawing. Last year? Nope. 2011? Nope. He was WAY too inconsistent and couldn't do anything impressive without the help of a bigger star in the same segment to help. 2013? Well, I think it's obvious what has happened here. The Rock feud exposed Punk to a new audience who wouldn't have seen him before and so far, they seem to be interested. NOW the argument can be made that it has paid off and is working. He went out there on his own, without the benefit of a hot timeslot and delivered the goods. You don't always have to go over to get put over. It will be interesting to see if this keeps up.
> 
> The success of the main event is obvious. You raise the stakes and I mean _really _raise the stakes, people are going to watch. It also doesn't hurt to tease an Undertaker appearance right before the match begins either. That's a fantastic number and they should be very pleased with that.
> 
> The Swagger angle also performs well and is drawing in the numbers. That's great for a WHC feud in 2013. The title actually seems halfway important for a change. Amazing what giving a little bit of spotlight and focus can do for something, eh?
> 
> The opener is the most surprising result of the night I suppose. Strange. Not that 3.6 is bad. You just would have expected it to do better considering the names involved. The only thing I can think of is the fact that nobody was expecting it to go on first which probably explains the bazillion recaps throughout the show for anybody who might have missed it and it wasn't the first show after a PPV which usually sees a higher number for the first segment because people want to know what's up. Other than that, I got nothing.
> 
> Overall though, some impressive stats for :vince3 to tell the world. Will be interesting to see how things go next week. Rock/Cena is set and HHH/Brock is almost set. I think we're all expecting Taker to finally show as well. INTERDASTING TIMEZ.


Holy Fuck that Avatar is Gruesome.


----------



## Oakue

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If Punk continues to draw like this, it's gold for WWE. WWE is set with a top babyface and top heel they can put throughout their show to bring in ratings at all different times of the night. Also allowing for new exposure to whoever those two are feuding with. Leading to an inevitable main event clash for the title at some point in the future that should see ratings such as this all over again.

It worked in the 90's just like that. Don't always have your draws feuding with each other, sprinkle them throughout the show. It was the formula that allowed them to win.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Great numbers but the Rock and Undertaker's influence held court over that overrun. 

Should be interesting to see what the Del Rio/Swagger/Zeb stuff draws in the weeks to come.

Team Bring It


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM ratingz Punk!


----------



## ahmad66265

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread 2013*

My think is a 3.0 ranking. Stone won't be able to raise them up very high; not a affect on him, nobody can.If Punk rock is constantly on the sketch like this, it's silver for WWE. WWE is set with a top babyface and top high heel they can put throughout their display to generate scores at all different periods of the evening. Also enabling for new contact with whoever those two are feuding with.


----------



## DesolationRow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bah, have to spread more rep, apologies, *Starbuck*!

But, yes, everything you wrote above is correct.

It really wasn't Punk's fault before. They treated him like a midcarder even when he was the babyface WWE Champion. Feuding with Del Rio/Miz/Jericho/Bryan wasn't going to get Punk over the cresting wave. Bringing in The Rock--against whom Punk turned heel in the first place--did.

It's funny, I was very much openly against the heel turn seven months ago but in retrospect, I can't imagine WWE being bearable if Punk had remained face. Maybe it's a chicken/egg deal because of all of the recent high-profile face turns by the likes of Miz and Del Rio, but without Punk, who would be the most entrenched top-tier heel right now? The Big Show? Seriously... (I'm not counting Brock Lesnar because, well, he's very rarely around.)

Nope, Punk had to turn. WWE clearly made the right decision here.

I personally would rather see Punk vs. Triple H in the latter's farewell match and Lesnar vs. Taker for the Streak but I can live with what they're doing, even if it means not one but two huge rematches from main events in the last calendar year.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Brock will be going over Triple H, the reason Brock/Taker has been saved (or likely won't even happen) is they need to keep Brock protected (barring Cena obviously who is a special case unk2) 

Rock/Brock II is the last money match of that caliber Vince will likely get for a long time, he'll want both guys looking strong going in.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Glad Punk is doing decent numbers. It took a while, but people eventually came around and now see him as the star he has become over the past year. The Rock feud was probably the icing on the cake for Punk. Punks heel turn was great IMO, it kept him from getting stale. WWE doesn't usually turn their top baby-faces to heels during their reigns as WWE Champion.

Also If CM Punk gets to the point that he can draw on his own, then that would definitely open alot more doors to newer guys to get a high profile storylines. It would help out guys like Daniel Bryan, Dean Ambrose, Damien Sandow etc to feud with CM Punk.


----------



## eireace

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



YoungGun_UK said:


> Brock will be going over Triple H, the reason Brock/Taker has been saved (or likely won't even happen) is they need to keep Brock protected (barring Cena obviously who is a special case unk2)
> 
> Rock/Brock II is the last money match of that caliber Vince will likely get for a long time, he'll want both guys looking strong going in.


I can't see any benefit to them having HHH go over Brock... hence HHH is going over Brock


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If the plan if for HHH to become GM or something, then a Triple H win might make sense. But if Triple H will be off-air all the time after Wrestle-mania then they should give Brock another win. Brock supposedly signed on for 2 years so they should build him up for other programs with the current guys.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



eireace said:


> I can't see any benefit to them having HHH go over Brock... hence HHH is going over Brock


This is a company that let Rock win the title from CM Punk so that he can drop it to John Cena.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> This is a company that let Rock win the title from CM Punk so that he can drop it to John Cena.


And now CM Punk is CM Draw. This benefited him in the long run far more than carrying the title and not main eventing would have. Cena vs. Rock 2 is main eventing no matter what. At least now the title is in the main event match at Wrestlemania. 

It is not just about winning matches with wrestlers, it is about making an impression and Punk has finally done that with the casuals it seems. Good for him.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



eireace said:


> I can't see any benefit to them having HHH go over Brock... hence HHH is going over Brock


I think the decision of who Brock was facing depended on if he signed that extension, if he had decided against it im pretty sure we'd all be looking forward Brock vs The Undertaker but instead Brock's a commodity to WWE till WrestleMania 31 and they'll want to protect that investment, at least till the big money matches.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



LovelyElle890 said:


> And now CM Punk is CM Draw. This benefited him in the long run far more than carrying the title and not main eventing would have. Cena vs. Rock 2 is main eventing no matter what. At least now the title is in the main event match at Wrestlemania.
> 
> It is not just about winning matches with wrestlers, it is about making an impression and Punk has finally done that with the casuals it seems. Good for him.




-CM Punk could have benefitted more if he won the title

-Ratings are always good on RTWM


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk is a positive difference maker in the ratings.

Punk sells merchandise.

And Vince who gets minute by minute breakdowns of the ratings books him like a guy who draws money.

Punk draws money.

That’s not to say the guy is a draw at the level of Cena or Rock. Someone would have to be blind to the evidence to say that.

But someone would also have to be blind to the evidence to say he doesn't draw at all.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_69099.shtml



> -- Monday's edition of Old-School Raw scored 368,234 in social media activity, which was essentially even with last week's score of 360,794 for the stacked & loaded episode featuring John Cena vs. C.M. Punk.
> 
> Raw was knocked out of first-place on cable TV for the first time since January, as NBA TV's coverage of the Miami Heat vs. Minnesota Timberwolves ranked #1. [ Data Source: Trendrr.TV ]


:bron2


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

True story: Punk was in the main event for the Survivor Series and Summerslam which drew the lowest buyrate in WWE history... and ppl wonder why the guy isn't in the Wrestlemania main event.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm expecting some wacky ratings for this weeks show since it was so horribly structured imo. The entire Undertaker thing should have closed, Rock/Cena at 10, HHH at 9 and keep the opener where it was obviously sans Taker. That would have brought about a much easier flow I think. The way we got it, we had HOLY FUCK TAKER and then he's gone, the high point of the show in Rock/Cena on way too early, a short HHH promo at 9 that was never able to follow it and a second HOLY FUCK TAKER to close things off. Strange. I imagine things will be skewed as a result when we get the numbers.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> True story: Punk was in the main event for the Survivor Series and Summerslam which drew the lowest buyrate in WWE history... and ppl wonder why the guy isn't in the Wrestlemania main event.


^False story. Brock vs HHH was the main event of Summer Slam. And Survivor Series also featured Cena, who is now main eventing WM, so your logic fails. And neither were the lowest of this year alone, let alone of all time. Over the Limit was the lowest buyrate this year.

Now what we _*actually*_ wonder is why you randomly posted this in the RAW Ratings thread, as this post of yours has nothing to do with that.


----------



## DogSaget

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> True story: Punk was in the main event for the Survivor Series and Summerslam which drew the lowest buyrate in WWE history... and ppl wonder why the guy isn't in the Wrestlemania main event.


Thats because pleb supercasuals are the ones who buy PPVs.


----------



## JAROTO

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

As far as I know SummerSlam had a big buyrate. And Lesnar was the reason.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I fully expect Rock/Cena segment at 9 to end up the highest rated part of the show, followed by the overrun.

BTW wtf happened to cena on the mic? he's getting worse everyweek imo.


----------



## wildx213

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> True story: Punk was in the main event for the Survivor Series and Summerslam which drew the lowest buyrate in WWE history... and ppl wonder why the guy isn't in the Wrestlemania main event.


Summerslam 2011: 296,000
Summerslam 2012: 358,000

What are you talking about?


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I like that Punk closed Raw over Rock/Cena, yet he was booked to almost never close when he was WWE Champion. It's like they do stuff like that just to fuck with him.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If it wasnt for Taker's grand return I dont think Punk would have been closing. Its not a big deal to me though. Long as the show is good.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I believe The Rock hasn't closed the show like 3 times since he is back.

Taker's Return, Brock's Return, & Cena's go home Rumble Promo


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I recall someone last night saying Vince doesn't give a shit about the third hour. Might be a reference to the fact that guys like Rock usually show up during Hour 2. Don't really pay attention to the time though, so I wouldn't know.


----------



## TheFighter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wildx213 said:


> Summerslam 2011: 296,000
> Summerslam 2012: 358,000
> 
> What are you talking about?


*Summerslam 2011 Mainevent: *John Cena vs CM Punk
*Summerslam 2012 Mainevent:* Triple H vs Brock Lesnar

*17.3%* increase, *62,000* more viewers. Also if I remember correctly, the most successful Summerslam numbers since 2008.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE Entertainment - 9:00 PM - 5,239,000 viewers, A18-49: 1.9
WWE Entertainment - 10:00 PM - 4,847,000 viewers, A18-49: 1.9
WWE Entertainment - 8:00 PM - 4,968,000 viewers, A18-49: 1.7

tvbythenumbers


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 2 did pretty damn good.

Thats 5 million viewer average.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...as-switched-at-birth-being-human-more/171916/

Hour 1 - 4.968 million
Hour 2 - 5.239 million
Hour 3 - 4.847 million


----------



## holt_hogan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The 04/03 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:

Hour 1: 4.968m
Hour 2: 5.239m
Hour 3: 4.847m

Compared to last weeks:

Hour 1: 4.86m
Hour 2: 4.70m
Hour 3: 4.56m


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If last weeks show did 3.46. This should have done around 3.6 maybe?


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's what having Dwayne on at 21:00 does, folks.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> True story: *Punk was in the main event for the Survivor Series and Summerslam which drew the lowest buyrate in WWE history*... and ppl wonder why the guy isn't in the Wrestlemania main event.


Please, if you insist on telling a "true story", at least come up with something that is relatively believable and has at least an iota of substance to it.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena v rock doing the numbers


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena and ROCK bringing them ratings to hour 2.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT HOUR 2. 

These are impressive numbers for a 3 hour show. What in the fuck happened last year that they couldn't even do this with a 2 hour show most times lol? Strange.


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

the rock and cena bringing in DEM ratings like always


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> DAT HOUR 2.
> 
> These are impressive numbers for a 3 hour show. What in the fuck happened last year that they couldn't even do this with a 2 hour show most times lol? Strange.


What happened? This happened:


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Holy shit at that viewership per hour. That's ridiculous. DAT HOUR 2.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Please, if you insist on telling a "true story", at least come up with something that is relatively believable and has at least an iota of substance to it.


It is true. Find me a summerslam that had lower buys than in 2011 and a survivor series that had lower buys than 2012 and I'll admit I was wrong


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If WWE can hold these numbers and then include all the social media numbers that are set to become part of the ratings system then.... :vince3


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think he's talking about Summerslam 11 because 12 was Main Evented by Lesnar v Triple H hence the huge spike in buys.


----------



## the fox

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock - Cena did a huge gaining it seems
this the first time Rock promo start the second hour right?


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> What happened? This happened:


 I owe you a green rep for that :lmao :lmao


----------



## apokalypse

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

wow...Undertaker=Ratings


----------



## OML

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What does that translate to? 3.6? That is an awesome rating


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

cm punk losing the wwe championship = those DEM ratingz going up alot


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Taker's back, and he bought dem ratings with him!


----------



## WWCturbo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> What happened? This happened:


True. This truth is like cum on a chick's face, except CM Punk's fans aren't happy about it.


----------



## JigsawKrueger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> It is true. Find me a *summerslam* that had l*ower buys than in 2011* and a survivor series that had lower buys than 2012 and I'll admit I was wrong


1992: 280,000
1993: 250,000
1995: 220,000
1996: 145,000
1997: 250,000


Source: Wrestling Observer


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Im a huge Punk mark but its pretty obvious that he is unable to draw


----------



## Elijah89

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> What happened? This happened:


Lmfao..

You sir, are now my all time favorite poster. Repped.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> Im a huge Punk mark but its pretty obvious that he is unable to draw


 No you're not.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> Im a huge Punk mark but its pretty obvious that he is unable to draw


:no:

Pretty obvious you don't know shit about Punk.


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Looks like it ended up with a 3.54 rating


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.54 rating with 5.018 million average viewers


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> :no:
> 
> Pretty obvious you don't know shit about Punk.


Please dont troll me, im a massive Punk mark and everyone knows that. 

Punk is good in the ring and is great on the mic, i dont know what he is missing since he is unable to draw. But ill support him anyway, best in the world!!!!


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Excellent numbers for all three hours. Cena, Rock, Undertaker, HHH, Punk, and Henry all brought in those incredible numbers.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Can't wait to see the breakdown and see how Taker's return and overrun, Rock/Cena, HHH's promo, and the streak contender's match did.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Rock and Undertaker get those ratings up...*Team Bring It 2013*


> "Old-School" WWE Raw on Monday, March 4 scored a 3.54 rating, up two percent from a 3.46 rating last week for the loaded episode featuring John Cena vs. C.M. Punk.
> 
> Overall, Raw scored its third-highest rating of the year behind a 3.68 rating the night after the Royal Rumble and a 3.56 rating on February 4 the week after the Rumble.
> 
> - Raw averaged 5.018 million viewers, up seven percent from last week. It was only the second time this year that Raw topped five million viewers. The other time was 5.019 million viewers for the Raw after the Rumble.
> 
> Hourly Break Down:
> 
> 1st Hour - 4.968 million viewers with buzz for The Undertaker's return. This was the most first-hour viewers during the three-hour Raw era since Raw 1,000 in July.
> 
> 2nd Hour - 5.239 million viewers for The Rock-John Cena confrontation. Viewership was slightly below the second hour of the post-Rumble episode for most of the year.
> 
> 3rd Hour - 4.847 million viewers for Triple H's speech and the Fatal Four-Way match to determine who faces Undertaker at WrestleMania. This was the second-most final hour viewers of the year behind the post-Rumble episode.
> 
> On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #1 in overall viewers and in the key male demographics. Raw also ranked #1 with younger viewers and all adults across each demographic.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> DAT HOUR 2.
> 
> These are impressive numbers for a 3 hour show. What in the fuck happened last year that they couldn't even do this with a 2 hour show most times lol? Strange.


The Rock is the WWE Champion. That's what happened.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> Im a huge Punk mark but its pretty obvious that he is unable to draw


Meh, seems he's been doing well lately, even on his own. I recall some people here going ape shit last week over him drawing higher by himself in a random time slot than did four big names combined in the opening segment.


----------



## kobra860

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> *Im a huge Punk mark* but its pretty obvious that he is unable to draw


Why do you have to tell us that? Just say that he can't draw.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JigsawKrueger said:


> 1992: 280,000
> 1993: 250,000
> 1995: 220,000
> 1996: 145,000
> 1997: 250,000
> 
> 
> Source: Wrestling Observer


LOL have to go all the way back to the mid-90s when international buys weren't included


----------



## JigsawKrueger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> LOL have to go all the way back to the mid-90s when international buys weren't included


There were no international buys then, so that is a moot point. WWE was more popular in places in Europe (1991-1997) than it is now, hence those buyrates would be the same as now.

Either way, if we say Punk cannot draw we have to say the same about Cena, Orton, Sheamus etc. Segments with just those guys weren't exactly pulling 3.0's.

The main draws being the part timers. The PPV without Punk and starring that huge draw John Cena had the second low domestic buys of all time. The PPV without Cena (Hell in a Cell) and starring CM Punk attracted a strong buyrate.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> Im a huge Punk mark but its pretty obvious that he is unable to draw


2 lies in 1 sentence.

Anyway, pretty good numbers. Obviously though considering they gave away Taker's return. 

I'm sure Vince and co will be well pleased with the numbers all round recently. Rock drawing as ever, Cena proving he hasn't lost his drawing ability (despite the bullshit redemption story), Punk pulling in fantastic numbers, HHH and Lesnar as reliable as ever.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Smell that MANIA season in the air. Get em Rocky. :rock4


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> What happened? This happened:


Yep, that must be why Vince was desperate for him to sign and stop him walking out the door, and why they had to cut the "walk-out angle" short, because they couldn't afford to keep him off TV for more than a week. Also why Vince put his premier title on him for a record-breaking, 434 days. Try harder next time.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Yep, that must be why Vince was desperate for him to sign and stop him walking out the door, and why they had to cut the "walk-out angle" short, because they couldn't afford to keep him off TV for more than a week. Also why Vince put his premier title on him for a record-breaking, 434 days. Try harder next time.


With the limited amount of options Vince has had, it's understandable. He has invested in him a fair amount so might as well try to sell him to the audience as a star and if it goes long enough, maybe they'll accept him. Didn't happen and the numbers don't lie.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Yep, that must be why Vince was desperate for him to sign and stop him walking out the door, and why they had to cut the "walk-out angle" short, because they couldn't afford to keep him off TV for more than a week. Also why Vince put his premier title on him for a record-breaking, 434 days. Try harder next time.


I'd rep you if it would let me but great post. Ever since the Rock feud started no one should be using that tired and lame Punk doesn't draw argument, because, quite honestly, they appear like uneducated idiots when they use it. The ratings evidence we have been getting for months now and especially last week tell us that Punk is indeed a strong draw now and no one can deny that.



Choke2Death said:


> With the limited amount of options Vince has had, it's understandable. He has invested in him a fair amount so might as well try to sell him to the audience as a star and if it goes long enough, maybe they'll accept him. Didn't happen and *the numbers don't lie.*


Your right dude they don't.



> In the segment breakdown, the show opened strong with Vince McMahon, Paul Heyman, Brock Lesnar and Triple H for a 3.6 quarter rating. We only have estimates on the gains and losses this week but Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler lost about 285,000 viewers. *CM Punk's promo and trailer for The Call gained around 420,000 viewers - huge numbers for that time slot.* The Great Khali vs. Mark Henry lost around 285,000 viewers. Jack Swagger, Zeb Colter and Alberto Del Rio at 9pm gained about 285,000 viewers for a strong 3.7 quarter rating.
> 
> Antonio Cesaro vs. Randy Orton lost about 430,000 viewers while Cody Rhodes vs. R-Truth stayed even. Kane and Daniel Bryan vs. Darren Young and Titus O'Neil lost another 285,000 viewers. The Shield's promo at 10pm with Sheamus and Randy Orton getting involved gained around 285,000 viewers for a 3.4 quarter rating.
> 
> The big drop of the night came with The Miz vs. Jack Swagger, losing around 430,000 viewers. John Cena's promo gained around 140,000 viewers and *CM Punk vs. Cena in the main event gained 1,002,000 viewers for a 3.9 overrun rating - a huge success.*


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> With the limited amount of options Vince has had, it's understandable. He has invested in him a fair amount so might as well *try to sell him to the audience as a star and if it goes long enough, maybe they'll accept him.* Didn't happen and the numbers don't lie.


Oh you mean like they did with Cena and Orton. Superman booking on top of that too! Wow, I wonder why they became big stars.


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Yep, that must be why Vince was desperate for him to sign and stop him walking out the door, and why they had to cut the "walk-out angle" short, because they couldn't afford to keep him off TV for more than a week. Also why Vince put his premier title on him for a record-breaking, 434 days. Try harder next time.


And we had 434 days of TNA Ratings. The day after punk lost the belt the ratings skyrocketd.

Im a huge indie mark and probably the number 1 Punk fan, but even i admit hes just not a draw, at least not at the Cena-Rock level.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> And we had 434 days of TNA Ratings. The day after punk lost the belt the ratings skyrocketd.
> 
> Im a huge indie mark and probably the number 1 Punk fan, but even i admit hes just not a draw, *at least not at the Cena-Rock level.*


No one is saying he is at their level, but it's pretty obvious that he's much closer to Cena's level after feuding with Rock then he was before and it may actually be a level he attains/surpasses if he keeps this up.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You think a draw is decided by ratings? You guys do make me laugh. Vince couldn't give less of a fuck if a wrestler gains or loses. If he did, Punk sure as hell wouldn't have faced The Rock in two PPV main events for the fucking title, which he held for 434 days.

Punk does draw ratings though, so it doesn't really matter...


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Your right dude they don't.


Wow, he gained huge while he's one of the two main characters on the show and someone who has the 50/50 chance of going to main event Wrestlemania against The ROCK. CONGRATULATIONS, he managed to impress for the first time ever on his own!

And some of you act like he gained 1 million all by himself in the main event, as if the biggest full-time draw was not there alongside. One good week does not erase 15 months of disaster. Is it getting better for him recently? No doubt, but there's also no doubt that his lengthy title reign didn't help ratings in any way. I don't think it's a coincidence that they finally go above the 3.0 mark and stay there consistently ever since he lost the belt. You can say it's Road to Wrestlemania and all of that, but facts are facts.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> *And we had 434 days of TNA Ratings.* The day after punk lost the belt the ratings skyrocketd.
> 
> Im a huge indie mark and probably the number 1 Punk fan, but even i admit hes just not a draw, at least not at the Cena-Rock level.


Really? I don't remember RAW's ratings falling into the 1's. And the reason the ratings skyrocketed, was I know largely down to the Rock, but it had nothing to do with Punk losing the belt either. The ratings would have improved regardless, even if Punk had still been champion. Also MNF had finished taking viewers by then,also.



Choke2Death said:


> Wow, he gained huge while he's one of the two main characters on the show and someone who has the 50/50 chance of going to main event Wrestlemania against The ROCK. CONGRATULATIONS, he managed to impress for the first time ever on his own!
> 
> And some of you act like he gained 1 million all by himself in the main event, as if the biggest full-time draw was not there alongside. One good week does not erase *15 months of disaster.* Is it getting better for him recently? No doubt, but there's also no doubt that his lengthy title reign didn't help ratings in any way. I don't think it's a coincidence that they finally go above the 3.0 mark and stay there consistently ever since he lost the belt. You can say it's Road to Wrestlemania and all of that, but facts are facts.


And this is an example of why I can't take most of what you say seriously. Oh and newsflash, Punk might not have improved the ratings when he was champ, but guess what? NOBODY was able to improve the ratings - not even Superman Cena himself. Even as champ, it was not solely on Punk to be a massive ratings draw, especially since they've never, ever positioned him to be one. The ratings only picked up when Hollywood filmstar and legendary, all-time great WWE superstar, the Rock came back. Funny that, isn't it? And once he leaves to go back to do his real job, the ratings will go back to normal, only Punk won't be champion then, so you and people of your ilk, will have to blame someone else.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

good rating


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Some idiots still trolling with the Punk comments. Too much butthurt, it's getting a bit tiring. He's the second biggest draw on the roster, it really isn't even a debate. 

Good numbers. Obviously expecting Rock/Cena and the opening/closing segments to do very well.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> And this is an example of why I can't take most of what you say seriously. Oh and newsflash, Punk might not have improved the ratings when he was champ, but guess what? NOBODY was able to improve the ratings - not even Superman Cena himself. Even as champ, it was not on Punk to be the sole ratings draw, especially since they've never, ever positioned him to be one. The ratings only picked up when Hollywood filmstar and legendary, all-time great WWE superstar, the Rock came back. Funny that, isn't it?


Punk was pretty much positioned to be "the man" after Raw 1000 last year all the way until his injury. (they kept having him in segments with legends like Foley, JR and so on plus he appeared numerous times in the 3 hours under all the good spots) Funny thing is, ratings were getting even lower during that period, reaching 2.5 on a couple of occasions. When you're pushed that much, it's on you to bring the overall viewership up.

And now it's The ROCK that helped the ratings pick up? Just the other day when his segment with Shield did bad, you and others were talking about how he isn't all that and now in order to defend Punk, you contradict yourself completely by saving ROCK is responsible for the ratings going up. You talk about not taking me seriously and thanks because the feeling is mutual. You don't seem to go one minute in your life without sucking on Punk's dick, which is placed comfortably in your mouth.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> You don't seem to go one minute in your life without sucking on Punk's dick, which is placed comfortably in your mouth.


 Free lollies for mblonde09!


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LOL at mid-to-high 2's being considered "TNA ratings". 

Good number. I thought that 'Taker bit would keep the fans intrigued for the rest of the show, and they had something strong at every top hour (Cena-Rock, HHH) to keep the fans interested. Looking forward to next week when Brock Lesnar returns. :brock


----------



## FreakyZo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Oliver-94 said:


> Free lollies for mblonde09!


That actually would be more useful to ChokesonDick lol


----------



## Catsaregreat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

im pretty sure it was Mae Young who brought in the ratings


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

C'mon Choke2Death, you're above these petty arguments. Come back to the Official DVD/Match Thread.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> C'mon Choke2Death, you're above these petty arguments. Come back to the Official DVD/Match Thread.


Ain't nothin' going on there at the moment. Plus I got some school shit to do which doesn't give me much time to watch any matches or shows and rate them. I'll be free for the weekend hopefully, though.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

When The Rock leaves and RAW has CM Punk and Cena as the champ... expect the shittest ratings, possibly of all time. Right now WrestleMania is being built on Attitude era names - The Rock, Taker, HHH and to a lesser extent Lesnar. These guys are appearing as pretty much one time deals.

May, September, October... guaranteed these months will go into low 2.0's... possibly high 1.0's. Fact is, nobody wants to see action figure Cena as a face, and nobody wants to see a cruiserweight midget with zero charisma who flunks his lines.

There is only one thing that can't stop the upcoming ratings freefall and that is this: Have the Shield interfere to help Cena, then the following night have Cena, heel, come out to this music dressed in a flak-jacket;






By doing that, WWE could sustain 3.0's all year around without a single million-dollar cameo. This could have been a defining moment for this company in vestige. A real chance to create a modern-era NWO. They won't do it.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^Turn Cena heel aswell as build 3 new big stars? That makes abosolutely no sense :vince


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They could get two years out of it. Year 1: Evil Cena wrecking everything. Year 2: The man who puts a stop to him. Possibly one of his own team. At least, this _used_ to be how wrestling worked.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Punk was pretty much positioned to be "the man" after Raw 1000 last year all the way until his injury. *(they kept having him in segments with legends like Foley, JR and so on plus he appeared numerous times in the 3 hours under all the good spots)* Funny thing is, ratings were getting even lower during that period, reaching 2.5 on a couple of occasions. When you're pushed that much, it's on you to bring the overall viewership up.
> 
> And now it's The ROCK that helped the ratings pick up? Just the other day when his segment with Shield did bad, you and others were talking about how he isn't all that and now in order to defend Punk, you contradict yourself completely by saving ROCK is responsible for the ratings going up. You talk about not taking me seriously and thanks because the feeling is mutual. You don't seem to go one minute in your life without sucking on Punk's dick, which is placed comfortably in your mouth.


Yes, the OVERALL ratings may have got lower, but those Punk segments you mentioned, the ones attributed to Punk, got good ratings. He simply can't be held responsible for the overall rating, when the rest of the show is filled with utter shite... it's not a hard concept to grasp. Oh and I knew it wouldn't be long before you resorted to the tired, Punk dick sucking crap, because you've got nothing else... Vintage Choke2Death:cole3


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Anyone else find it disturbing that the only way they can seemingly break the 3.0 barrier is by basically throwing in everything + the kitchen sink on a weekly basis? Doesn't bode well for the future.

And fpalm at people here still blaming Punk for the crappy ratings in the fall. As I recall, wasn't there a divorced, live action Barney the Dinosaur turd still on the show in those times? Champion as Punk may have been, I don't remember him becoming the face of the industry, unlike someone else. Where's all the hate for him? Last I checked, face of the industry > WWE champion. In that regard, he should bare the majority of the fault. He's the representative to the people, he's evidently failing at his job.


----------



## KrazyGreen

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> Anyone else find it disturbing that the only way they can seemingly break the 3.0 barrier is by basically throwing in everything + the kitchen sink on a weekly basis? Doesn't bode well for the future.
> 
> And fpalm at people here still blaming Punk for the crappy ratings in the fall. As I recall, wasn't there a divorced, live action Barney the Dinosaur turd still on the show in those times? Champion as Punk may have been, I don't remember him becoming the face of the industry, unlike someone else. Where's all the hate for him? Last I checked, face of the industry > WWE champion. In that regard, he should bare the majority of the fault. He's the representative to the people, he's evidently failing at his job.


Raw is still generally the highest rated cable show on Monday nights and continues to impress with 4.7-5.2 million viewers weekly. To you that may not seem like a lot, but for a cable program that has been on air for 20 plus years, it's pretty damn impressive. 

The ratings are fine, look past the one dimension and you'll realize that worldwide, the WWE is doing better financially now than ever. 

Just look at their stock portfolio, the WWE network, their worldwide mass appeal in major markets, I could go on but I'd rather implore you to research this yourself, so you won't bask on how you believe the ratings are "disappointing". Ask any major cable network if they would be satisfied with 5 million viewers weekly, most major shows (excluding series hits like Walking Dead, "The Bible", etc.) on cable can only dream of viewership in the 5 million's week in and week out for a show that has been on TV for 20 years.


----------



## Oakue

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> Im a huge Punk mark but its pretty obvious that he is unable to draw


And you sir would be a fucking liar.

All it takes is two seconds to look at your posts, to see you're anything but a "Punk mark".


Let's take a look:



Nimbus said:


> Im a massive Punk Mark but im so sick and tired of this best in the world shit, just SHUT UP Already, sooo booooring.





Nimbus said:


> No pop for Punk.





Nimbus said:


> Punk should take notes, this is how you do a promo...





Nimbus said:


> Terrible. Punk is just not that big to face The Rock.





Nimbus said:


> And we had 434 days of TNA Ratings. The day after punk lost the belt the ratings skyrocketd.





Nimbus said:


> Im a huge Punk mark but i admit he just doesnt have the starpower or the drawhability to main event Wrestlemania.
> 
> This is a rematch, Punk doesnt fit in here.





Nimbus said:


> Rock is fantastic, cant say the same about punk, he just dindt look good at all...rocky was carrying him the whole match.


Yeah. But you're a "Punk mark".

And by the way it's really funny for you to keep starting every post with "I'm a huge Punk mark" and the proceed to shit on him as if you think we're all stupid.

unk2


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nimbus is an obvious troll, this has been clear for quite some time now.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KrazyGreen said:


> Raw is still generally the highest rated cable show on Monday nights and continues to impress with 4.7-5.2 million viewers weekly. To you that may not seem like a lot, but for a cable program that has been on air for 20 plus years, it's pretty damn impressive.
> 
> The ratings are fine, look past the one dimension and you'll realize that worldwide, the WWE is doing better financially now than ever.
> 
> Just look at their stock portfolio, the WWE network, their worldwide mass appeal in major markets, I could go on but I'd rather implore you to research this yourself, so you won't bask on how you believe the ratings are "disappointing". Ask any major cable network if they would be satisfied with 5 million viewers weekly, most major shows (excluding series hits like Walking Dead, "The Bible", etc.) on cable can only dream of viewership in the 5 million's week in and week out for a show that has been on TV for 20 years.


Let's just say this: to get above a minimum of 3.0 rating now, they need to bring in Rock, Lesnar, Trips, Taker and a whole slew of others. 

13 years ago, they could rely on their own roster and competency to the point where 4.0 was considered low.

So I fail to see how this 3.5 (I believe is what it translates into roughly) should be considered impressive considering how many proven draws, mega stars and celebrities of past eras they need to bring in bump it up to that point. All that and the best they can do is a 3.5? They should be getting like...4s at the minimum.

And why should I care about their stock portfolio? Their success in the global market =/= a good product. I think the product right now is 99% complete shit, and I stick by that.

I also stick by my belief that the fact that wrestling isn't MORE popular than it already is is due to who we have as the face of the industry right now. Cena makes it uncool to be a wrestling fan.


----------



## KrazyGreen

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> Let's just say this: to get above a minimum of 3.0 rating now, they need to bring in Rock, Lesnar, Trips, Taker and a whole slew of others.
> 
> 13 years ago, they could rely on their own roster and competency to the point where 4.0 was considered low.
> 
> So I fail to see how this 3.5 (I believe is what it translates into roughly) should be considered impressive considering how many proven draws, mega stars and celebrities of past eras they need to bring in bump it up to that point. All that and the best they can do is a 3.5? They should be getting like...4s at the minimum.
> 
> And why should I care about their stock portfolio? Their success in the global market =/= a good product. I think the product right now is 99% complete shit, and I stick by that.
> 
> I also stick by my belief that the fact that wrestling isn't MORE popular than it already is is due to who we have as the face of the industry right now. Cena makes it uncool to be a wrestling fan.


Fair enough. 

Your points are well taken.

However they still dominate the all important 18-49 demo weekly, generally averaging higher numbers than most programs (excluding Monday Night Football).


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

4.0s for a 3 hourly weekly show? Yeah right. Lol. This isnt the NFL.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Ageei said:


> And you sir would be a fucking liar.
> 
> All it takes is two seconds to look at your posts, to see you're anything but a "Punk mark".
> 
> Yeah. But you're a "Punk mark".
> 
> And by the way it's really funny for you to keep starting every post with "I'm a huge Punk mark" and the proceed to shit on him as if you think we're all stupid.
> 
> unk2


Here's another one for you:



Nimbus said:


> Punk is not a treat for the streak, is this a joke?


Although this one ended up being unintentionally, hilarious... "a treat for the streak", LOL.


----------



## Sam Knight

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM Punk IWC marks are delusional.RAW ratings dropped to 2.7 when Punk was the champion.RAW still scored ratings in 3's before Punk was the champion.The Rock is responsible for the current boom and nobody else.CM Punk is a draw in the midcard but giving him the main event just doesn't work.I doubt we'll ever see him again in WWE title picture except against Cena.
Marks have to accept it,CM Punk is just no Rock/Hogan/Austin/Cena.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> Let's just say this: *to get above a minimum of 3.0 rating now, they need to bring in Rock, Lesnar, Trips, Taker and a whole slew of others.
> *
> 13 years ago, they could rely on their own roster and competency to the point where 4.0 was considered low.
> 
> So I fail to see how this 3.5 (I believe is what it translates into roughly) should be considered impressive considering how many proven draws, mega stars and celebrities of past eras they need to bring in bump it up to that point. All that and the best they can do is a 3.5? They should be getting like...4s at the minimum.
> 
> And why should I care about their stock portfolio? Their success in the global market =/= a good product. I think the product right now is 99% complete shit, and I stick by that.
> 
> I also stick by my belief that the fact that wrestling isn't MORE popular than it already is is due to who we have as the face of the industry right now. Cena makes it uncool to be a wrestling fan.


It takes 20 mins of Rock, 10 mins of HHH, and 5 mins of Taker to keep it in the mid 3's. If all the filler and pointless matches were eliminated, then it would easily be a 4.0 show for the full three hours and this is despite the fact that the WWE is using their stars in the worst ways possible.

Also, the ratings would have been higher if they would've came out in retro gear and used old themes, especially since this was supposed to be an 'Old School" Raw.
I saw no 1000 dollar shirts and heard no "My Time." Just imagine how much cooler that "Lance Armstrong" ether line would've been if Rock was wearing his expensive shirt, pants, shoes, and sunglasses. Such a missed opportunity. :no:


----------



## Werb-Jericho

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sam Knight said:


> CM Punk IWC marks are delusional.RAW ratings dropped to 2.7 when Punk was the champion.RAW still scored ratings in 3's before Punk was the champion.The Rock is responsible for the current boom and nobody else.CM Punk is a draw in the midcard but giving him the main event just doesn't work.I doubt we'll ever see him again in WWE title picture except against Cena.
> Marks have to accept it,CM Punk is just no Rock/Hogan/Austin/Cena.


he main evented the last raw you bell end


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Nimbus is an obvious troll, this has been clear for quite some time now.


I think everyone on the forum knows this, or at least should anyway.


----------



## Sam Knight

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Werb-Jericho said:


> he main evented the last raw you bell end


I am talking about PPV's.And Rock is responsible for the current RAW ratings regardlesss whoever mainevents it.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow taker pulling in those monster numbers! And people say he was never a big draw :lmao fools. Rock got decent numbers, expected but i think after thay awful promo with cena people will know it will be same old shit and maybe it will cause a loss in viewers when its their segments in future. Punk pulling in numbers again, the hate and jealousy the guy gets shows how successful he is becoming, punk = ratings and he will be a main star for the foreesable future and there is not a damn thing any hater can do about it!


----------



## Sam Knight

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^^^lol we'll see.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> Let's just say this: to get above a minimum of 3.0 rating now, they need to bring in Rock, Lesnar, Trips, Taker and a whole slew of others.
> 
> 13 years ago, they could rely on their own roster and competency to the point where 4.0 was considered low.


13 years ago we were in the middle of the biggest boom period pro wrestling has ever seen, also 13 years ago an average of over 5 million viewers would garner at least a 4.5 rating back then, raw in 1999 was doing over 5 ratings with 5.5 million viewers average over 2hrs, nitro was doing over 4 ratings with viewership in the low to mid 4 million range...


----------



## ChickMagnet12

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Any chance that the ratings could be posted in a locked sticky thread so I don't have to crawl through the same continuous argument that's been raging for over a year to see it?

Huge ratings for today's product. Can't really deny Rock being champ has brought a great deal of viewership that has stuck around. Punk's reign in later 2012 had no buzz about it after HIAC (the whole Ryback "will they/won't they" give him the title) as then it as pretty much concrete that he was facing Rock at the rumble so there was no buzz about the title picture.


----------



## Icon_Vs_Icon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Taker has always been really overrated as a draw. All the success WWE has had in the last several years is cuz of :rock3 without him the entire product would be stale as shit. Its funny cuz people can complain they think hes stale, his promos, his matches suck, his feuds suck, ect but everyone still has there eyes glued every time the GOAT returns. GOAT saves dem companies


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings are always high during Mania season, and several years? Rock only came back two years ago. LOL


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Ratings are always high during Mania season, and several years? Rock only came back two years ago. LOL


 True dat.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> And we had 434 days of TNA Ratings.


No. We did not. The sharp curve in the ratings decline began after July. Conspicuously, not long after the change to 3 hours.


----------



## SteenIsGod

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Okay, For those of you that think Punk doesn't draw is that going to change how Punk is positioned? He hasn't apparently "Drawn" for over a year, and back then ALL OF YOU guys said that he was going back to being a mid card jobber. It isn't happening, face reality, the Guy is the #2 guy in the company, and He's been that for almost 2 years where apparently he hasn't "Drawn". Your guys' definition of Drawing must not be the same as WWE's because if it was, Punk would be a mid card jobber.


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk has doing well in segments/matches for a while now. I guess people don't want to admit that yet. Cena & Punk are the only consistent drawing power now besides the old guys of course. The feud with The Rock has put Punk into a new light, and the rub with the The Undertaker will give him even more exposure. He's not going back tot he midcard, use your brains. He might not be in the main event, but he will be in the uppercard for a while until he gets back into the main event prehaps even later this year with Brock/Punk inevitably happening later this year..


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



hazuki said:


> Punk has doing well in segments/matches for a while now. I guess people don't want to admit that yet. Cena & Punk are the only consistent drawing power now besides the old guys of course. The feud with The Rock has put Punk into a new light, and the rub with the The Undertaker will give him even more exposure. He's not going back tot he midcard, use your brains. He might not be in the main event, but he will be in the uppercard for a while until he gets back into the main event prehaps even later this year with Brock/Punk inevitably happening later this year..


Great post. Rock has helped punked and gave him that much needed exposure that is why he is now drawing in big numbers. Feuding with taker now will set him to a whole new level, then his face turn next time will be a huge success.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I love how all these peeps are saying Punk is drawing _now_. That would suggest that he wasn't drawing before. Which would mean that half the people in this thread have been correct for the past God knows how many months and the other half are merely proving that correctness by their use of the term _now_.

Funny shit.


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think Punk absolutely needs to win at wrestlemania right now. Punk doesn't need the "star-rub" from 'Taker anymore, he's is in a bigger position than that. A predictable loss to the undertaker is only going to hurt him at this point. Apparently Punk feels the same way about the match,



> CM Punk was asked at the Ohio Comic-Con in last September if he would like to challenge The Undertaker for “the streak” at Wrestlemania. Punk replied, “*That Doesn’t interest me… I like being in situations where you don’t know who is going to win… Whoever wrestles in that I feel it’s a foregone conclusion… There needs to be some drama and stuff.*”


It's funny even after a year long title reign, CM Punk is in the exact same position at Wrestlemania this year that he was last year. Overshadowed by the two big (re)matches and this time with no WWE title. Granted Undertaker is much bigger star than Chris Jericho, still it's a very weak match up and Punk is no threat to the streak at all. Punk absolutely needs to win, taker obviously isn't going to lose. 

IMO they should be booking Orton/Punk II right now. Considering Orton doesn't have any big match and since they have been using him lately to put guys over anyway, Punk vs Orton rematch with Orton putting him over clean in a show-stealing match at mania is much better option for punk and for Orton too. I mean Punk is bigger star than Sheamus right? Besides in a feud with Orton, punk can be presented much much more stronger than he would be in a feud(which he will lose ultimately) with the Undertaker. I for one would be interested more in a Orton/Punk wrestlemania rematch than a predictable Taker/Punk.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I love how all these peeps are saying Punk is drawing _now_. That would suggest that he wasn't drawing before. Which would mean that half the people in this thread have been correct for the past God knows how many months and the other half are merely proving that correctness by their use of the term _now_.
> 
> Funny shit.


Truer words were never spoken.



Felpent said:


> IMO they should be booking Orton/Punk II right now. Considering Orton doesn't have any big match and since they have been using him lately to put guys over anyway, Punk vs Orton rematch with Orton putting him over clean in a show-stealing match at mania is much better option for punk and for Orton too. I mean Punk is bigger star than Sheamus right? Besides in a feud with Orton, punk can be presented much much more stronger than he would be in a feud(which he will lose ultimately) with the Undertaker. I for one would be interested more in a Orton/Punk wrestlemania rematch than a predictable Taker/Punk.


No, that would suck donkey balls. Orton looks to be turning heel in a 6 man tag with Show and Sheamus against the Shield. And even if he remains face and they lose, it's still a million times better than lowering himself to job to Punk in an afterthought of a REmatch. (as if we don't have enough rematches as it is already)


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Great post. Rock has helped punked and gave him that much needed exposure that is why he is now drawing in big numbers. Feuding with taker now will set him to a whole new level, then his face turn next time will be a huge success.


Well, more so because it's MANIA season as well, people need to stop forgetting where we're at right now.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol now? Punk has been doing well for months now. Of course this will cause the inevitable "OH BUT THE OVERALL NUMBERS~" debate, ignoring the fact that Punk has pulled off far more good to great numbers, than bad ones, ever since his push started. Nobody has ever said that he's a huge draw, but the posts stating that he was never a draw and still isn't can only be taken as troll posts because that's all they really are. Always coming from the same butthurt people, too. Shocking. 

He's the second biggest draw they have on the roster. Anybody who disagrees is lying to themselves because, well, he wouldn't be booked as so, would he? Open your eyes, gentlemen.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

He's been doing well since the Rock feud and I mean well enough to start crediting him instead of everybody around him. Up until that point, he was nothing to brag about which is why it's funny to me since people have been going back and forth for basically 2 years on this subject. If he's only starting to do well now then he wasn't doing well before. It's just making me laugh. 

I don't see anybody denying that he's the second biggest draw on the roster atm either, he's got nobody to compete with lol. That's not taking away from him, it's just the truth.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Jericho program, great ratings. The Bryan/Kane/AJ program, great gains and numbers. The Ryback program, great numbers and buyrate. His segments with Johnny Ace, 700k/800k gains. These all did very well. You're going to credit all of that to the opposition? Come on.

EDIT: You're right, this has been going on for two years now. What has it accomplished? If the people claiming he isn't one were right, his push would have surely ended by now. CM Punk continues to grow. What's the point in continuing? WWE clearly see him as one of their two big draws.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk always drew to some extent, most Punk marks just don't care about numbers like Rock marks do. I still don't, but acting like he never drew is just dumb on other peoples part. As if a guy who never drew would be WWE Champion for a year, beat the top star half a dozen times, then spend the first 3 ppvs this year facing guys like Rock and Taker. Duh.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Define great. Yeah, he had some 'great' numbers, his best coming with much bigger and established draws. He also had some of the worst numbers in years. Way too inconsistent. I don't remember any of the numbers you're talking about being 'great' bar that one week with Jericho that did well and the Big Johnny stuff. The Rock feud starts and now look what has happened. I said it weeks ago that working with Rock was going to be the best thing to happen to him because of the exposure it would bring. So far it has worked. I'm curious to see if that continues and we're only going to really find out when he's the one supporting a feud based on his star power alone and not relying on a Rock or a Cena or a Taker to help. I'm also not about to start a debate. As of now, things are starting to shift in his favour but that doesn't change the fact that up until now, he was rarely impressive and based on recent information, I don't see how that can be disputed.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Define great. Yeah, he had some 'great' numbers, his best coming with much bigger and established draws. He also had some of the worst numbers in years. Way too inconsistent. I don't remember any of the numbers you're talking about being 'great' bar that one week with Jericho that did well and the Big Johnny stuff. The Rock feud starts and now look what has happened. I said it weeks ago that working with Rock was going to be the best thing to happen to him because of the exposure it would bring. So far it has worked. I'm curious to see if that continues and we're only going to really find out when he's the one supporting a feud based on his star power alone and not relying on a Rock or a Cena or a Taker to help. I'm also not about to start a debate. As of now, things are starting to shift in his favour but that doesn't change the fact that up until now, he was rarely impressive and based on recent information, I don't see how that can be disputed.


What about during the extended program with DB? 

I think Punk is a big draw considering he's one of WWE's most popular stars who WWE can solely rely on to keep people interested even if something were to happen to Cena. But I don't think his star power is quite up there just yet.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

He's not going to be a "Taker or Rock or Cena" with just a year and a half of a push. It's ridiculous to even think so. But with his position, he has been doing well. And so far, feuding with Rock has helped him. That is the point to begin with. You think working with Jericho, Bryan, Kane and Ryback was going to propel him to Rock/Taker/Cena level? Never has a main eventer who is in the middle of his rise, had to work with wrestlers so much lower on the ladder. What the Rock program did that none of the other ones could was it got eyes on Punk who only came back to see Rocky for a bit, and those eyes stayed on Punk. He went from doing well in his position, to doing great in his position. _So far.
_
He has had some of the worst numbers in years. So has Cena. But I don't agree with him being "too inconsistent" because those "bad numbers" are rarely seen. Like I said, they pale in comparison to his good numbers. I'm not specifically talking about you Starbuck, since you've mostly been pretty fair in the discussion with Punk. But when people post claims that he's never been a draw or isn't one today, those posts can really only be looked at as troll posts because honestly it's what they are.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> What about during the extended program with DB?
> 
> I think Punk is a big draw considering he's one of WWE's most popular stars who WWE can solely rely on to keep people interested even if something were to happen to Cena. But I don't think his star power is quite up there just yet.


I think he's now reaching that point where he's starting to draw. It doesn't just happen overnight though. It has taken this long for him to get here but it looks like the push is starting to pay off. I'm not going to call him a big draw because he isn't. Not yet. I don't think it's fully fair to compare him to the big guns either though, not even Cena. That isn't a fair comparison. He's head and shoulders above the rest of the full time guys though, that much is certain.

EDIT - I don't expect him to be on the level of the guys who actually _are _big draws. Like I just said, that isn't a fair comparison. But if we're calling Rock/Brock/HHH/Taker/Cena big draws then that means that we can hardly go calling Punk a big draw when he isn't close to that level of stardom. 

I call Punk inconsistent because he is. Cena has had some poor numbers, yes, but everybody knows that he can deliver and deliver big time because he has done it in the past and done it to the highest degree. Punk hasn't. Their situations aren't comparable.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I'm not going to call him a big draw because he isn't. Not yet. I don't think it's fully fair to compare him to the big guns either though, not even Cena. That isn't a fair comparison. He's head and shoulders above the rest of the full time guys though, that much is certain.


All I'm saying, really.


----------



## WWCturbo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SteenIsGod said:


> Okay, For those of you that think Punk doesn't draw is that going to change how Punk is positioned? He hasn't apparently "Drawn" for over a year, and back then ALL OF YOU guys said that he was going back to being a mid card jobber. It isn't happening, face reality, the Guy is the #2 guy in the company, and He's been that for almost 2 years where apparently he hasn't "Drawn". Your guys' definition of Drawing must not be the same as WWE's because if it was, Punk would be a mid card jobber.


The fact that Punk is 2nd (out of Full-Timers) just proves how bad the current situation is. There are plenty of OK wrestlers but no game changing ones (or at least they aren't getting the push), fact is Punk's push could've been used on someone else younger... who also happens to draw.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I think he's now reaching that point where he's starting to draw. It doesn't just happen overnight though. It has taken this long for him to get here but it looks like the push is starting to pay off. I'm not going to call him a big draw because he isn't. Not yet. I don't think it's fully fair to compare him to the big guns either though, not even Cena. That isn't a fair comparison. *He's head and shoulders above the rest of the full time guys though, that much is certain.*


Yeah, I don't think this can be argued. WWE knows this, my bet, which is why he is given all the high profile stuff to work with.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I call Punk inconsistent because he is. Cena has had some poor numbers, yes, but everybody knows that he can deliver and deliver big time because he has done it in the past and done it to the highest degree. Punk hasn't. Their situations aren't comparable.


Cena's 2012 was just as inconsistent as Punk, if not more so, especially towards the latter part of the year. Cena's drawn well but he's done poorly at times, just like Punk. Their situations are pretty comparable, although not completely even leveled as only Cena got to work with proven draws like Vince, HBK, HHH, etc. on a weekly basis for a longer period than Punk's got to work with them, period. He had years of exposure and when he's the solid top draw, with those guys not around, he's not helping things any more than Punk, and that's also with all the exposure Rock gave Cena. Punk's drawing abilities from his feud with Rock remains to be seen and we won't really know until after Mania, which by that point he'll also have weeks of working with Taker under his belt. We won't really know what effects the Rock feud had on his drawing ability until Rock, Lesnar, Taker, and HHH aren't on the show.

The segment last week, and the 3.7 he got on his own to open Raw a few weeks ago are great signs, but nothing concrete yet. He's on his way to becoming a big draw from the looks of it, though he's been a draw for many months now.

Edit: Is the breakdown available yet?


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> The Jericho program, great ratings. The Bryan/Kane/AJ program, great gains and numbers. The Ryback program, great numbers and buyrate. His segments with Johnny Ace, 700k/800k gains. These all did very well. You're going to credit all of that to the opposition? Come on.
> 
> EDIT: You're right, this has been going on for two years now. What has it accomplished? If the people claiming he isn't one were right, his push would have surely ended by now. CM Punk continues to grow. What's the point in continuing? WWE clearly see him as one of their two big draws.


Everybody hates on AJ around here and despises her for no reason but they FORGET that the reason she got pushed so hard was because her segments during that Punk/Bryan/AJ triangle got 700k overruns. That's why they kept going with her and she was getting cheered over CM Punk too. People don't wanna talk about that either. 

And he got big numbers with McMahon, Rock, and that Cena match. A Heyman promo with him did big too but he's also had some of the worst numbers in Raw history before the Rock hyped return started. 2.5s and 2.7s....DISGUSTING gains in those main events.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I love how all these peeps are saying Punk is drawing _now_. *That would suggest that he wasn't drawing before. *Which would mean that half the people in this thread have been correct for the past God knows how many months and the other half are merely proving that correctness by their use of the term _now_.
> 
> Funny shit.


I rarely saw people claiming he was a draw before. The argument is, there were reasons Punk wasn't drawing. 

There were idiots, (and still is) who claim that Punk was the sole reason for poor ratings. People who think that wrestlers should miraculously become a draw without credible competition to help them along the way. People who think a wrestler has a chance of becoming a draw despite rarely main eventing ppvs even as champion. People who can't seem to understand that constantly reminding the audience that " yes CM Punk maybe champion, but NOBODY EVOKES EMOTION LIKE THE FACE OF THE COMPANY, JOHN CENA!", is not a wise strategy if they were intending to make him a draw.

Of course now Punk has had credible competition, main evented a couple of ppvs, and been portrayed as a threat, he is starting to reap the rewards. 

Credible competition (far more than Punk has faced), main event title feuds (far more than Punk has had), and being portrayed as a legitimate threat (far more than Punk has been), are all reasons why John Cena is the big time draw that we see today. Some people seem to forget that too.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If he couldn't draw good ratings, why the hell would anyone get mad when he loses the belt? He should of BEEN LOST the belt if you want to get technical about it. Since everyone wanted to hate on the Miz so much and act like he was the worst shit in wrestling history....don't recall him having some of the worst overruns since 1996 though like Punk.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SerapisLiber said:


> No. We did not. The sharp curve in the ratings decline began after July. Conspicuously, not long after the change to 3 hours.


Even Rock/Brock can come back full time for a feud with Cena himself and I bet ratings around that time will not touch 3 always.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Even Rock/Brock can come back full time for a feud with Cena himself and I bet ratings around that time will not touch 3 always.


unk2


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The truth is, ever since he's been positioned near the top of the company, Punk has always been a draw - admittedly, not a mega-draw, but a draw nonetheless. His merch sales alone prove that. He's been as much of a draw as he's been given scope to be. Like someone said he's been working with people lower on the totem pole, and hasn't been afforded the luxury of working with and being put over by the legends and HOF'ers, which would get him to that next level. Cena was working with the big names more or less from the word go, he didn't become a draw overnight, and it's taken years of company promotion, strong booking and marketing - things they haven't been willing to afford Punk until recently, to get Cena to the position he is in today. Until he started working with Cena, the biggest names Punk had worked with were Batista briefly, Jeff Hardy and 'Taker for a cup of coffee... and we all know that particular program did him more harm than good. However, once he starts working with the likes of Cena, HHH and as we've seen most recently, the Rock, he pulls in bigger numbers for his individual segments. He was never going to be an uber-draw stuck working with people like Mysterio and Big Show in the mid-card on SD. 

Despite what some on here believe, Punk is a draw and an attraction, and people do pay to see CM Punk... in fact, there will be a hell of a lot of people who have paid to see him on the upcoming UK/European tour (myself included) - which is one of the reasons why he can't take a break after WM, like some have suggested might happen. Also, add to that Vince himself saying that Punk along with Cena, is his main full-time draw, and HHH commenting on his DVD that Punk is now a marquee name, and it's not even up for debate. I think I'll take their word on Punk's drawing ability, over the dolts on here who say otherwise.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

By your logic, everybody who has ever been pushed to the main event is a draw. I paid money to see Miz as champion. I certainly watch for Orton. Just give The Great One some credit for elavating ya boy.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

We can talk about drawing ability once Rock, Taker and Lesnar leave. Rock can draw in feud against a ham sandwich. Same can be said about the streak nowadays. Obviously no one should expect these numbers to remain the same but if there's not growth from the prior yeah then no they're not drawing.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> By your logic, everybody who has ever been pushed to the main event is a draw. I paid money to see Miz as champion. I certainly watch for Orton. Just give The Great One some credit for elevating ya boy.


Did Miz hold the WWE Title for over a year because WWE didn't see anyone else as a more suitable holder? If CM Punk wasn't bringing in some sort of high end revenue for the company he wouldn't be featured the way he is, and the fact that he did it all while only working with a small group of marquee names makes it all the more impressive. He didn't have the Guerrero's, Lesnar's, Angle's, Jericho's(in his prime), HBK's, HHH's, Batista's, etc.. to work with all the while being pushed to the moon and steamrolling through all of those guys and more dominantly and CLEAN like Cena did.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Did Miz hold the WWE Title for over a year because WWE didn't see anyone else as a more suitable holder? If CM Punk wasn't bringing in some sort of high end revenue for the company he wouldn't be featured the way he is, and the fact that he did it with with only working with a small group of marque names makes it all the more impressive. He didn't have the Guerrero's, Lesnar's, Angle's, Jericho's(in his prime), HBK's, HHH's, Batista's, etc.. to work with all the while being pushed to the moon and steamrolling through all of those guys and more dominantly and CLEAN like Cena did.


Punk held the title for a year to feud with Rock. If this was 10 they would have done the same thing with Miz. If Miz got a match with the Rock his booking is set in stone.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I hope this incessant bickering back and forth will slow down, now that Punk "draws". It's really annoying having to sift through the same arguments rehashed by the same people over and over again. Then, I wouldn't have to surf through filler crap to find the ratings and breakdown as much


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AthenaMark said:


> If he couldn't draw good ratings, why the hell would anyone get mad when he loses the belt? He should of BEEN LOST the belt if you want to get technical about it. *Since everyone wanted to hate on the Miz so much and act like he was the worst shit in wrestling history....don't recall him having some of the worst overruns since 1996 though like Punk.*


You mean the 4 month reign where he only feuded with the two top stars and even the Rock got involved, not to mention much of that reign was during Mania season, which is always good in ratings? Yeah, hardly the same as a 14 month reign where Punk had to keep it up almost 4 times longer than Miz ever did. Nice try though.


----------



## Sam Knight

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock got over like within 3 months of his push in 1998 and started getting ratings in 6's and 7's.CM Punk is taking forever.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

_*Not sure saying someone isn't as big as one of the three biggest of all time is really even an insult.*_


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh there is nothing funnier than the bitter behavior of the Phil-nonbelievers. Stay in denial, folks.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sam Knight said:


> Rock got over like within 3 months of his push in 1998 and started getting ratings in 6's and 7's.CM Punk is taking forever.


How can anybody be this stupid?


----------



## fabi1982

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

if you believe in what you say for long enough you will think this is the only correct answer (although everybody else will think you are stupid) 



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> How can anybody be this stupid?


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The WWE could have easily let Cena, Jericho, Kane, and Daniel Bryan get a month or two long reign. If Punk was considered such a non draw, they certainly wouldn't have let him hold the belt for that long simply to get a payoff with the Rock winning the title.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*Punk has been booked as a guy who draws for the past 18 months or so. The only guy on the full time roster closing shows over him was Cena, the number one guy in the company.*


----------



## Brogue_Kick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If somehow CM Punk manages to end the streak, he will be the Greatest of All Time, hands down


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The awesome Rock/Cena segment did the peak of the show with a 4.1 quarter. Fitting that it is the biggest quarter of the year as it was the best TV they produced this year so far. Biggest number in a long time, probably since May 2011(Rock's birthday segment)for a regular show.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Defei said:


> I fully expect Rock/Cena segment at 9 to end up the highest rated part of the show.



Looks like I was right, Rock/Cena at 9 seems to have done a 4.1 QHR, biggest in months. WWE champion vs Royal Rumble winner... obviously interest is up, actually way up from last year but not nearly as much as their 2011 WM feud tease involving The Miz. Undertaker/Punk don't seem to be doing too well and Swagger/Del Rio angle isn't working at all, lowest part of the show.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk is really starting to hit his stride lately with those gains. He has always been a draw somewhat (not near the level of Rock/Taker/Lesnar/HHH/Cena) but feuding with the Rock seems to certainly helped. It will be interesting to see how his segments continue to do after Mania when the part timers aren't around.

That Rock/Cena segment at 4.1 is really big, not surprising though as its the biggest draw of this current era vs the biggest draw of the attitude era arguably for the title. Bringing in dem casuals.


----------



## the fox

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

segment breakdown out yet?


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No, just that irrelevant Household rating.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> If CM Punk wasn't bringing in some sort of high end revenue for the company he wouldn't be featured the way he is


^That got me curious. Turns out 2012 did turn a profit over 2011 even with Punk as champ the entire calendar year. Interestingly enough, their biggest gains were for "Live and _*Televised*_ Entertainment," in spite of those dismal football season numbers.:lol

I wonder if that's thanks to the extra revenue of the third hour.

Seems they slipped quite a bit though in WWE Studios. That's their movie franchise, right? LOL, the one area where Punk was _*not*_ involved.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE honestly just needs to give up with WWE studios, they aren't making any money whatsoever with it.


----------



## Sam Knight

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> How can anybody be this stupid?


Dude just get the heck out from here.You're a horrible troll,perhaps the worst troll in the history of this forum.First you say that currently you hate Shaemus the most and then you vote for the Rock as your most hated wrestler.You're nothing but an Austin tool.And how are you gonna reply to me now?By bringing the superman/batman/spiderman argument again?Go find some new returns dude.And take the Rock out from your nobodycaresdamn list.


----------



## Sam Knight

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Does it matter what IWC thinks?IWC constitutes a very small portion of WWE universe.They say that they can't stand Rock/Cena 2 and here I see Rock/Cena 2 segment did the highest quarter rating in months.I don't think the WWE cares about the IWC.It won't surprise me if they did Rock/Cena 3 at WM 30.


----------



## Icon_Vs_Icon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> As if a guy who never drew would be WWE Champion for a year, beat the top star half a dozen times, then spend the first 3 ppvs this year facing guys like Rock and Taker. Duh.


Punk is awesome but he only held the title so long to make it more epic when da GOAT won and cuz Cena couldnt have it. WWE proved many times they didnt care about Punk or his title run and never pushed it as a big deal until January 



swagger_ROCKS said:


> I think Punk is a big draw considering he's one of WWE's most popular stars who WWE can solely rely on to keep people interested even if something were to happen to Cena. But I don't think his star power is quite up there just yet.


Punk is not a big draw. Its not his fault though cuz WWE hasnt even tried to let his reach his peak out of fear he would overshadow Hunter and Cena 



GillbergReturns said:


> We can talk about drawing ability once Rock, Taker and Lesnar leave. Rock can draw in feud against a ham sandwich. Same can be said about the streak nowadays.


True about da GOAT but not about the streak, it did terrible buys at Mania with the greatest in ring worker in history Shawn Michaels. If da GOAT wasnt there to save Mania 27 and 28 i highly doubt either wouldve broken over one million buys. 



Sam Knight said:


> Rock got over like within 3 months of his push in 1998 and started getting ratings in 6's and 7's.


Rock got over huge in August 1998, three months later he was the favorite to win the title at Survivor Series. It was around this time when Rocky kept the momentum on WWF side ratings wise which put the nail in WCW coffin. Once he turned babyface WWF ratings skyrocketed 



Brogue_Kick said:


> If somehow CM Punk manages to end the streak, he will be the Greatest of All Time, hands down


That title has already been taken since 2002



Rock316AE said:


> The awesome Rock/Cena segment did the peak of the show with a 4.1 quarter. Fitting that it is the biggest quarter of the year as it was the best TV they produced this year so far. Biggest number in a long time, probably since May 2011(Rock's birthday segment)for a regular show.


:rock4 approves


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Still no breakdown?

Rock/Cena doing a 4.1 did surprise me a tad bit, if only because none of their segments last year did anywhere close to that number. I do wonder if it will hold up on their next encounter... then again, that's three weeks away at the very least. But anyway, incredible number. The gain for that should be very impressive.

I still am curious as to how both quarters Taker appeared in did, the four-way, and the HHH segment. Although if what Deifi said is true, it appears the Taker segments didn't do so well and we know Swagger/Del Rio got the lowest of the night.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Did Miz hold the WWE Title for over a year because WWE didn't see anyone else as a more suitable holder? If CM Punk wasn't bringing in some sort of high end revenue for the company he wouldn't be featured the way he is, and the fact that he did it all while only working with a small group of marquee names makes it all the more impressive. He didn't have the Guerrero's, Lesnar's, Angle's, Jericho's(in his prime), HBK's, HHH's, Batista's, etc.. to work with all the while being pushed to the moon and steamrolling through all of those guys and more dominantly and CLEAN like Cena did.


I got 3 words for ya. She a mus,


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Icon_Vs_Icon said:


> Punk is awesome but he only held the title so long to make it more epic when da GOAT won and cuz Cena couldnt have it. WWE proved many times they didnt care about Punk or his title run and never pushed it as a big deal until January
> 
> 
> 
> Punk is not a big draw. Its not his fault though cuz WWE hasnt even tried to let his reach his peak out of fear he would overshadow Hunter and Cena
> 
> 
> 
> True about da GOAT but not about the streak, it did terrible buys at Mania with the greatest in ring worker in history Shawn Michaels. If da GOAT wasnt there to save Mania 27 and 28 i highly doubt either wouldve broken over one million buys.
> 
> 
> 
> Rock got over huge in August 1998, three months later he was the favorite to win the title at Survivor Series. It was around this time when Rocky kept the momentum on WWF side ratings wise which put the nail in WCW coffin. Once he turned babyface WWF ratings skyrocketed
> 
> 
> 
> That title has already been taken since 2002
> 
> 
> 
> :rock4 approves


Yeah but Triple H Taker brought in the best ratings last year. I'd like to think that Michaels Taker elevated the streak.

I also agree with you on WCW's demise. Rock and Foley's promotion is ultimately what did them in.


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Maybe Punk cant draw, but at least hes entertaining, and he delivers AAA matches all the time.

The only reason The Rock is a draw is because of his Hollywood carrer, hes not that great in the ring.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> Maybe Punk cant draw, but at least hes entertaining, and he delivers AAA matches all the time.
> 
> The only reason The Rock is a draw is because of his Hollywood carrer, hes not that great in the ring.


Take away hollywood, rock is one of the biggest stars the wrestling industry has seen. It's not just because of hollywood that he is a draw come on.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> The only reason The Rock is a draw is because of his Hollywood carrer, hes not that great in the ring.


 He was still a big draw even before he started his acting career.


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Take away hollywood, rock is one of the biggest stars the wrestling industry has seen. It's not just because of hollywood that he is a draw come on.


The Rock was a Hollywood star before WWE, he was the scorpion King and he did many movies, not only G.I. Joe and Fast and furious...


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> The Rock was a Hollywood star before WWE, he was the scorpion King and he did many movies, not only G.I. Joe and Fast and furious...


The rock was a huge draw late 90's early 2000's lol way before the scorpion king was made


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> The rock was a huge draw late 90's early 2000's lol way before the scorpion king was made



You're fooling nobody lol..im not new here, ive been watching wrestling since early 2005 and im pretty sure the Rock was already a Hollywood Star, wayy before he joined WWE to challenge Cena.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*Don't engage Nimbus, he was exposed as a troll like 20 threads ago. DO NOT TAKE THE BAIT!!*


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> *Don't engage Nimbus, he was exposed as a troll like 20 threads ago. DO NOT TAKE THE BAIT!!*


 No shit.


----------



## James1o1o

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Nimbus said:


> The Rock was a Hollywood star before WWE, he was the scorpion King and he did many movies, not only G.I. Joe and Fast and furious...


Uh what?

The Rock did his first film in 1999. He joined the WWE in 1996. He was a wrestler before he was a "Hollywood star"


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



James1o1o said:


> Uh what?
> 
> The Rock did his first film in 1999. He joined the WWE in 1996. He was a wrestler before he was a "Hollywood star"


He's a troll, ignore it


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> He's a troll, ignore it


Just because someone has a different opinion, doesn't mean it's trolling.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

_*No, your trolling makes you a troll.*_


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

He thinks The Rock debuted as a wrestler in 2011. Or at least that's what it seems like. :lol


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> He thinks The Rock debuted as a wrestler in 2011. Or at least that's what it seems like. :lol


 It's the ROCK, not the 'Rock'. : :rock


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*A lot of Rock marks online were Cena fans first, a lot of them pretend to be long time Rock fans but his return two years ago was probably the first time a lot of them ever saw him on TV.*


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> He thinks The Rock debuted as a wrestler in 2011. Or at least that's what it seems like. :lol


I wonder if this is him?:hmm:


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> *A lot of Rock marks online were Cena fans first, a lot of them pretend to be long time Rock fans but his return two years ago was probably the first time a lot of them ever saw him on TV.*


 Kinda like when CM Punk "fans" did after the shoot, knowing damn well they couldn't give not even 1 single fuck about him beforehand.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ChromeMan said:


> I wonder if this is him?:hmm:


:lmao


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> Kinda like when CM Punk "fans" did after the shoot, knowing damn well they couldn't give not even 1 single fuck about him beforehand.


*Agreed, it goes with a lot of guys on the show. Bandwagons everywhere, usually when someone gets over huge or comes back. Punk and Rock are really the two best current examples.*


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> *Agreed, it goes with a lot of guys on the show. Bandwagons everywhere, usually when someone gets over huge or comes back. Punk and Rock are really the two best current examples.*


I'm for 1 am not one. I usually like what I like no matter the success as apparent by my avatar.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> *A lot of Rock marks online were Cena fans first, a lot of them pretend to be long time Rock fans but his return two years ago was probably the first time a lot of them ever saw him on TV.*


So what. You don't have to watch indy wrestling to appreciate Bryan or Punk, and if you're too young to remember Rock back in the AE but still a fan that's cool too. Chances are those Cena kids watched Rock's many kid centered movies and can appreciate him there.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



GillbergReturns said:


> So what. You don't have to watch indy wrestling to appreciate Bryan or Punk, and if you're too young to remember Rock back in the AE but still a fan that's cool too. Chances are those Cena kids watched Rock's many kid centered movies and can appreciate him there.


Perhaps, but I have seen plenty on different forums who never once claimed to like Rock two years ago and then suddenly they are huge fans. The word 'bandwagon' exists for a reason.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> n the segment-by-segment, the first segment with C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman out for an interview, with Randy Orton, Sheamus and Big Show coming out to set up the main event opened with a 3.7 rating.
> 
> We don’t have exact gains and losses, but have very close estimates for each match or segment. Ryback vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 427,000 viewers. Mark Henry vs. Zack Ryder gained 142,000 viewers. The Miz vs. Dolph Ziggler (segment with Ric Flair) stayed even. The star segment of the show was the Rock face-off with John Cena, which did a 4.1 quarter and gained 855,000 viewers at 9 p.m. Jack Swagger vs. Jim Duggan, with Dusty Rhodes and Sgt. Slaughter, lost 712,000 viewers. Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. Prime Time Players (Ted DiBiase Sr. at ringside) and Brodus Clay & Tensai vs. Drew McIntyre & Heath Slater (Honky Tonk Man return) lost 142,000 viewers. The Fandango ring entrance and interview lost 284,000 viewers. The HHH promo gained 427,000 viewers and did a 3.6 rating at 10 p.m. Wade Barrett vs. Alberto Del Rio and a Swagger & Zeb Colter video promo lost 427,000 viewers. The Mae Young birthday lost 142,000 viewers and was the lowest rated portion of the show. C.M. Punk’s winning the four-way over Show, Orton and Sheamus gained 570,000 viewers to a 3.7 overrun.


This Zeb Coulter/Swagger shit is obviously not working.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> ...We don’t have exact gains and losses, but have very close *estimates* for each match or segment....


fpalm


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Mae Young doesn't draw.


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Dafuq?

Henry/Ryder gains 142,000 viewers, Mae young bithday segment loses 142,000 and Clay/tensai/Drew match loses 142,000 viewers..the same exact amount of viewers? 

Ryback/cesaro loses 427,000 viewers, Barret/Del Rio loses 427,000 but HHH gains 427,000 viewers? Again exact same amount of viewers? WTF is this crap? Where is he getting these figures or is he coming up with his own gains and loses? 

And how long was that Henry/Ryder match exactly? I don't think it was even a minute long iirc.

Worthless report. Meltzer needs to stop reporting RAW quarter hours, if he doesn't have them. Why make up his own "estimates"? Terrible job.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

One thing is for certain..the Rock PROVES he's supposed to be WWE Champion heading into Mania. Numbers just don't lie.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...nt_The_Rock_and_Cena_Do_Big_Numbers_More.html



> - As noted before, the March 4th old-school edition of WWE RAW did a 3.52 cable rating with 5.01 million viewers, the second best numbers of the year. RAW was the highest rated show on cable for the night, even beating out Pawn Stars.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, the first segment, after The Undertaker opened the show, with CM Punk and Paul Heyman, Randy Orton, Sheamus and Big Show opened strong with a 3.7 quarter rating. We don't have exact gains and losses this week but Ryback vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 427,000 viewers while Zack Ryder vs. Mark Henry gained 142,000. The Miz vs. Dolph Ziggler and segment with Ric Flair stayed even.
> 
> The high-point of the show came with The Rock and John Cena having their point & counterpoint segment, which did a 4.1 quarter rating and gained 855,000 viewers in the 9pm timeslot. Jim Duggan with the WWE Legends vs. Jack Swagger lost 712,000 viewers. Kane and Daniel Bryan vs. Darren Young and Titus O'Neil plus Tensai and Brodus Clay vs. Drew McIntyre and Heath Slater lost 142,000 viewers. Fandango's entrance and interview lost 284,000 viewers.
> 
> Triple H's segment gained 427,000 viewers and did a 3.6 quarter rating in the 10pm timeslot. Alberto Del Rio vs. Wade Barrett plus a promo from Swagger and Zeb Colter lost 427,000 viewers. Mae Young's birthday segment lost 142,000 viewers and was the lowest rated part of the show. The Fatal 4 Way main event with Punk, Orton, Sheamus and Big Show gained 570,000 viewers for a 3.7 overrun.


----------



## LKRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk, Rock, Cena, HHH, Brock and Taker: The biggest draws, and only two of them are full timers. There's no way three hour Raw is going to hold up after 'Mania season


----------



## Rop3

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> This Zeb Coulter/Swagger shit is obviously not working.


You have pretty high expectations if you thought that Swagger vs some old farts draws more than Cena vs Rock promo, and Swagger promo draws more than Triple H vs Brock Lesnar promo. These two big promos were also at even clock time, which means more people tuning in after a show finishes in another channel. Looking at these numbers without understanding the context is about as useful as making up numbers in your head.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So we had the incredible 4.1 rating for Rock/Cena. Great numbers for Taker's return. 3.7 on both occasions is impressive. HHH promo did well as well. Same rating he got last week, but last week it was a bit disappointing considering it was not only him, but 2-3 other proven draws in Lesnar, Vince, and Heyman (maybe). This week he was on his own and the 3.6 looks much better due to that. Very good number.

Estimates suck, but oh well. Of course it's interesting because even the lowest rated segment is probably getting more viewers than the highest rated segment of any Raw 3-5 months ago. Kinda interesting when you think about it, of course now they have Taker, HHH, and either Rock or Lesnar on each show until the Raw before Mania, where they'll have all those big names. And then you have full-time draws like Cena, Punk, Henry, and Ryback to add on top of that, it all seems to be good.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Even though I am a Rock fan,I do not want this match between Cena and Rock to draw: either ratings or PPV numbers.Because my biggest fear is,if this Mania happens to be as successful as the previous one,the money hungry Vince Mcmahon will/may arrange Rock-Cena 3 or 4(if Extreme Rules match betwen these two is on),and that would be disaster for me,since I want the Rock to either fight Brock or Taker in the coming mania-


But alas,looking at the ratings breakdown,people are still watching Rock/Cena rivalry in big numbers -


PS: Working with The G.O.A.T Rock has seemingly worked for Punk,as from ratings killer,slowly but surely he is generating some interest among the casuals.Good for him,and the WWE!


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They got a 4.1? Well, fuck.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

For what it is worth, a 4.1 rating is about *5.8 million viewers*. I do wonder if 'Taker had something to do with it, I imagine news of his return spread on social media, leading to a higher quarter hour than expected maybe at 9pm.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

D M N trying to steal Rock/Cena's ratings. Bad form.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> For what it is worth, a 4.1 rating is about *5.8 million viewers*. I do wonder if 'Taker had something to do with it, I imagine news of his return spread on social media, leading to a higher quarter hour than expected maybe at 9pm.


A Household rating has nothing to do with the viewership.
You only get the number of households from the rating: 4.1 = about 4.071 million households (12/13 season 1.0 HH rating = 993,010 (USA Network) households)


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Some notable Rock ratingz moments since he returned in 2011:

March 28, 2011 - Rock and Cena in highest rated segment (4.77) since commercial free raw in 2009: 

http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/community/showthread.php?5357-WWE-RAW-3-28-11-Ratings/page2

May 2, 2011 - Rock's Birthday Bash opener draws the highest rated second quarter in years (4.1):

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/5...05-02-2011-rock-segment-draws-4-1-rating.html

Rock has been in the 3 highest rated segments since Raw 1000

1. 4.43 - Raw 1000 overrun (with Punk, Cena and Big Show)
2. 4.1 - March 4, 2013 (with Cena)
3. 4.03 - January 28, 2013 (with Punk)

Add the awesome ratings with the Wrestlemania and Survivor Series buys, and it's clear that Rock = GOAT draw


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> Even though I am a Rock fan,I do not want this match between Cena and Rock to draw: either ratings or PPV numbers.Because my biggest fear is,if this Mania happens to be as successful as the previous one,the money hungry Vince Mcmahon will/may arrange Rock-Cena 3 or 4(if Extreme Rules match betwen these two is on),and that would be disaster for me,since I want the Rock to either fight Brock or Taker in the coming mania-
> 
> 
> But alas,looking at the ratings breakdown,people are still watching Rock/Cena rivalry in big numbers -
> 
> 
> PS: Working with The G.O.A.T Rock has seemingly worked for Punk,as from ratings killer,slowly but surely he is generating some interest among the casuals.Good for him,and the WWE!


Rock and Cena was arranged around WM 27. He'll do the two jobs but he's facing Lesnar at Mania 30. He wants that match and it's gonna happen at Summerslam or WM next year. Not sure where he'll be around Summerslam though so I don't trust that but WM XXX? Oh yeah..he'll definitely make Vince do the match.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

HHH promo did bad in my opinion. I would have expected a bigger gain after losing 1 million+ viewers through the previous 3 segments.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk and Undertaker program already doing better than the Lesnar/HHH program.

:HHH unk


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So this weeks ratings are just estimates? Meh, judging by that breakdown this just confirms Rock vs Cena, Undertaker vs CM Punk and Triple H vs Brock Lesnar will have the highest segments till Wrestlemania, but this is obvious.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> A Household rating has nothing to do with the viewership.
> You only get the number of households from the rating: 4.1 = about 4.071 million households (12/13 season 1.0 HH rating = 993,010 (USA Network) households)


I know that - but you can try and work it out from...

- 5.01 million divided by 3.52 rating * 4.1 rating = 5.8 million.

There's no better method to use based on the data provided. And even so, the dirtsheets seem to use the identical same method hence their illogical "don't have exact numbers" sentence.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



WallofShame said:


> HHH promo did bad in my opinion. I would have expected a bigger gain after losing 1 million+ viewers through the previous 3 segments.


How is a 3.6 bad when you are standing out there by yourself and not pandering to the crowd nor putting them down? His promo was the only one that made sense to be honest. He explained what made him come back and who he wants to fight and it was under 10mins.

To me all of the big time part-timers held up their end of the deal and Cena and Punk are benefiting from it wonderfully.

The show would've done better if they actually used retro outfits and themes. Plus, there was no Jericho and Brock.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:shocked: at that 4.1

Another slap to the IWC :lmao

They would have never gotten that number if it was a triple threat with Punk included. Thank God.

I will guarantee you now WM 29 will get AT LEAST 1.6 million buys.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock, punk, taker pulling them ratings!!!


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Hawksea said:


> :shocked: at that 4.1
> 
> Another slap to the IWC :lmao
> 
> *They would have never gotten that number if it was a triple threat with Punk included.* Thank God.
> 
> I will guarantee you now WM 29 will get AT LEAST 1.6 million buys.


You're right to be fair, it would have been at least a 4.5. unk


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Hawksea said:


> I will guarantee you now WM 29 will get AT LEAST 1.6 million buys.


If it's a guarantee, what will you do for compensation if the buyrate is lower?


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



purple_gloves said:


> You're right to be fair, it would have been at least a 4.5. unk


Punk have never even pulled at least one 4.0 in his life. fpalm

This is like Rock's 110th 4.0 + already and Cena's probably 10th or 15th. This is mainstream territory. And only Rock, Cena, Brock, Vince, HHH and Undertaker can pull numbers like this.

Punk can barely even pull a 3.0 when Rock, Cena and Vince doesn't give a crap about him. fpalm


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That 4.1 has blown me away but I think it's well deserved. Great promo and work from both men. I hope they keep it this serious route. No raps, no concerts, just 2 of the biggest stars of all time who want to prove they are the best and become/remain champion. 

Trips pulling a 3.6 completely on his own is great. Now that the challenge has been issued and with both Brock/Heyman there next week, they should be hovering around this number or even higher if they can for the rest of the road to Mania. Taker's return also did great for the start and end of the show. I also expect numbers to hover around the 3.6 mark for this program too.

They're never going to be pulling in 4.1's or 3.9's every week. At least I don't think so. I'd say all the big programs will range between 3.5 and 4.0 depending on what they're doing any given week. 

Swagger/ADR having such a big drop off is disappointing considering the big number they did last week. But that had MOZ DA GOAT and like it or not, his MizTV segments have always delivered in the ratings department. I guess that's what really drew the number there. 

All in all some impressive stuff. Now all the main programs are set. Let's see if they can hold interest as we get closer to the big day.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Hawksea said:


> :shocked: at that 4.1
> 
> Another slap to the IWC :lmao
> 
> They would have never gotten that number if it was a triple threat with Punk included. Thank God.
> 
> I will guarantee you now WM 29 will get AT LEAST 1.6 million buys.


You're a Vince Russo guy, so this sort of delusional post is not surprising coming from you. :no:


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> You're a Vince Russo guy, so this sort of delusional post is not surprising coming from you. :no:



If WM 29 buys > WM 28 buysraise Rock,Brock and Taker

If WM 29 < WM 28:Blame Cena,HHH and Punk


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I hope it's true Rocks last match might be at 30. Gotta let Rock get his win back from Brock first though. It's like nothing else matters when Rock is here, pathetic way to map out the future of the company. Make a few extra million, fuck making new stars though.


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> If WM 29 buys > WM 28 buysraise Rock,Brock and Taker
> 
> If WM 29 < WM 28:Blame Cena,HHH and Punk


I think Taker and HHH deserve some of the credit for the success of WM 28.Their program last year was the highest point of the show every week ahead of Rock/Cena.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> I hope it's true Rocks last match might be at 30. Gotta let Rock get his win back from Brock first though. It's like nothing else matters when Rock is here, pathetic way to map out the future of the company. Make a few extra million, fuck making new stars though.


Except that isn't the case. Seems like you are putting way too much on Rock for WWE's all around short comings. Can you be any more irrational. Rock is not the reason WWE hasnt made new stars and everything doesn't stop in favor of him. This is silly talk. Hell they had 7 years without the guy to get shit together anyway.


----------



## CenaSux84

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Missing dat MizTV draw this week. Like it or not Miz haters, MizTV does actually draw.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



robertdeniro said:


> I think Taker and HHH deserve some of the credit for the success of WM 28.Their program last year was the highest point of the show every week ahead of Rock/Cena.


Source or :banplz:


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> Source or :banplz:


OK that's fine..



> As noted before, the January 30th RAW Supershow did a 3.55 cable rating and 5.21 million viewers. This was the most-watched RAW since May 23rd, 2011.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, the opener did a 3.90 quarter-rating. Randy Orton vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 580,000 viewers while Tyler Reks vs. Brodus Clay lost 166,000 viewers. CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan gained 219,000 viewers to a 3.54 quarter-rating - which is actually a weak gain for that time slot.
> 
> The Miz vs. Kofi Kingston lost 231,000 viewers while *The Rock's video lost 329,000*. Eve Torres vs. Beth Phoenix and the Kane vs. John Cena brawl gained 325,000 viewers. *The segment with Triple H, John Laurinaitis and The Undertaker gained 753,000 viewers.*
> Source - Wrestling Observer





> Quarter 1: Show opened at a 2.9
> Q2: Lost 49,000 viewers (Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston)
> Q3: Lost 24,000 viewers (Backstage shenanigans with John Cena and Zack Ryder; John Laurinaitis and David Otunga)
> Q4: Gained 93,000 viewers (Big Show vs. Randy Orton)
> Q5: *Gained 822,000 (return of Michaels, Triple H, Undertaker video) to take the show to a 3.6*
> Q6: Lost 621,000 viewers (Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth)
> Q7: Lost 320,000 viewers (Tamina Snuka vs. Brie Bella; Eve walking into the back of an ambulance & ensuing snog with Cena)
> Q8: Lost 139,000 viewers (C.M. Punk vs. The Miz) to do a 2.8.
> Over-run: Gained 505,000 (Kane zooming Ryder off a 3ft stage) viewers to close out on a 3.1





> Raw on 2/20 did a 3.24 rating and 4.63 million viewers, an increase that appears to have been fueled by coming the day after Elimination Chamber and the HHH/Undertaker confrontation.
> 
> The show did a 2.8 in Male teenagers (up 8%), 2.9 in Males 18-49 (up 7%), 1.2 in Female teenagers (up 100%) and 1.1 in Women 18-49 (even to the prior week). The audience was 68.1% male. The show was 5th for the night on cable, and for only the second time in modern history, the NCIS rerun, the show USA ran at 8 p.m. before Raw, drew a higher rating than Raw. The only major sports competition was an NBA game on TNT that did 1.53 million viewers. There was an hour-to-hour decline in viewing, although not big. Still, any decline at all would be amazing considering the Undertaker/HHH segment and the John Cena interview about Rock, along with the Battle Royal were all hour two.
> 
> The one thing notable the past two weeks is a different approach to television based on the changing patterns. The WWE’s usual m.o. for Raw has been to build to what in theory is the strongest segment and put it on last, when viewership would be the highest. I don’t think anyone expected the last two weeks that the Shawn Michaels/HHH and Undertaker/HHH segments wouldn’t be the ones that had the most interest. But both were put on at 10 p.m., clearly with the idea the audience would drop when the show went on, and even with the inherent advantage the overrun has, they seem to feel 10 p.m. is the strongest time slot.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, there was interest at the start, opening with a 3.58 first quarter which was the Cena/Eve Torres segment, but that’s probably more due to the fallout of the Chamber show. Sheamus vs. Mark Henry lost 486,000 viewers, which also included a backstage segment with John Laurinaitis, Teddy Long and David Otunga. R-Truth & Kofi Kingston vs. Primo & Epico and the Ron Simmons Hall of Fame announcement gained 71,000 viewers. Otunga vs. Ezekiel Jackson with Laurinaitis and Long in the corners lost 314,000 viewers. To show what carried the show, *Undertaker/HHH in-ring segment gained 1,122,000 viewers, the best 10 p.m. quarter gain in probably a year or more, doing a 3.85 quarter.* Of course, when that segment was over, they were gone and Daniel Bryan vs. Santino Marella lost 932,000 viewers. Kelly Kelly & Aksana vs. Bella Twins and *Cena promo on Rock lost another 480,000 viewers. So the great Cena promo only did a 2.86 quarter.* The Battle Royal in the overrun gained 601,000 viewers to a 3.31 overrun.
> 
> In comparing the two key segments, and again, keep in mind the overrun has a huge advantage because people tuning in for the next show start coming in at 11 p.m. and had nine minutes to build, with Male teens, the Undertaker segment went from 2.7 to 3.5 while the Battle Royal went from 2.3 to 2.9. With Males 18-49, the Undertaker segment went from 2.7 to 3.5 and the Battle Royal went from 2.7 to 3.1 With teenage girls, the Undertaker segment went from 1.5 to 1.7 and the Battle Royal from 1.1 to 1.3, and with Women 18-49 the Undertaker segment went from 1.1 to 1.3 and the Battle Royal from 1.1 to 1.1.]





> Raw on 2/27 featuring the return of The Rock did a disappointing 3.14 rating and 4.64 million viewers. The rating was actually down from the previous week, although viewers were basically identical.
> 
> In the demos, Teenage boys did a 2.7 (down 4% from last week), Males 18-49 did a 2.8 (down 3%), Teenage girls did a 1.1 (down 8%), and Women 18-49 did a 1.2 (up 9%). The show was third for the night on cable. The show did 67.3% male viewers.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, the C.M. Punk and Chris Jericho dueling promo did a 3.22 opening quarter. Punk vs. Daniel Bryan lost 289,000 viewers. *The HHH/Undertaker video package gained 526,000 viewers and did a 3.38, which is excellent because video packages to build matches usually lose viewers and are considered more necessary evils to ratings*. Kelly Kelly vs. Nikki Bella lost 816,000 viewers. John Cena vs. The Miz gained 388,000 viewers, which is weak for the top of the hour, doing only a 3.09. Primo & Epico vs. Jack Swagger & Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth & Kofi Kingston lost 221,000 viewers. The Eve Torres interview gained 225,000 viewers. Big Show & Sheamus vs. Cody Rhodes & Mark Henry and Rhodes showing the Floyd Mayweather-Show clips gained 3,000 viewers. And as noted before, the Rock’s promo pre-Cena gained 643,000 viewers to a to a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun. And the Cena promo and him leaving and Rock finishing up lost 349,000 viewers and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise.
> 
> Another interesting note regarding the rating is that on 2/20, NCIS that preceded Raw did 4.65 million viewers, and on 2/27 it did 3.30 million viewers. The Daytona race was the difference, so the idea it’s a non-factor wasn’t the case with NCIS. Historically, because major auto races aren’t on Monday nights, there is no history of a major race hurting prime time ratings. There was a correlation in the 80s when TBS wrestling followed races (ratings were up, sometimes a lot, but the theory always was that Southern style wrestling and NASCAR had the big crossover but WWF and NASCAR didn’t) and went against races (ratings were down). ]





> Raw on 3/12 did a 3.29 rating and 4.84 million viewers. The increase may have been due to the lack of cable competition, as the usual History Channel shows that beat Raw were in reruns, although an NBA game on ESPN did 3.03 million viewers. Not only was Raw the highest rated program, but its NCIS rerun lead-in was No. 2 (3.79 million viewers).
> 
> The audience was 67.2% male. In the demos, Male teens did a 2.5 (Up 14% from last week), Men 18-49 did a 3.1 (identical to last week), Girl teens did a 1.3 (up 30%), and Women 18-49 did a 1.3 (up 18%). The show also did better in the second hour, which has been a rarity of late, largely due to the Undertaker-Michaels segment.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Sheamus vs. Ziggler lost 6,000 viewers coming off a John Cena rap open. Usually the second segment of Raw loses several hundred thousand, so that’s a very good number.
> 
> Mark Henry & David Otunga vs. Santino Marella in a handicap match gained 225,000 viewers, which is a good sign for the Laurinaitis-Long program since that was the focus of the segment.
> 
> Brodus Clay vs. Jinder Mahal lost 276,000 viewers.
> 
> *The Undertaker-Michaels in-ring segment gained 869,000 viewers to a 3.73 quarter, the best quarter on the show in several weeks.*C.M. Punk vs. Miz then lost 888,000 viewers, which is the biggest drop segment in a long time.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Jack Swagger gained 58,000 viewers.
> 
> *And the final segment with The Rock concert gained 509,000 viewers, which is below average gain for an overrun and did a 3.51 quarter.*
> 
> The final segment was huge in Males 18-49, however, growing from a 3.1 to a 3.8. For teen males it went from 2.3 to 2.7. Teen girls for the Rock concert stayed at 1.1. Women 18-49 went from 1.3 to 1.4.





> As noted before, the March 20th WWE RAW Supershow did a 3.10 cable rating with 4.38 million viewers.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, Kane vs. Big Show lost 125,000 viewers from the opener which is less than usual for the second slot. Santino Marella vs. David Otunga and the interview with The Rock outside in Philadelphia gained 205,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Zack Ryder lost 418,000 viewers.
> 
> *Mark Henry vs. John Cena with The Rock coming out gained 327,000 viewers for a 3.20 quarter rating at the top of the hour, which is a weak gain for that timeslot*. The Miz vs. Sheamus lost 279,000 viewers while the Randy Orton interview and Kofi Kingston & R-Truth vs. Jack Swagger & Dolph Ziggler lost 151,000 viewers.
> 
> *The final segment with Shawn Michaels, Triple H and The Undertaker gained 597,000 viewers, which is below average, but the 3.32 overrun rating was still the highest rated point of the show*. The final segment saw the Male Teens rating go from 2.2 to 2.5, Males 18-49 go from 2.5 to 3.2, Female Teens drop from 0.6 to 0.5 and the rating with Women 18-49 go from 1.1 to 1.2.



*Source - Wrestling Observer*


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



robertdeniro said:


> OK that's fine..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Source - Wrestling Observer*









:lolHalf the stuff you listed was either just Rock(Rock always gained), Just Cena, or a video package. And you purposely left out segments etc for your own agenda. Please, no matter how much shit Taker and Trips tried to tac on( Hell In A Cell, Shawn Michaels), They were not the drawing point or even close to being the drawing point for WM 28.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Undertaker,atleast at Wrestle-Mania is indeed a big draw,like it or not.The streak has become the most talked about thing in wrestling since years.So Undertaker's match with Game would have also contributed in the overall PPV buys.However,anyone saying that it was THE major attraction is definitely wrong.The entire Mania of last year was billed as,"Once in a Lifetime".And people wanted to see who will win between two icons of their respective era.So last year became the most suceessful WM of all time undoubtedly because of The Rock,whilst others like Cena,Taker,Game,Punk,Y2J etc.,played their part!



And unlike some people who are saying that if this wrestlemania(WM29) will be successful the praise will go to Rock,Brock,Taker,and if it turns out to be not as success as last year's Mania Cena,Punk,and Game would be blamed,are dead wrong.Why?


Because if this WrestleMania does not happen to be as successful as last year's Mania despite having big draws like Brock and Rock,it would be only because of WWE's obsession with REMATCHES,and not because of any full or part time wrestler,IMO!


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> Undertaker,atleast at Wrestle-Mania is indeed a big draw,like it or not.The streak has become the most talked about thing in wrestling since years.So Undertaker's match with Game would have also contributed in the overall PPV buys.However,anyone saying that it was THE major attraction is definitely wrong.The entire Mania of last year was billed as,"Once in a Lifetime".And people wanted to see who will win between two icons of their respective era.So last year became the most suceessful WM of all time undoubtedly because of The Rock,whilst others like Cena,Taker,Game,Punk,Y2J etc.,played their part!
> 
> 
> 
> And unlike some people who are saying that if this wrestlemania(WM29) will be successful the praise will go to Rock,Brock,Taker,and if it turns out to be not as success as last year's Mania Cena,Punk,and Game would be blamed,are dead wrong.Why?
> 
> 
> Because if this WrestleMania does not happen to be as successful as last year's Mania despite having big draws like Brock and Rock,it would be only because of WWE's obsession with REMATCHES,and not because of any full or part time wrestler,IMO!


Great post. I also feel more people are interested in punk/taker than any other match at this years wrestlemania.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Great post. I also feel more people are interested in punk/taker than any other match at this years wrestlemania.


No. Rock/Cena will still be the big selling point of WM 29 just like last year's. That's pretty much common sense.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Great post. I also feel more people are interested in punk/taker than any other match at this years wrestlemania.


No chance in hell.


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> :lolHalf the stuff you listed was either just Rock(Rock always gained), Just Cena, or a video package. And you purposely left out segments etc for your own agenda. Please, no matter how much shit Taker and Trips tried to tac on( Hell In A Cell, Shawn Michaels), They were not the drawing point or even close to being the drawing point for WM 28.


:lol Just a typical Rock mark.


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> Undertaker,*atleast *at Wrestle-Mania is indeed a big draw,like it or not.The streak has become the most talked about thing in wrestling since years.So Undertaker's match with Game would have also contributed in the overall PPV buys.!


You can remove atleast .


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



robertdeniro said:


> :lol Just a typical Rock mark.


If speaking truthfulness is typical of a Rock mark, sure.


----------



## TrentBarretaFan

LOL at people saying The Undertaker doesn't draw...

Of course he does, he draws huge ratings.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TrentBarretaFan said:


> LOL at people saying The Undertaker doesn't draw...
> 
> Of course he does, he draws huge ratings.


Taker does draw. But nobody is going to be as much as interested on The Streak as they usually do. Not with the current guy opposing him.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

People will be interested in Punk/Taker. The streak match is always a selling point. But you'd be foolish to think anything other than Rock/Cena 2 is the top match. This entire WrestleMania, like last years will focus on Rock/Cena as major attraction.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*Just like last year, Rock/Cena is the main draw, but Takers match will steal the show. Nothing new about that. Taker is the show stealer EVERY year it seems. Hell, 2006 was the last time his match wasn't the best on the card, that was seven years ago. No doubt he is the MVP of this event ATM.*


----------



## USAUSA1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> *Just like last year, Rock/Cena is the main draw, but Takers match will steal the show. Nothing new about that. Taker is the show stealer EVERY year it seems. Hell, 2006 was the last time his match wasn't the best on the card, that was seven years ago. No doubt he is the MVP of this event ATM.*


When you only have to wrestle once a year, you better have the greatest match ever.


----------



## Icon_Vs_Icon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



robertdeniro said:


> I think Taker and HHH deserve some of the credit for the success of WM 28.Their program last year was the highest point of the show every week ahead of Rock/Cena.


Mania 28 was sold on one man alone. Taker two epic matches with Shawn didnt even get over one million buys. Shawn is a lot better than Hunter so that proves without da GOAT Mania 28 wouldve had the same fate and not reached over one million buys.



Boots2Asses said:


> Undertaker,atleast at Wrestle-Mania is indeed a big draw,like it or not.The streak has become the most talked about thing in wrestling since years


The streak is so overrated for being a draw. Its not nearly as big as people make it out to be in terms of drawing power. 



Charlie Bronson said:


> *Just like last year, Rock/Cena is the main draw, but Takers match will steal the show. Nothing new about that. Taker is the show stealer EVERY year it seems. Hell, 2006 was the last time his match wasn't the best on the card, that was seven years ago. No doubt he is the MVP of this event ATM.*


Taker always steals the show yet Rocky always goes after him at Mania, makes no sense.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



USAUSA1 said:


> When you only have to wrestle once a year, you better have the greatest match ever.


Ringrust makes it harder, not easier. Why you think they put Taker in a house show match recently.


----------



## HEELKris

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Takers match will steal the show.


You are delusional if you think so. Undertaker's matches with Punk in the past were average at best and this time is not going to be any different. To be perfectly honest, it's probably gonna be WORSE now that Taker is so old. I don't give one single fuck about Brock Lesnar versus Triple H, but I think it's the match that's going to steal the show.


----------



## TheFlyingAsterix

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



HEELKris said:


> You are delusional if you think so. Undertaker's matches with Punk in the past were average at best and this time is not going to be any different. To be perfectly honest, it's probably gonna be WORSE now that Taker is so old. I don't give one single fuck about Brock Lesnar versus Triple H, but I think it's the match that's going to steal the show.


I've gotten so sick of your posts tbh.You're favourites include Curt Hawkins,Cody Rhodes and even Jack I cant do shit Swagger.You have no right criticizing other wrestlers.


----------



## HEELKris

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TheFlyingAsterix said:


> :frustrate:frustrate I couldn't come up with decent arguments so I decided to bash your favorite wrestlers :frustrate:frustrate:frustrate


Reported for trolling, enjoy your warning/ban because that's what trolls like you deserve. I have one question for you, what the hell do my favorite wrestlers have to do with the Taker/Punk match at WM?


----------



## Alden Heathcliffe

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



HEELKris said:


> You are delusional if you think so. Undertaker's matches with Punk in the past were average at best and this time is not going to be any different. To be perfectly honest, it's probably gonna be WORSE now that Taker is so old. I don't give one single fuck about Brock Lesnar versus Triple H, but I think it's the match that's going to steal the show.


Probably. I could see it being a decent match, but as you said, their styles never meshed well. 

Who knows, maybe one of the best matches could be in the undercard. Del Rio and Swagger are more than competent in the ring. Give them around 15 minutes and it could impress.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The first mania without Taker is going to be interesting. That's going to be the give away as to how big a WM draw he is. I'm certain that when he goes, a huge amount of buys are going with him.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Taker's a big Wrestlemania draw but here's the thing, and this goes for anyone else on the roster... Rock already draws in the fans that would pay for Taker's streak anyway plus even more. The majority of people Taker draws in with the streak are probably older fans who remember Rock and come back mainly for him. Same thing with a guy like HHH, and even Brock Lesnar (though Brock has the MMA audience that follows him that Rock doesn't attract). 

But yeah, while Taker/HHH may have been the difference between... say... 1,150,000 buys and 1,250,000 buys (or whatever they got and if even that much of a difference), Rock/Cena is what brought in most of the fans. If we assume the Wrestlemania event itself would bring in 700,000 buys alone no matter what (which I think is a fair guess), Rock/Cena was responsible for 400,000-500,000 buys. WM28's enormous success by far goes to Rock/Cena, even if Taker/HHH did much better in the ratings.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Undertaker VS Punk was "meh" at best last time. I am hoping that this time they put on a far far better match, which they are both capable of doing.



roadkill_ said:


> Ringrust makes it harder, not easier. Why you think they put Taker in a house show match recently.


Especially with such a pro-longed gap between matches and age being a factor. Undertaker has still had fantastic matches though (his WrestleMania 28 match was by far MOTY 2012). Rock's matches have been good too. I would even call his Royal Rumble match very good-great (in my opinion at least). Hopefully Cena can bring out more from him and the match is better paced than their last.


----------



## Icon_Vs_Icon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



purple_gloves said:


> The first mania without Taker is going to be interesting. That's going to be the give away as to how big a WM draw he is. I'm certain that when he goes, a huge amount of buys are going with him.





The Rawk said:


> Taker's a big Wrestlemania draw but here's the thing, and this goes for anyone else on the roster... Rock already draws in the fans that would pay for Taker's streak anyway plus even more. The majority of people Taker draws in with the streak are probably older fans who remember Rock and come back mainly for him. Same thing with a guy like HHH, and even Brock Lesnar (though Brock has the MMA audience that follows him that Rock doesn't attract).
> 
> But yeah, while Taker/HHH may have been the difference between... say... 1,150,000 buys and 1,250,000 buys (or whatever they got and if even that much of a difference), Rock/Cena is what brought in most of the fans. If we assume the Wrestlemania event itself would bring in 700,000 buys alone no matter what (which I think is a fair guess), Rock/Cena was responsible for 400,000-500,000 buys. WM28's enormous success by far goes to Rock/Cena, even if Taker/HHH did much better in the ratings.


Taker streak proved not to be a big draw at Mania 25 and 26. Mania 28 only broke records cuz of one man. 



NearFall said:


> Undertaker VS Punk was "meh" at best last time. I am hoping that this time they put on a far far better match, which they are both capable of doing.


The Best In The World wont disappoint. He should end the streak then get a monster push as the next top man


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Icon_Vs_Icon said:


> Taker streak proved not to be a big draw at Mania 25 and 26. Mania 28 only broke records *cuz of one man.*


:cena2


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The streak is a big draw for Mania and has been for years now but you got to be out of your mind if you think anyone else but the Rock is the big draw for Mania this year. He was for WM 27 and 28 and will be this year too. Numbers don't lie.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> :cena2


:rock4


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> :rock4


:cena4


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> Undertaker VS Punk was "meh" at best last time. I am hoping that this time they put on a far far better match, which they are both capable of doing.


Have you seen their SD match in 2010 in September (the one before Bearer returns)? That was pretty awesome.

I have to ask, is that match not rated highly, or just a forgotten gem? I mean the rest of the Taker/Punk matches haven't been anything special, but you also have to remember most if not all of them got under 10 minutes (including the SD 2010 match I was referring to), and a match under 10 minutes is difficult to make anything more than "good".




We all know who the real draw of Mania was last year and will be this year:

:henry1


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> :cena4


unk2 





The Rawk said:


> Have you seen their SD match in 2010 in September (the one before Bearer returns)? That was pretty awesome.
> 
> I have to ask, is that match not rated highly, or just a forgotten gem? I mean the rest of the Taker/Punk matches haven't been anything special, but you also have to remember most if not all of them got under 10 minutes (including the SD 2010 match I was referring to), and a match under 10 minutes is difficult to make anything more than "good".



I actually forgot about that one, that one was pretty good. I was giving more of an overall view though. Punk/Taker didn't get much time to be true and one match was just entirely gimmicked so can't really be rated due how bad it was (submission match). I'm a big Punk mark and I do think they are both very capable of putting on a great match, but I just hope they do. Punk/Jericho at Mania is a very over-rated match in my eyes, I hated it as only the end was of decent pace/entertainment.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> unk2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I actually forgot about that one, that one was pretty good. I was giving more of an overall view though. Punk/Taker didn't get much time to be true and one match was just entirely gimmicked so can't really be rated due how bad it was (submission match). I'm a big Punk mark and I do think they are both very capable of putting on a great match, but I just hope they do. Punk/Jericho at Mania is a very over-rated match in my eyes, I hated it as only the end was of decent pace/entertainment.


What makes me think Taker/Punk will be awesome is I genuinely believe Punk has gotten better in the ring since back in late 09, and Taker always goes all out for Mania, so that's what makes me really optimistic for the match. As long as they make it a very back and fourth match, it'll be great I think.

Out of curiosity, did you like Punk/Jericho ER?


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk Jericho sucked dick as well as HHH/Taker HIAC

No way in hell can Punk carry taker to anything but 3stars at best.

HHH is gonna put on his tryhard trunks and carry lesnar to a 4star match though.


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Here is my frist post about WM 28:



> *I think Taker and HHH deserve some of the credit for the success of WM 28*.Their program last year was the highest point of the show every week ahead of Rock/Cena.


Did i say anything wrong or what? yeah i know Rock/Cena was the draw for WM 28 but i don't like the fact that Taker and HHH don't get any credit.

Of course Rock marks will freak out bucause they think Rock is the only draw in the history.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



robertdeniro said:


> Here is my frist post about WM 28:
> 
> 
> 
> Did i say anything wrong or what? yeah i know Rock/Cena was the draw for WM 28 but i don't like the fact that Taker and HHH don't get any credit.
> 
> Of course Rock marks will freak out bucause they think Rock is the only draw in the history.


*Yes, one Rock mark, who is a known idiot, freaks out...and now they all freak out. Great logic.*


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

We all know the real draw of Mania 28 was BIG JOHNNY. Seriously. Guy is a ratings and buyrates machine. Why the hell don't we have a BIG JOHNNY smiley yet? Somebody needs to get on that LIKE NOW.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *Yes, one Rock mark, who is a known idiot, freaks out...and now they all freak out. Great logic.*


Agreed.

Ive been seeing this for far too often. People letting one or two irrational marks sway them and get them riled up. Makes no sense.


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *Yes, one Rock mark, who is a known idiot, freaks out...and now they all freak out. Great logic.*


Most of them of course not all of them.In case you haven't seen the GOAT thread..check it out .


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



robertdeniro said:


> Here is my frist post about WM 28:
> 
> 
> 
> Did i say anything wrong or what? yeah i know Rock/Cena was the draw for WM 28 but i don't like the fact that Taker and HHH don't get any credit.
> 
> Of course Rock marks will freak out bucause they think Rock is the only draw in the history.


How can get it credit when no one went out of their way to pay for it for Taker/Cripple H..shit they had to add a HIAC because they KNEW they couldn't wrestle a str8 up match without the crowd going quiet..how can get it credit when those record breaking gates were already accomplished in the first 3 months of WM going on sale. No one even knew what the hell Cripple H and Taker was doing at Mania. And if you want to get technical about it, their segments were getting cat calls and WHAT chants almost every week. Taker was stuttering big time during one episode in Minnesota and Michaels was stuttering the next week like some NXT rookie.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



robertdeniro said:


> Most of them of course not all of them.In case you haven't seen the GOAT thread..check it out .


*Yeah, I've seen the GOAT thread. Icon and SamKnight are the 2 obnoxious Rock marks in there and that's about it. Way to generalize, bro.*


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *Yeah, I've seen the GOAT thread. Icon and SamKnight are the 2 obnoxious Rock marks in there and that's about it. Way to generalize, bro.*


 And Rock Bottom. Other Rock marks are alright.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> We all know the real draw of Mania 28 was BIG JOHNNY. Seriously. Guy is a ratings and buyrates machine. Why the hell don't we have a BIG JOHNNY smiley yet? Somebody needs to get on that LIKE NOW.












and the biggest draw of the 2012 summer

DAT TEAR












The Rawk said:


> Out of curiosity, did you like Punk/Jericho ER?


Yep. It's one of my favourites from Punk's reign actually. Not to turn this into match discussion but I also really enjoyed the triple threat TLC, Royal Rumble(Rock), Over The Limit and Survivor Series matches from his big reign.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

you're gonna get obnoxious marks all the time. There are also a couple of obnoxious Punk marks too. And I'm a fan of both Rock and Punk.


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *Yeah, I've seen the GOAT thread. Icon and SamKnight are the 2 obnoxious Rock marks in there and that's about it. Way to generalize, bro.*


LOL.*Rocky Mark * is the only one i would take seriously.The rest of them are obnoxious with numbers.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



robertdeniro said:


> LOL.*Rocky Mark * is the only one i would take seriously.The rest of them are obnoxious with numbers.


Loudness is a very fair and nearly unbiased poster as well.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hmm..so it's the Rock marks who are the problem and not the slick fans of CM Punk that duck out on realities that are the cream of the crop eh? How convenient. There is nothing annoying about telling the truth about how when one guy is champion..ratings and business goes up and everyone here all of a sudden gives a fuck about pro wrestling worldwide and when that guy is GONE, they don't. Very simple.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Speaking of ratings and the world suddenly caring about the show...uh, nope. The ratings are worse than when Rock came back 2 years ago. The current rating is because of Mania, it was in the lower 2's before that. What's that you were saying about realities?


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WM? WM doesn't mean jack shit without the Rock. Before the Rock came back TWO YEARS AGO, they were doing all of that wack Michaels/Undertaker and HHH/Undertaker stuff and what did that do? Nothing. Couldn't get a million buys. Mediocrity. Boring. Average. Futile. It was forgettable and till this day, no one talks nor cares about it. Michaels went away and no one gave a fuck. The Rock has a title and people on here are ready to blow their brains out. That's influence. That's power.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Icon_Vs_Icon said:


> Mania 28 was sold on one man alone.
> 
> The streak is so overrated for being a draw. Its not nearly as big as people make it out to be in terms of drawing power.
> 
> 
> Taker always steals the show yet Rocky always goes after him at Mania, makes no sense.


-One Man?You talk as if Rock faced Tyson Kidd in the main-event.Not saying Cena was more important than Rock but he deserves credit too.The crowds at WM 28(Hometown of Rock) were booing/chanting Cena sucks more than cheering/chanting Rocky

-I am not the biggest fan of Taker but to tell his streak ain't a draw is ridiculous.But since it comes from you,it ain't a surprise to me.Stop talking as if Taker is Zack Ryder.Taker is one of the greats of all time.And at WM,his stock rises way more




AthenaMark said:


> How can get it credit when no one went out of their way to pay for it for Taker/Cripple H..shit they had to add a HIAC because they KNEW they couldn't wrestle a str8 up match without the crowd going quiet..how can get it credit when those record breaking gates were already accomplished in the first 3 months of WM going on sale. No one even knew what the hell Cripple H and Taker was doing at Mania. And if you want to get technical about it, their segments were getting cat calls and WHAT chants almost every week. Taker was stuttering big time during one episode in Minnesota and Michaels was stuttering the next week like some NXT rookie.


Taker vs HHH was getting the biggest gains/ratings around WM 28.More than Rock vs Cena.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AthenaMark said:


> WM? WM doesn't mean jack shit without the Rock. Before the Rock came back TWO YEARS AGO, they were doing all of that wack Michaels/Undertaker and HHH/Undertaker stuff and what did that do? Nothing. Couldn't get a million buys. Mediocrity. Boring. Average. Futile. It was forgettable and till this day, no one talks nor cares about it. Michaels went away and no one gave a fuck. The Rock has a title and people on here are ready to blow their brains out. That's influence. That's power.


:no:

Pathetic. Your delusion has put on the same level as Sam and Icon.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Speaking of ratings and the world suddenly caring about the show...uh, nope. The ratings are worse than when Rock came back 2 years ago. The current rating is because of Mania, it was in the lower 2's before that. What's that you were saying about realities?


This. Not for nothing, but it's not like the ratings have returned to Attitude era level numbers this WM season. And not even just ratings, but even the number of viewers. They STILL lose viewers in hour 3. And hour 3 is typically when the main eventers are on the most (Rock, Cena, Punk, etc). I know they've had their moments, but it's not like the numbers are through the roof. And the quality of programming? :lol This has been one of the worst build-ups to WM in a VERY long time. HBK/Taker and HHH/Taker builds blow this shitty "buildup" (if you can even call it that with ReMatch-Mania and the fact that Rock, Brock, and Taker are barely on any of the shows) out of the water.


----------



## Icon_Vs_Icon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *Yeah, I've seen the GOAT thread. Icon and SamKnight are the 2 obnoxious Rock marks in there and that's about it. Way to generalize, bro.*


Stop trying so hard to be liked by everyone, all you do is remain neutral on everything so people can like you, how lame :flip



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> -One Man?You talk as if Rock faced Tyson Kidd in the main-event.Not saying Cena was more important than Rock but he deserves credit too.The crowds at WM 28(Hometown of Rock) were booing/chanting Cena sucks more than cheering/chanting Rocky


Im not convinced Cena was ever a big draw.



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> -I am not the biggest fan of Taker but to tell his streak ain't a draw is ridiculous.


Once again people like you lie about my comments, i never said it wasnt a big draw just that its not as big as people try to make it out to be and Mania 25 and 26 prove that. 



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> But since it comes from you,it ain't a surprise to me.Stop talking as if Taker is Zack Ryder.Taker is one of the greats of all time.And at WM,his stock rises way more.


Your one of the biggest Taker haters on this site while ive never posted anything bad about him. 



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Taker vs HHH was getting the biggest gains/ratings around WM 28.More than Rock vs Cena.


What like one night? Rocky was still booked over both of them at all the Manias in the Attitude Era and even now, deal with it. 



AthenaMark said:


> WM? WM doesn't mean jack shit without the Rock. Before the Rock came back TWO YEARS AGO, they were doing all of that wack Michaels/Undertaker and HHH/Undertaker stuff and what did that do? Nothing. Couldn't get a million buys. Mediocrity. Boring. Average. Futile. It was forgettable and till this day, no one talks nor cares about it.


Very interesting post, i agree Mania 28 without Rocky wouldve not gotten over one million buys. 



AthenaMark said:


> Michaels went away and no one gave a fuck. The Rock has a title and people on here are ready to blow their brains out. That's influence. That's power.


Very true, Rocky is essentially the top babyface and heel at the same time. Tons of IWC nerds hate him for taking the title off The Best In The World yet they still got there eyes glued every time he shows up just to shit on whatever he does which only helps him draw.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Im not convinced Cena was ever a big draw.


:no:



> Very interesting post, i agree Mania 28 without Rocky wouldve not gotten over one million buys.


Yeah, cuz if it only got 800,000 buys, that would have been horrible. Shit, Rock and Brock are only paying for the few shitty movies anyway. They only got ahead by a few million last year, probably less than they lose with WWE Studios. So these ppv boosts aren't really helping them at all.



> Very true, Rocky is essentially the top babyface and heel at the same time. Tons of IWC nerds hate him for taking the title off The Best In The World yet they still got there eyes glued every time he shows up just to shit on whatever he does which only helps him draw.


Are you brand new to forums? Rocky was getting hate two years ago when he came back, long before Punk came into the picture. Hell, he was getting hate in 2004 just for leaving to do shitty popcorn movies.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Taker's streak is a big Mania attraction, but always in a supporting role. It was never the main drawing match besides maybe WM25-26 and both didn't do a million buys with big star power on the card. Taker usually gets the promotion based on the drama of the result, like putting HBK's career against it or building HHH for over a year as the guy who beat Taker for 30 minutes in their last match, this year drama is not a factor and it's third from the top anyway. The intention behind it is people wanting to see the reaction WHEN/IF the streak ends, in that sense, it's a big draw but you need to organize everything around it for that to work. Rock is the driving force in the last two years, nobody is even close because what pushed WM27-28 to break records is the incredible numbers they did in the international market which is Rock's fanbase. Nobody expected it to be as strong as it was in an era where wrestling awareness is at an all time low and worldwide business dropped every year until 2011.


----------



## Awesome22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not sure if I'm going to watch. I just can't get into their shows anymore. First hour isn't even over and I'm bored.


----------



## Hennessey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



HEELKris said:


> You are delusional if you think so. Undertaker's matches with Punk in the past were average at best and this time is not going to be any different. To be perfectly honest, it's probably gonna be WORSE now that Taker is so old. I don't give one single fuck about Brock Lesnar versus Triple H, but I think it's the match that's going to steal the show.


Are you fucking kidding me? Last time they were in a program Undertaker was injured badly, that is why their matches were less then 10 minutes long, and even then they were still decent. This time the match will probably be twice as long, and its at Wrestlemania so you know they will both give it their all no matter what.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sparta101 said:


> Are you fucking kidding me? Last time they were in a program Undertaker was injured badly, that is why their matches were less then 10 minutes long, and even then they were still decent. This time the match will probably be twice as long, and its at Wrestlemania so you know they will both give it their all no matter what.


Isn't he injured all the time?


----------



## Lurkin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Anyone know that song that is playing right now?


----------



## Brye

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



HEELKris said:


> You are delusional if you think so. Undertaker's matches with Punk in the past were average at best and this time is not going to be any different. To be perfectly honest, it's probably gonna be WORSE now that Taker is so old. I don't give one single fuck about Brock Lesnar versus Triple H, but I think it's the match that's going to steal the show.


You are aware that the story and booking of the match can drastically change the way the match looks? Take a look at the 2009 storyline and then this one. It'll be much better.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Lurkin said:


> Anyone know that song that is playing right now?


 "Letters From The Sky" by Civil Twilight


----------



## ToddTheBod

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm calling off work tomorrow. Why?

"_I'm too busy being Wade Barrett_."


----------



## ToddTheBod

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Did they drop the Jericho/Ziggler thing?

Was that smart to do?


----------



## ToddTheBod

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What in the hell happened to that segment?


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Expect this show to do awful ratings, and I wouldn't be surprised if Punk/Kane only does a 500k overrun gain.


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Kane isnt being a star.


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ToddTheBod said:


> Did they drop the Jericho/Ziggler thing?
> 
> Was that smart to do?


Unless they have Ziggler cost Jericho the match next week.


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Has Cena not be on this show? Well besides that stupid video.

Is that just because they wanted to hide the fact the rock was not there


----------



## Rated_RKO_2009

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



birthday_massacre said:


> Has Cena not be on this show? Well besides that stupid video.
> 
> Is that just because they wanted to hide the fact the rock was not there


Oh yeah just noticed. Haha so Cena no-showed tonight. Thats a first. lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It won't help the over-run that they actually went to commercial during it. I still can't believe that. I could be wrong, but I don't think they've ever done that before.


----------



## x78

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> Expect this show to do awful ratings, and I wouldn't be surprised if Punk/Kane only does a 500k overrun gain.


:langston


----------



## sharkboy22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I posted in thw wrong section, silly me


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_69255.shtml



> -- Monday's Raw dipped 16 percent in social media activity compared to Old-School Raw last week. Raw scored 309,819 in social activity, as compared to an average of 364,000 the previous two weeks.
> 
> Raw retained its #1 ranking on cable TV, though. It marks six out of the last seven weeks where Raw ranked #1 on Monday nights. [ Data Source: Trendrr.TV ]


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think the overrun would do a good number based off the fact that the audience probably expected Undertaker to make an appearance or something. The fact that there was a commercial during the overrun is stupid though. What the hell?


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings will be down from last week but still expect a strong number


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...rican-pickers-lizard-lick-towing-more/173016/

Hour 1 - 4.98 million
Hour 2 - 4.89 million
Hour 3 - 4.57 million

Average - 4.813 million


it also was the most watched show on Cable yesterday


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...rican-pickers-lizard-lick-towing-more/173016/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.98 million
> Hour 2 - 4.89 million
> Hour 3 - 4.57 million
> 
> 
> it also was the most watched show on Cable yesterday


Looks like punk/taker brought in good numbers.


----------



## Gang

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3 th hour did bad compared to last week.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No Rock

No Cena

No HHH

Brock on screen for 5 mins.

Nearly 5 million viewers. 

Punk/Taker and Bearers passing can be credited I think.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

final rating: 3.36


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> final rating: 3.36


Not bad


----------



## Padhlala

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Brock was advertised, so viewership was up. After he appeared viewership went down.

But the fact that the third hour still did a good number compared to a couple of months ago is showing that Punk is increasing in TV draw power (shown it pass few weeks as well). Ever since he feuded with the rock, he has been doing good numbers. New/Old eyes obviously see Punk as a main guy.

Personally I think Swagger/Coulter would've lost a lot of viewership, as they normally do.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Big decrease for hour 3 as usual.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Padhlala said:


> Brock was advertised, so viewership was up. After he appeared viewership went down.
> 
> But the fact that the third hour still did a good number compared to a couple of months ago is showing that Punk is increasing in TV draw power (shown it pass few weeks as well). Ever since he feuded with the rock, he has been doing good numbers. New/Old eyes obviously see Punk as a main guy.
> 
> Personally I think Swagger/Coulter would've lost a lot of viewership, as they normally do.



I would have thought Coulter and Swagger would generate something...even if it was just people watching in outrage for the moment they "get theirs." Apparently not.

As for Punk, if he is finally starting to draw after working with Rock, then the last year has been an unmitigated disaster. Punk has gone through everyone at this point. Who is left to feed to him? Of course, I would argue that the only time he has gotten any real interest was when he was facing Rock and now Taker. Mega stars who are elevating Punk, IMO. Let's see if he still generates any interest when he is fueding with a lesser star.


*Spoiler: He won't.*


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So when we going back to 2 hours?


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> So when we going back to 2 hours?


Hopefully ASAP


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> So when we going back to 2 hours?


By the end of the year. I'm sure of it. After Mania those ratings are gonna fall off the cliff....then something will be done.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> So when we going back to 2 hours?


after SummerSlam probably


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Hopefully ASAP





Happenstan said:


> By the end of the year. I'm sure of it. After Mania those ratings are gonna fall off the cliff....then something will be done.





JY57 said:


> after SummerSlam probably



Lets hope!


----------



## antdvda

Ratings went from a 3.5 something to a 3.3 something. Don't know how some of you say it was a good turnout?

The only thing that was different was that Rock was known to not be appearing. 

Cena not being on the show is irrelevant. Nobody knew he wasn't gonna be on the show and people who tuned in to see Cena didn't realize he wasn't making TV until most of the show was through. 

"I think this proves Punk is gaining viewership"....GREAT...now all they have to do is make sure he's always paired with a legend.

At least they know he will draw when Austin, Hogan, Sting, Angle and Goldberg return.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Taker/Punk in the opener should've done over 5,000,000 based on this. The overrun could go either way as while it ran long, it had a commercial during it and I could see that hurting it. If Taker/Punk managed to pull a 3.7 in the overrun this week, that would be amazing.

Lesnar of course had a big impact as well, and I'm sure Bearer's passing also had a positive impact on viewership. 

Won't know until we see the viewership, but it appears Taker/Punk has the casuals reeled in.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



antdvda said:


> "I think this proves Punk is gaining viewership"....GREAT...now all they have to do is make sure he's always paired with a legend.
> 
> At least they know he will draw when Austin, Hogan, Sting, Angle and Goldberg return.


:lmao :agree:


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> So when we going back to 2 hours?


When the WCW-style cameos dry up and RAW nosedives towards 2.0.


----------



## Kamaria

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> As for Punk, if he is finally starting to draw after working with Rock, then the last year has been an unmitigated disaster. Punk has gone through everyone at this point. Who is left to feed to him?


I would argue not everyone he's faced has been 'fed' to him, especially not in the latter half of his reign where he was a heel. 

If WWE are problems having Punk draw (which they really aren't, ratings on TV don't matter and the average mark doesn't tune in JUST to see a heel, see my sig) it's through their own fault of booking Punk always second to Cena.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wrestling fans begging for less wrestling? 2 hour or 3 hours some shows will be great and some will be bad. The length isnt the problem its how they use their time so blame Vince and Co.


----------



## obby

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

EDIT - Wrong thread


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Soupman Prime said:


> Wrestling fans begging for less wrestling? 2 hour or 3 hours some shows will be great and some will be bad. The length isnt the problem its how they use their time so blame Vince and Co.


3 hours IS a problem. I don't care about some random RASSLIN, I can't stay interested for 3 freaking hours no matter what. They can't use 2 hours properly, so 3 hours just muddies the waters.


----------



## obby

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

EDIT - Wrong thread


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Who is left to feed to him?


:HHH2 :brock :henry1 :vince :ambrose2

















Wishful thinking on my part, I know, but the options _*are*_ there should the 'E choose to go that route, and that's enough to carry him through another year.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Was Cena not there last night? Didn't even notice. The two guys who are closing Mania no showed a Raw one month beforehand, and yet the show didn't suffer for it. Says a lot.


----------



## Schrute_Farms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think people are turned off by the constant movie trailers and ads and recaps and wasted segments. Is it worth sitting there for an entire hour just to see the Bryan vs Ziggler match, IMO no. Is Kane vs Punk an acceptable Monday night Raw main event this time of year? hell no. The champ isn't even on tv a few weeks from Wrestlemania. The show was a mess last night, the crowd was DEAD and I think this company is in huge trouble after Wrestlemania, people are only watching to see the part time guys that is it. Once they leave and we're left with 3 hours of trailers and recpas and Cena/Punk/Orton... goodbye viewers, nobody is going to watch that garbage.


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Raw scored a 3.36 rating, down five percent from a 3.54 rating last week. Two weeks ago, Raw scored a 3.46 rating.
> 
> - Raw averaged 4.81 million viewers, down four percent from an average of 5.02 million viewers last week. Raw did top viewership from two weeks ago, though.
> 
> Hourly Break Down: 4.98 million first hour viewers for the first look at how WWE would tribute Paul Bearer following Bill Moody's death, 4.89 million second hour viewers, and a seven percent decline to 4.57 million third hour viewers.
> 
> It was the ninth consecutive week that Raw's third hour viewership declined from the second hour. It also marks 32 out of 34 shows during the Three-Hour Raw Era to have that distinction.
> 
> - Also of note, the replay of Chris Jericho's "Robot Combat League" that followed Raw's over-run at 11:15 p.m. EST averaged 1.21 million viewers. So, the third hour of Raw averaged 4.57 million viewers, then an unhyped Jericho-hosted episode dipped 73 percent out of the prime-time window. It reinforces WWE TV as appointment television with habitual viewership.
> 
> - On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #1 in viewers during the first and second hours, but fell to #2 behind "Pawn Stars" on History Channel in the third hour. Raw ranked #1 in all key male demos, but ranked #2 in adults 18-34 behind "Teen Mom 2" on MTV.
> 
> - Last year this week, a two-hour Raw scored a 3.27 rating and averaged 4.82 million viewers. This year's rating was slightly higher, but viewership was essentially even.


Last year was it was the Rock concert show.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

32 out of 34 weeks lol


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They probably opened strong for the Brock announcement and to see the Taker tribute. The big third hour drop was expected after the terrible angle they did using Paul Bearer in the storyline and the fact that Lesnar already appeared before that. Brock at 9pm, like Rock/Cena last week was probably strategic placement to do a big peak segment before viewership drop in the third hour.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk/taker feud > rock/cena


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> They probably opened strong for the Brock announcement and to see the Taker tribute. The big third hour drop was expected after the terrible angle they did using Paul Bearer in the storyline *and the fact that Lesnar already appeared before that. Brock at 9pm, like Rock/Cena last week was probably strategic placement to do a big peak segment before viewership drop in the third hour.*


Yeah, you're vastly over-estimating how much of a draw Lesnar is - although that's hardly surprising. He's not as big a draw as some people on here, would like to believe. Oh yeah, and that "terrible angle" is now the best angle on the show leading into 'Mania - it's certainly more interesting than a pointless re-match, and this Cena "redemption" rubbish.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I love how some marks on here just grasp at straws at trying to convince others this Rock/Cena rematch is so different than last year. It's the same damn angle done all over again.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They handled every aspect of the Taker/Punk program so far in the worst way possible. First Punk is losing a lot of matches before that, then out of the blue he gets a match with Taker at WM because he wins a random 4 way. Then they're using Paul Bearer's death as the major story of the feud and above all else, beating Punk AGAIN on RAW. Taker's WM match is all about drama, what they're building now is a babyface/heel program where you're supposed to want to see the babyface beating the heel after he escapes the entire feud. The babyface getting his hands on the heel is the payoff, that's fine for any other show, not for Undertaker's WM match. I'm also surprised by the fact that Taker agreed to come back to work a program when everything is so spontaneous and random, especially when usually for his kind of WM match everything needs to be organized months beforehand to create a believable scenario for the opponent to beat him. This storyline is the worst booked major feud of the year so far. 

As for Lesnar's drawing power, Lesnar already proved his worth countless of times, he's a legit difference maker.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

As opposed to "GREATNESS VS. REDEMPTION" ?

Come off it son, this isn't Steve Austin vs. John Marston here. Rock/Cena is one of the worst feuds in Wrestlemania history because people outside of Cena and Rock marks couldn't give two shits about it and for good reason too. We saw it last year and it stunk then too.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Who is John Marston?


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The entire fanbase of the company is "Cena and Rock marks"? Because they're doing the biggest TV audience, getting the biggest reactions and last year drew the biggest PPV audience in the history of the industry. Greatness vs Redemption has the obvious flaws with Cena's booking for the last year but at least they made a compelling case for it in the video package because he lost a lot of big matches and didn't win the WWE Title. Along with that they had a great selling segment last week, by far the best thing WWE produced on this RTWM so far. The Rock/Cena program 2011-2013 is one of the most successful interactions in wrestling history.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Who is John Marston?


The dude from Red Dead Redemption.



Rock316AE said:


> The entire fanbase of the company is "Cena and Rock marks"? Because they're doing the biggest TV audience, getting the biggest reactions and last year drew the biggest PPV audience in the history of the industry. Greatness vs Redemption has the obvious flaws with Cena's booking for the last year but at least they made a compelling case for it in the video package because he lost a lot of big matches and didn't win the WWE Title. Along with that they had a great selling segment last week, by far the best thing WWE produced on this RTWM so far.


Yeah, clearly the whole entire fan base are Rock and Cena marks :lol

Compelling case? They brought up his bullshit divorce like it had anything to do with him being booked to lose in a fake wrestling match. Segment last week was considered good because of all the pathetic shit they pulled off last year. This feud so far hasn't even been half as good as Punk/Rock, which easily should have been the Wrestlemania main event this year. But I am in no way shape or form shocked that YOU think it's the best thing the WWE has produced considering who is involved.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> Yeah, clearly the whole entire fan base are Rock and Cena marks
> 
> Compelling case? They brought up his bullshit divorce like it had anything to do with him being booked to lose in a fake wrestling match. Segment last week was considered good because of all the pathetic shit they pulled off last year. This feud so far hasn't even been half as good as Punk/Rock, which easily should have been the Wrestlemania main event this year. But I am in no way shape or form shocked that YOU think it's the best thing the WWE has produced considering who is involved.


You claimed that only "Rock and Cena marks" care about this feud when from every indicator this feud has the most interest. 

The divorce part was unnecessary, agree with that. But it was there to emphasize the point. Besides that they showed every Cena loss on PPV, and he lost a lot last year which helped their presentation. Along with that he didn't win the title all year, and the WWE Title is on the line at WM. The segment last week was great because it WAS great work from both of them. Nothing to do with anything they did before. They took the dynamics between them to a different direction with Rock as the confident, arrogant, almost heelish figure, and Cena as the sympathetic figure trying to rebuild his career, they worked every aspect of their current story to perfection and did it all based on their history together. Only Rock/Punk segment with the argument to be equal or better is the first one in January and IMO it was not as good for the simple fact that Rock and Punk talked about the history of their characters in general and not the development of the program between them like Rock and Cena did.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> You claimed that only "Rock and Cena marks" care about this feud when from every indicator this feud has the most interest.
> 
> The divorce part was unnecessary, agree with that. But it was there to emphasize the point. Besides that they showed every loss Cena, and he lost a lot last year which helped their presentation. Along with that he didn't win the title all year, and the WWE Title is on the line at WM. The segment last week was great because it WAS great work from both of them. Nothing to do with anything they did before. They took the dynamics between them to a different direction with Rock as the confident, arrogant, almost heelish figure, and Cena as the sympathetic figure trying to rebuild his career, they worked every aspect of their current story to perfection and did it all based on their history together. Only Rock/Punk segment with the argument to be equal or better is the first one in January and IMO it was not as good for the simple fact that Rock and Punk talked about the history of their characters in general and not the development of the program between them like Rock and Cena did.


Sure he may have lost last year, but how many clean? He still defeated Brock Lesnar, won Money in the Bank, main evented numerous Raws and the majority of PPVs, won Superstar of the Year and so far this year has pinned CM Punk, the longest reigning modern Champion and won the Royal Rumble, the whole thing just screams desperate to try and make shit smell of roses, but I don't buy it, they really could have built something different, something fresh for The Rock and they decided to stick him with cancer again.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> They handled every aspect of the Taker/Punk program so far in the worst way possible. First Punk is losing a lot of matches before that, then out of the blue he gets a match with Taker at WM because he wins a random 4 way. Then they're using Paul Bearer's death as the major story of the feud and above all else, beating Punk AGAIN on RAW. Taker's WM match is all about drama, what they're building now is a babyface/heel program where you're supposed to want to see the babyface beating the heel after he escapes the entire feud. The babyface getting his hands on the heel is the payoff, that's fine for any other show, not for Undertaker's WM match. I'm also surprised by the fact that Taker agreed to come back to work a program when everything is so spontaneous and random, especially when usually for his kind of WM match everything needs to be organized months beforehand to create a believable scenario for the opponent to beat him. This storyline is the worst booked major feud of the year so far.
> 
> As for Lesnar's drawing power, Lesnar already proved his worth countless of times, he's a legit difference maker.



The Rock is the biggest drawing card of all time, A- list movie star, The Rock is The GOAT, Hogan second. 



Rock316AE said:


> You claimed that only "Rock and Cena marks" care about this feud when from every indicator this feud has the most interest.
> 
> The divorce part was unnecessary, agree with that. But it was there to emphasize the point. Besides that they showed every Cena loss on PPV, and he lost a lot last year which helped their presentation. Along with that he didn't win the title all year, and the WWE Title is on the line at WM. The segment last week was great because it WAS great work from both of them. Nothing to do with anything they did before. They took the dynamics between them to a different direction with Rock as the confident, arrogant, almost heelish figure, and Cena as the sympathetic figure trying to rebuild his career, they worked every aspect of their current story to perfection and did it all based on their history together. Only Rock/Punk segment with the argument to be equal or better is the first one in January and IMO it was not as good for the simple fact that Rock and Punk talked about the history of their characters in general and not the development of the program between them like Rock and Cena did.


The Rock is the biggest drawing card of all time, A- list movie star, The Rock is The GOAT, Hogan second. 



Rock316AE said:


> The entire fanbase of the company is "Cena and Rock marks"? Because they're doing the biggest TV audience, getting the biggest reactions and last year drew the biggest PPV audience in the history of the industry. Greatness vs Redemption has the obvious flaws with Cena's booking for the last year but at least they made a compelling case for it in the video package because he lost a lot of big matches and didn't win the WWE Title. Along with that they had a great selling segment last week, by far the best thing WWE produced on this RTWM so far. The Rock/Cena program 2011-2013 is one of the most successful interactions in wrestling history.


The Rock is the biggest drawing card of all time, A- list movie star, The Rock is The GOAT, Hogan second.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> *Sure he may have lost last year, but how many clean?* He still defeated Brock Lesnar, won Money in the Bank, main evented numerous Raws and the majority of PPVs, won Superstar of the Year and so far this year has pinned CM Punk, the longest reigning modern Champion and won the Royal Rumble, the whole thing just screams desperate to try and make shit smell of roses, but I don't buy it, they really could have built something different, something fresh for The Rock and they decided to stick him with cancer again.


That's not really the point of this angle, he's not losing clean but besides beating Brock Lesnar at ER, which was one of the worst decisions they have ever done for a lot of reasons, he almost never got the payoff in his programs. He lost to Rock at WM, lost his MITB, lost to Punk/didn't win the WWE Championship in every match they had. Lost to Ziggler on PPV, lost to Johnny Ace on PPV, was involved in stupid storylines like with AJ and Ziggler etc. They presented it perfectly in this video:

1:00





Everything he did in 2013 like winning the Rumble and beating Punk is part of the current Redemption story. One more important aspect here is that Cena didn't just talk about winning matches, he talked about winning THE match, the only and biggest challenge that he never overcome and that's beating The Rock in the biggest match of his career. So while I agree that I would love to see Rock in a Brock Lesnar program for example, everything they booked and performed in the build up to Rock/Cena 2 is spot on so far.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If ya want to put it into a different perspective:
-WM 28, Cena loses the biggest match of his life and fails the biggest promise he ever made (-)
-ER, Cena continuously gets beat up by Lesnar and is bullied. An old time Rival even tells him to wake up. During the match Cena gets beaten like a ragdoll but gets *lucky* when Brock fucks up a rope dive and Cena uses a foreign object.(+)
-Cena is ment to take time off, but before that can happen a divorce insues.(-)
-Cena loses on a RAW to Tensai in only his second week on the show(-)
-Cena takes on a general manager, who has been beaten up by other lower-card wrestlers and fails to win after 15 minutes by a single blow from Big Show(-)
-NWO, Cena bearly beats Big Show with help from many people(+)
-MITB,Cena manages to win Money in the Bank(+)
-RAW 1000, Cena becomes the first ever to fail a Cash in on a longtime rival. Punk stands tall over the man Cena failed to even harm over a full year.(-)
-SS,Cena fails to beat Punk again, after doing all the work to take Big Show down. (-)
-NOC, Cena had Punk beat however he is careless enough and sloppiness costs him the match. Forcing a draw. (-)
-HIAC, Cena got injured.(-)
-SVS, Cena loses again to Punk and was taken out by a newbie in the form of RyBack (who Punk had managed to survive against). Cena loses his SVS streak. (-)
-TLC, Cena loses a possible new "girlfriend" to Ziggler and then loses a match against Ziggler(who RyBack, Sheamus, Orton and Punk have all beaten cleanly).(-)
-Cena wins superstar of the year (+)

Count the negatives versus the positives. If Cena didn't win superstar of the year and if he sold the loss better, this story would be more believable. However you can see the basis they are trying to form.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> That's not really the point of this angle, he's not losing clean but besides beating Brock Lesnar at ER, which was one of the worst decisions they have ever done for a lot of reasons, he almost never got the payoff in his programs. He lost to Rock at WM, lost his MITB, lost to Punk/didn't win the WWE Championship in every match they had. Lost to Ziggler on PPV, lost to Johnny Ace on PPV, was involved in stupid storylines like with AJ and Ziggler etc. They presented it perfectly in this video:
> 
> 1:00
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything he did in 2013 like winning the Rumble and beating Punk is part of the current Redemption story. One more important aspect here is that Cena didn't just talk about winning matches, he talked about winning THE match, the only and biggest challenge that he never overcome and that's beating The Rock in the biggest match of his career. So while I agree that I would love to see Rock in a Brock Lesnar program for example, everything they booked and performed in the build up to Rock/Cena 2 is spot on so far.


Even now when they look back at the Brock match they pretty much make out like he lost, so i think even they know it was the wrong decision. 
His redemption is a piss take though


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not surprised it goes down without Rock, Cena and HHH. Taker and Brock kept it from being a Punk title reign-esque number (below 3.0's).


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock/cena sucks. Rocky 3:16 is deluded


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> As opposed to "GREATNESS VS. REDEMPTION" ?
> 
> Come off it son, this isn't Steve Austin vs. John Marston here. Rock/Cena is one of the worst feuds in Wrestlemania history because people outside of Cena and Rock marks couldn't give two shits about it and for good reason too. We saw it last year and it stunk then too.


You forget that Rock and Cena are by far the two most popular wrestlers at the moment. This is literally the second biggest match they can do (after Brock and Rock), notwithstanding that it's been done before. Rock and Cena may have a lot of haters on this site, but this site is not in anyway representative of the WWE fanbase as a whole.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> If ya want to put it into a different perspective:
> -WM 28, Cena loses the biggest match of his life and fails the biggest promise he ever made (-)
> -ER, Cena continuously gets beat up by Lesnar and is bullied. An old time Rival even tells him to wake up. During the match Cena gets beaten like a ragdoll but gets *lucky* when Brock fucks up a rope dive and Cena uses a foreign object.(+)
> -Cena is ment to take time off, but before that can happen a divorce insues.(-)
> -Cena loses on a RAW to Tensai in only his second week on the show(-)
> -Cena takes on a general manager, who has been beaten up by other lower-card wrestlers and fails to win after 15 minutes by a single blow from Big Show(-)
> -NWO, Cena bearly beats Big Show with help from many people(+)
> -MITB,Cena manages to win Money in the Bank(+)
> -RAW 1000, Cena becomes the first ever to fail a Cash in on a longtime rival. Punk stands tall over the man Cena failed to even harm over a full year.(-)
> -SS,Cena fails to beat Punk again, after doing all the work to take Big Show down. (-)
> -NOC, Cena had Punk beat however he is careless enough and sloppiness costs him the match. Forcing a draw. (-)
> -HIAC, Cena got injured.(-)
> -SVS, Cena loses again to Punk and was taken out by a newbie in the form of RyBack (who Punk had managed to survive against). Cena loses his SVS streak. (-)
> -TLC, Cena loses a possible new "girlfriend" to Ziggler and then loses a match against Ziggler(who RyBack, Sheamus, Orton and Punk have all beaten cleanly).(-)
> -Cena wins superstar of the year (+)
> 
> Count the negatives versus the positives. If Cena didn't win superstar of the year and if he sold the loss better, this story would be more believable. However you can see the basis they are trying to form.


Pretty good way to look at it without completely shitting on it like most.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> You forget that Rock and Cena are by far the two most popular wrestlers at the moment. This is literally the second biggest match they can do (after Brock and Rock), notwithstanding that it's been done before. Rock and Cena may have a lot of haters on this site, but this site is not in anyway representative of the WWE fanbase as a whole.


Rock/Taker
Brock/Rock
Brock/Taker
Cena/Taker
Punk/Rock

are all matches that are better than this shit.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> Rock and Cena may have a lot of haters on this site, but this site is not in anyway representative of the WWE fanbase as a whole.


Pretty much sums things up.


----------



## Padhlala

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> Rock/Taker
> Brock/Rock
> Brock/Taker
> Cena/Taker
> Punk/Rock
> 
> are all matches that are better than this shit.


If Cena/Taker happened, Brock/Rock would've happened, leaving Punk no one.

Punk/Rock has been done twice, and doesn't draw as much as Rock/Cena. 

As much as it's not enjoyable for the IWC, it's the best combination of drawing and keeping all big stars in a big match.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock316AE trashing Punk/Taker but defending Cena's story of REDEMPTION!

Sit down son.


----------



## Icon_Vs_Icon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock316 isnt trashing Punk hes stating the obvious which is WWE has done a very poor and sloppy job with that feud. The Best In The World shouldve loss at Rumble was horrendous, this coming from a huge Rocky mark. His loss at EC was almost just as bad then he turns around and looses to Cena of all people on Raw which threw away a big money match. Punk shouldve been in the main event, even he said hes going after Taker streak cuz he cant be in the main event. Rock and Cena program is better than last year but still trash. I will never buy this redemption bull after he beat a legit MMA fighter, that alone kills that stupid crap there tryna force on us.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Rock316AE trashing Punk/Taker but defending Cena's story of REDEMPTION!
> 
> Sit down son.


What were you expecting? :lol


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Should have pulled the Rock/Brock and Cena/Taker trigger this year, it would have been a better match and a bigger draw than a rematch. Hopefully we get it next year.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not sure how I feel about WWE's decision to spread out the booking for the 3 main events, kind of feels were stuck in 2nd gear when its time to really go for it. 

Maybe it'll work I dunno and the go home show being the only one were everything develops makes us all super excited. I actually agree with Rock316AE, you don't have to like the Rock/Cena II happening but so far they've booked it really well. 

That Cena package is brilliant and I don't even like him.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Monday really shows how weak their booking really is. One month away from Mania and they make Punk look weak plus the two guys closing Mania are nowhere to be found. Great job Vince.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



WrestlingforEverII said:


> Pretty good way to look at it without completely shitting on it like most.


I don't even like the storyline, but I can make sense out of what they're trying to accomplish. However, they're just doing a brutal job on the Cena part (Rock's build into the feud has been good, although he needs to be there more).


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Padhlala said:


> If Cena/Taker happened, Brock/Rock would've happened, leaving Punk no one.
> 
> Punk/Rock has been done twice, and doesn't draw as much as Rock/Cena.
> 
> As much as it's not enjoyable for the IWC, it's the best combination of drawing and keeping all big stars in a big match.


Punk could face HHH, who should have already put him over anyways. A personal feud like HHH/Orton in 2009 would have been great. Punk already has had bad blood with Trips and Vince both, so the history is already there.


----------



## yoseftigger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> Rock/Taker
> Brock/Rock
> Brock/Taker
> Cena/Taker
> Punk/Rock
> 
> are all matches that are better than this shit.


Out of those, only Rock/Brock is bigger imo. I can see why they are doing Rock/Cena. At least the storyline makes sense unlike Punk/Taker (discrediting the Streak) and Brock/Triple H (slow pace/no point)


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> Rock/Taker
> Brock/Rock
> Brock/Taker
> Cena/Taker
> *Punk/Rock*
> 
> are all matches that are better than this shit.


Rock/Cena WM 28 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Rock/Punk EC 2013 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rock/Punk RR 2013


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Rock316AE trashing Punk/Taker but defending Cena's story of REDEMPTION!


I'm not defending it at all, I'm just saying how horrendously booked the Taker/Punk program has been so far. I mentioned the obvious flaws but they at least presented Cena's story in a logical manner with the video packages and the fact that he actually lost a lot. And the work Rock and Cena did last week selling the match was top class. 



Cookie Monster said:


> Rock/Taker
> Brock/Rock
> Brock/Taker
> Cena/Taker
> Punk/Rock


From these matches, only Rock/Brock and maybe with the right build up, Rock/Taker is bigger than Rock/Cena 2. WM29 should have been Rock/Brock because along with the NY market, it would have done record breaking business in every aspect. I don't think Rock/Cena 2 is drawing a bigger buyrate than WM28 but besides trying to sell the match on Cena's angle, they're doing a very good so far on the main event.



NearFall said:


> If ya want to put it into a different perspective:
> -WM 28, Cena loses the biggest match of his life and fails the biggest promise he ever made (-)
> -ER, Cena continuously gets beat up by Lesnar and is bullied. An old time Rival even tells him to wake up. During the match Cena gets beaten like a ragdoll but gets *lucky* when Brock fucks up a rope dive and Cena uses a foreign object.(+)
> -Cena is ment to take time off, but before that can happen a divorce insues.(-)
> -Cena loses on a RAW to Tensai in only his second week on the show(-)
> -Cena takes on a general manager, who has been beaten up by other lower-card wrestlers and fails to win after 15 minutes by a single blow from Big Show(-)
> -NWO, Cena bearly beats Big Show with help from many people(+)
> -MITB,Cena manages to win Money in the Bank(+)
> -RAW 1000, Cena becomes the first ever to fail a Cash in on a longtime rival. Punk stands tall over the man Cena failed to even harm over a full year.(-)
> -SS,Cena fails to beat Punk again, after doing all the work to take Big Show down. (-)
> -NOC, Cena had Punk beat however he is careless enough and sloppiness costs him the match. Forcing a draw. (-)
> -HIAC, Cena got injured.(-)
> -SVS, Cena loses again to Punk and was taken out by a newbie in the form of RyBack (who Punk had managed to survive against). Cena loses his SVS streak. (-)
> -TLC, Cena loses a possible new "girlfriend" to Ziggler and then loses a match against Ziggler(who RyBack, Sheamus, Orton and Punk have all beaten cleanly).(-)
> -Cena wins superstar of the year (+)
> 
> Count the negatives versus the positives. If Cena didn't win superstar of the year and if he sold the loss better, this story would be more believable. However you can see the basis they are trying to form.


Explained it perfectly. Like I said, if you take out the Brock Lesnar match, he lost pretty much every major payoff he had during the entire year.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> That's not really the point of this angle, he's not losing clean but besides beating Brock Lesnar at ER, which was one of the worst decisions they have ever done for a lot of reasons, he almost never got the payoff in his programs. He lost to Rock at WM, lost his MITB, lost to Punk/didn't win the WWE Championship in every match they had. Lost to Ziggler on PPV, lost to Johnny Ace on PPV, was involved in stupid storylines like with AJ and Ziggler etc. They presented it perfectly in this video:
> 
> 1:00


 But it can be argued that he won most of those feuds. He beat Lesnar, won his feuds with Big Show and John Laurinitis (by getting him fired), beat Ziggler twice in a row and etc. The only real feud he lost was against Punk. How is 2012 different to 2009? 2009 he was losing against Edge, Orton, Sheamus and etc. but the only difference was that he won the Superstar of the year and the WWE championship. Last year, he only won the superstar of the year and the MITB. It's not really bad. If he sold the defeat to the Rock better then I would agree that this redemption storyline makes sense.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't think anyone is defending any of these storylines because the way people have been booked has killed all of the credibility of these feuds. None of them are believable but at least the Rock/Cena one makes the most sense. If Cena would've kept his ego in check and lost against Lesnar and the MITB match, then countless storylines/matches would not have been ruined and we very well could've had a WM card that was either slightly different or at least the re-matches would've made sense.

It just makes him look petty that he couldn't lose 2 more matches in the year, especially if it is true that the Rock is going to drop the title to him at WM 29. I mean, it is not like he is fighting for his spot in the company, he is the very essence that it is built on at the moment. His own inability to see the bigger picture has ruined any chance of him getting resounding cheers after his title win. The Rock may not have been his best on the mic this year but I would rather cheer him over someone that is this selfish. 

WM 29 can't get here fast enough. Hopefully the matches don't disappoint. That is all that I ask for because asking for competent booking is apparently too much.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Hawksea said:


> Rock/Cena WM 28 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Rock/Punk EC 2013 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rock/Punk RR 2013


No surprise coming from someone like you now is it.




Rock316AE said:


> From these matches, only Rock/Brock and maybe with the right build up, Rock/Taker is bigger than Rock/Cena 2. WM29 should have been Rock/Brock because along with the NY market, it would have done record breaking business in every aspect. I don't think Rock/Cena 2 is drawing a bigger buyrate than WM28 but besides trying to sell the match on Cena's angle, they're doing a very good so far on the main event.


I think all with the right build up would be bigger than Rock/Cena 2. For me, no one wants to see Rock/Cena 2 except some Rock and Cena fans. We all wanted something fresh from The Rock this Mania, we all wanted him and Brock, lets not kid ourselves.

I still think it's a real slap in the face to Punk that the two don't meet at Mania though. For me realistically if it wasn't Rock/Brock, I wanted Rock/Punk. Don't have them face off in some meaningless Rumble match that wouldn't even main event, or some B movie like Elimination Chamber.

They should have had Punk continue his reign ALL the way to Wrestlemania and to legitimize himself as the longest reigning champion in the modern era defeat The Rock. Whether cleanly or not it don't matter but they should have had him defeat The Rock in the main event of Wrestlemania.

I would have had no problem with The Rock picking up the belt at Extreme Rules or something the following PPV or whatever but Punk DESERVED at least something from that reign and defeating The Rock should have been that, one the grandest stage of them all.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Besides Rock/Brock and Rock/Taker, the only one with a realistic argument to be bigger is Lesnar/Taker if it happened during that 2010-2011 period when they had the buzz from their UFC PPV confrontation. Again, if YOU don't want to see it again, that's fine, your opinion. But you can't say "for me, nobody cares about this match besides Rock/Cena fans", that's simply not true, every factor indicates that Rock/Cena has by far the most interest on the card. And yes, I wanted Rock/Brock or Rock/Taker over Rock/Cena 2, but I'm not going to deny the marketing potential behind it just because I wanted to see something else. 

Rock/Punk at WM is not a good idea because you have at least 3-4 matches bigger than that. That's also the reason not to do Rock vs Lesnar in any other show than WM, you don't give your audience a blockbuster on a secondary show and save a big match for your biggest event of the year. The only reason Punk held the title for so long was because of The Rock and the fact that they booked the Rock/Punk program since July. He's already longest reigning champion in this era and the 2 months program they had in January-February was very good and at the right time. No reason to change any of that IMO.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*Segment Breakdown
*


> In the segment-by-segment, the show opened at 3.46 for the Paul Bearer tribute to Undertaker and the C.M. Punk interruption.
> 
> Big Show vs. Seth Rollins lost 9,000 viewers.
> 
> Daniel Bryan vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 132,000 viewers.
> 
> The segment with Fandango coming out with Brodus Clay & Tensai lost 298,000 viewers.
> 
> The New Age Outlaws vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow, which was really the Brock Lesnar & Paul Heyman promo was the big segment of the show, gaining 326,000 viewers to a show-high 3.57 quarter.
> 
> Mark Henry vs. Kofi Kingston and Ryback vs. Heath Slater and the Henry/Ryback face-off lost 179,000 viewers.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 265,000 viewers.
> 
> The John Cena/Rock video package lost 10,000 viewers.
> 
> Randy Orton & Sheamus vs. Rhodes & Sandow in the 10 p.m. slot gained 106,000 viewers to a 3.32.
> 
> The Highlight Reel with Chris Jericho, Wade Barrett, Miz and Brad Maddox and all the movie trailers gained 81,000 viewers.
> 
> Jericho vs. Miz lost 359,000 viewers.
> 
> Jack Swagger vs. Sin Cara lost 78,000 viewers.
> 
> C.M. Punk vs. Kane in the overrun gained 153,000 viewers which is a very weak overrun gain, finishing at 3.18. The issue was probably going 15 minutes is too long after a three hour show, plus they took a rare commercial break during the overrun.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> Rock/Punk at WM is not a good idea because you have at least 3-4 matches bigger than that. That's also the reason not to do Rock vs Lesnar in any other show than WM, you don't give your audience a blockbuster on a secondary show and save a big match for your biggest event of the year. The only reason Punk held the title for so long was because of The Rock and the fact that they booked the Rock/Punk program since July. He's already longest reigning champion in this era and the 2 months program they had in January-February was very good and at the right time. No reason to change any of that IMO.


It makes a star (years too late however) of Punk which is what they should have been doing. Ratings at the moment do show that the program with Rock has helped Punk and I think some of the older fans that have come back to view The Rock have warmed to Punk, I really do after reading things on twitter and some of my friends who watched wrestling for the first time in years etc.

It was a decent program you're right, but it was and is a feud worthy of Wrestlemania in my opinion. The story writes itself. The Rock, looking to reclaim the belt after 10 long years, CM Punk looking to extend his unbelievable reign by defeating the most electrifying man in Sports Entertainment, no "GREATNESS VS. REDEMPTION" bullshit, this is simply "GREATNESS"

CM Punk DESERVED to main event Wrestlemania after last year alone, there is no way someone who they gave a lengthy reign too should have been treated the way he has been the past few months, he hasn't won on a PPV (and after Mania) for over 5 months which is just embarrassing quite frankly.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kokepepsi said:


> *Segment Breakdown
> *


TEAM DRAW SCHOLARS :mark:

Mark Henry losing his touch?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LESNAR. Pretty damn impressive, I have to say.

Overrun did bad. What a stupid decision to put a commercial in the overrun. I've never seen that before. And matches should never go 15 minutes in the overrun.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They were asking for trouble with the overrun. No surprise Lesnar did the peak rating of the show. Taker/Punk was never going to be good idea from the start because nobody believes Punk will win.

So was the Rock/Cena video package the show low?


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM DRAW bringing in the rati........oh.

Looks like Punk cannot draw unless he's with a big star like Rock or Cena


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

- As noted before, the March 11th WWE RAW did a 3.34 cable rating with 4.79 million viewers.

In the segment breakdown, the show opened at a 3.46 quarter rating for the Paul Bearer tribute, The Undertaker and CM Punk. Big Show vs. Seth Rollins lost 9,000 viewers. Dolph Ziggler vs. Daniel Bryan gained 132,000 viewers. Fandango's segment with Tensai and Brodus Clay lost 298,000 viewers. The New Age Outlaws vs. Cody Rhodes and Damien Sandow with Brock Lesnar's appearance gained 326,000 viewers for a show-high 3.57 quarter rating.

Mark Henry vs. Kofi Kingston and Ryback vs. Heath Slater and the Henry-Ryback face-off lost 179,000 viewers. Antonio Cesaro vs. Alberto Del Rio lost 265,000 viewers. The video for John Cena vs. The Rock lost 10,000 viewers. Sheamus and Randy Orton vs. Rhodes and Sandow in the 10pm timeslot gained 106,000 viewers for a 3.32 quarter rating. The Highlight Reel with Chris Jericho, The Miz, Wade Barrett and Brad Maddox gained 81,000 viewers but Jericho vs. Miz lost 359,000 viewers. Jack Swagger vs. Sin Cara lost 78,000 viewers.

CM Punk vs. Kane in a No DQ main event gained 153,000 viewers for a 3.18 quarter rating, which is a very weak overrun gain.
Read more at http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._the_Main_Event_More.html#pgRSWSXlRwUTPvO6.99


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Here's what I estimate for each quarter using DMN's formula he posted a while ago on the first segment (and then adding/subtracting as necessary):

Q1- 4,962,000
Q2- 4,953,000
Q3- 5,085,000
Q4- 4,787,000
Q5- 5,113,000
Q6- 4,934,000
Q7- 4,669,000
Q8- 4,659,000
Q9- 4,765,000
Q10- 4,846,000
Q11- 4,487,000
Q12- 4,409,000
Overrun- 4,562,000

Once again, these are just estimates and I'm sure DMN can provide better ones. However, just to give us something to discuss, it looks like Brock's segment indeed got over 5,000,000 viewers, and apparently Bryan/Ziggler might've as well. Great to see a good match getting a good number.

Opening was a bit disappointing considering who was in it, but still a very good number considering the overall rating of the show. Overrun was terrible but only because of it going way over normal and there being a fucking commercial in the middle of it. No way the overrun was going to do well with that all into account, even with a possible Taker appearance.

Lesnar doing peak of the show with a 3.57 is great, and as said he (and Rhode Scholars/NAO/Heyman) got over 5,000,000.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:brock

Rollins/Show only losing 9000 after the opener is really good. 

Ziggles/Bryan gaining that much is even better although I would question the timing of this and whether or not the Shield stuff ran into it tbh. That's seems like a more logical reason for that number than a random match to me. 

MONDAY NIGHT RAW STARRING :brock. As expected though.

Rock/Cena only losing 10k is pretty good for a video package. 

10pm did well enough for the guys in it. 

Lol overrun. Don't think that many people would have tuned in regardless of there being a commercial or not. It wasn't exactly must see TV.

:brock


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bossdude said:


> CM DRAW bringing in the rati........oh.
> 
> Looks like Punk cannot draw unless he's with a big star like Rock or Cena


Undertaker isn't a big star?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Stad said:


> Undertaker isn't a big star? :lmao


Kane isn't.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

But the two biggest stars lost viewers..


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

... in a video package.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And? People still saw Rock and Cena in a package and decided to tune out. At the end of the day, Taker came out in the overrun, in the flesh and it didn't draw high numbers. People had probably tuned out by then granted but you'd have to be pretty stupid not to expect a Taker/Punk showdown again.


----------



## #Mark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> ... in a video package.


Still means something. For all they (they being the casual fans) know the package could have lead to an in-ring promo between Rock/Cena.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good lord, everyone did awful.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> And? People still saw Rock and Cena in a package and decided to tune out.


But it is a video package. It adds nothing new to the feud. People know that it will just be a promotion/recap of what they already saw and a large amount probably wouldn't be too bothered to miss it.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Rock/Cena promo the week before didn't add anything new either. We're watching the same exact feud a second year in a row.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> It makes a star (years too late however) of Punk which is what they should have been doing. Ratings at the moment do show that the program with Rock has helped Punk and I think some of the older fans that have come back to view The Rock have warmed to Punk, I really do after reading things on twitter and some of my friends who watched wrestling for the first time in years etc.
> 
> It was a decent program you're right, but it was and is a feud worthy of Wrestlemania in my opinion. The story writes itself. The Rock, looking to reclaim the belt after 10 long years, CM Punk looking to extend his unbelievable reign by defeating the most electrifying man in Sports Entertainment, no "GREATNESS VS. REDEMPTION" bullshit, this is simply "GREATNESS"
> 
> CM Punk DESERVED to main event Wrestlemania after last year alone, there is no way someone who they gave a lengthy reign too should have been treated the way he has been the past few months, he hasn't won on a PPV (and after Mania) for over 5 months which is just embarrassing quite frankly.


Great post! I think WWE going with Rock/Cena 2 instead of Rock/Punk is happening because of a combo of things. It can be due to them failing to see the long term benefit of Rock putting over Punk and his reign on the grandest stage of them all. I also believe that going with Rock/Cena 2 will bring in more money for mania but will also cause a monumental dropoff in ratings and overall enjoyment in the post-mania months, which wwe definitely fail to see. I know way more casual people that wouldn't mind seeing Punk beat the Rock but would stop watching completely if Cena beat him.

Does this make it a certainty? Not at all. But refusing to put over anyone other Cena is something that WWE still, to this day, cannot see the big problem with.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> The Rock/Cena promo the week before didn't add anything new either. We're watching the same exact feud a second year in a row.


I wouldn't start brother, Rock marks will come out in unison and have you believe it's much more different.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Rock/Cena video package was 3 minutes and 50 seconds out of a 15 minutes segment. If you consider the fact that they tried to build an entire quarter on that, it did very good. Punk/Kane overrun doing horrible was expected and Brock doing the biggest was expected. Like I said before, they're putting their biggest angles to draw a big peak rating before the third hour drop. Which is we're probably going to see the Rock/Cena/Brock/HHH segments in that time slot.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Didn't know John Cena was trying to redeem his loss against Rock last year or Rock was a champion going into the match with his opponents number.

Didn't know Rock was out there last week signing songs and calling John Cena Fruity Pebbles.

Didn't know John Cena was out there rapping and talking about how he was there every week.

Point is, the Rock/Cena fued is not the exact same. 

Hilarious to see this match get irrationally shitted on up here. Its one thing to bring up some good points but the things people say to try and shoot this thing down. :lmao


----------



## #Mark

A pretape sit down interview with Rock/Cena next week would be awesome. Probably would be the highest rated segment on the show :lol 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Icon_Vs_Icon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The IWC is so annoying, all you guys do is cry like girls over why your favorite wrestler isnt in the position Rocky is in. Fact is hes by far WWE biggest commodity so when hes around they center the entire show around him. Everyone else gets shuffled around according to how much hes able to show up. I love Punk but anyone who expected him to be in the main event over Rocky is delusional. This Mania is arguably the worst booked Mania in history, how do you have all that talent and waste it? Rock/Cena is trash, Punk/Taker is trash cuz of how weak Punk has been booked, Brock/HHH is trash and has no point. The real card should be 

Rock/Brock as the main event
Taker/Cena/Punk for the title as semi main

The way i see it Taker streak is not a draw given how predictable it is. If you really add the deck against him then it would actually be worth a damn. Imagine if they had Cena and Punk in a feud over who was going to end the streak imo thats far more compelling then what theyve done with Taker at Mania in a long time besides HBK retirement match


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> I wouldn't start brother, Rock marks will come out in unison and have you believe it's much more different.


Nah,we Rock fans are true gentlemen of the sport(fan clubs).We don't care about blind haters,who think everything the Rock does sucks,and every word they utter is Holy Bible,lol.


BTW,on a serious note,you are dead right,working with Rock has definitely helped Punk.The ratings before and after his feud with DA G.0.A.T very well testifies this fact.


About the main eventof this year's Mania,neither Rock vs Cena excits me,nor Rock vs Punk would have.It should have been Rock vs Brock-the biggest UFC draw vs the biggest wrestling draw.Am waiting for that match since the last 10 years or so.


If next year WWE decides to go with Taker vs Brock,then it would mean that we'll see another Rock vs Cena feud.I am about to faint,just with this very thought-


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> And? People still saw Rock and Cena in a package and decided to tune out. At the end of the day, Taker came out in the overrun, in the flesh and it didn't draw high numbers. People had probably tuned out by then granted but you'd have to be pretty stupid not to expect a Taker/Punk showdown again.





#Mark said:


> Still means something. For all the they (they being the casual fans) know the package could have lead to an in-ring promo between Rock/Cena.


Nope. Video packages always lose viewers. IIRC, the only time I can remember a video package gaining viewers was one of the HHH/Taker video packages for either the 27 or 28 match one week when they didn't appear. Everybody was surprised that it gained. Why? Because for the most part, video packages usually lose a lot of viewers. Rock/Cena only losing 10k is a good result in my book. 

People still complaining about Rock/Punk not happening need to realize that Rock coming back was always to put over John Cena. Whether that's right or wrong is up to you but CM Punk was never in the discussion and he's lucky he got to even work with him at all really. I think it's great that he did and they shared that spotlight to get extra eyeballs on him. But Rock putting over Cena is ultimately the right thing to do. Cena is THE guy, not CM Punk, and therefore when a previous GUY comes back, it's only right that the current GUY go over him. Rock got his win and moment in Miami and that's fine. Now it's Cena's turn. I'm starting to believe the poster on here who said that after Mania 29 is over, WWE are going to start promoting Cena as the GOAT. I think they are. Again, whether you agree or disagree is up to you but in this instance, Cena, as the only representative of this and his era, should be going over a representative of the previous era. It's only right. Were Punk or Orton or whoever else in Cena's spot I'd be saying the exact same thing. That's just the way it works. 

WWE haven't particularly hyped anything for next week's show apart from Triple H's response to Lesnar's response of HHH's original response so I reckon they'll be around even to this week in terms of viewership.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Only way cena should go over rock at wrestlemania is if he turns heel in the process.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Also rock/cena doesn't pull in ratings like it did last year. People are fed up of this feud.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good to know you can speak for all the people of the world. Thank you for telling me and the rest of us our opinions.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Good to know you can speak for all the people of the world. Thank you for telling me and the rest of us our opinions.


I have two words for ya "YOU'RE WELCOME!"


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

A rating of 4.1 is hardly "fed up". The bottom line is as *Starbuck* put it. I for one am very happy Punk even got to feud with Rock, especially getting 2 matches. He looked good throughout the feud and has been exposed to a much wider audience because of it. It is a positive.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Also rock/cena doesn't pull in ratings like it did last year. People are fed up of this feud.


?

Rock/Cena have had one face to face segment since their match was made official. It got a 4.1 rating and over 5 million viewers. The highest rated Raw segment of the 3 hour era. Higher than anything they did last year during their feud. Higher than anything Rock/Punk did during their feud. Higher than anything Brock/Hunter or Undertaker/Punk are doing now.

Were you hoping no one would bother to check the facts and you would get away with your blatant lie?


----------



## ChickMagnet12

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't see why people are singling out anyone here. The ratings as a whole are up and the company as a whole is drawing right now. A 10k loss isn't really worth noting when the ratings are as high (in modern day times) as they are.

Pretty weak overrun though, not exactly a match I was looking forward too either to be honest. Add that commercial factor into that as well.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Also rock/cena doesn't pull in ratings like it did last year. People are fed up of this feud.


4.1 quarter last week says otherwise. Did you really think a video package was going to draw in 500,000 viewers?


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol @ the haters trying to say ROCK/Cena II is a fail because of a fucking video package. Still pretty good to only lose 10k for a video package when they usually lose a lot more. Great to see Orton's segment gaining (even though it was mostly because of the losses preceding it) and BORK doing what he does best. KICK ASS AND DRAW RATINGS!

Not surprised in the slightest at the weak gain for the main event.


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

cm punk just can't draw at all


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



uknoww said:


> cm punk just can't draw at all


Way to be original and conveniently ignore what he's been doing for the past 3 months.


----------



## Icon_Vs_Icon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> About the main eventof this year's Mania,neither Rock vs Cena excits me,nor Rock vs Punk would have.It should have been Rock vs Brock-the biggest UFC draw vs the biggest wrestling draw.Am waiting for that match since the last 10 years or so.


Dude when WWE does finally do this match they will fuck it up. If its at next years Mania the hype and anticipation will be killed cuz both men will be coming off of loses at this years Mania. WWE may even waste it at Summerslam this year which only proves once and for all WWE only cares about there political agenda not whats good for business. They shouldve had Brock crush Cena and HHH then face Rocky at this Mania who has also crushed everyone, that buy would be record breaking. 



Cmpunk91 said:


> Only way cena should go over rock at wrestlemania is if he turns heel in the process.


The idea of a guy like Cena going over the biggest star in history just speaks to how crappy the company as gotten since hes left. 



Cmpunk91 said:


> Also rock/cena doesn't pull in ratings like it did last year. People are fed up of this feud.


Didnt they just get a 4.1? Isnt that higher than anything they did last year? 



uknoww said:


> cm punk just can't draw at all


Its not The Best In The Worlds fault, he hasnt been positioned to draw by WWE.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Looks like the show just straight up didn't do as well. but i enjoyed it.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*Let me get this straight. So Rock and Cena get a 4.1, one of the highest rated segments in a LONG time, they have a video package that loses viewers (BECAUSE THEY ALWAYS DO), they only lose an un-noteworthy number of 10K, and now people are fed up with this feud? :lmao Man, some of you are trying too hard to be negative.*


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Show/Rollins only lost 9K, that isn't that bad. Not that it matters, just saying.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Show/Rollins only lost 9K, that isn't that bad. Not that it matters, just saying.


*What came on before it?*


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *What came on before it?*


The opener, so it was a successful match/segment.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> The opener, so it was a successful match/segment.


*There's usually a lot more lost after the opener, right?
*


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *There's usually a lot more lost after the opener, right?
> *


Usually over 100,000.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Jerichoholic4Life said:


> ?
> 
> Rock/Cena have had one face to face segment since their match was made official. It got a 4.1 rating and over 5 million viewers. The highest rated Raw segment of the 3 hour era. Higher than anything they did last year during their feud. *Higher than anything Rock/Punk did during their feud.* Higher than anything Brock/Hunter or Undertaker/Punk are doing now.
> 
> Were you hoping no one would bother to check the facts and you would get away with your blatant lie?


I'm pretty sure a Rock/Punk segment did a 4.1 too. Just saying like.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Usually over 100,000.


*Damn! Why so high?*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



purple_gloves said:


> I'm pretty sure a Rock/Punk segment did a 4.1 too. Just saying like.


Close, but not quite. It did a 4.03.

And the number after the opener usually decreases by a lot more. Last week it decreased by over 400,000, the week prior over 200,000, the week before that over 200,000, and before that over 300,000.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> Show/Rollins only lost 9K, that isn't that bad. Not that it matters, just saying.


I think it matters because it shows that the interest is there for The Shield. Yeah, they didn't gain but they didn't lose an astronomical amount of viewers in a spot that usually loses an astronomical amount of viewers. That's a success in my book and great for The Shield angle overall.


----------



## Nafstem

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *Damn! Why so high?*


Usually because they open up with a segment that has a lot of hype, and then they transition to something on the lower card, therefore the interest drops.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The fact that Rollins vs. Show lost only 9,000 viewers in a slot that usually loses more than 100,000 is good news for The Shield. As mentioned, it proves the interest in The Shield is high.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Losing 9000 viewers in the second quarter is great actually. Only losers were Fandango (understandable since he just debuted), Albert & Clay and Cesaro/Del Rio.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



jerseysfinest said:


> Usually because they open up with a segment that has a lot of hype, and then they transition to something on the lower card, therefore the interest drops.


*I never thought of it like that.
*


Starbuck said:


> I think it matters because it shows that the interest is there for The Shield. Yeah, they didn't gain but they didn't lose an astronomical amount of viewers in a spot that usually loses an astronomical amount of viewers. That's a success in my book and great for The Shield angle overall.


*That's because they book the Shield properly. Now people care about them. Strange isn't it?*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ROGERTHAT21 said:


> *That's because they book the Shield properly. Now people care about them. Strange isn't it?*


Shut up with that blasphemy. People only care about someone when Cena is there to bury them. :vince


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I think it matters because it shows that the interest is there for The Shield. Yeah, they didn't gain but they didn't lose an astronomical amount of viewers in a spot that usually loses an astronomical amount of viewers. That's a success in my book and great for The Shield angle overall.


No, I meant it doesn't matter to me, I would love the Shield no matter what rating they got. But it is really good that they lost so little, considering the usual drop.


----------



## MikeChase27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I thought Ryback was a draw?


----------



## Zk29

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE keeps giving us quick fixes to get ratings up, but once those segments are over, people aren't watching. You think that would tell them they need a more consistent product.

They throw everything and every star they have out there, John Cena, The Rock, Triple H, Undertaker, Brock Lesnar, CM Punk, out there and they still pull mid-3's.

It's not complicated, give people a reason to tune in, then hook them in with the rest. Bringing back part-timers occasionally won't keep people watching for long. And the ratings prove it.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

A 326,000 gain for the Lesnar segment ain't all that impressive, considering Punk pulled in almost a 100,000 more by himself the other week. Besides, I'd put that down to people wanting to see the NAO, and Lesnar wasn't even advertised for that segment.



Starbuck said:


> Nope. Video packages always lose viewers. IIRC, the only time I can remember a video package gaining viewers was one of the HHH/Taker video packages for either the 27 or 28 match one week when they didn't appear. Everybody was surprised that it gained. Why? Because for the most part, video packages usually lose a lot of viewers. Rock/Cena only losing 10k is a good result in my book.
> 
> People still complaining about Rock/Punk not happening need to realize that Rock coming back was always to put over John Cena. Whether that's right or wrong is up to you but CM Punk was never in the discussion and he's lucky he got to even work with him at all really. I think it's great that he did and they shared that spotlight to get extra eyeballs on him. But Rock putting over Cena is ultimately the right thing to do. *Cena is THE guy, not CM Punk, and therefore when a previous GUY comes back, it's only right that the current GUY go over him.* Rock got his win and moment in Miami and that's fine. Now it's Cena's turn. I'm starting to believe the poster on here who said that after Mania 29 is over, WWE are going to start promoting Cena as the GOAT. I think they are. Again, whether you agree or disagree is up to you but in this instance, Cena, as the only representative of this and his era, should be going over a representative of the previous era. It's only right. Were Punk or Orton or whoever else in Cena's spot I'd be saying the exact same thing. That's just the way it works.


It may have escaped your notice, but Cena only remains as THE GUY, because of their refusal to allow anybody else the opportunity to be THE GUY... and when someone gets too close and threatens to usurp Cena, they put a stop to it - just like they did with Punk.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> A 326,000 gain for the Lesnar segment ain't all that impressive, considering Punk pulled in almost a 100,000 more by himself the other week. Besides, I'd put that down to people wanting to see the NAO, and Lesnar wasn't even advertised for that segment.
> 
> 
> It may have escaped your notice, but Cena only remains as THE GUY, because of their refusal to allow anybody else the opportunity to be THE GUY... and when someone gets too close and threatens to usurp Cena, they put a stop to it - just like they did with Punk.


If your admitting they do that, then who else besides Punk did they stop from overtaking " The Guy" role.


----------



## Icon_Vs_Icon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Cena only remains as THE GUY, because of their refusal to allow anybody else the opportunity to be THE GUY... and when someone gets too close and threatens to usurp Cena, they put a stop to it - just like they did with Punk.


This to the 10000 degree. People always claim Cena would turn if they was someone who could take his spot but Punk proved that not to be true. He was far more over then Cena has ever been in his life and WWE get the brilliant idea to kill his momentum cuz he doesnt fit the mold of what the WWE wants to force down our throat. No Cena fan can justify or make excuses why it was okay for them to kill Punk like that, only reason is cuz they were scared he would be bigger than Cena.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I honestly believe that if Randy Orton didn't get the CM Punk treatment in his 2010 title reign, he could have easily surpassed Cena as face of the company. Orton was so over in all demographics, and every time he and Cena had an encounter, Orton would get the louder pop. Unfortunately for him, Cena was the guy that got the main event storyline, while Orton had to play second/third fiddle to Cena for no reason.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Rawk said:


> Shut up with that blasphemy. People only care about someone when Cena is there to bury them. :vince


*Oh! I forgot about that.*


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The 9 PM quarter started off (and was advertised) as Rhodes Scholars vs. New Age Outlaws, THEN Brock Lesnar came out. Wasn't announced or anything for that quarter. Still a good number. I'm not sure if many people expected Lesnar at that point.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Charlie Bronson said:


> No, I meant it doesn't matter to me, I would love the Shield no matter what rating they got. But it is really good that they lost so little, considering the usual drop.


Oh it doesn't matter to me either. I like what I like whether it gains a million or loses a million. I just think it's good for The Shield angle in general. 



mblonde09 said:


> A 326,000 gain for the Lesnar segment ain't all that impressive, considering Punk pulled in almost a 100,000 more by himself the other week. Besides, I'd put that down to people wanting to see the NAO, and Lesnar wasn't even advertised for that segment.
> 
> It may have escaped your notice, but Cena only remains as THE GUY, because of their refusal to allow anybody else the opportunity to be THE GUY... and when someone gets too close and threatens to usurp Cena, they put a stop to it - just like they did with Punk.


Are you actually being serious with this shit? Wait, of course you are, you're a blind mark. Jesus. I hate to break it to you but Brock Lesnar always has been and most likely always will be a bigger draw than CM Punk. Punk can't cure cancer or bring peace to the middle east either btw. Shocking, I know, but it's true. 

So if that's the case then they stopped Orton becoming the guy too, right? Don't be silly. It takes more than pops and selling a few t-shirts to take the top spot. Orton couldn't do it in 2010 and Punk couldn't do it in 2011 either despite both of them having red hot babyface runs. You keep believing what you want to believe though. At the very least your posts are good for a laugh.


----------



## VINT

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I actually wanna know wether Sandow, Rhodes and NAO had any pull in that 300k number.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> So if that's the case then they stopped Orton becoming the guy too, right? Don't be silly. *It takes more than pops and selling a few t-shirts to take the top spot*. Orton couldn't do it in 2010 and Punk couldn't do it in 2011 either despite both of them having red hot babyface runs. You keep believing what you want to believe though. At the very least your posts are good for a laugh.


Like what? Superman booking, backstage allies, countless title reigns? Fair enough Cena deserved his place at the top, but he's been there for a long, long time, and I think there is a legitimate argument for him staying there because they won't allow anyone to take his place. 

With Punk, maybe, maybe not. Who knows? Personally I think they had a chance with the MITB storyline, but blew it. HHH going corporate heel would have been interesting. Maybe they genuinely didn't think something like that was the best thing to do, or maybe they didn't like the thought of Punk being the top guy, so purposefully stifled his momentum and robbed him of a potentially brilliant storyline and certain stardom. As of now, as much as I'd like to see it, I can't see Punk ever becoming a draw on Cena's level.

Orton lacks mic skills and fucks up all the time, so he was never going to topple Cena.

The other candidate for me in terms of being knocked back down when they were becoming a threat to Cena, is Ryback. Gaining viewers in his segments, massively over, popping a big buyrate at HIAC. Then has his momentum killed by being jobbed out ppv after ppv. Why? Maybe Cena had something to do with it. It could be a load of bullshit, but I think there's definitely an argument to be had there.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



purple_gloves said:


> Like what? Superman booking, backstage allies, countless title reigns? Fair enough Cena deserved his place at the top, but he's been there for a long, long time, and I think there is a legitimate argument for him staying there because they won't allow anyone to take his place.
> 
> With Punk, maybe, maybe not. Who knows? Personally I think they had a chance with the MITB storyline, but blew it. HHH going corporate heel would have been interesting. Maybe they genuinely didn't think something like that was the best thing to do, or maybe they didn't like the thought of Punk being the top guy, so purposefully stifled his momentum and robbed him of a potentially brilliant storyline and certain stardom. As of now, as much as I'd like to see it, I can't see Punk ever becoming a draw on Cena's level.
> 
> Orton lacks mic skills and fucks up all the time, so he was never going to topple Cena.
> 
> The other candidate for me in terms of being knocked back down when they were becoming a threat to Cena, is Ryback. Gaining viewers in his segments, massively over, popping a big buyrate at HIAC. Then has his momentum killed by being jobbed out ppv after ppv. Why? Maybe Cena had something to do with it. It could be a load of bullshit, but I think there's definitely an argument to be had there.


He's been there so long because nobody has been able to knock him off. Rock and Austin left while still at their peak or at the very least just at the tipping point where they were starting to dwindle. Guaranteed had they both stuck around they would have remained at the top just like Cena has all these years. The difference between Rock and Austin at the top was the fact that they had a whole host of supporting characters. Up until 2010, Cena had that too but then in one fell swoop they all left and the gap between Cena and the rest of the roster became even more apparent. 

HHH didn't turn heel because the plan was HHH/Taker at Mania 28 and they stuck to it. If HHH goes heel, Undertaker doesn't have a match for Wrestlemania. That's what took precedence over a HHH heel turn if anything and it makes a lot of sense when you think about it. Punk has hardly had his momentum stifled. The man has just come off the longest WWE title reign for the past 25 years. How that equates to somebody being held back is beyond me. He hasn't always gone over but he's had the opportunity to work with the biggest name in wrestling atm in Rock and is now with Taker. None of the other guys are getting pushes like that. They're on board with Punk and have been ever since he signed his new contract. All this being held back shit is a myth concocted by his marks who don't seem to be able to grasp realities. They maybe haven't gone balls to the wall with him but they certainly haven't held him back either. 

There's being a huge star and then there's being the face of all things WWE. That's what John Cena is. He's the guy with his likeness plastered all over everything. He's the guy they send out to represent them at functions and events. He's the guy who epitomises what they want in their ultimate WWE star. I don't know how many times it needs to be said but CM Punk isn't. His look isn't, his attitude isn't, his character isn't. Not everybody can be what Cena is. It's the entire Cena package that Vince loves and guess what? It works. Half the fans may hate his guts but the other half love him. The corporate sponsors love him. John Cena, the brand, makes money. Being the face of the company has a lot more to do with what you see on TV every week. It never has just been about being over, getting pops and selling some shirts. If that was the case we would have seen the back of Cena at the top a long time ago. If you can't get that, then there's nothing else that can be said to get through to you.

EDIT - And after posting all that I just saw your signature. What a brilliant waste of time that post will turn out to be.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> .
> 
> EDIT - And after posting all that I just saw your signature. What a brilliant waste of time that post will turn out to be.


It's not a waste of time at all. Ignore the sig, it's just a light hearted joke.

Personally I don't see why Taker/HHH couldn't have happened with HHH as heel, would have added a bit more spice to it for me. 

In regards to Punk, I completely get your point about his character, attitude etc, when it comes to being the "face" of the company, but really how long can they rely on Cena? Eventually they are going to need new stars. Regardless of whether they fit how the company wants them to be percieved are not. If someone's not going to come out of the pack on their own and make it, then Vince and co are going to have to pounce on every opportunity to make someone. Personally I feel they had had 2 such chances with Punk and Ryback, and as of now, failed. 

And don't get me confused with these blind Punk marks, or blind anybody marks for that matter. I just say it how I see it.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



purple_gloves said:


> The other candidate for me in terms of being knocked back down when they were becoming a threat to Cena, is Ryback. Gaining viewers in his segments, massively over, popping a big buyrate at HIAC. Then has his momentum killed by being jobbed out ppv after ppv. Why? Maybe Cena had something to do with it. It could be a load of bullshit, but I think there's definitely an argument to be had there.



How exactly can an "argument be had" based on an assumption on your part. Yes, Cena may have ordered Vince to job out Ryback, or maybe the Easter Bunny saw Ryback's head, thought it was one of her eggs and ordered Vince to do the exact same thing. Or, maybe Goldberg got tired of hearing his name chanted at every event, called Vince up and said "Bury that bald bitch or I'm gonna sue you." Yeah, that's probably what happened...or at least there is an argument to be had that it did. fpalm


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



purple_gloves said:


> It's not a waste of time at all. Ignore the sig, it's just a light hearted joke.
> 
> Personally* I don't see why Taker/HHH couldn't have happened with HHH as heel, would have added a bit more spice to it for me.*
> 
> In regards to Punk, I completely get your point about his character, attitude etc, when it comes to being the "face" of the company, but really how long can they rely on Cena? Eventually they are going to need new stars. Regardless of whether they fit how the company wants them to be percieved are not. If someone's not going to come out of the pack on their own and make it, then Vince and co are going to have to pounce on every opportunity to make someone. Personally I feel they had had 2 such chances with Punk and Ryback, and as of now, failed.
> 
> And don't get me confused with these blind Punk marks, or blind anybody marks for that matter. I just say it how I see it.


Because they were running a year long storyline, with undertaker being stretchered out and all, and it was 
all about "respect". It wouldn't have worked with HHH as a heel.

Really good rating, even without Rock/Cena.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Way to be original and conveniently ignore what he's been doing for the past 3 months.



Sorry but I don't think leeching off the Rock and Taker's heat counts. Let's see Punk draw next month when he's fueding with Del Snooze-o.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> How exactly can an "argument be had" based on an assumption on your part. Yes, Cena may have ordered Vince to job out Ryback, or maybe the Easter Bunny saw Ryback's head, thought it was one of her eggs and ordered Vince to do the exact same thing. Or, maybe Goldberg got tired of hearing his name chanted at every event, called Vince up and said "Bury that bald bitch or I'm gonna sue you." Yeah, that's probably what happened...or at least there is an argument to be had that it did. fpalm


I assume your new to wrestling and not aware of backstage politics? Maybe you should read a Chris Jericho or Mick Foley book, or pretty much any wrestler who's ever wrote one. 

There's reasons why certain people appear on tv and others don't. There's reasons why wrestlers are presented in certain ways and booked well/poorly. It's perfectly reasonable to assume something like that could happen.


----------



## MikeChase27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



purple_gloves said:


> Like what? Superman booking, backstage allies, countless title reigns? Fair enough Cena deserved his place at the top, but he's been there for a long, long time, and I think there is a legitimate argument for him staying there because they won't allow anyone to take his place.
> 
> With Punk, maybe, maybe not. Who knows? Personally I think they had a chance with the MITB storyline, but blew it. HHH going corporate heel would have been interesting. Maybe they genuinely didn't think something like that was the best thing to do, or maybe they didn't like the thought of Punk being the top guy, so purposefully stifled his momentum and robbed him of a potentially brilliant storyline and certain stardom. As of now, as much as I'd like to see it, I can't see Punk ever becoming a draw on Cena's level.
> 
> Orton lacks mic skills and fucks up all the time, so he was never going to topple Cena.
> 
> The other candidate for me in terms of being knocked back down when they were becoming a threat to Cena,* is Ryback. Gaining viewers in his segments, massively over, popping a big buyrate at HIAC. Then has his momentum killed by being jobbed out ppv after ppv. Why? Maybe Cena had something to do with it. It could be a load of bullshit, but I think there's definitely an argument to be had there.*


lol what? :flip


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



purple_gloves said:


> I assume your new to wrestling and not aware of backstage politics? Maybe you should read a Chris Jericho or Mick Foley book, or pretty much any wrestler who's ever wrote one.
> 
> There's reasons why certain people appear on tv and others don't. There's reasons why wrestlers are presented in certain ways and booked well/poorly. It's perfectly reasonable to assume something like that could happen.


Don't do that. Don't play stupid. I'm quite aware of backstage politics. Hogan was a master at them, and there are several dozen guys lined up to tell the tell. Where are the dozens of held down wrestlers chomping at the bit to tell about the "Real John Cena?" Now maybe you are right. Maybe he is protecting his spot, but you present that theory as if it is a no brainer. As if it just has to be true even though you have no proof whatsoever.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Don't do that. Don't play stupid. I'm quite aware of backstage politics. Hogan was a master at them, and there are several dozen guys lined up to tell the tell. Where are the dozens of held down wrestlers chomping at the bit to tell about the "Real John Cena?" Now maybe you are right. Maybe he is protecting his spot, *but you present that theory as if it is a no brainer*. As if it just has to be true even though you have no proof whatsoever.


No I didn't. I said it could be bullshit and only presented it as my opinion.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Don't do that. Don't play stupid. I'm quite aware of backstage politics. Hogan was a master at them, and there are several dozen guys lined up to tell the tell.


Yes, twenty years _*after*_ the fact, when Hogan is no longer a threat to them.



Happenstan said:


> Where are the dozens of held down wrestlers chomping at the bit to tell about the "Real John Cena?"


Probably likewise waiting until Cena is no longer a threat to their livelihood. I know one example is Ken Anderson since his release has tossed Cena in with the likes of HHH as ruthless backstage politicians. (That's not to excuse Anderson's many other problems that got him released though.) He never bitched about Cena before, he only tattled after he no longer worked with Cena.

There was also that nobody from the Nexus, Tarver something. Only complained after he lost his job.

I can't recall if Tyler Reks was still employed or not when he allegedly started tweeting about Cena holding him down.


----------



## nwoattitude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

First of all, CM Punk NEVER came close to taking Cena's spot. The only men that ever came close were Batista and Randy Orton. Batista was actually bigger than Cena in 2005-2006 until he got inured and Orton was over as fuck from 2009-2011. Even as a heel he was huuuuge. You just dont get that aura from Punk. Orton and Batista were fighting it out for the 2nd spot for yeaaaaars. Punk has been a main eventer for a year and a half and now he is a threat to Cena? I'm sorry but that is just not true. Orton from 2007 and Batista from 2005 were always close to Cena's level. Punk has had his run and he has done very well but he is not on Batista/ Orton's level far more for Cena.


----------



## kiguel182

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> He's been there so long because nobody has been able to knock him off. Rock and Austin left while still at their peak or at the very least just at the tipping point where they were starting to dwindle. Guaranteed had they both stuck around they would have remained at the top just like Cena has all these years. The difference between Rock and Austin at the top was the fact that they had a whole host of supporting characters. Up until 2010, Cena had that too but then in one fell swoop they all left and the gap between Cena and the rest of the roster became even more apparent.
> 
> HHH didn't turn heel because the plan was HHH/Taker at Mania 28 and they stuck to it. If HHH goes heel, Undertaker doesn't have a match for Wrestlemania. That's what took precedence over a HHH heel turn if anything and it makes a lot of sense when you think about it. Punk has hardly had his momentum stifled. The man has just come off the longest WWE title reign for the past 25 years. How that equates to somebody being held back is beyond me. He hasn't always gone over but he's had the opportunity to work with the biggest name in wrestling atm in Rock and is now with Taker. None of the other guys are getting pushes like that. They're on board with Punk and have been ever since he signed his new contract. All this being held back shit is a myth concocted by his marks who don't seem to be able to grasp realities. They maybe haven't gone balls to the wall with him but they certainly haven't held him back either.
> 
> There's being a huge star and then there's being the face of all things WWE. That's what John Cena is. He's the guy with his likeness plastered all over everything. He's the guy they send out to represent them at functions and events. He's the guy who epitomises what they want in their ultimate WWE star. I don't know how many times it needs to be said but CM Punk isn't. His look isn't, his attitude isn't, his character isn't. Not everybody can be what Cena is. It's the entire Cena package that Vince loves and guess what? It works. Half the fans may hate his guts but the other half love him. The corporate sponsors love him. John Cena, the brand, makes money. Being the face of the company has a lot more to do with what you see on TV every week. It never has just been about being over, getting pops and selling some shirts. If that was the case we would have seen the back of Cena at the top a long time ago. If you can't get that, then there's nothing else that can be said to get through to you.
> 
> EDIT - And after posting all that I just saw your signature. What a brilliant waste of time that post will turn out to be.



So you are pretty much admiting that Cena is on that spot because of his image? 

Cena is the glass ceiling, nobody is allowed to pass him. Is true and it happened to more people than just Punk. He was just the most recent one. 

You talk about the year long reign? It's an imaginary brass ring, Cena still main-evented most of the PPVs, they gave Punk the title but didn't gave me what really matters: the top spot in the card.

He is hated by HALF the crowd, how is that being successful babyface? how? He represents everything that is wrong with WWE today. He has overstayed his welcome long ago and needs to be replaced asap. 

I don't care about make-a-wish, or the public image of the company. I care about entertainment and good wrestling. Punk has tattoos, so what? Cena will never be half the wrestler/wrestling mind Punk is. He is a corporate boy scout. And I don't buy it.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> A 326,000 gain for the Lesnar segment ain't all that impressive, considering Punk pulled in almost a 100,000 more by himself the other week. Besides, I'd put that down to people wanting to see the NAO, and Lesnar wasn't even advertised for that segment.


Jesus. You can't be serious... Lesnar gaining 326,000 vs Punk gaining 100,000 more than Lesnar leads to Lesnar not being impressive and Punk being impressive? And Lesnar not being advertised only adds more to his credit. You before have stated that a single week can't dictate anything. So much illogical thinking here.




mblonde09 said:


> It may have escaped your notice, but Cena only remains as THE GUY, because of their refusal to allow anybody else the opportunity to be THE GUY... and when someone gets too close and threatens to usurp Cena, they put a stop to it - just like they did with Punk.


They gave Punk the WWE title and main event in the summer of 2011 in which he bested Cena, they then gave him a 434 day reign. He then went on the face The Rock. They gave Orton the ball with a WrestleMania main-event program. They gave Jeff Hardy the ball with the WWE Title and WHC. None of the 3 men could get the job done. WWE are flawed in their booking, but to say Punk has been held back in terms of push is no longer relevent at all.


----------



## Icon_Vs_Icon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

How can anyone say Punk wasnt held back? He only held the title so long cuz they already gave Cena to many and had to wait to give him another one. Not to mention WWE didnt even book his title run as important or try to make him look strong. Punk was sabotaged cuz Cena set the standard so low that they have to kill anyone momentum cuz its so easy to overthrow him. Nobody since the Ruthless Aggression era has been booked anywhere near Cena besides Hunter but he was a heel, and i would argue hes not as big as he should be either.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kiguel182 said:


> So you are pretty much admiting that Cena is on that spot because of his image?
> 
> Cena is the glass ceiling, nobody is allowed to pass him. Is true and it happened to more people than just Punk. He was just the most recent one.
> 
> You talk about the year long reign? It's an imaginary brass ring, Cena still main-evented most of the PPVs, they gave Punk the title but didn't gave me what really matters: the top spot in the card.
> 
> He is hated by HALF the crowd, how is that being successful babyface? how? He represents everything that is wrong with WWE today. He has overstayed his welcome long ago and needs to be replaced asap.
> 
> I don't care about make-a-wish, or the public image of the company. I care about entertainment and good wrestling. Punk has tattoos, so what? Cena will never be half the wrestler/wrestling mind Punk is. He is a corporate boy scout. And I don't buy it.


Yes. Cena's image and the whole John Cena brand is a big reason why it has been so hard to knock him off the to spot. That's hardly a criticism of him either. His brand has become so strong that in order for someone to take his spot, they're going to have to create a stronger brand than him. The fact that Cena can talk AND wrestle big time WWE main event style matches are the other reasons why he is there. When WWE find somebody who can do everything that Cena does and can be everything that Cena is, they'll get his spot. 

You don't care about Make A Wish or the public image of the company but WWE does. It's not about what you want as an individual. If WWE is your company you can go right ahead and have Punk as your top man. But it isn't. The fact that you can't even appreciate what Cena brings to the table and WHY he's in the spot he's in though is unfortunate. I'm a Cena mark but I'm not blind. He has his flaws just like everybody else and some times I can't bear the thought of watching him go through the motions. But I completely understand why he is where he is and why it has been so hard for others to get there with him. If you stopped being so bias perhaps you would see it too.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Yes. Cena's image and the whole John Cena brand is a big reason why it has been so hard to knock him off the to spot. That's hardly a criticism of him either. His brand has become so strong that in order for someone to take his spot, they're going to have to create a stronger brand than him. The fact that Cena can talk AND wrestle big time WWE main event style matches are the other reasons why he is there. When WWE find somebody who can do everything that Cena does and can be everything that Cena is, they'll get his spot.
> 
> You don't care about Make A Wish or the public image of the company but WWE does. It's not about what you want as an individual. If WWE is your company you can go right ahead and have Punk as your top man. But it isn't. The fact that you can't even appreciate what Cena brings to the table and WHY he's in the spot he's in though is unfortunate. I'm a Cena mark but I'm not blind. He has his flaws just like everybody else and some times I can't bear the thought of watching him go through the motions. But I completely understand why he is where he is and why it has been so hard for others to get there with him. If you stopped being so bias perhaps you would see it too.


Good post. It is a shame though, because if WWE still sees it the way you're saying then I can't see anyone at all on the roster, in development, or in the indies that could take his spot because no one offers everything that WWE seems to value at Cena's current level. No one other than the Rock, and perhaps AJ Styles if he ever came over.

It's a damn shame though, because the values that many of us hardcore fans cherish so much are often thrown under the bus and not taken nearly as seriously as they should be. Hopefully when HHH takes over that will change and guys like Punk, Bryan, Ambrose, Sandow, Cesaro, Ohno, Neville, El Generico, Wyatt, etc.. will be allowed to become *THE TOP* stars. If WWE actually lowers Cena's importance and spotlight and spreads it to these guys prominantely, only then will RAW be as entertaining as it has the potential to be. And by fronting these guys Cena could finally afford to take a long break, and WWE will have the only set of guys in their current system that have the potential/drive/experience/talent to launch themselves into MEGAstardom


----------



## curtaincall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk is interesting, I dont know where to place him as a draw because he does get great reactions, but doesn't bring in ratings or buys, so its hard to say


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

it will be interesting to see what rating they get this week. They got stiff competition: Miami vs Boston on ESPN (22 game win streak on the line) & Season Premiere with Dancing with The Stars being the main opposite competition


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Maybe if they took the time to build someone and not bury the shit out of someone (coughZigglercough) before they even got to the top, they would have someone who could be another star. To their credit, they did give Punk a nice, long title reign. BUT, at the same time, as the WWE Champion, he was STILL relegated to playing second fiddle to Cena. Even as WWE Champ for over a year, he never had a shot to outshine Cena because of the booking by WWE clearly put forth the message to the fans that while Punk may be the champ, Cena is still clearly their #1 guy. And not only does that hurt Punk, but it hurt the WWE Title, as well. Seriously, if you're not going to book the WWE Champion as the #1 guy in all of the main events of the PPVs, then don't bother making that guy the champion in the first place. Because all it does is hurt the belt and hurt the wrestler himself.

I totally get why Cena is the #1 guy. But at the same time, WWE doesn't give anyone the opportunity to outshine Cena. Even when someone is given over a year long WWE Title reign, that guy is STILL booked as the clear #2 guy behind Cena. So, I don't know how anyone can expect any other wrestler on the roster to come and take Cena's spot. If they aren't given the opportunity to take Cena's spot, they can't do it. 

This isn't UFC or boxing where if you beat guys, you become the #1 contender and then get a title shot and if you win you are the champion and therefore the clear cut #1 guy. This is wrestling/entertainment. They have writers just like TV sitcoms do. If an actor on a sitcom is the supporting role to the lead actor of the show, he has to be written by the writers of that show to become the lead of the show. He can't just go out there make up his own lines and do what he wants and be lead guy.

And this is by no means a "I Hate Cena" post. To put it in perspective, I make no bones about the fact that I'm a huge HBK mark. But if HBK, (even in his prime), was booked to be the face of the company for 8 (now going on 9) years, even I would want the madness to end. No one guy should be the face of the company for nearly a decade. It makes the company stale (at the very least the main event scene) and the character himself stale. So, if HBK himself was given this push for this amount of time, I'd even want that to end. So, its not about hating Cena, it's just not being able to watch the same thing happen for 8-9 years straight, no matter who it is.


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The fact that Cena can talk AND wrestle big time WWE main event style matches are the other reasons why he is there. When WWE find somebody who can do everything that Cena does and can be everything that Cena is, they'll get his spot.


But then he had how many years to improve and get to that level? John Cena was far from the great worker he is today, when they were putting him over every AE star on PPVs.




> No one other than the Rock, and perhaps *AJ Styles *if he ever came over.


:lmao what? Jack swagger right now is bigger star than AJ styles. Go figure.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Felpent said:


> But then he had how many years to improve and get to that level? John Cena was far from the great worker he is today, when they were putting him over every AE star on PPVs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao what? Jack swagger right now is bigger star than AJ styles. Go figure.


Yeah I'm gonna go ahead and say if people like Roode, AJ and Aries were to come to WWE they would instantly be bigger than the majority of the WWE roster if WWE/Cena didn't think they were a threat to Cena's top star status.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



curtaincall said:


> Punk is interesting, I dont know where to place him as a draw because he does get great reactions, *but doesn't bring in ratings or buys, so its hard to say*


You need to get with the program. This has NOT been the case ever since his heel turn last summer.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Heat-Celts game is gunna kill them.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk is the by far and away the second biggest full timer on the roster not far behind cena. All he needed was exposure, and his feuds with rock and taker are leading him to gain the big exposure numbers he's needed.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cliffy Byro said:


> The Heat-Celts game is gunna kill them.


This man speaketh the truth :lelbron


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't think the ratings are going to look pretty this week. Show was all over the place not to mention fucking horrible for the most part. The 9pm and 10pm slots were also handled terribly. Punk/Taker went for like 5 minutes and then the rest of that quarter, a quarter usually used to gain big numbers, is fucking recaps and movie trailers. Stupid move. Same goes for 10pm. Then they have a 20 minute overrun but by that stage I wouldn't be surprise if a ton of people just stopped watching. 3 hours of shit only to reach an extended overrun segment? Yeah.....no. Will be interesting to see how it turns out but yeah, I don't think anything is going to perform super well this week. Horribly structured show.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

For the past two weeks of RAW, 9 PM quarter has been the highest rated part of the show. Could very well be a pattern for RTWM this year or maybe it's just because of Rock and Lesnar. We can find out from this week's numbers if Undertaker at 9PM had the same level of interest as Rock/Lesnar.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Only thing is Taker took up the last 3 minutes of quarter 4 and Punk took the first 2 minutes of quarter 5, so they didn't even get a proper quarter. If they did do peak of the night in the 9PM slot, that would be amazing considering the rest of the quarter outside of the first 2 minutes were... Well... um, don't even remember.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_69394.shtml

-- Monday's WWE Raw scored 275,437 in social media activity, according to Trendrr.TV, down 11 percent from last week. It was the lowest social score in over one month going back to February 11.

Raw ranked #2 on cable TV, trailing the Heat vs. Celtics NBA game, which drew over 1.0 million in social activity.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yup. Shit gonna be bad this week.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Poor show. Its structure was all over the place. Taker/Punk got 5 and 3 minutes roughly in two different quarters, with the rest of the quarters being full of recaps and trailers. The exact same occurred again, with the rest of the hours filled with crap. The overrun was surprisingly long, however whether that is a help or not remains to be seen. (at least, unlike last week they didnt throw in commercials during the over-run)


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

NBA Basketball was the night's top cableprogram, earning a 1.7 adults 18-49 rating. *WWE Raw came in second with a 1.5 adults 18-49 rating during its most-watched hour,down from last week's 1.8.*

WWE Entertainment - 9:00 PM:4,415,000 viewers, A18-49: 1.5
WWE Entertainment - 8:00 PM: 4,252,000 viewers, A18-49: 1.5 
WWE Entertainment - 10:00 PM: 4,114,000 viewers, A18-49: 1.5


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...w-bates-motel-dallas-being-human-more/173806/

Hour 1 - 4.252 million
Hour 2 - 4.415 million
Hour 3 - 4.114 million

it was 2nd on cable behind obvious Miami vs Boston game


----------



## Alim

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think even the casuals have started realizing that this Wrestlemania build-up has been shit


----------



## vanboxmeer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Looks like the AJ segments once again brought numbers back to where they were before The Rock showed up when there was more than 1 of them a week. The same dump in Jersey.


----------



## Gang

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I am actually happy for this low rating. WWE deserve this. Show was so bad with few expectations. Time to wake up goddammit - Wrestlemania almost here!


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

First hour said it all


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That Third hour is still below par. What's going on, is it the three hours that's too much?


----------



## Dub

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gang said:


> I am actually happy for this low rating. WWE deserve this. Show was so bad with few expectations. Time to wake up goddammit - Wrestlemania almost here!


Dont think WWE would be concern since it was still in the top of cable viewing, plus they usually go all out in the last 2 weeks before a ppv. If those last 2 weeks drop way low, then they would concern.


----------



## DesolationRow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What a horrible show it was for about 90% of its running... I'm not sure if they just didn't care because of the Heat/Celtics game (which I admit I watched, too, while recording Raw), or what, but this Road to Wrestlemania has been truly awful for the most part.

Terrible "structure," we can even call it that, this week, too, like *Starbuck* and others have noted.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The first hour got the rating it deserved. I'm surprised a small bit of the increase for hour 2, given that it was also pretty poor. The third hour tells it all for 3 hours. Horrible rating for a horrible show, this should not be the ROTWM standard.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That hour 3 number may not look too good for Lesnar and HHH, but then again their segment's probably the only thing that did decent in the hour.


----------



## cyrus_cesar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Man that Celtics game was really good last night. The first segment of Raw turned me off, and it didn't get better. I was done before 9, and even though I DVRed it, I'd seen all I needed to see.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Doesn't help that our main event match only has a 3 week build to the biggest show of the year. This Rock reign has been a complete failure, he should of been on every RAW since Elimination Chamber so they could build this feud properly.

Punk/Taker really isn't any better, they had about 5 minutes last night on a 3 hour show but decide to fill it with squash matches and garbage that no one cares to see instead.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Average Viewership of March so far,

3/04/2013 - *5,018,000* 
3/11/2013 - *4,813,000* 
3/18/2013 - *4,260,000*

Pretty big drop this week, I guess the Punk stealing the Urn and mocking Taker/kane from last week, really didn't work with the casuals to keep the interest up. Also the lack of Rock/Cena build is hurting them a bit.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Audience probably tuned in for the beginning. Said to themselves "what the fuck is this shit?" when seeing the maineventer of WM interacting with Titus O Neil wearing a wig, And didn't come back.


----------



## Dub

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Stad said:


> Doesn't help that our main event match only has a 3 week build to the biggest show of the year. This Rock reign has been a complete failure, he should of been on every RAW since Elimination Chamber so they could build this feud properly.
> 
> Punk/Taker really isn't any better, they had about 5 minutes last night on a 3 hour show but decide to fill it with squash matches and garbage that no one cares to see instead.


How is Rock's reign a failure? WWE is still gonna make a shitload of money and it a lot of the credit is due to him. I'm not a huge Rock fan but saying his reign is failure is nonsense.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DubC said:


> How is Rock's reign a failure? WWE is still gonna make a shitload of money and it a lot of the credit is due to him. I'm not a huge Rock fan but saying his reign is failure is nonsense.


Don't care how much money they make, i'm talking entertainment wise. Our WWE Champion hasn't even been on RAW the past 2 weeks, i don't think much else needs to be said really, lol.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

final rating - 3.09

lucky they didn't go below 3 with their competition yesterday


----------



## Awesome22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> final rating - 3.09
> 
> lucky they didn't go below 3 with their competition yesterday


3.09 is still really bad condidering they're on the road to Wrestlemania. I can't imagine what the ratings are gonna be when they're going to face Monday Night Football.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Shit rating for a shit show.

The build to WM used to actually build up, with twists and turns along the way. Storylines were thought out and got better. The closer you got to mania, the more interesting things would get. To the point where, come the last Raw before, you'd be genuinely excited about what was going to happen. It was actually worth spending money on. 

Nowadays, they seem to have completely lost the ability to write storylines that are captivating and build gradually until the big pay off. They just announce a match, people get excited about it, we get 1 or 2 decent promos, then nothing seems to happen. They just go through the motions. Ratings don't go up as storylines progress now, they go down. This is the RTWM for fucks sake. And it's been terrible. 

I'm praying that this WM bombs. I really hope they don't get the numbers they are hoping for, and it acts as a wake up call. It just seems that zero effort has gone into everything about it.

Predictable storylines, predictable WM card, and predictable outcomes. Can anyone give me any sort of reason to actually watch the next couple of Raws, and mania itself?


----------



## Amber B

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> final rating - 3.09
> 
> lucky they didn't go below 3 with their competition yesterday


They need to go lower in order to get their heads out of their asses.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WOW, what a shitty rating :lmao .


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They are only three weeks away from Wrestlemania and they barely get a rating above 3. Well deserved for the boring shit they put on. This is supposed to be the best part of the year yet it's as dull as the past 10 months.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Show deserved much lower than this. Would've thought Lesnar/HHH would've had a lot more tuned in. We won't know until we see the overrun, but it definitely disappointed as far as keeping people tuned throughout the show. But who knows, it might've still done peak of the show considering it was in the overrun, since it's not factored into hour 3.

Looks like the hour Taker/Punk at the end of the first hour/start of the second hour ended up doing well... well that's what it looks like from the hourly viewership, but unless quarter 5 boosted numbers with the advertisement of Taker coming out and they stayed throughout, can't say exactly what made it the top hour by as much as it was. We'll see I suppose in the breakdown.

So yeah, overall, disappointing numbers. Let's see if Rock can get dem numbers back up next week.


----------



## IncapableNinja

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Heyman/ Brock/ HHH should do extremely well considering the Celtics/ Heat & Bulls/ Nuggets games both finished at 10:45.

Whoever was in the third hour before them will have their names attached to some horrible quarter hours, given that the average was 4.1 million with the final segment included. :lol


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> final rating - 3.09
> 
> lucky they didn't go below 3 with their competition yesterday












Pretty bad since it's the road to WM. First hour set the tone for the show


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings are decent if not too bad,IMO.But I agree with purple gloves,they neeed to do something extraordinary before WM,that really evokes the interest of the fans again.


Next week Rock is coming back.Why can't they book him to compete in a tag match,and after the match Cena may deliver an AA,or something like that.



Only promo and promo and more promo,literally kills off any intensity,you need to get little physical IMO to complete a proper build!


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Do wwe even care about rating anymore? Seems to me as if they are half-assing every show and relying on star power to pop a big WM buyrate.


----------



## NJ88

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's fairly awful. Usually on the RTWM the ratings tend to go up as the excitement for the show builds. But the shows have been so...normal and half hearted it's difficult to get interested right now to be honest. I really hope the ratings continue to get lower and lower so they actually might do something about it and create a show to keep viewers interested.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NJ88 said:


> That's fairly awful. Usually on the RTWM the ratings tend to go up


One would think, but that is wrong actually. 

From 2000 to 2004 and again from 2008 to 2011 and some years before that like 1996, between the February PPV and Mania, ratings always decreased until the go-home show to Mania.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Let's not forget RTWM is three hour shows this year, unlike in the past. Viewers probably get tired soon and switch channels.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

was just a complete lackluster and in 1st gear show, the problem is IMO they've messed up the undercard, most of the undercard feuds could quite easily be matches being setup for a B PPV. They should have gone a safer route IMO with Team Hell No vs The Shield (let them win the belts and also let them be apart of the build for Taker/Punk as henchmen) Sheamus vs Randy Orton, Ryback vs Big Show.

I don't have a problem with Rock not being there but are WWE that imcompetent that they couldn't think of ways to continue to the build for this match!

The Video package is brilliant but they should have had a sit down with Rock and Cena with JR (if they don't want it confrontational you could do JR one on one with both and air them both during one night in different segments) you should have had Piper have a segment with Cena IMO with one year on from the last segment and how he didn't listen and thus failed. we don't need Rock/Cena in the ring because we got so much out of that last year but they could still have built it up.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The fact that 4 million people watch RAW week in week out is beyond my comprehension. For 3 straight hours, as well.


----------



## Dub

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Karma101 said:


> Do wwe even care about rating anymore? Seems to me as if they are half-assing every show and relying on star power to pop a big WM buyrate.


Well....


Da Silva said:


> The fact that 4 million people watch RAW week in week out is beyond my comprehension. For 3 straight hours, as well.


^^ There is your answer and to add to this quote, they are still one of the top viewing shows on monday. WWE knows that they are going to make money regardless if they have a couple of bad weeks.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DubC said:


> Well....
> 
> ^^ There is your answer and to add to this quote, they are still one of the top viewing shows on monday. WWE knows that they are going to make money regardless if they have a couple of bad weeks.


There once was a company down in Atlanta that had a very similar mindset. Turned out, they didn't make money regardless.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Defei said:


> Let's not forget RTWM is three hour shows this year, unlike in the past. Viewers probably get tired soon and switch channels.


viewers.. i noticed tons of empty seats in the upper sections when hhh came out on monday night, those seats were all jam packed full at the start of the show

3hrs is killing raw


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RAW was a pretty terrible show. There was no Rock, and since Rock is the champion, that also means no WWE title. Which wouldn't necessarily be that terrible, but they barely acted like the Cena/Rock feud existed. They expect this thing to sell on name power alone, I know, but they at least need to _try_. They are treating the biggest feud of the year as though it's not that big of a deal.
HHH and Brock and Punk and Taker tried their best, but both those feuds just don't feel big time at this point, which is a real problem. WWE just seems to be in cruise control right now, which is not the place to be heading into Wrestlemania. If "big things" are going to happen, now is the time. The fact that big things aren't happening is pretty telling (if this is as dramatic as things are going to get, then what's the spring shit-PPV season going to look like?).


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*Segment Breakdown*



> In the segment-by-segment, John Cena vs. Darren Young and Ryback vs. David Otunga lost 36,000 viewers.
> 
> The Fandango/Great Khali segment lost 104,000 viewers.
> 
> R-Truth vs. Damien Sandow lost 128,000 viewers.
> 
> The Undertaker/C.M. Punk interaction plus Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. Primo & Epico gained 111,000 viewers to a 3.27 quarter and was the high point of the show.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Cody Rhodes lost 184,000 viewers.
> 
> The Booker T Hall of Fame video and announcement lost 124,000 viewers.
> 
> Sheamus & Randy Orton vs. Heath Slater & Drew McIntyre and its post match gained 58,000 viewers at 10 p.m. to a 3.09 quarter.
> 
> Dolph Ziggler vs. Kofi Kingston lost 302,000 viewers.
> 
> Wade Barrett vs. Chris Jericho vs. The Miz lost 54,000 viewers.
> 
> The final segment with Paul Heyman, HHH and Brock Lesnar gained 494,000 viewers to a 3.19 overrun.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

5 minutes long, high point of the show.

unk

A bit surprised by the overrun. That's a pretty poor number.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.3 as the high point, 3.2 overrun. 

At least WWE has Heat/Celtics as the convenient out for how horrible the first 80 minutes of that show was.


----------



## sharkboy22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow, no surprise at all at the breakdowns. Ok, a bit surprised Fandango lost viewers as well as Ryback. Also, Cena lost viewers? Meh, silly choice to cut to commercial 30 seconds into the match and by the time we're back it only had like 30 seconds to go as well.

Also, what the hell? HHH/Heyman gained 484,000! Jesus, that's a lot.

As figured, looks like the only feuds people care about are Punk/Taker and HHH/Lesnar. Could you blame them? They're the only two feuds with an actual build. Swagger/Del Rio is a joke and Cena/Rock is the biggest joke of them all. 

WM has got to be one of the wost WM builds of all time. Just doesn't even feel like Mania season.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



sharkboy22 said:


> Also, what the hell? HHH/Heyman gained 484,000! Jesus, that's a lot.


Not really, considering who was in it and that it had no commercial break. It was a promo too, which usually do a lot better than matches. The rating for that segment should be considered very disappointing. I'm also surprised the Cena opening did bad. Except I hardly put the fault on Cena. Who's fucking idea was it to put Darren Young and Titus Neal in there?


----------



## version 1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kokepepsi said:


> In the segment-by-segment, John Cena vs. Darren Young and Ryback vs. David Otunga lost *36,000* viewers.
> 
> The Fandango/Great Khali segment lost *104,000* viewers.
> 
> R-Truth vs. Damien Sandow lost *128,000* viewers.


So how can they lose 36.000 + 104.000 + 128.000 = 268.000 viewers



kokepepsi said:


> The Undertaker/C.M. Punk interaction plus Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. Primo & Epico gained *111,000* viewers to a 3.27 quarter and was the high point of the show.


Gaining back 111.000 viewers and be the high point of the show???


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Heyman/HHH/Lesnar... damn, it's a decent number considering the overall show rating, but when you also consider a throw-away 20 minute commercial-filled Punk/Kane match with a Taker appearance last week did almost just as well of a rating, well... that Heyman/HHH number seems even worse. Of course it was 20 minutes over which is ridiculous. These long overruns need to stop. The show is long enough as is.

Genuinely surprised Taker/Punk gained that well (might've done even more but most viewers who tuned in tuned out after the segment was over and the tag match was ready to start). High point of the show is good, though the 9PM has been the high point for the last few weeks. Pretty good stuff.

The IC Title triple threat only losing 58,000 isn't that bad, is it? Not sure what the average is for that quarter but it doesn't look as terrible as I would've thought. 

Anyway, terrible breakdown. Lesnar/HHH contract signing advertisement either failed to bring in viewers or failed to keep them through the Heyman rapeage. Taker/Punk's number even isn't really anything to talk about. Let's see if Rocky can kick things back up next week.



> version 1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So how can they lose 36.000 + 104.000 + 128.000 = 268.000 viewers
> 
> 
> 
> Gaining back 111.000 viewers and be the high point of the show???
Click to expand...

Either a typo on someone's end or the Taker/Punk segment got the highest *rating*, but not the highest viewership (which is stupid that they don't use viewership to determine the highpoint of the show if that's the case). I mean, based on those numbers, the first 3 quarters all did better viewership than Taker/Punk's quarter.

I still do think though had Taker/Punk gone on longer, it would've done a lot better, but as it stands it certainly wasn't the peak of the show unless there's an error in the breakdown. It was certainly higher than anything after it, but yeah...


----------



## rks300

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

given that WWE pretty much goes out of there way to try and make sure people dont give a shit about the midcard combined with the competition in the Heat/Celtics game. Nothing in the breakdown surprise me whatsoever. You have random irrelevant pointless throw away matches that mean next to nothing (for the most part) and filler segments like last Monday and people are going to tune out because theres no reason to stick with the entire 3 hour show with other alternatives to watch. And Punk/Taker, Brock/HHH do the biggest numbers.... that doesnt surprise at all also. 

I'd be curious to see what DVR numbers are like when they have competition for the same viewers like this (I guess during football season would do). Im sure numbers are high since Raw isnt worth watching live 90 - 95% of the time when there are other alternatives on TV.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Defei said:


> *For the past two weeks of RAW, 9 PM quarter has been the highest rated part of the show. Could very well be a pattern for RTWM this year* or maybe it's just because of Rock and Lesnar. We can find out from this week's numbers if Undertaker at 9PM had the same level of interest as Rock/Lesnar.



Like I said, This seems to be a pattern here. Whatever angle is placed in the 9Pm quarter, its peaking with viewer's interest. First Rock/Cena angle, the next week Lesnar/HHH, and now Taker/Punk. Viewers immediately tune out once the big segment is over, and only some of them return by the end of the show for the overrun. Next week if they manage to put Rock/Cena at the end of show instead of 9 PM, we will know the pattern for sure.



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Not really, considering who was in it and that it had no commercial break. It was a promo too, which usually do a lot better than matches. The rating for that segment should be considered very disappointing. I'm also surprised the Cena opening did bad. Except I hardly put the fault on Cena. Who's fucking idea was it to put Darren Young and Titus Neal in there?


It was a 19 minute overrun though, way too long. They should glad they didn't lose viewers.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol why did fandango lose viewers?


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



RevolverSnake said:


> lol why did fandango lose viewers?


He didn't lose that much so i think that's good  .


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm guessing these losses don't mean much because there was straight up losses through out the entire show.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, John Cena vs. Darren Young and Ryback vs. David Otunga lost *36,000 viewers.*
> 
> The Fandango/Great Khali segment lost *104,000 viewers.*
> 
> R-Truth vs. Damien Sandow lost *128,000 viewers.*
> 
> The Undertaker/C.M. Punk interaction plus Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. Primo & Epico gained *111,000 viewers* to a 3.27 quarter and was the high point of the show.


Based on this breakdown, the Cena promo at the start was the peak of the show.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> Based on this breakdown, the Cena promo at the start was the peak of the show.


you missed the part where it said "The Undertaker/C.M. Punk interaction plus Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. Primo & Epico gained 111,000 viewers to a 3.27 quarter and *was the high point of the show.*"


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah but it's not possible based on the figures. They lost 268k from the first quarter and gained 111k for the 9pm segment.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

then the 111k figure is wrong, the highpoint of the show has to be during the second hour as that was far and away the most watched


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Either the "highpoint of the show" is a typo or the figure "110,000" is a typo. I'd be more inclined with the first option, since Punk/Taker barely lasted 6 minutes. They have a higher rating with lower viewer-ship, which is impossible.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> Either the "highpoint of the show" is a typo or the figure "110,000" is a typo. I'd be more inclined with the first option, since Punk/Taker barely lasted 6 minutes. *They have a higher rating with lower viewer-ship, which is impossible.*


Why? Household ratings have nothing to do with the viewership.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I've been thinking about it and I think the gains/losses are wrong. The first hour only averaged 4.252 million, which doesn't add up with the numbers I'm getting as no quarter number in the 1st hour of viewership goes below 4.3 million (based on my calculations). Has to be a typo somewhere.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So they basically just lost viewers all night with minimal gains throughout? Not surprising. Something doesn't add up though. They can't lose over 200k from the beginning, only gain 100k back and have that the highest of the night. Doesn't make sense.

The numbers don't shock me though. This Raw was dogshit although it's great to see that Orton/Seamus managed a gain, even if it was a small one. Nice to see that The Shield angle is working and has some peoples interest at the least. 

9pm didn't perform half as well as it has in previous weeks but that isn't surprising when Punk/Taker were on for 5 minutes and the rest was commercials, recaps and fucking Primo. Barely over 100k for your 9pm slot? Not good. This is what happens when you don't use one of your main holding segments correctly. It performs weakly. 

The overrun managing to pull back everybody they lost during the last hour _and _150k more is impressive. As a standalone number however, it isn't. Again, it's hardly surprising though given the flat nature of the previous 3 hours. Then it goes for 20 minutes which is considerably long for an overrun and this is what you get. It still did miles better than last week which is a positive I suppose. 

Definitely the worst performing show on the RTWM thus far and the numbers reflect that. Rock hasn't even been advertised for next week either which is foolish. I doubt they'll be able to rebound up to the standard they had before and especially if they dish out shows similar to the total shit this one was. They're lucky the first Rock/Cena interaction this year was seen by so many people because chances are that's the segment that is going to sell Wrestlemania whether casuals watch the rest of the remaining Raws or not.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Actually, this week's overrun wasn't "miles better" than last week's as last week they got a 3.18. Also worth noting last week's may have had better viewership as well (need to check that). I'd consider last week's more impressive on that fact and it didn't have two big draws in a big feud important segment for 20 minutes going back and fourth, and it also had a commercial break working against it. This week's overrun though did gain more, but that's the only advantage I see it for it.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Uhhhh, they kinda did though.

Last week: 

10pm starts at a 3.32

Next 2 quarters lose a combined 437k

Overrun only pulls back 153k to end the show at 3.18

This week:

10pm starts at 3.09

Next 2 quarters lose a combined 356k

Overrun pulls back 494k to end the show at 3.19

Yeah.....it kinda did. They were against an uphill battle this week and actually managed to pull back all the people they lost and more. Last week? Not so much. It's nothing to shout home about overall but compared to last week they very clearly smoked it.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Forgot to mention it in the RAW thread but why they didn't even tell the audience that Rock is there live next week? Last week it was fine because he was on the last show, now he wasn't on two shows and viewership dropped a lot from that big audience who watched the Rock/Cena segment. Such a lazy promotion. Instead of promoting Rock in something, even a confrontation with Cena would have been good, they will promote Rock's segment on the actual show for 30 minutes without the ability to make a difference in the overall number. The only positive here is that as Starbuck said, the biggest money segment of the year was also the most watched, so they can hope that it sold WM there.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> Forgot to mention it in the RAW thread but why they didn't even tell the audience that Rock is there live next week? Last week it was fine because he was on the last show, now he wasn't on two shows and viewership dropped a lot from that big audience who watched the Rock/Cena segment. Such a lazy promotion. Instead of promoting Rock in something, even a confrontation with Cena would have been good, they will promote Rock's segment on the actual show for 30 minutes without the ability to make a difference in the overall number. The only positive here is that as Starbuck said, the biggest money segment of the year was also the most watched, so they can hope that it sold WM there.


they promoted The Rock's return on Main Event and USA Commerical AD during Main Event


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> they promoted The Rock's return on Main Event and USA Commerical AD


At least they did that, but with a mention on RAW by Cole and King would have been even better.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> they promoted The Rock's return on Main Event and USA Commerical AD during Main Event


They should have promoted it on the show. They seem to be using dot com and superstars twitter to promote what happens the next week instead of actually sticking a graphic bumper on for a couple of seconds on Raw itself. Any time they've done it the latter way it has worked much better iirc and for obvious reasons. More people know what to look forward to the next week instead of just the people who check online or have a social media presence.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

@Starbuck

Regardless, they still didn't do a better viewership so to say they "smoked" it last week is overdoing it. I don't know for sure which I'd say is better as a standalone number but I'd probably give the edge to this week's. However still last week's I'd say was more impressive for the reasons I stated above. Both are disappointing in the grand scheme of things.

One other thing to consider is this week's show was advertised and built heavily around the contract signing since last week, and yet not only did they disappoint in the overrun but the show number itself failed with the rating on Lesnar and HHH's back.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This week they started lower, continued to dip lower and lower and it was literally all on the overrun to pull that back, which it did and more. Last week started higher, dropped and didn't recover. I really don't see why you're arguing about this though lol. The numbers are right there in front of you, take them or leave them. They promoted the contract signing throughout the show, yes, they also delivered a super shit and horrible show where the trend was viewers tuning out rather than tuning in. The overrun alone basically negates the poor performance of the entire third hour because it brought more people back. I don't know what you were expecting it to do, pull in a million people when the interest clearly wasn't there all night long? They were hardly going to pull a 3.7 out of thin air under the circumstances. Context and all that.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I was expecting it to top the show and do a much better number than last week's overrun. I was also expecting a better show rating as a whole than a 3.09 on the road to Mania. Last week's didn't have two guys who were big proven draws like this week's did in Heyman/HHH. It had Punk who's a draw but not a big one, and Kane, who's never been much of a draw. And Taker only came out in the last two minutes, not to mention a commercial right where Raw would usually end. Heyman/HHH with Lesnar at the end should've done much better than that but it didn't, as you can see with the numbers. A 3.3-3.4 based on the overall show rating is what I was expecting tbh, especially when the part about some game ending a bit before the overrun start was brought up which was the main competition for Raw from what I understand.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://www.yardbarker.com/wwe/articles/raw_supershow_rating_breakdown_31912/10370827

last year around the same time they got 3.10 (2 hours) compared to the 3.09 this year (3 hours). So not really a drop off, but it seems 3 hour format can get numbers up when it comes to ratings compared to two hours. But it still too long and Hour 3 has 23 out 26 weeks decreasing.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Rawk said:


> I was expecting it to top the show and do a much better number than last week's overrun. I was also expecting a better show rating as a whole than a 3.09 on the road to Mania. Last week's didn't have two guys who were big proven draws like this week's did in Heyman/HHH. It had Punk who's a draw but not a big one, and Kane, who's never been much of a draw. And Taker only came out in the last two minutes, not to mention a commercial right where Raw would usually end. Heyman/HHH with Lesnar at the end should've done much better than that but it didn't, as you can see with the numbers. A 3.3-3.4 based on the overall show rating is what I was expecting tbh, especially when the part about some game ending a bit before the overrun start was brought up which was the main competition for Raw from what I understand.


This weeks Raw only managed to gain 663k viewers throughout the _entire _show. 494k of those viewers came from the overrun. Brock and HHH are big draws. They aren't miracle workers.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well, guess we'll have to agree to disagree, although on a different subject since you brought it up, I can't see how they only gained 663K when supposedly Taker/Punk was the peak of the show and only gained 110K. I mean, they should've gotten at least 300,000, or it wasn't the peak of the show after all. Something is definitely wrong with the breakdown.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

All I did was add up the gains that were reported. 

110k for 9pm. 58k for 10pm and 494k for the overrun. Something is obviously screwy somewhere but based on the numbers we do have, 494k in one segment coming from 663k in total is what happened. When you consider that, it's a pretty shitty indictment on everything else. In contrast, last week had over 700k in gains and only 150k or whatever came from the overrun not to mention the fact that they weren't able to pull back the viewers lost in the third hour and the third hour started out higher than what the overrun ended up. In no way am I saying this week is some triumph but it most definitely takes a shit on last week that much is evident.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And all I'm saying is it can't take a shit on last week's because last week's was a better viewership number, the main event had less hype and less starpower than the contract signing and the rest of the show wasn't in heavy competition leading to losses all across the board for the overrun to pick back up when the heavy competition is over. They're both roughly equally bad. But that's the last thing I'm saying on the topic.

On the numbers subject, I think I'll try and figure out what's what. Based on the hourly average viewership, the 9Pm and/or some segment in the second hour should've added up to at least a 300,000 gain, maybe even more. The numbers have to be wrong, but what numbers are wrong is the question.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Seems like you're not reading or are just ignoring the other things I'm saying to you. Meh. You're the one taking issue with it, not me. Despite the fact that it's pretty obvious from looking at the numbers I can't say it any other way than what I already have.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

PWTorch says 2007 averaged 3.63 in the ratings.
2009 was a 3.59
That is what they averaged. That wasn't Taker back, Trips back, Brock with Heyman managing, Jericho working a 12 minute match
Road to Wrestlemania. That was average.

WWE is blowing its wad with all these "big names" with not much to show for it.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

next week will be all about Rock/Cena since no Brock, no Hunter, and apparently no Taker (not currently advertised). So a slight from this week (like 3.3) maybe.

IMO the go home show and post-Mania shows will be the calling cards and true tests of how good the ratings can be (not next week)


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I just found it odd you of all people would state something ridiculous like that and figured I'd bring it up (plus Ive been at work with the system fucking up all day so I have nothing better to do). As far as ignoring things, I haven't. Read my posts again.

Edit: So anyway, on the numbers thing, here's what I got as the viewership for each quarter, with all the gains/losses from the breakdown:

Q1- 4,665,000
Q2- 4,629,000
Q3- 4,525,000
Q4- 4,397,000
Q5- 4,508,000
Q6- 4,324,000
Q7+Q8- 4,200,000
Q9- 4,258,000
Q10- 3,956,000
Q11- 3,902,000
Q12+OR- 4,396,000

On the breakdown, it seems either Q6 and Q7 were combined, or Q7 and Q8 were combined. Anyway, the problem with these numbers is the average viewership, without doing any calculations, are clearly considerably above the 4.252 million given by tellbythenumbers. So I took away 300,000 from the first three segments to get an average 4.254 million viewers for the first four quarters, which isn't perfect, but really close and as close I'm going to get without taking away extremely small amounts. Here's what the viewership would look like if I'm correct:

Q1- 4,365,000
Q2- 4,329,000
Q3- 4,225,000
Q4- 4,097,000
Q5- 4,508,000
Q6- 4,324,000
Q7+Q8- 4,200,000
Q9- 4,258,000
Q10- 3,956,000
Q11- 3,902,000
Q12+OR- 4,396,000

If this is the case, quarter 5 with Taker/Punk actually gained about 411,000 viewers, which would explain the mistake and make sense of the breakdown. Always possible though I could've messed up, or Taker/Punk wasn't peak of the show AND the numbers reported earlier for the hourly viewership was wrong, but yeah...


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The HHH/Brock segment was god awful. Yeah, they're draws but that segment ran forever with Heyman. HHH is awful on the mic and the beatdown seemed forced. Then after what seemed like forever waiting for Brock, they didn't even touch. Plus the stip is dumb and not worth bothering with. The whole show overall was a clusterfuck, surprised something like that could even get a 3.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

More people watched Undertaker/CM Punk angle then HHH/Brock angle, which happened at the overrun. Yet people are saying the final segment did better? 

okay, less people watched it though.


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah, I knew RAW would get a low rating. It sucked.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Rawk said:


> I just found it odd you of all people would state something ridiculous like that and figured I'd bring it up (plus Ive been at work with the system fucking up all day so I have nothing better to do). As far as ignoring things, I haven't. Read my posts again..


What's ridiculous about it? I don't see anything at all ridiculous about what I said. You want to see something ridiculous look at your post. All that work for what? Nothing from the looks of it lol. 



The Cynical Miracle said:


> More people watched Undertaker/CM Punk angle then HHH/Brock angle, which happened at the overrun. Yet people are saying the final segment did better?
> 
> okay, less people watched it though.


I'm not saying it did better. I never did. I said that the overrun performance this week was considerably better than the overrun performance last week when you look at things in a little more detail. Rawk took exception and here we are. Much ado about nothing. 

okay, obviously don't read my post either though.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This week's overrun performed better? Completely disagree when you consider who was in it, and it was a promo that had no commercial breaks, unlike last week. The numbers were virtually the exact same.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Another person who isn't reading a thing I said or looking at what I posted and crying over pretty much nothing. 3 Punk marks in a row. Why am I not surprised? 

unk2


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol calm down, I read what you wrote. I don't see how the last segment gaining those viewers back and then some makes the overrun performance so much more impressive than last week's. I'm really just focusing on the viewers, which were the same. Overall, the viewers this week were lower. And the three main feuds can be faulted for that, I believe. But this week Lesnar/HHH was the main selling point of the show, with it being hyped all night. (to a small extent). That's why I'm not as impressed by it as you are.

Starbuck with dat generalizing.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If you read what I posted then you would and should be able to see the point I'm making which clearly expands beyond viewership. And I'm not even impressed by it which is why I don't understand where all this crying is coming from. I knew it wasn't going to be a particularly good number and it isn't. Just like I knew last weeks wasn't going to be either. All I said was that this weeks did better than last weeks and why. Then I get a debate started over absolutely nothing. 

Punk marks with dat crying over nothing.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think we should stop Wrestlinfan, Starbuck's gettin' angry and I don't think we'll like it if Starbuck's angry...






Edit: (Also Starbuck, you said it did MUCH better than last week's. I even agreed it was better than last week's but found it ridiculous that you put it at such a level it's clearly MUCH better. Did you yourself read mine or Wrestlinfan35's posts? Either you didn't or you're trolling.)


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Angry? Come on lol. I don't take this stuff that seriously. I worry for anybody who does. 

But....it did do a lot better. Seriously, how many times are we going to go over this. I read your posts, there's nothing in them to suggest otherwise.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Angry? Come on lol. I don't take this stuff that seriously. I worry for anybody who does.


Oh come on, you are clearly as angry as Peter in that video, clearly. unk2

Or :HHH

Anyway, I am interested in seeing what kind of impact Rock will have on Raw's rating next week. It'll be his first appearance in three weeks and is the WWE Title build. And then the Raw before Mania... no reason that shouldn't do well as they'll be loaded with star power. Rock or Cena in the opener, Taker/Punk in the 9PM, Lesnar/HHH in the 10PM and closing with Rock/Cena to send us into 8.0 land. 

Also heard Taker isn't advertised for Raw next week, which kinda sucks, but better he take off next week than the Raw before Mania. Punk will probably have his own segment so it'll be interesting to see how he manages to keep things with him and Taker afloat in the ratings department. He's had two or so great segments on his own in the past couple of months, and I imagine he'll be on his own again as he most likely won't be competing and there's no reason for anyone else to interject in the feud... unless maybe Foley to re-ignite the Punk/Foley fire, though it would be awesome if Foley gave him a talk like he did Edge years ago, pushing Punk to drop the shenanigans and cowardly acts and become the fighting champion he was for 434 days.

Well... more like a fighting champion for half his reign, but WWE have re-written history before, and they'll no doubt do it countless times from here to the end.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I didn't watch it. I don't like Family Guy. 

Next week will probably be up from this week since they shouldn't be dipping any lower than 3.0 but I don't think Rock's going to have that big of an impact since they haven't bothered advertising him. Then again, I never thought Rock/Cena would hit a 4.1 so you never know. 

:rock4

Star power doesn't always equal success. Look no further than this week for proof of that. Taker, HHH, Brock all there and they barely got above 3.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Don't like Family Guy? What a coincidence! Well... I don't like it _anymore_, but the first 3 seasons I loved, and that specific scene is one of my favorites (though you'd have to see the whole episode to really appreciate it).

The way I figure it, last week will probably be the low of the road to Mania. Next week has to be better, I can't see it not being. I'm thinking a 3.2-3.3, and then the week after that should be a lot better as all the major angles will be on the show with all the major stars and it's the Raw before Mania, and then the fallout from Mania should be a big number as well.

And then after that the ratings will fall... and fall... and fall... and fall... and it will be all Cena's fault since he's the champion and the centerpiece of the show. unk2

John-boy's gonna usher in the era of 1.0's! :mark:


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yup,next week with Rock finally returning should be better not only in terms of programming,but also in terms of ratings(Only request to WWE,please book him in a match against a new talent at Raw).

But the million dollar question is,if WWE's programming is suffering(both in terms of quality+ratings) without The Great One,what'll happen when he'll leave after Mania/Extreme rules,man I absolutrely shudder to think?


Something big needs to happen at this year's Mania,yes Cena SHOULD turn heel,but darn to his new Friuty Pebbles contract,now chances of that are so bleak.

If nothing changes after Mania,except Cena being the new WWE champ instead of Rock,GOD knows what'll happen to WWE programming quality and ratings wise!


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Like i said punk/taker is more interesting to people than rock/cena or brock/taker. How can people be interested in rock/cena when 1: it's been done before and it was awful last time. And 2: rock and cena hardly are on raw at the same time?


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Taker vs Punk was done before and nobody even remembers it. Nobody on this forum acts like they even cared about CM Punk in 2009.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If Rock decides to finally wrestle on Raw,the ratings record of the past many years may crumble.

C'mon Rocky do it!


----------



## Firallon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What...the...hell?................. ........................... . .... . . .....


----------



## SJP

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena will look totally out of place hahaha.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_69517.shtml



> -- Monday's Raw slightly increased in Social Media Activity from last week's show. Raw scored 288,262 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, which was up five percent from last week. But, Raw still remained below the 300,000 mark and the yearly average of 315,000.
> 
> Raw ranked #1 on cable TV Monday night, continuing a four-week pattern of ranking #2, then #1 and repeat.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

ROCK returns and there's an increase? What a shock! :rock4


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

All Hail :rock3


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cody wins a match on raw ratings increase :cody


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They've been at a steady amount of viewers this year, even though WM build has been crap.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...real-housewives-of-beverly-hills-more/174974/

Hour 1 - 4.58 million
Hour 2 - 4.69 million
Hour 3 - 4.58 million

Average - 4.616 million


----------



## the fox

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

first and third hour the same?


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good rating. Predicting a big increase during the last segment.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

final rating - 3.24


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The ROCK doing what he does best :rock


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

the rock doing what he does best and that is bringing in DEM ratingz


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.24 is nothing special with Rock, Taker and HHH all advertised and the fact that this is the RTWM.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> WWE Raw Rating Rises
> Posted by Jeremy Thomas on 03.26.2013
> 
> *The Rock bumps the rating...*
> 
> - Monday's episode of WWE Raw scored a 3.24 rating with 4.62 million viewers. Those numbers are up from last week's 3.09 and 4.28 million viewers; the show did hours of 4.58 million, 4.69 million and 4.58 million viewers.
> 
> The show ranked #1 among cable shows for the night in overall viewers and the male 18 - 34 and male 18 - 49 demographics. The third hour had a higher adult male demo rating than the first hour, *indicating that the show drew a larger general audience for the first hour while the show's core male demographical audience tuned in for the third hour to replace those viewers lost.
> *
> Credit: PW Torch



Once again...the Rock shows why he is the TRUE headliner leading into WM 29. Can't let those ratings slip into garbage. Someone has to keep this thing going strong.



> 3.24 is nothing special with Rock, Taker and HHH all advertised and the fact that this is the RTWM.


It's very special considering the show was 3 1/2 hours and the shows before the Rock was there could barely get to 2.4 over 3 hours.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Could be better, but it's not that bad. Let's see how the ratings will be for the next Raw. Go-home show, :brock , :rock and :taker in the same show. Should be good.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AthenaMark said:


> It's very special considering the show was 3 1/2 hours and the shows before the Rock was there *could barely get to 2.4 over 3 hours*.


Exaggerating much?

6 of the 11 Raws in 2013 have boasted a better rating than 3.24. So like I said, it's nothing special is it?


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Like I said earlier, Cody wins and ratings increase :cody


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Mediocre rating. Not good considering Wrestlemania is just 2 weeks away.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not a surprise re: the rating. No one cares if John Cena wins the belt or not AGAIN. There's only so many times you can see the same damn thing for 9 years and eventually just get tired of it and tune out. Good job by the peeps tuning out.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm sorry, but to carry a 3.24 rating through a 3 and a half hour show with minimal attractions is impressive as hell.

Nobody should be complaining. And fyi, #1 on cable. That's all that matters. /complaints


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> If Rock decides to finally wrestle on Raw,the ratings record of the past many years may crumble.
> 
> C'mon Rocky do it!


The Rock will not wrestle on Raw.The novelty wears off and PPV buys will get affected


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



WallofShame said:


> I'm sorry, but to carry a 3.24 rating through a 3 and a half hour show with minimal attractions is impressive as hell


What's your definition of "minimal attractions?" Everyone but Brock Lesnar was there: Triple H, The Rock, John Cena, The Undertaker...even legends like Bret Hart. That was about as star-studded as WWE can be nowadays, sans a Steve Austin return.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



purple_gloves said:


> Exaggerating much?
> 
> 6 of the 11 Raws in 2013 have boasted a better rating than 3.24. So like I said, it's nothing special is it?


Of course its over 3s with Rock around in 2013...Im talking about last year when Punk was champion and they could barely buy a 2.5 and got some of the worst overrun viewer losses in wrestling history. The Rock gets the belt and the next Raw is almost a fucking 4.0. No exaggeration needed. Just the way it is.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Mediocre rating. Not good considering Wrestlemania is just 2 weeks away.


Mediocre rating? It was 3.0 last week with no Rock and it being all about Lesnar/Cripple H/Punk..these fans on here are full of shit. Lol..lying through their teeth as usual.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why do people fight and insult one another on here about ratings that will never effect any of our lives?


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> The Rock will not wrestle on Raw.The novelty wears off and PPV buys will get affected


I'm not saying that Rock will wrestle on Raw,but what I'm saying is he SHOULD wrestle atleast once on free TV either on RAW or his show Smackdown.

It'll be epic if he FINALLY does so.


As far as the novelty wearing off is concerned,Rock has been quite regular since the last two years,but his drawing power hasn't been affected apparently,especially looking after the ratings he (still)gets and of course PPV buys in which he is featured(as ME).

So,I don't think if he wrestles once,his novelty will wear off,of course if anything becomes too common,it is bound to lose its shine a little bit,that's very obvious IMO.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



purple_gloves said:


> Exaggerating much?
> 
> 6 of the 11 Raws in 2013 have boasted a better rating than 3.24. So like I said, it's nothing special is it?


True. They have been pretty consistent with or without the Rock. Last week they got killed due to Miami Heat vs. Boston Celtics game on ESPN, which topped the night.

2/18 - 3.30 rating
2/25 - 3.46 rating
3/04 - 3.54 rating
3/11 - 3.36 rating
3/18 - 3.09 rating (Heat/Celtics)
3/25 - 3.24 rating


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._News_on_RAW_Being_Three_Hours_Roadblock.html



> - The three-hour RAW shows are said to be taking a toll on the WWE crew and they've become a dreaded event every week. The feeling is that RAW will stay three-hours at least through SummerSlam.
> 
> Source: F4Wonline.com


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^ what does that have to do with ratings?


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^ RAW would consistently pull better ratings at 2 hours. The third hour has been nearly always been losing viewers for the entire hour and hurts the rating. (Check some old posts where the first 2 hour rating vs 3 hour rating for the same show are given)


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> ^ RAW would consistently pull better ratings at 2 hours. The third hour has been nearly always been losing viewers for the entire hour and hurts the rating. (Check some old posts where the first 2 hour rating vs 3 hour rating for the same show are given)


How does it matter? 3 hours = more money for WWE no matter what way you look at it.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Karma101 said:


> How does it matter? 3 hours = more money for WWE no matter what way you look at it.


The poster above me asked what it had to do with ratings and I explained. And yes, WWE are getting paid more for the extra hour, but look at how they're filling the 3 hours. Its leading to a loss of interest in the later half of the show outside of the over-run, which will hurt them overall too. WCW going to 3 hours was disastrous, WWE going to 3 hours has also been mostly disastrous.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*Segment Breakdown*



> In the segment-by-segment, the show opened strong with the C.M. Punk segment with Undertaker doing a 3.39 first quarter.
> 
> Jericho vs. Ziggler lost 441,000 viewers.
> 
> The Fandango attack on Jericho and backstage segment with Sheamus & Orton & Show brawling with The Shield gained 117,000 viewers.
> 
> Mark Henry vs. Usos lost 54,000 viewers.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Antonio Cesaro with the Jack Swagger attack on Ricardo Rodriguez at 9 p.m. gained 371,000 viewers to a 3.28.
> 
> Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. Prime Time Players lost 241,000 viewers.
> 
> HHH interview lost 6,000 viewers.
> 
> Wade Barrett vs. The Miz gained 71,000 viewers.
> 
> The Shield vs. Zack Ryder & Justin Gabriel & Great Khali at 10 p.m. gained 187,000 viewers which is nothing for the time slot, doing a 3.29 quarter.
> 
> Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow vs. Brodus Clay & Tensai and Ryback vs. 3MB in a 1 vs. 3 match lost 102,000 viewers.
> 
> A.J. vs. Kaitlyn lost 257,000 viewers.
> 
> The Rock-Cena segment with the legends gained 615,000 viewers and ended at 3.47.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock/Cena doing that big with a 23 minutes overrun after a 3 hours show is really impressive. You would expect it to be the peak with the names in the ring and the quality of the promo but after 3 hours when the main event segment wasn't close to the peak segment for a long time now, pretty big.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Taker/Punk started off great, and great number (and well deserved) for the Rock/Cena promo. Now THAT was an overrun that smoked the week's prior (and the one prior to that for that matter).

:lmao at HHH losing and then Barrett/Miz gaining. Though to be fair, HHH was positioned very oddly and only given a few minutes. 

Good numbers for Fandango/Jericho, Shield and opponents, 9PM, and 10PM.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well deserved overrun number that more than lived up to the hype. Nice to see the Shield holding interest even if they aren't setting the world on fire. All 5 minutes of Trips segment loses a whopping 6k viewers. Take him out back and shoot him. Miz/Barrett gaining is surprising. It was obviously the intrigue of the nutshot and whether Barrett could fight on without the use of his balls. Something doesn't seem right there though since they were all the same quarter iirc. Not that it matters. It was a nothing promo that was pretty much pointless and over in a flash. 

DAT FANDANGO


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Interesting breakdown. 

-The show opening strong is a good sign. Punk/Taker showing that their feud is garnering interest. Punk can be credited for his promo but also the apprehension of Undertaker coming out/interrupting would definitely have kept viewers.

-Shield and Fandango stuff gaining viewers is a good sign, despite it being a weak gain. 

-The top hour WHC feud was well placed and gained well, the feud seems to be rather flip/flop. 

-HHH barely lost viewers, and after the big over-run last week thats a great sign. 

-Barret/Miz is a shock.

-Shield/Jobbers is poor, but a gain is a gain. Shield are showing they have some interest. 

-Cena/Rock had a great over-run. Impressive given how long the promo was. A strong finish and the feud is still very popular. If only Rock had been there the past 2 weeks to help boost the show.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nice gain by Swagger, your next WCH...:side:


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

rock/cena program paying off once again

The two are on another level to the rest of the roster.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Great to see Orton's segment gaining early on. And ROCK/Cena's main event segment doing well is well deserved and not exactly surprising.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Nice gain by Swagger, your next WCH...:side:


Smoke the stuff he had and he can be WHC in your eyes :lol



Amuroray said:


> rock/cena program paying off once again
> 
> The two are on another level to the rest of the roster.


Rock is just in a class of his own.

Cena, as much as I hate his face character, has just a stupid level of consistency. He draws in everything he is given.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> Smoke the stuff he had and he can be in your WHC eyes :lol.


Just you wait...HHH has Swagger's back all the way thorugh


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk and Undertaker opening strong is very good. Overrun did good too. The bigger two of the three main events doing very well.

lol @ Triple H. I was expecting a strong gain. At the very least, a small gain. But a loss is :lol.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Is the recent increase in ratings because of RTWM or the return of Rock/Brock/Taker/HHH ?


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Amuroray said:


> rock/cena program paying off once again
> 
> The two are on another level to the rest of the roster.


a 3.47 for their only their second segment together this mania season isn't anything spectacular, quite a few rock/punk segments beat it this year

jan 7th The Rock/Punk segment back and forth did a 3.67 quarter rating. 
jan 28th The in-ring segment with Punk and Rock at 10pm gained 279,000 viewers for a 4.03 quarter rating
feb 11th The final segment with The Rock and CM Punk gained 578,000 viewers for a 3.48 overrun rating.

and the cena punk match on feb 25th blew it away as well
CM Punk vs. Cena in the main event gained 1,002,000 viewers for a 3.9 overrun rating - a huge success.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^Rock marks creaming themselves over a number that isn't very special at all is nothing new.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> a 3.47 for their only their second segment together this mania season isn't anything spectacular, quite a few rock/punk segments beat it this year
> 
> jan 7th The Rock/Punk segment back and forth did a 3.67 quarter rating.
> jan 28th The in-ring segment with Punk and Rock at 10pm gained 279,000 viewers for a 4.03 quarter rating
> feb 11th The final segment with The Rock and CM Punk gained 578,000 viewers for a 3.48 overrun rating.
> 
> and the cena punk match on feb 25th blew it away as well
> CM Punk vs. Cena in the main event gained 1,002,000 viewers for a 3.9 overrun rating - a huge success.


No point in bringing it up. The Rock was on the show so whatever Rating Raw got some ppl wont complain. If they got this rating last week or the week before it would be bad. With mania so close and Rock and Cena barely together youd expect something amazing.

Hopefully with everyone there next week wwe has a great show from beginning to end.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow,Rock hit his peak way back in 2000,and thirteen years later he is still wrestling's biggest draw.Simply amazing.



I though no one would pay a shit about Rock/Cena programme,but how wrong was I? Cause it really is the central attraction of the show-whether you like it or not! The ratings prove it for all.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> Wow,Rock hit his peak way back in 2000,and thirteen years later he is still wrestling's biggest draw.Simply amazing.



Rock's peak in terms as a draw is post-2011.


----------



## Gang

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kokepepsi said:


> Alberto Del Rio vs. Antonio Cesaro with the Jack Swagger attack on Ricardo Rodriguez at 9 p.m. gained 371,000 viewers to a 3.28.
> 
> Wade Barrett vs. The Miz gained 71,000 viewers.
> 
> The Rock-Cena segment with the legends gained 615,000 viewers and ended at 3.47.


.

(Y)


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Rock's peak in terms as a draw is post-2011.


 As a PPV draw,debatable-perhaps yes, perhaps no!You could argue that Rock at 2000 was at his peak even as a PPV DRAW,since 2000 was the most successful year in WWE history especially because of how all the PPVs sold!


But since this is the ratings thread,I meant biggest draw -ratings wise.

And ratings wise 1999-2000 Rock>> 2011-current Rock.


But of course you could argue that wrestling itself was cool and at its very peak between 1999-2000,so whatever.


However my point being,we all know about the fact that Rock got the highest ever ratings segment in 1999(8.4),and continued that trend till he retired in 2004.And that was his very peak(basically1999-2000) in terms of being a ratings magnet.

But he comes back into this dull and bland era,and gets the highest ratings of the show.It just proves the longevity and sustainability of his popularity especially when compared with other legends of his time.


Just look at this week ever the greatest WWE legend ever Undertaker lost viewers,whilst Rock gained most!


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> As a PPV draw,debatable-perhaps yes, perhaps no!You could argue that Rock at 2000 was at his peak even as a PPV DRAW,since 2000 was the most successful year in WWE history especially because of how all the PPVs sold!
> 
> 
> But since this is the ratings thread,I meant biggest draw -ratings wise.
> 
> And ratings wise 1999-2000 Rock>> 2011-current Rock.
> 
> 
> But of course you could argue that wrestling itself was cool and at its very peak between 1999-2000,so whatever.
> 
> 
> However my point being,we all know about the fact that Rock got the highest ever ratings segment in 1999(8.4),and continued that trend till he retired in 2004.And that was his very peak(basically1999-2000) in terms of being a ratings magnet.
> 
> But he comes back into this dull and bland era,and gets the highest ratings of the show.It just proves the longevity and sustainability of his popularity especially when compared with other legends of his time.
> 
> 
> Just look at this week ever the greatest WWE legend ever Undertaker lost viewers,whilst Rock gained most!


Dude,We can have Arnold vs Stallone vs Bruce Willis on Raw and it won't touch a rating of 5.

Rock was the most hyped guy during his Hollywood Rock gimmick.He had feuds with Hogan,Austin and Goldberg.Every single PPV lost buys compared to the previous years.So don't say he was bigger than he is now.His drawing power decreased after 2002.His run in Hollywood is what is really helping him now.

I ll stick to my view-Rock's peak as a draw is post 2011 because it was a legend's return and more importantly,his career in Hollywood is at his peak.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> ^Rock marks creaming themselves over a number that isn't very special at all is nothing new.


Not really. I did have a boner after hearing the buys for WM 27, 28,and RR 13 tho.


----------



## MikeChase27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ryback losing ratings again? I thought he was a draw?


----------



## checkcola

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



MikeChase27 said:


> Ryback losing ratings again? I thought he was a draw?


I thought his match with Punk at Hell in a Cell actually popped a higher buyrate for a b-ppv? Hmmm, his lack of m.o. probably has something to do with jobbing him out at ppv after ppv. Fans lose hope. WWE chose the Shield over him, yet the Shield seem to be losing steam also, so bravo WWE, you fail at creating new stars. How very WCW Nitro of you.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk drawing big again, amazing what a little bit of exposure can do, his feud with the rock has elevated him and now with taker it will elevate him further. Cena/rock done well no surprise as the segment was really good


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Dude,We can have Arnold vs Stallone vs Bruce Willis on Raw and it won't touch a rating of 5.
> 
> Rock was the most hyped guy during his Hollywood Rock gimmick.He had feuds with Hogan,Austin and Goldberg.Every single PPV lost buys compared to the previous years.So don't say he was bigger than he is now.His drawing power decreased after 2002.His run in Hollywood is what is really helping him now.
> 
> I ll stick to my view-Rock's peak as a draw is post 2011 because it was a legend's return and more importantly,his career in Hollywood is at his peak.


Just forget about everything else,and answer one simple question of mine:


Do you honestly think that just in terms of being a ratings puller 2011-current Rock >> than 1999-2000 Rock?


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^I think CM Punk gained more from WWE giving him the title for so long more than feuding with Rock or Taker.CM Punk has gained nothing much after his losses to Rock,Cena and Taker


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> Just forget about everything else,and answer one simple question of mine:
> 
> 
> Do you honestly think that just in terms of being a ratings puller 2011-current Rock >> than 1999-2000 Rock?


1.Why did you just avoid everything I said?

Rock in 2003 couldn't pull huge numbers in PPVs.
Rock post-2011 is giving PPVs an increase of 10-15% 

What changed?

Only his status in Hollywood.


2.Rock in 2012 is a bigger draw than Rock in 2000.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> 1.Why did you just avoid everything I said?
> 
> Rock in 2003 couldn't pull huge numbers in PPVs.
> Rock post-2011 is giving PPVs an increase of 10-15%
> 
> What changed?
> 
> Only his status in Hollywood.
> 
> 
> 2.Rock in 2012 is a bigger draw than Rock in 2000.


Look,I am not avoiding whatever you have said,but the fact is that this is the ratings thread and not the 'biggest draw' thread.

AFAIK,PPV buys suffered after 2001 because wrestling itself was not as cool as it used to be when Monday night wars was going on.It has nothing to do with drawing power of Rock,Hogan or Austin,since all three were there in the PPVs that you named(add Goldberg into the list as well-Backclash2003).


I don't want to debate upon whether Rock is a bigger draw in 2012 or he was in 2000,my question to you is regarding "RATINGS" as simple as that.


So,I will repeat my self once again:




Do you honestly believe that as a RATINGS DRAW(only ratings and not PPVs),2011-current Rock is greater than 1999-2000 Rock(when he was supposedly at his VERY peak in terms of eveything)?


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings/PPV,it doesn't matter.Rock is a bigger star now than ever before.


Don't talk about ratings of 7.5 then and 2.5 now.Wrestling was it's peak then.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The Shield vs. Zack Ryder & Justin Gabriel & Great Khali at 10 p.m. gained 187,000 viewers *which is nothing for the time slot*, doing a 3.29 quarter.


No shit. Why the fuck did they put Ryder/Khali/Gabriel match at 10 PM instead of the HHH's promo? Granted it was only a four minute promo but could have brought them much bigger gain.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> HHH interview lost 6,000 viewers.


:HHH2



> The Fandango attack on Jericho and backstage segment with Sheamus & Orton & Show brawling with The Shield gained 117,000 viewers.


FANDANGOAT. :cena2


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Breakdown pretty much ties in with how I watched the show on Tuesday morning. Watched the first segment, then virtually fast forwarded the entire show until the last segment.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> However my point being,we all know about the fact that Rock got the highest ever ratings segment in 1999(8.4),and continued that trend till he retired in 2004.And that was his very peak(basically1999-2000) in terms of being a ratings magnet.


highest rated segment in raw history is austin vs taker wwf title match on june 29 1999 which did a 9.5 rating (10.7 million viewers)

the company as a whole was superhot in 1999-2000, segments like chaz beating meat drew numbers that rock and cena title match on raw these days couldn't match, by 2002-03 the company had cooled off massively


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> highest rated segment in raw history is austin vs taker wwf title match on june 29 1999 which did a 9.5 rating (10.7 million viewers)
> 
> the company as a whole was superhot in 1999-2000, segments like chaz beating meat drew numbers that rock and cena title match on raw these days couldn't match, by 2002-03 the company had cooled off massively


Austin vs Taker was the highest rated MATCH with the over-run,if I'm not mistaken.


However,highest ever rated SEGMENT was indeed 'This is your life' presented by Mick Foley to the Rock.


Please correct me if I'M wrong.

Here is an article from Bleacher Report on this subject:http://bleacherreport.com/articles/57902-bill-banks-talks-about-the-highest-rated-wrestling-segment



> THIS IS YOUR LIFE:
> 
> One of my proudest moments in the wrestling business was coming up with the idea for the *highest-rated cable segment in the history of wrestling—the 1999 "This Is Your Life" with The Rock and Mick Foley.*
> 
> At the time, The Rock and Foley had combined forces as "The Rock N' Sock Connection" tag team. The dynamic between them was that The Rock was too cool for a slob like Foley, but The Rock still had a soft spot for him. In turn, Foley did everything he could to impress The Rock and get on his good side.
> 
> When I was providing ideas to Russo and Ferrara on a weekly basis, one of the things I did was scan the TV Guide, reading up on plot summaries for upcoming movies and television shows.
> 
> One day, I came across the lineup for a "This Is Your Life" marathon of the old 1950s show. It gave me the idea to have Foley and Rock have their own. Knowing Russo was a fan of old television shows, I typed out the idea and emailed it to him—Mick would celebrate The Rock's life by reuniting him with his former girlfriend, a grade-school teacher, his coach, and some others.
> 
> Russo loved it and decided to go with it. I'll never forget watching it from backstage while it was happening in the ring—not only were the fans loving it, but so was everyone in the back. That is, except for Vince McMahon.
> 
> The entire segment went for something like 21 minutes, which McMahon was livid about. Even though we had overtaken WCW in the ratings war, they were still competition and McMahon didn't want to give them an inch. He thought it was too much time to devote to a "talking segment" and told Russo and Ferrara to never let it happen again.
> 
> So, after watching my idea unfold in the ring, it was a letdown afterwards to see that McMahon didn't like it. Russo and Ferrara were disappointed with Vince's reaction as well.
> 
> The next day was the SmackDown tapings. I got a ride from Dr. Tom Prichard from the hotel to the arena and a few minutes after arriving, I saw Russo come out of McMahon's office. "Go look at the door" he told me.
> 
> By that, he meant the production office door where the ratings from the previous night's RAW were posted for everyone to see, broken down by each segment. Next to the "This Is Your Life" segment were the numbers 8.4, and someone had circled it with a pen and wrote "Highest Ever."
> 
> I stood there for a few seconds letting it all sink in. When I turned around, Ferrara was behind me smiling—"Ya, nobody wants to watch those talking segments," he joked. I don't think McMahon ever apologized or even congratulated Russo or Ferrara.
> 
> So, after watching my idea unfold in the ring, it was a letdown afterwards to see that McMahon didn't like it. Russo and Ferrara were disappointed with Vince's reaction as well.
> 
> The next day was the SmackDown tapings. I got a ride from Dr. Tom Prichard from the hotel to the arena and a few minutes after arriving, I saw Russo come out of McMahon's office. "Go look at the door" he told me.
> 
> By that, he meant the production office door where the ratings from the previous night's RAW were posted for everyone to see, broken down by each segment. Next to the "This Is Your Life" segment were the numbers 8.4, and someone had circled it with a pen and wrote "*Highest Ever*."
> 
> I stood there for a few seconds letting it all sink in. When I turned around, Ferrara was behind me smiling—"Ya, nobody wants to watch those talking segments," he joked. I don't think McMahon ever apologized or even congratulated Russo or Ferrara.
> 
> I think it was in 2004 that WWE did another version of the "This Is Your Life" segment, this time with The Rock honoring Foley. The ratings were much lower for that one…


This article was written by Bill Banks,who worked with Vince Russo at that time.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^I think it's debatable.Dave Meltzer says it's the match.WWE says it's the segment.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> 1.Why did you just avoid everything I said?
> 
> Rock in 2003 couldn't pull huge numbers in PPVs.
> Rock post-2011 is giving PPVs an increase of 10-15%
> 
> What changed?
> 
> Only his status in Hollywood.
> 
> 
> 2.Rock in 2012 is a bigger draw than Rock in 2000.



Your reasoning is wrong because ratings and ppv buys were way lower when Rock came back in 2011 compared to what they were in 2000. WWE's popularity was at an all-time high in 1999-2000. So just because business was down in 2003 compared to 2000, doesn't mean that Rock is a bigger draw now then he was then


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> Austin vs Taker was the highest rated MATCH with the over-run,if I'm not mistaken.


well here is meltzers input



> June 28, 1999: A match where Steve Austin won the WWF title from The Undertaker in Charlotte drew the largest rating and audience to ever witness a pro wrestling match or for that matter, any pro wrestling segment, ever on U.S. cable television. The match did a 9.5 rating, which was 10.72 million viewers. Perhaps the most impressive is that one out of every six television sets in the U.S. that had cable that was on during that time was watching that match. Because for more than a decade, *Vince Russo has made it a talking point to say how the “The Is Your Life: Rock,” segment was the highest rated segment in history (it did an 8.4 quarter), to show how skits outdraw matches, it’s become a talking point how that was the highest rated segment in Raw history. Actually there were a handful of different quarter hours that beat that total, including most of the second hour of the May 10, 1999 show.*


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> Your reasoning is wrong because ratings and ppv buys were way lower when Rock came back in 2011 compared to what they were in 2000. WWE's popularity was at an all-time high in 1999-2000. So just because business was down in 2003 compared to 2000, doesn't mean that Rock is a bigger draw now then he was then



They are two different points.

1.Boots2Asses argued that Rock took a dull business in 2012 and made it profitable.

I said wrestling in 2003 was more relevant than wrestling in 2012.

Every PPV that Rock appeared lost buys compared to the previous year but Rock has increased PPV buys by 10-20% since his return.So if he could do it in 2012,why wasn't he able to do it in 2003 with more established names?

Nothing much has changed to Rock in wrestling between 2003-2011.So how is he able to pull off such huge numbers right now?I believe it is due to his status in Hollywood.


2.Rock has increased PPV buys by 10-20 % since his return.

Rock's 'peak' 

Rock's first PPV without another major draw(Stone Cold) was Survivor Series 1999.Stone Cold returned to a match at No Mercy 2000.


-11 PPVs were held in that time period.

-Buyrates of only 4 PPVs increased.Rock main-evented in only two of those while HHH main-evented in all the four


Since Rock's return in 2011,The Rock has appeared on following PPVs:

WM 27 and WM 28 have grossed more than 1 million

Royal Rumble 201 PPV buys are highest since 2008.

Survivor Series 2011 had a 15 % increase compared to SS 2010



My point is simple:Rock is a much bigger draw since his return in 2011.It's not even debatable.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

@validreasoning:

I never said I don't believe Meltzer.

But the fact still is till date 'This is your Life' remains the most watched non-match segment(Quarter??).


Also we must count the over-runs in the overall ratings which Austin/Taker got.


One more thing if we talk about match ratings(with overrun included of course) then what about Patterson/Brisco vs The Posse? WWE has called that match as the highest rated in Raw history in one of their DVDs(which one,I don't remember at the moment).


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think the build has been lackluster to WrestleMania but can someone help me out, hasn't the rating on the RTW this year trounced last years? 

Like it or not Vince is making that money #MAKINMOVES #MILLIONSOFDOLLERS :vince2 :young2


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I said 'This is your life' was the highest rated Segment while Patterson/Brisco vs Mean Strret Posse was the highest rated match ever on Raw history.Here is the proof,straight from WWE's Atitude Era DVD Disc One Review:http://pdrwrestling.net/2013/01/01/wwe-the-attitude-era-dvd-review-disc-one/



> The World Was Watching: Record ratings caused various athletes and celebs to show up on WWF TV. WWE became broadcast all over the world with continued success.
> 
> *The highest-rated match of the Attitude Era was Pat Patterson and Jerry Brisco against the Mean Street Posse in May of 1999. *
> 
> The highest-rated segment ever was the Rock and Mankind’s “This Is Your Life” segment in September of 1999, which ran long and upset Vince. Come to find out though, this ended up being the highest rated segment ever on RAW.



So it wasn't Austin vs Taker as big Dave says,but Patterson/Brisco vs Posse as WWE OFFICIALLY Says!


----------



## vanboxmeer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good to see that the diva dirt mongs' half star dream match of AJ/Kaitlyn lost plenty of viewers for their "main event".


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



YoungGun_UK said:


> I think the build has been lackluster to WrestleMania but can someone help me out, hasn't the rating on the RTW this year trounced last years?
> 
> Like it or not Vince is making that money #MAKINMOVES #MILLIONSOFDOLLERS :vince2 :young2


trounced no, viewership in millions, of course 2013 is 3hrs whereas 2012 was 2 so that has to be taken into account, however so far in 2013 wwe have used alot more gimmicks to get people watching ie 20th anniversary, old school raw, announcing takers return electronically whereas last year he just returned, tlc wwe title match which was built up for a few weeks, cena/punk to determine mania main eventer which was also built up for a week

2012
march 26th .........4.44m
march 19th .........4.38m
march 12th .........4.82m (rock/rap show)
march 5th ..........4.61m
feb 27th ...........4.65m (rocks return)
feb 20th ...........4.63m (night after EC)
feb 13th ...........4.12m
feb 6th ............4.62m
jan 30th ...........5.22m (night after rumble)
jan 23th ...........4.62m
jan 16th ...........4.3m
jan 9th ............4.01m

2013
mar 25th............4.62m
mar 18th............4.26m
mar 11th............4.81m
mar 4th ............5.02m (old school raw)
feb 25th........... 4.71m
feb 18th ...........4.66m (night after EC)
feb 11th ...........4.26m
feb 4th ............4.81m
jan 28th ...........5.02m (night after rumble) 
jan 21st ...........4.32m
jan 14th ...........4.55m (20th anniversary show)
jan 7th ............4.42m (rocks return)


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> Look,I am not avoiding whatever you have said,but the fact is that *this is* the ratings thread and *not the 'biggest draw' thread*.
> 
> AFAIK,PPV buys suffered after 2001 because wrestling itself was not as cool as it used to be when Monday night wars was going on.It has nothing to do with drawing power of Rock,Hogan or Austin,since all three were there in the PPVs that you named(add Goldberg into the list as well-Backclash2003).
> 
> 
> I don't want to debate upon whether Rock is a bigger draw in 2012 or he was in 2000,my question to you is regarding "RATINGS" as simple as that.
> 
> 
> So,I will repeat my self once again:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you honestly believe that as a RATINGS DRAW(only ratings and not PPVs),2011-current Rock is greater than 1999-2000 Rock(when he was supposedly at his VERY peak in terms of eveything)?


Really? Could've fooled me. Oh, and given the names appearing in that segment (well, apart from Booker T), a 615,000 gain isn't alll that impressive, tbh. Certainly nothing to get excited about.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Really? Could've fooled me. Oh, and given the names appearing in that segment (well, apart from Booker T), a 615,000 gain isn't alll that impressive, tbh. Certainly nothing to get excited about.


It is though, given the losses before it is gained lots of new viewers after regains. It outdrew the past 2 weeks of over-runs and ended the show on a good quarter. Not to mention it lasted 30 minutes or so, which could have sabotaged it. Rock/Cena is still a hot program as the numbers have shown, their opening promo drawing over 4.0 and this impressive over-run are proof of that.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The two feuds causing main interest at this Wrestlemania is Rock/Cena and Taker/Punk. They keep drawing in the most numbers. Wrestlemania will have a big buy rate this year again.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings for each of the 3 main events since they officially started. I'm only counting actual segments here and not video packages or throwaway 5 minute segments therefore the Rock/Cena video packages are out, the 5 minute Taker/Punk promo from last week is out and the 5 minute HHH promo from this week is out. Rock/Cena was obviously announced well in advance. Taker/Punk started the week after Old School Raw and HHH/Brock on Old School Raw itself. 

*Rock/Cena = 4.1, 3.5

Taker/Punk = 3.5, 3.2, 3.4

HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2*

If you want to include the previous weeks numbers, in other words, the no.1 contenders match between Cena/Punk to determine who would fight Rock for the title, the Old School Raw fourway to determine who would face Taker and the Vince/Heyman match with the Brock and HHH returns from the Feb 26th show then it would look like this:

*Rock/Cena = 3.9, 4.1, 3.5

Taker/Punk = 3.7, 3.5, 3.2, 3.4

HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.6, 3.2*

Just thought I'd leave that there for those of us getting carried away with nonsense.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Forgot to include the opening for Old School Raw, which was the first segment for the streak build/tease, so that was the start if we're talking before official matches were made. The 3.2 for the overrun was Punk/Kane with Taker only appearing at the end for 2 minutes. If we're not counting segments less than 5 minutes, that shouldn't be taken into account either.


Rock/Cena = 3.9, 4.1, 3.5

Taker/Punk = 3.7, 3.7, 3.5, 3.4

HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.6, 3.2


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why you always have to come and try to start shit lol? 

I put one 3.7 in there because they were from the same show. No reason to include it twice when it wasn't an official part of the Punk/Taker feud and neither of the other 2 programs have got 2 segments on 1 show. It evens things out. The Punk/Kane stuff was still part of the Punk/Taker feud considering it was all about Bearer. It stays. If the streak tease stuff from Old School Raw gets included then I see no reason why the Punk/Cena match doesn't get included since they're essentially the same thing, a match determining what the next match is going to be. You can't include one and exclude the other. 

The best way to go about it is obviously to take from when the feud actually/officially started then and cut out the video packages/5 minute bullshit. So now we're back to this.

*Rock/Cena = 4.1, 3.5

Taker/Punk = 3.5, 3.2, 3.4

HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I only correct shit. 

Taker/Punk's start was a 3.7, and the overrun that directly had an impact on the streak match was a 3.7 as well. You can keep the 3.6 for Lesnar/HHH's brawl but now that I think about it, the 3.6 for what I'm assuming was Lesnar's destruction of NAO/Heyman promo was under 5 minutes as well. No reason to include that in that case. And no, the 3.2 shouldn't count for the Punk/Kane overrun for the same reason I stated before. It didn't have much to do with Taker/Punk as it did Kane's revenge on Punk for earlier.

And I didn't realize what the 3.9 was for until a few minutes later and I edited that part out and included it back in. 

So we're now with:

Rock/Cena = 3.9, 4.1, 3.5

Taker/Punk = 3.7, 3.7, 3.5, 3.4

HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2

Clearly the one drawing the most attention is Rock/Cena. That's not a question at all. As far as Taker/Punk and Brock/HHH, it's fairly simple to pick Taker/Punk. However let's go week by week since Taker/Punk started and see which got the highest number (using the highest numbers for each from the show):

3/4- Taker-Punk (3.7), Lesnar-HHH (3.6)
3/11- Taker-Punk (3.46), Lesnar-HHH (3.6) 
3/18- Taker-Punk (3.27), Lesnar-HHH (3.19)
3/25- Taker/Punk (3.39), Lesnar-HHH (not sure, but has to under a 3.3 considering what the 10pm and 9pm segments got)

So 3 out of the last 4 weeks, it's been Taker/Punk. All signs point to that drawing the most attention next to Rock/Cena. And I'm only including 5 min segments in the above if I have to for comparison's sake.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Jesus Christ. I'm not trying to start a war here. You're over complicating things as usual. How can the Old School Raw be the official start of that feud when it wasn't even decided until the last minute what the feud was going to be? Including peaks of shows and what not serves no purpose when the actual segments aren't equal competitors. 

*Rock/Cena = 4.1, 3.5

Taker/Punk = 3.5, 3.2, 3.4

HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2*

That takes them from when they definitively start and cuts out the nonsense of video packages and less than 5 minute segments. It's really not that hard and I'm not speaking for one over the other. They are what they are, take from them what you will. If you want to cut the Punk/Kane match out because you think it was only a 2 min segment then take it out. The segments above are all _actual _in-ring segments about and contributing to their respective feuds.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Jesus Christ. I'm not trying to start a war here. You're over complicating things as usual. How can the Old School Raw be the official start of that feud when it wasn't even decided until the last minute what the feud was going to be? Including peaks of shows and what not serves no purpose when the actual segments aren't equal competitors.
> 
> *Rock/Cena = 4.1, 3.5
> 
> Taker/Punk = 3.5, 3.2, 3.4
> 
> HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2*
> 
> That takes them from when they definitively start and cuts out the nonsense of video packages and less than 5 minute segments. It's really not that hard and I'm not speaking for one over the other. They are what they are, take from them what you will. If you want to cut the Punk/Kane match out because you think it was only a 2 min segment then take it out. The segments above are all _actual _in-ring segments about and contributing to their respective feuds.


By that last sentence, my point about the March 4th Taker/streak/Punk segments stand, both of them, and thus giving Taker/Punk the edge. Don't know how else to put it without "over-complicating" things, but I best shut-up now I suppose before I do and we go in another circle.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk vs. Orton vs. Seamus vs. Show = Punk vs. Taker. 

Sure. Makes sense. But hey, the end with Punk/Taker only lasted 2 minutes so going by your other logic we have to take that one out too, right? 

You want to keep things simple, even, accurate and logical, without any bias? 

*Rock/Cena = 4.1, 3.5

Taker/Punk = 3.5, 3.2, 3.4

HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2*

There it is right there for the 4th time.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Shouldn't you be comparing actual viewing numbers instead of ratings? A 3.2 rating can have a different amount of viewers on a different night can't it?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Punk vs. Orton vs. Seamus vs. Show = Punk vs. Taker.
> 
> Sure. Makes sense. But hey, the end with Punk/Taker only lasted 2 minutes so going by your other logic we have to take that one out too, right?


Punk/Orton/Sheamus/Show was for the streak match. Taker/whoever was the feud right there, and Punk won and since then it's been Taker/Punk. Same thing goes for the segment earlier in the night. Punk/Kane was not to see who would battle for the streak, it was built on the premise of Kane trying to make Punk pay for dis-respecting Bearer. Nothing to do with the Taker feud directly.

And the rest, well, again, just read what I've posted above for a truly unbiased assessment, both by show and by segments.



> Shouldn't you be comparing actual viewing numbers instead of ratings? A 3.2 rating can have a different amount of viewers on a different night can't it?


I could work on that later, but even then it would just be estimates and I doubt it's worth the time for this argument anyway.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Must have missed the part about over complicating things. Holy Jeebus. I'm not about to go look for viewership numbers and all the rest of it. I'm not trying to prove a point. All I did was set out the numbers the 3 main events have pulled in proper segments since they officially began. For the 5th time...

*Rock/Cena = 4.1, 3.5

Taker/Punk = 3.5, 3.2, 3.4

HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2*

Can't be put any clearer than that. No....it really can't be put any clearer than that.

@Rawk - You said Taker/Kane didn't count because it only lasted 2 minutes. Now you're saying the 4-way counts even though the ending only lasted 2 minutes. Make up your mind please. 

You want to go dig up viewership numbers for no reason? Go ahead. Again, all I did and wanted to do was lay things out clearly and without bias which I did. If you didn't want to start an argument then why did you post in the first place lol? The last 3 or 4 of your posts have clearly had the agenda of trying to prove a point yet now you're saying the argument isn't worth it. Again, if it wasn't worth it then why did you post in the first place? DAT PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE POSTING.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Must have missed the part about over complicating things. Holy Jeebus. I'm not about to go look for viewership numbers and all the rest of it. *I'm not trying to prove a point.* All I did was set out the numbers the 3 main events have pulled in proper segments since they officially began. For the 5th time...
> 
> *Rock/Cena = 4.1, 3.5
> 
> Taker/Punk = 3.5, 3.2, 3.4
> 
> HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2*
> 
> Can't be put any clearer than that. No....it really can't be put any clearer than that.


Your original post:



> Ratings for each of the 3 main events since they officially started. I'm only counting actual segments here and not video packages or throwaway 5 minute segments therefore the Rock/Cena video packages are out, the 5 minute Taker/Punk promo from last week is out and the 5 minute HHH promo from this week is out. Rock/Cena was obviously announced well in advance. Taker/Punk started the week after Old School Raw and HHH/Brock on Old School Raw itself.
> 
> Rock/Cena = 4.1, 3.5
> 
> Taker/Punk = 3.5, 3.2, 3.4
> 
> HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2
> 
> If you want to include the previous weeks numbers, in other words, the no.1 contenders match between Cena/Punk to determine who would fight Rock for the title, the Old School Raw fourway to determine who would face Taker and the Vince/Heyman match with the Brock and HHH returns from the Feb 26th show then it would look like this:
> 
> Rock/Cena = 3.9, 4.1, 3.5
> 
> Taker/Punk = 3.7, 3.5, 3.2, 3.4
> 
> HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.6, 3.2
> 
> Just thought I'd leave that there for those of us getting carried away with nonsense.


So if you weren't trying to prove a point, why not just lay out all the numbers for all segments that had to do with them and not just the few you chose necessary? Why keep responding? Clearly there's been a point you've been trying to make.



> You want to go dig up viewership numbers for no reason? Go ahead. Again, all I did and wanted to do was lay things out clearly and without bias which I did. If you didn't want to start an argument then why did you post in the first place lol? The last 3 or 4 of your posts have clearly had the agenda of trying to prove a point yet now you're saying the argument isn't worth it. Again, if it wasn't worth it then why did you post in the first place? DAT PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE POSTING.


There's no reason because I've already proved my point with the evidence put fourth. Either you acknowledge it or you don't.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Rawk said:


> Your original post:
> 
> 
> 
> So if you weren't trying to prove a point, why not just lay out all the numbers for all segments that had to do with them and not just the few you chose necessary? Why keep responding? Clearly there's been a point you've been trying to make.


What point am I trying to make? There's nothing biased in that post at all. I clearly stated that I wasn't taking into account video packages and/or worthless 5 minute segments that don't account for anything and don't give an accurate representation of anything. The video packages cover Rock/Cena and the 5 minute stuff covers both Punk/Taker and Brock/HHH. All 3 get equal treatment. Jesus Fuck. I honestly don't even know what the hell is going on now. If you can find bias in anything I said then please, I'd like to see it. You're the one getting up in arms over absolutely nothing...again, not to mention contradicting yourself along the way.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> What point am I trying to make? There's nothing biased in that post at all. I clearly stated that I wasn't taking into account video packages and/or worthless 5 minute segments that don't account for anything and don't give an accurate representation of anything. The video packages cover Rock/Cena and the 5 minute stuff covers both Punk/Taker and Brock/HHH. All 3 get equal treatment. Jesus Fuck. I honestly don't even know what the hell is going on now. If you can find bias in anything I said then please, I'd like to see it. You're the one getting up in arms over absolutely nothing...again, not to mention contradicting yourself along the way.


:lmao

If I'm "up in arms" you must be tearing your hair out based on these responses. Not only do you make no sense in that last post, having no point in posting yet posting it, with certain restrictions that even within the bounds you put, you still didn't utilize all the segments that fall within those bounds and even include something that shouldn't (and in your original post, it was 2-3 things). So clearly there was a point you were trying to make. I'm sorry if delving a slight bit more into the topic than you means I'm "over-complicating" things, but oh well. It's just gotten funny. 

What else can I post that I haven't? Taking everything into account that you put out there, once again, here are the numbers. Hell, I'll even take out one of the 3.7's as while I don't agree with it, I suppose I'm not playing on your terms going against what you said about each feud having only one segment a night (and this way each only have 3 numbers to go by):

Rock/Cena = 3.9, 4.1, 3.5

Taker/Punk = 3.7, 3.5, 3.4

HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Makes no sense post makes no sense. Other observations include a severe lack of consistency combined with confused logic. Sometimes, well, most times actually, I honestly don't think you actually _read _half the things you read. 

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink and all that.

Says 2 minute segments don't count. Includes 2 minute segments. Doesn't address why some of said segments are included and others are not. 

And I bet you're wondering why we're going in circles, eh?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Makes no sense post makes no sense. Other observations include a severe lack of consistency combined with confused logic. Sometimes, well, most times actually, I honestly don't think you actually _read _half the things you read.
> 
> You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink and all that.
> 
> Says 2 minute segments don't count. Includes 2 minute segments. Doesn't address why some of said segments are included and others are not.
> 
> And I bet you're wondering why we're going in circles, eh?


First two lines of your post... :lmao 

Second part, where did I include 2 minute segments? For Rock/Cena, there was a 20 or so minute match, a 15 or so minute segment, and a 20-30 minute segment. With Taker/Punk, there was a 15-20 minute match, a 10 minute segment, and another 10 minute segment (and that's not including the first 10-15 minute segment of the build). For Lesnar/HHH, there was a 5-10 minute fight, a 5-10 minute segment and a 15-20 minute segment.

So please Starbuck, start making some sense.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The RAWK vs Starbuck = Wrestlemania 30. Now that's a match that will draw ratings and buyrates :vince


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Been making sense all along 

You're the one who needs to catch up. The fact that you can't see the contradictions in some of the things you've said is rather amusing though.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Oliver-94 said:


> The RAWK vs Starbuck = Wrestlemania 30. Now that's a match that will draw ratings and buyrates :vince


I'd be starting my undefeated streak from the looks of things (including the post above, which again, makes no sense). 8*D


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Rawk said:


> Forgot to include the opening for Old School Raw, which was the first segment for the streak build/tease, so that was the start if we're talking before official matches were made. *The 3.2 for the overrun was Punk/Kane with Taker only appearing at the end for 2 minutes*. If we're not counting segments less than 5 minutes, that shouldn't be taken into account either.





The Rawk said:


> I only correct shit.
> 
> Taker/Punk's start was a 3.7, and the overrun that directly had an impact on the streak match was a 3.7 as well. You can keep the 3.6 for Lesnar/HHH's brawl but now that I think about it, the 3.6 for what I'm assuming was Lesnar's destruction of NAO/Heyman promo was under 5 minutes as well. No reason to include that in that case. And no, *the 3.2 shouldn't count for the Punk/Kane overrun for the same reason I stated before*. It didn't have much to do with Taker/Punk as it did Kane's revenge on Punk for earlier.





The Rawk said:


> Taker/Punk = *3.7, 3.7*, 3.5, 3.4


From your own mouth. Make sense for you now? Contradictory statements aren't becoming of a sound argument.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> From your own mouth. Make sense for you now? Contradictory statements aren't becoming of a sound argument.


I fail to see the contradiction and I'm now seeing you don't read my posts (which is ironic considering what you posted last week). Punk/Kane had nothing to do with Punk/Taker, which only had two minutes after that match and it's why I didn't include it. The fatal four way had everything directly to do with Taker and it's why it's included. Why is that so hard to understand? I'm not giving that overrun and segment credit because of two minute Taker appearances, it's because everything surrounding them had to do with the streak match. Punk/Kane had to do with Kane "avenging" Paul Bearer.

So please, try again.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Rawk said:


> *I fail to see the contradiction* and now seeing you don't read my posts. Punk/Kane had nothing to do with Punk/Taker, which only had two minutes after that match and it's why I didn't include it. The fatal four way had everything directly to do with Taker and it's why it's included. Why is that so hard to understand? I'm not giving that overrun and segment credit because of two minute Taker appearances, it's because everything surrounding them had to do with the streak match. Punk/Kane had to do with Kane "avenging" Paul Bearer.
> 
> So please, try again.


Of course you do. Everything to do with Taker, not everything to do with Taker/Punk which is why, going back to my original post, I started from the week that things were officially confirmed for each match, discounting the Punk/Cena match, discounting the 4 way stuff, discounting Vince/Heyman and thus, for the 5th time now...

*Rock/Cena = 4.1, 3.5

Taker/Punk = 3.5, 3.2, 3.4

HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2*

And I'm out because this is so utterly pointless and if you don't get it by now then you never will.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So I see now where you're failing to understand. The Undertaker streak match was confirmed the second he returned, and if not then by the end of the segment when they announced a four-way number one contenders match. That falls in line with Taker/Punk because that's how the feud started (both the segment and the match). Just because it wasn't officially announced doesn't mean the build/feud didn't start. And if we're getting technical, Lesnar/HHH wasn't "officially" confirmed until this Monday, thus going by the criteria you set up, everything before that shouldn't count and thus throwing that all out and they're sitting with just a 3.2. No matter which way you look at, you've contradicted yourself. Either all the build for Lesnar/HHH pre-match counts, which goes back to the initial brawl, or it doesn't and we start with that this week, which is stupid. But if we're going based on when the build started, Taker/Punk's build started, if not when Taker returned, as soon as Punk cut his promo on Taker in that first segment. 

Hopefully that makes it easier for you.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Rawk said:


> So I see now where you're failing to understand. The Undertaker streak match was confirmed the second he returned, and if not then by the end of the segment when they announced a four-way number one contenders match. That falls in line with Taker/Punk because that's how the feud started (both the segment and the match). Just because it wasn't officially announced doesn't mean the build/feud didn't start. And if we're getting technical, Lesnar/HHH wasn't "officially" confirmed until this Monday, thus going by the criteria you set up, everything before that shouldn't count and thus throwing that all out and they're sitting with just a 3.2. No matter which way you look at, you've contradicted yourself. Either all the build for Lesnar/HHH pre-match counts, which goes back to the initial brawl, or it doesn't and we start with that this week, which is stupid. But if we're going based on when the build started, Taker/Punk's build started, if not when Taker returned, as soon as Punk cut his promo on Taker in that first segment.
> 
> Hopefully that makes it easier for you.


Well said. That's presented as clear as day for anyone to understand. Any joe blow casual knew we'd be getting HHH/Lesnar 2 and Punk/Taker as soon as those first segments presented themselves so that's when the numbers should begin to count.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Rawk rocking some sense. 

unk :HHH

The three main events are all doing well so far, though. I'm sure WWE is happy with the numbers.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> The Rawk rocking some sense.
> 
> unk :HHH
> 
> The three main events are all doing well so far, though. I'm sure WWE is happy with the numbers.


Oh yeah they are ALL doing well and then there's the dropoff afterwards . Too bad creative can't book every feud well. Their brains can't handle more than 3 things at once it seems, and according to reports, even that is difficult for them.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

OK then. If we're going by that logic then I guess we should stretch all the way back to when Lesnar returned and F5'd Vince in January because the build for the HHH/Lesnar match started there right? So then we'll go ahead and add a 4.0 to their numbers. 

I understand what you're saying but you're being way too inconsistent for it to matter. When I made my original post, I said that I was taking things from when the feuds properly started, as in, there was no doubt/mystery surrounding any of them and we knew what we were going to see. For Rock/Cena, their first face to face segment was advertised for Old School Raw. For Punk/Taker, they were advertised to have their first interaction the week after Old School Raw. For HHH/Brock, HHH was advertised to address Brock the week after the brawl. That's why I'm starting where I did for each one because that's when each feud actually started. 

You can pick and choose starting dates for each of them all you want. Go ahead and get _technical_. It doesn't matter because you aren't being impartial therefore your opinion on the matter is flawed not to mention your logic. It really doesn't surprise me that the two peeps who agree with you are who they are either. You're seeing what you want to see and changing things to suit your argument instead of seeing what actually is and taking it for what it actually says.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*










ok


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

On the Lesnar F-5ing Vince, there was no confirmation Lesnar would have a Mania match, who would avenge Vince if he did, or if anyone would avenge Vince as maybe Vince would've avenged himself. Not the same with Taker and the segment that followed, which confirmed the Taker match. Lesnar/HHH's build didn't truly start until HHH returned to fight Lesnar. 

Second paragraph, I don't even know where to start. Simply put, it shows the bias you're using. Rock's WWE Title match was set for Mania as soon as he retained the title and it happened to be Rock/Cena, and that's part of the build. Taker/Punk started with that segment and the announcement of a four way match to determine who would face Taker. Lesnar/HHH's build started truly when HHH made the challenge, but I'll also include the brawl as that was a physical confrontation between the two that wasn't leading anywhere except Lesnar vs. HHH. 

And the last paragraph, again, is funny. You basically describe yourself there in this whole argument, as I've shown through the last bazillion posts I've made in this thread. 

But ah well. Just to add a cherry on top, look at Kokepepsi's post (though that alone doesn't prove anything, in this case with two matches that are fairly close in ratings, it says it all). No bias... well, except obviously for obviously all the fans that voted Taker/Punk, because clearly they MUST be biased. At least that's what you're going by with your little jab at THANOS and Wrestlinfan35. I realize no one's ever going to be able to talk 100% accurately when it comes to people they mark for, and I'm not an exception to that, but you certainly aren't either Starbuck and your refusal to acknowledge this in the past (and acting like I'm the only one being even just partially a mark here) is what's making you ridiculous and hilarious here.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kokepepsi said:


> ok


Was this on WWE.com?


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kokepepsi said:


> ok


:wilkins

That's not what the numbers translate to. Is that poll from WWE.com or?


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> :wilkins
> 
> That's not what the numbers translate to. Is that poll from WWE.com or?


Looks fake to me. Not because of the results but because it's pretty easy to put one of these pics together.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Looks fake to me. Not because of the results but because it's pretty easy to put one of these pics together.


Edit: Lol 101%


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kokepepsi said:


> ok


:rock3 

101%? ok. 

As for the Lesnar/HHH vs Taker/Punk discussion. They did pretty similar numbers on TV because it was the first time we saw Taker on TV in almost a year, but the second biggest and most promoted match is Lesnar/HHH. They planned and booked this program 3 months ago, Taker/Punk is booked like a last minute decision to get a streak match on the card.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> Edit: Lol 101%


It being 101% proves it to be 100% fake (no pun intended). I created this using paint a few months ago, so when I say it's easy, I mean it.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> :rock3
> 
> 101%? ok.
> 
> As for the Lesnar/HHH vs Taker/Punk discussion. They did pretty similar numbers on TV because it was the first time we saw Taker on TV in almost a year, but the second biggest and most promoted match is Lesnar/HHH. They planned and booked this program 3 months ago, Taker/Punk is booked like a last minute decision to get a streak match on the card.


:lol I never even noticed the 101% until you said it. Oh well.

As for Lesnar/HHH vs Taker/Punk. It is odd.


Starbuck said:


> *
> Taker/Punk = 3.5, 3.2, 3.4
> 
> HHH/Brock = 3.6, 3.6, 3.2*


 Taking these numbers Lesnar/Triple H has an average of *3.46*, Punk/Undertaker has an average of *3.36*. So numbers wise, they are pretty much the same. As for a booking standpoint (placement), they have flip-flopped between each other. However Triple H/Brock is being presented as a bigger deal at the moment. Undertaker/Punk does not even seem to fully sell "The Streak". Punk keeps mentioning it in promos however his emphasis is on disrespect and Undertaker hardly talking is hurting the feud. It just doesn't come across well. Whereas Triple H/Brock seems more consistent and "full" with the feud direction/storyline. As for placement on the final WM card, WWE probably sees it as: Punk and The Streak VS Possible HHH retirement. We will have to see how they value each.



Choke2Death said:


> It being 101% proves it to be 100% fake (no pun intended). I created this using paint a few months ago, so when I say it's easy, I mean it.


Haha. Good use of paint!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> As for the Lesnar/HHH vs Taker/Punk discussion. They did pretty similar numbers on TV because it was the first time we saw Taker on TV in almost a year, but the second biggest and most promoted match is Lesnar/HHH. They planned and booked this program 3 months ago, Taker/Punk is booked like a last minute decision to get a streak match on the card.












I'm not saying you're wrong, but so far the build has been pretty equal between HHH/Lesnar and Taker/Punk. They've been given practically the same amount of build. Both programs have main evented the show, however it is easier to build the Punk/Taker program because Lesnar is a part timer and misses some weeks of TV. It'll be interesting to see how they build these two programs on the final RAW.

I'm hoping a segment involving all four, it only makes perfect sense. :mark:

lol Starbuck, you're talking as if your opinion is completely logical and 100% the truth, and anybody that dares disagree with you is a LOLMARK and somebody who can't use any logical thinking. I agree with Rawk and think he's making a lot more sense in his breakdown of the numbers, but it must be because I'm a biased Punk mark. It just has to be.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Of course I'm talking like what I'm saying is completely logical. It is. And so far nobody has been able to present anything to make me question what I have said. I'm open for debate. That much should be obvious by now. I like to discuss things and can easily be swayed to an opposing opinion if it makes sense. All this however, doesn't and the only people who think it does are being biased. You are lol. I only wish one or both of you would just come out and say it and we could be done with this. Instead we're stuck with Rawk trying to present an unbiased view with skewed and partial logic. It's nonsense. 

I haven't been biased in anything I have said. I haven't tried to position one match over another. I have treated all 3 equally. I was consistent in everything I said. I was logical in everything I said. I explained everything I said. I was impartial in everything I said. I haven't changed my position. I haven't contradicted myself. I haven't cherry picked what information to use and what not to make my position stronger because I have no position. All I wanted to do with my original post was set out the ratings. That's it. Then all this nonsense gets started because somebody couldn't accept the facts and had to start twisting things to fit with their own agenda.

As for how WWE views what programs are the biggest, here you go...






Are we going to have another merry-go-round discussion over that as well?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why do people care at what match is postioned in the promotion?

It doesnt dictate anything on the night.

Edge V Taker was the Number 4 match at WM 24, it main evented and was the MOTN

This debate is very strange and pointless.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just to add this in, Taker/Punk and Lesnar/HHH, as far as which match is number 2, is just as by a head scratched as which one is drawing more casual interest. Taker/Punk has main evented more, is the streak match and has the magazine cover, by Lesnar/HHH has been planned for months, and is now put with a HHH retirement storyline. I think WWE have been doing their best to make them equals as far as number 2 goes, and it's clearly been working.

Edit: Starbuck, just keep telling me you're right and Im illogical and I'm sure you'll convince me eventually.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Why do people care at what match is postioned in the promotion?
> 
> It doesnt dictate anything on the night.
> 
> Edge V Taker was the Number 4 match at WM 24, it main evented and was the MOTN
> 
> This debate is very strange and pointless.


I don't.

Agreed.

True except for the MOTN part.

Yes. 

And now here we go again lol. Denial all around. Taker/Punk has main evented more times than Rock/Cena too has it not? I guess it's a bigger match than that as well. Dear lord.

What does that commercial promote for Wrestlemania? Rock/Cena and HHH/Brock. What doesn't get mentioned at all? Taker/Punk. This is directly from WWE. Magazine covers lol? Come on. Aside from the solo Rock/Cena commercial, this is the other one they are running. The streak match isn't part of their promotion for the event. It's right there in front of you and in black and white. What more do you need?


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

As for the "main evented more" part, that's not because of importance and higher profile. WWE booked the biggest angles at 9pm as a strategic placement to maximize Rock and Lesnar's segments before the third hour drop, Rock/Cena did there 4.1, the week after Lesnar/Heyman did a 3.6 during a tag match. WWE promotion aside, Lesnar/HHH is still a bigger match because Lesnar means more on PPV than Taker today. Add to it that Punk is not a difference maker and HHH's career stipulation. Another problem with Taker's WM streak match this year is the weak storytelling. The biggest attraction about Taker at WM is the possibility of the streak ending, this year the ultimate payoff to the match is Taker getting revenge on Punk and taking the urn back.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> *I don't.*
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> True except for the MOTN part.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> And now here we go again lol. Denial all around. Taker/Punk has main evented more times than Rock/Cena too has it not? I guess it's a bigger match than that as well. Dear lord.
> 
> What does that commercial promote for Wrestlemania? Rock/Cena and HHH/Brock. What doesn't get mentioned at all? Taker/Punk. This is directly from WWE. Magazine covers lol? Come on. Aside from the solo Rock/Cena commercial, this is the other one they are running. The streak match isn't part of their promotion for the event. It's right there in front of you and in black and white. What more do you need?


Why are you continuing to respond and argue to others page after page about MATCH PROMOTION then?

This a pointless argument on a minuscule subject matter. Like I said on the night, none of that matters. 

I'd rather have Rock316AE give some old school ratings analysis then peeps arguing about what match is promoted on a commercial/magazine cover more.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> What does that commercial promote for Wrestlemania? Rock/Cena and HHH/Brock. What doesn't get mentioned at all? Taker/Punk. This is directly from WWE. Magazine covers lol? Come on. Aside from the solo Rock/Cena commercial, this is the other one they are running. The streak match isn't part of their promotion for the event. It's right there in front of you and in black and white. What more do you need?


Except, Taker/Punk get their own commercial. "Isn't part of the promotion." Wow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Aiis1OVUcA

unk

As for the debate being pointless. What'd you expect from the ratings thread? It's where pointless discussions and debates live and breathe.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> *Edge V Taker was the Number 4 match at WM 24*, it main evented and was the MOTN


Edge/Taker had a pretty long build IIRC. Started in May 2007. I can't say it was MUCH bigger than Cena/Orton/HHH but it wasn't an obvious number 4 IMO. Floyd/Show and Flair/HBK were the top 2, then it was pretty equal.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> a 3.47 for their only their second segment together this mania season isn't anything spectacular, quite a few rock/punk segments beat it this year
> 
> jan 7th The Rock/Punk segment back and forth did a 3.67 quarter rating.
> jan 28th The in-ring segment with Punk and Rock at 10pm gained 279,000 viewers for a 4.03 quarter rating
> feb 11th The final segment with The Rock and CM Punk gained 578,000 viewers for a 3.48 overrun rating.
> 
> and the cena punk match on feb 25th blew it away as well
> *CM Punk vs. Cena in the main event gained 1,002,000 viewers for a 3.9 overrun rating - a huge success.*


You forgot why....they fought over who was facing the Rock at WM 29. MORE THAN ENOUGH incentive for a ton of extra vieweres who usually don't check out Cena/Punk matches.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Because I'm bored and have nothing better to do on this blessed Good Friday. 

This is the main promotional TV spot for Wrestlemania.






This is the other one.






Learn the difference between WWE's promotion during their own shows and their promotion for outside their own shows. These 2 commercials are the ones that run on TV outside of anything WWE and last 30 seconds a piece, the standard length for a TV spot of that nature. Of course Punk/Taker is going to get promoted. It's one of the biggest matches on the card. But they aren't using it to sell the PPV to anybody outside the WWE audience.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

While were all going to be biased to some degree I definitely think HHH/Brock is #2 with Taker/Punk in a clear #3 in terms of WrestleMania priority, It's very clear to see the effort creatively put into a Triple H WrestleMania match HHH2unk3) is on a higher scale than CM Punk and Undertaker which they didn't even start building till 3 weeks ago which make's sense with Punk's displeasure with creative in recent weeks and how that feud is being presented compared to when Triple H and Shawn Michaels were challenging for it.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Final show approaching, y'all feeling a positive rating?


----------



## DesolationRow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I love CM Punk, and he's pretty much the only "full-time" main event star WWE has right now that demands my undivided attention at all times, but, no offense, guys, some of you are being more than a little overprotective with him in these circular debates with *Starbuck*. Having read all of the posts, I completely, utterly comprehended the precise reckoning *Starbuck* was using in examining how well the three big programs are doing (LOL WHC). Where things got hairy was *Rawk* attempting to appropriate segments which occurred before Punk/Taker became an actual program as such. Yes, Taker deserves credit for those segments, and Punk deserves some, too, but that segment rating _should not be highlighted as belonging to the "CM Punk vs. The Undertaker" storyline feud, because said feud did not yet exist in those segments_. It even would have been different if WWE had booked the program with greater depth and texture, as I would have liked, with it being sparked with a character-driven segment of Punk cutting a long, ranting promo about his place at this time in WWE, and that drew Taker out to teach Punk a lesson in humility rather than the "up-for-grabs" lottery ticket-style of storytelling WWE employed in a fourway #1 contender match for the Streak at Wrestlemania. Now, I think most even vageuly knowledgeable wrestling fans knew that Punk was going to win, and you can say that helped the program, but none of us know that to actually be true, and even if we did, it would be impossible to ascertain just what percentage of viewers held this opinion or thought (perhaps fueled by online dirt sheets, etceteras). *Starbuck*'s approach has been wholly objective in my view, and I'd be even more blunt: Cena/Rock for the title is the clear-cut #1, Lesnar/Triple H for Triple H's career is the clear-cut #2 and practically the co-main event in a way that last year's "End of an Era" HIAC match was in its standing with Rock/Cena I. Then there's a fairly decent-sized gap, and there you find Punk/Taker for the Streak. Punk/Taker for the Streak is a much bigger #3 than last year's Jericho/Punk WWE Championship match was--that match was a distant #3. But a #3 it is. And there's nothing wrong with that. The WHC match is, once again, a very, very distant #4, the kind of program that could have had the Intercontinental Championship as its centerpiece 20-25 or so years ago.

As a Punk fan, while I personally would have liked Punk/Triple H and Lesnar/Undertaker, I can fully get behind where he is on the card, and as Triple H and, soon, Undertaker and probably Rock depart wrestling, Punk's stature on Wrestlemania cards in the very near future is going to grow tremendously. He may only be on a few more of these cards, what with his desire to retire at a relatively young and all, but I'm quite confident he will be in at least one true final match main event of a Wrestlemania between now and Wrestlemania XXXII.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Final show approaching, y'all feeling a positive rating?


Let's put it like this: If they can't get an average 4.0 rating with Rock, Cena, Triple H, Lesnar, Taker and Punk, they might never ever get one again.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Final show approaching, y'all feeling a positive rating?


Should be. Expecting around a 3.4-3.6, probably in the higher range of that. They have Rock/Cena, Taker/Punk, and Lesnar/HHH all on the same show, and it's the final show before Mania. All factors should lead it to being a big rating, and same for the Raw after Mania.

@Deso- Don't really have anything to say that I haven't, and for the record I don't majorly disagree with anybody saying Lesnar/HHH is the number 2 biggest match on the card (on paper, it should easily be in terms of overall star power compared to Taker/Punk). The rest of the stuff though either you agree with it or you don't. I can agree though on wanting Taker/Lesnar and Punk/HHH over what we got. However something else you brought up I want to discuss, you mentioning how the WHC match is the 4th biggest match... I actually think The Shield match is bigger. Seems to get more promotion, has a lot more starpower, and overall has a bigger match feel to it than the WHC match. The World Title in general has meant shit for 2-3 years now, but especially this year it seems to have hit a new low.

May just me though.


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> As for the "main evented more" part, that's not because of importance and higher profile. WWE booked the biggest angles at 9pm as a strategic placement to maximize Rock and Lesnar's segments before the third hour drop, Rock/Cena did there 4.1, the week after Lesnar/Heyman did a 3.6 during a tag match. WWE promotion aside, Lesnar/HHH is still a bigger match *because Lesnar means more on PPV than Taker today*. Add to it that Punk is not a difference maker and HHH's career stipulation. Another problem with Taker's WM streak match this year is the weak storytelling. The biggest attraction about Taker at WM is the possibility of the streak ending, this year the ultimate payoff to the match is Taker getting revenge on Punk and taking the urn back.


Maybe but not at Wrestlemania,Taker "today" is bigger than anyone not named The Rock when it comes to Wrestlemania.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think it's close between Taker and Lesnar. Both of them give a large incentive for WWE fans to watch their matches at PPV's with now how rare they are, and Taker may edge Lesnar in that department at Mania, but Lesnar attracts a fan base Taker doesn't and therefore, I think I'd end up giving Lesnar the edge as far as what his matches mean to WWE PPV's, even Wrestlemania. However both of them are the two biggest stars and draws out of their matches and the biggest reasons for why their matches are as big as they are. The difference in star power though is made apparent by the difference between Punk and HHH, as while HHH is a fairly close third between the four of them, Punk is a very distant fourth.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Final show approaching, y'all feeling a positive rating?


tomorrow maybe. but post Mania it will go up against the NCAA National Championship game, so not sure what they think they can get against that.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If the average WWE viewer knew punk was going to win the four way on RAW, then I'm fairly certain he'd already know the result of the match. Besides like Rock316AE mentioned this year, the build isn't even about the streak. It's all about the Urn. Taker/Punk is a distant #3 for sure.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Rawk said:


> @Deso- Don't really have anything to say that I haven't, and for the record I don't majorly disagree with anybody saying Lesnar/HHH is the number 2 biggest match on the card (on paper, it should easily be in terms of overall star power compared to Taker/Punk). The rest of the stuff though either you agree with it or you don't. I can agree though on wanting Taker/Lesnar and Punk/HHH over what we got. However something else you brought up I want to discuss, you mentioning how the WHC match is the 4th biggest match... *I actually think The Shield match is bigger.* Seems to get more promotion, has a lot more starpower, and overall has a bigger match feel to it than the WHC match. The World Title in general has meant shit for 2-3 years now, but especially this year it seems to have hit a new low.
> 
> May just me though.


This might come as a surprise but.....I'm inclined to agree with you on this score lol. I'd say The Shield match is either equal to or slightly above the WHC match in terms of importance/hype. 

As far as this weeks rating goes, I reckon they'll do slightly above what they did last week because they didn't bother to advertise that any of these guys are going to be there. We'll see. Maybe if they announce some actual segments of what they're going to be doing, maybe that will help.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Shield vs Orton-Sheamus-Show is a bigger match and the Smackdown "main event", not that WHC afterthought match. They've closed more Smackdowns than Swagger or Del Rio.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> tomorrow maybe. but post Mania it will go up against the NCAA National Championship game, so not sure what they think they can get against that.


Thought post mania would be better viewing than the final show before mania regardless.


----------



## Sir Wade Barrett

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

house divided my arse


----------



## PopularChinaman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Personally, I think that was one of the worst Smackdowns of the year. I mean what the hell?


----------



## PopularChinaman

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I haven't seen the ratings for this weeks raw yet but I think they'll be on par with like Rock Austin stuff


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> Let's put it like this: If they can't get an average 4.0 rating with Rock, Cena, Triple H, Lesnar, Taker and Punk, they might never ever get one again.


if they advertised and built to rock and cena wwe title match for 2 weeks i think it would break a 4

a 4 today would be seriously impressive and over 6.5 million average over 3hrs

raw got a 5.2 rating and nitro a 4.2 this particular night



> 12/14/1998
> Raw drew 5,735,000 viewers to Nitro's 4,414,000. In the various demo breakdowns, For 18-24 Males it is Raw with 388,000 and Nitro with 321,000. For 25-54 Males it is Raw with 1,743,000 to Nitro's 1,326,000. For 55+ Males it is Raw with 447,000 to Nitro's 439,000. For 18-24 Females, it is Nitro with 300,000 to Raw's 275,000. For 25-54 Females it is Raw with 928,000 to Nitro's 683,000. For 55+ Females it is Nitro with 306,000 to Raw's 170,000. For kids 2-11, it is Raw with 650,000 to Nitro's 558,000. For teenagers it is Raw with 1,134,000 to Nitro at 482,000.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_69666.shtml



> -- With The Rock, The Undertaker, Brock Lesnar, Triple H, and Shawn Michaels all on the same show for the final WrestleMania hard sell, Monday's WWE Raw only increased six percent in social media activity compared to last week's show.
> 
> Raw scored 306,530, according to Trendrr.TV, compared to 288,262 last week. Also, Raw remained below the 2013 average of 313,000.
> 
> On cable TV Monday night, Raw easily ranked #1, but Raw trailed "The Voice" for the overall TV lead.


----------



## reDREDD

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

i think the whole "2nd highest show on all of TV that night" shows the era we live in


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Redead said:


> i think the whole "2nd highest show on all of TV that night" shows the era we live in


Yep the era of youtube, streaming, downloading, and googling the segments you desire to see. Hence why WWE is doing A LOT better then the ratings would dictate. On the flip side though, Walking Dead does over 12 million viewers every week so there's that lol. I know it would be interesting to see what internet favourites such as punk and bryan do in terms of youtube views in comparison to the non-internet friendly superstars.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Yep the era of youtube, streaming, downloading, and googling the segments you desire to see. Hence why WWE is doing A LOT better then the ratings would dictate. On the flip side though, Walking Dead does over 12 million viewers every week so there's that lol. I know it would be interesting to see what internet favourites such as punk and bryan do in terms of youtube views in comparison to the non-internet friendly superstars.


Punk and Daniel Bryan both have very popular fan made compilation videos on Youtube, in the form of "summer of Punk" and "The Daniel Bryan story" which I'm not sure can be said of other wrestlers as I've not come across other such videos (at least not popular ones)


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> With The Rock, The Undertaker, Brock Lesnar, Triple H, and Shawn Michaels all on the same show for the final WrestleMania hard sell, Monday's WWE Raw only increased six percent in social media activity compared to last week's show.
> 
> Raw scored 306,530, according to Trendrr.TV, compared to 288,262 last week. Also, Raw remained below the 2013 average of 313,000.
> 
> On cable TV Monday night, Raw easily ranked #1, but Raw trailed "The Voice" for the overall TV lead.


I thought this would be the case and it looks like I'm right. WWE, you can have all the stars in the world on Raw but if you don't advertise them then this is what you get. It's actually rather confusing tbh. When WWE go balls to the wall and promote something they get big time results. You would think they would know that promoting the shit out of the fact that all these guys were going to be there would herald results. But they don't do that and only God knows why. Despite that though, I still think Wrestlemania 29 was sold on the first Rock/Cena promo a few weeks back. That was the highest audience reach they had with their 2 top names in the biggest match they have on offer. If they didn't sell it then they were never going to sell it at all. Curious to see whether it beats Mania 28 which contrary to this years show was the total opposite in terms of hype. People couldn't wait for Wrestlemania 28 while a lot of folks seem to be mostly meh about Wrestlemania 29.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE Raw was the top-rated cable original Monday night with a 1.6 adults 18-49 rating during its most-watched hour, down from last week's 1.8. Teen Mom 2 came in second with 1.5 adults 18-49 rating, even with last week.

WWE Entertainment 9:00 PM: 4,483,000 viewers, *A18-49: 1.6* - #1
WWE Entertainment 10:00 PM: 4,402,000 viewers,* A18-49: 1.6* - #2
WWE Entertainment 8:00 PM: 4,031,000 viewers, *A18-49: 1.4* - #5

tvbythenumbers


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...las-being-human-love-and-hip-hop-more/175916/

Hour 1 - 4.031 million
Hour 2 - 4.483 million
Hour 3 - 4.402 million


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think even if they did promote the hell out of Rock, Lesnar and every other part timer, they still wouldn't get as big a number as they did post-Rumble and a bit after. I think people have been put off by the build to WM, tbh. Just my opinion.


----------



## Striketeam

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> WWE Raw was the top-rated cable original Monday night with a 1.6 adults 18-49 rating during its most-watched hour, down from last week's 1.8.* Teen Mom 2 came in second with 1.5 adults 18-49 rating*, even with last week.
> 
> WWE Entertainment 9:00 PM: 4,483,000 viewers, *A18-49: 1.6* - #1
> WWE Entertainment 10:00 PM: 4,402,000 viewers,* A18-49: 1.6* - #2
> WWE Entertainment 8:00 PM: 4,031,000 viewers, *A18-49: 1.4* - #5
> 
> tvbythenumbers


:no:


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

There was no point on having all of those stars on the show if they weren't going to be doing anything. Seriously, the only people who even touched each other was Punk and Taker. The show as a whole and this entire Wrestlemania season has just felt as if everyone is mailing it in. 

If WM 29 does more buys than WM 28 then....:no:


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Pretty weak numbers to be honest. Especially hour one.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



RatedR10 said:


> I think even if they did promote the hell out of Rock, Lesnar and every other part timer, they still wouldn't get as big a number as they did post-Rumble and a bit after. I think people have been put off by the build to WM, tbh. Just my opinion.


This is true and I agree that people most likely have been put off by the build. But the likes of Rock etc are enough to pop a bit of interest on their own. If people don't know that they're going to be on the show then you aren't even giving them the option of tuning in, you know? It's just very confusing when you consider the promotional campaign they did for Raw 1000 and the incredible numbers they were able to pull for that. I'm not saying they should and could be doing that all the time but Jesus, I doubt it's a massive job to put a graphic on screen for 5 seconds telling people what to expect for the next weeks show. Like HBK appearing this week for example, why didn't they advertise that last week to let people know he was going to be there? Most likely because they didn't bother to ask him until Sunday because they don't plan for shit any more but that's another story all together.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Pretty weak numbers to be honest. Especially hour one.


Well, Cena should be blamed for that hour sucking. He opened the show and gave a promo that got "boring" chants from the crowd.:jordan


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Final hour did ok


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

At least things had an upward trend for a change instead of the usual third hour drop. Hour 2 and 3 are pretty much even. If they didn't lose too much viewership between 10pm and the end of the show then the overrun has a shot at doing a good/great number.


----------



## IncapableNinja

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> This is true and I agree that people most likely have been put off by the build. But the likes of Rock etc are enough to pop a bit of interest on their own. If people don't know that they're going to be on the show then you aren't even giving them the option of tuning in, you know? It's just very confusing when you consider the promotional campaign they did for Raw 1000 and the incredible numbers they were able to pull for that. I'm not saying they should and could be doing that all the time but Jesus, I doubt it's a massive job to put a graphic on screen for 5 seconds telling people what to expect for the next weeks show. Like HBK appearing this week for example, why didn't they advertise that last week to let people know he was going to be there? Most likely because they didn't bother to ask him until Sunday because they don't plan for shit any more but that's another story all together.


I guess their thinking is that out of the 4-5 million regular viewers, those that are ordering 'Mania were ordering it regardless of the build up. You could go balls out and pour all of your resources into the TV show, but I don't see that having a significant impact on the PPV buys. I think their only objective was not to hurt the allure of 'Mania and I think they achieved that. Just about.

Seems more prudent to focus on getting the word out to casual non-watchers that BROCK LESNAR & DWAYNE 'THE ROCK' GI JOHNSON can appear on your screen for the generous price of $70.

Totally agreed they wouldn't be over-exerting themselves to flash a 5-second graphic advertising HBK fresh from the swamp, though. Come on Vince. :vince4


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Promoting the appearances of Rock, Brock etc to increase viewership? ique2

Vince has probably spent the last few weeks on one of P Diddy's expensive yachts, balls deep in dem hoes to even consider putting effort and common sense into the planning of each RAW like that and advertising his stars.


----------



## Awesome22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Weak numbers.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Except, Taker/Punk get their own commercial. "Isn't part of the promotion." Wow.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Aiis1OVUcA
> 
> unk
> 
> As for the debate being pointless. What'd you expect from the ratings thread? It's where pointless discussions and debates live and breathe.


Video was fan made.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Final Rating - 3.12


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Final Rating - 3.12


Terrible number for a terrible show. And this is the go-home for Wrestlemania... wow.


----------



## Dub

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Terrible number for a terrible show. And this is the go-home for Wrestlemania... wow.


And? Raw was still #1 in cable and last year's go home show did a lower number. The money matches segments will be the usual gain, that is what matters the most.


----------



## Amber B

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Final Raw before Mania. :lmao
This company is the best.


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Final Rating - 3.12


Wow.


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's a damn bad rating!


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lulz 3.12


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Final rating - 3.12

:damn

Looks like it wasn't just the fans at the arena who were "bored."

:vince4 :cena3


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

last year the go home show had a 3.04 rating. its not like they are falling off completely (actually better)

wrestling just not TV friendly anymore. days of 4.0 + Ratings are long long gone. So its not really surprising.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And who opened the show for the first hour? >>>>> :cena4


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I so want them to go consistantly below 3 for weeks on end.


----------



## Awesome22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Go home show for Wrestlemania with Lesnar, The Rock, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, John Cena, The Undertaker, CM Punk and only a 3.12. I can't imagine how bad the ratings are gonna be after Wrestlemania.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They didn't promote anything for the show, they can have all the big stars, if nobody knows they're there, it doesn't matter. They're lazy in their promotion for a long time now.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's fine. Mania is gonna do well financially, regardless. Let's just hope it's a great show sunday.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Seven mega-stars on that show and only a 3.12. However, that number shouldn't really be given much value because last year had a terrible go-home show rating yet Mania broke buyrate records.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well, Rock/Cena was on last year's go home show, but there was no Brock, so that might the biggest reason it got a better rating than last year. But they didn't build the show hardly at all, so it's wonder the rating was still not that great. Plus the show was awful anyways. Two matches and a couple other good moments, but out of a 3 hour show, pretty lame go home show.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If the show is shit,nobody can save the ratings.Raw would pull ratings below 3 if this wasn't RTWM regardless of who is present.


----------



## 2 Ton 21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> last year the go home show had a 3.04 rating. its not like they are falling off completely (actually better)
> 
> wrestling just not TV friendly anymore. days of 4.0 + Ratings are long long gone. So its not really surprising.



The thing is last night did a 3.12 rating with 4.31 million viewers. 
Last year, for the last Raw before WM, it did 3.04 rating with 4.44 million.
So yes a better rating than last year, but less viewers.


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's a good rating for a horrible show. Looks like Vince McMahon will never have to try hard to get the quality of his show up again. This just sucks.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Rock316AE said:


> They didn't promote anything for the show, they can have all the big stars, if nobody knows they're there, it doesn't matter. They're lazy in their promotion for a long time now.


It's the go home show before Wrestlemania i think everyone knows the big stars are gonna be there, unless of course you're fucking retarded.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^We all know why he gave that as an excuse


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Excuse? I am sure just like every week Rock would have got most viewers.But of course the ratings break-down will clear the air.


As far as what Rock316AE is saying,well he is not specifically pointing towards this show.Throughtout this year WWE has hardly promoted the Rock,even though they could have made a big deal out of it.

Multiple times,it was very hard for us to know whether the Rock is scheduled for SmackDown or Raw(without reading the spoilers).So Rock316AE is dead right in his assumption.


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It just baffling after the success of Raw 1000 with all that hype they fail to recreate that for the Raw before their most important show of the year.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

At the very least, does this mean we can now stop pretending the ratings are any one persons fault?


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> At the very least, does this mean we can now stop pretending the ratings are any one persons fault?


The Punk haters will along to answer you shortly unk2


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Another difference is a LOT happened on RAW 1000, even though WWE had all of those big names it seemed like they didn't really care that they did because they barely used them. Both Rock and Cena just emphasized what they said the week prior and the idea was to just play it safe, Not sure why they couldn't have simply had them brawl to end the show (similar to Rock and Punk) Brock and Trips needed some physicality and they didn't but again im sure they don't want any of these feuds to have one look slightly superior on the go home show anymore.

Punk and Undertaker was easily the best angle of the night for the big 3 but that's also down to the fact it was the weakest going into this show.

They basically got some of the build the wrong way around IMO, The Brock/Trips Contract signing segment should have aired this week along with Rock/Cena Q & A and basically change the ending instead of The Rock Bottom just a massive brawl with the Legends and referee's breaking it up.


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't know much about stuff like this but the viewership seems pretty good regardless of the rating.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DwayneAustin said:


> Da Silva said:
> 
> 
> 
> At the very least, does this mean we can now stop pretending the ratings are any one persons fault?
> 
> 
> 
> The Punk haters will along to answer you shortly unk2
Click to expand...

And much like Groundhog's Day, it all depends on what they see when they come out of their hole.

If they see that the Rock's segment failed to meet expectations, then no, it's no longer any specific person's fault, it's a multitude of other causes that are out of the wrestlers' hands.

If they see that Rock's segment met or exceeded expectations, then we get six more weeks of equating lower ratings with just one person/cause.


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SerapisLiber said:


> And much like Groundhog's Day, it all depends on what they see when they come out of their hole.
> 
> If they see that the Rock's segment failed to meet expectations, then no, it's no longer any specific person's fault, it's a multitude of other causes that are out of the wrestlers' hands.
> 
> If they see that Rock's segment met or exceeded expectations, then we get six more weeks of equating lower ratings with just one person/cause.


Your fúcking sig is disgusting.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^PM when it's stuff like that so as to avoid derailing the thread conversation at hand.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

In the segment-by-segment, the John Cena interview opened at a 3.10 Household rating. 
Randy Orton & Sheamus & Big Show vs. Heath Slater & Drew McIntyre & Jinder Mahal lost 95,000 viewers. 
Daniel Bryan vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 43,000 viewers. 
The in-ring with Shawn Michaels and HHH, with Brock Lesnar and Paul Heyman later coming out, gained 585,000 viewers. (3.42 HH)
Wade Barrett vs. Zack Ryder lost 458,000 viewers. 
Mark Henry vs. Santino Marella, the Ryback confrontation and the C.M. Punk interview, gained 14,000 viewers. 
Alberto Del Rio vs. Zeb Colter lost 108,000 viewers. 
The Rock interview at 10 p.m. gained 275,000 viewers. (3.22 HH)
Antonio Cesaro vs. Chris Jericho with the Fandango attack lost 168,000 viewers. 
A bunch of video features lost 212,000 viewers. 
Cameron & Naomi vs. Bella Twins gained 288,000 viewers. 
And the final segment with Undertaker doing the interview, the Druids, Paul Heyman and C.M. Punk gained 599,000 viewers. (3.58 HH)


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



2 Ton 21 said:


> The thing is last night did a 3.12 rating with 4.31 million viewers.
> Last year, for the last Raw before WM, it did 3.04 rating with 4.44 million.
> So yes a better rating than last year, but less viewers.


Nielsens margin of error is greater than 100,000 viewers. The viewership is essentially the same.

Edit: CM DRAW ..... that is all


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Cameron & Naomi vs. Bella Twins gained 288,000 viewers.


What in the hell?



> And the final segment with Undertaker doing the interview, the Druids, Paul Heyman and C.M. Punk gained 599,000 viewers


unk2



> The Rock interview at 10 p.m. gained 275,000 viewers. (3.22 HH)


:rock3 



> The in-ring with Shawn Michaels and HHH, with Brock Lesnar and Paul Heyman later coming out, gained 585,000 viewers.


:hbk :HHH2 :brock


----------



## Thwagger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*when it's the last RAW before WrestleMania and when you have Rock, Undertaker, HBK, Lesnar, HHH and Cena on the same show and the rating is 3.1 you need to start worrying.*


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Is Rock's 3.22 quarter the lowest since he returned?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Is Rock's 3.22 quarter the lowest since he returned?


pretty sure its the Rumble go home show with The Shield/Punk:



> The Rock’s interview at 10pm with The Shield attacking him lost 109,000 viewers for a 3.01 quarter rating – a very bad number for the 10pm timeslot


don't remember if he did worst than that in 2011 or 2012


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, the John Cena interview opened at a 3.10. Randy Orton & Sheamus & Big Show vs. Heath Slater & Drew McIntyre & Jinder Mahal lost 95,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 43,000 viewers. The in-ring with Shawn Michaels and HHH, with Brock Lesnar and Paul Heyman later coming out, gained 585,000 viewers to a 3.42, so very strong growth. Wade Barrett vs. Zack Ryder lost 458,000 viewers. Mark Henry vs. Santino Marella, the Ryback confrontation and the C.M. Punk interview , gained 14,000 viewers. Alberto Del Rio vs. Zeb Colter lost 108,000 viewers. The Rock interview at 10 p.m. gained 275,000 viewers to a 3.22 rating. Antonio Cesaro vs. Chris Jericho with the Fandango attack lost 168,000 viewers. A bunch of video features lost 212,000 viewers. Cameron & Naomi vs. Bella Twins gained 288,000 viewers. And the final segment with Undertaker doing the interview, the Druids, Paul Heyman and C.M. Punk gained 599,000 viewers to a 3.58.\


Punk/Undertaker with a higher overrun number then Rock/Cena overrun last week 

unk:taker


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:taker brings the DEM ratings.


----------



## DA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The urn must be the source of WWE's Ratings power, and they emptied it, those fools :taker


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk outdrawing Rock.


----------



## VINT

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Divas drawing more than Rock? :lmao


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> *Mark Henry vs. Santino Marella, the Ryback confrontation and the C.M. Punk interview, gained 14,000 viewers.*


Hm, gained 14,000... who was in that quarter last week with a segment? Believe it lost 6,000? unk 

unk2

Awesome overrun number. While I don't know if I'd put it above last week's due to the overrun to show rating ratio and the fact last week's went 20-30 minutes over and this one, if I'm not mistaken, only went about 5. But hey, it was Taker advertised with a likely Punk appearance, so no surprises I suppose.

9PM did very well as well.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk and Undertaker winning the night. Outdrawing Rock and Cena.

Can't say I'm surprised. CM DRAW.


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

edit


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE needs more deaths to booost ratings.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kokepepsi said:


> ok


Ratings back this up huh

101%>100% anyways


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And once again, CM Punk proves why he is a draw. This is just laughable. All doubters be damned! unk4


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Made the last post in a rush right before I went to work. Didn't see the divas gain, but it looks like that may have been quarter 12, which also had the Taker promo... and that would explain the gain... either that or the masses dig white chicks vs. black chicks.


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Taker vs Punk is the #2 match at WWE.COM (Wrestlemania page).


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It was a great segment. Both man did well of selling the show. 

And the match is going to be in the middle of the card instead of being before Rocky/Cena :no:. Hopefully they changed it.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

UNDERTAKER drawing like the legend that he is! :taker

And the Bella Twins are now draws? :lol


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Cameron & Naomi vs. Bella Twins gained 288,000 viewers.


How? Why? Ugh...


----------



## MoveMent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.12 is a good rating they're still drawing over 4 million viewers what's the problem?


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You could almost add the 288k from the divas match onto the Punk/Taker gain as that was obviously due to fans tuning back in on time for the final segment.


----------



## Dub

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Coffey said:


> How? Why? Ugh...


Cause they're hot?


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



MoveMent said:


> 3.12 is a good rating they're still drawing over 4 million viewers what's the problem?


It's terrible for the go-home show to WRESTLEMANIA. They also have six huge stars there with ROCK, Cena, Lesnar, HHH, HBK and Taker but that's all they can get? (with only Cena being a full-timer)

It's an okay rating for the rest of the year but not the week before the biggest show.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:wilkins *3.12 *.... *3.12* on the RAW before Mania? Just like last year, the go home rating is atrocious. As for breaking it down, the opening I thought would be stronger. Cena shows his consistency but it's half as impressive as I would have thought for this show. The stuff before the HHH/Brock stuff losing viewers is not surprising. HHH/Brock with Shawn Michaels gained well as expected, the feud is defiantly attractive to audience, despite hate for the rematch on here. Wade/Zack losing viewers is obvious too. Punks interview and a Henry/Ryback build drew 14,000 viewers. Low, but a gain is a gain I guess. Del Rio/Swagger continues to flip/flop an loses viewers this time. Rock gaining is practically a given, 3.22 is not bad, but like Cena you expect it to be higher. Especially given their steam from last week. Notably that is Rock's lowest gaining quarter and second lowest overall quarter. Jericho/Fandango and Videos losing viewers is meh. Divas tag gaining is surprising, perhaps some of this was to tune in for the shortly advertised "Undertaker eviscerates (verbally, of course) CM Punk!". The overrun was strong and impressive, as was last week's overrun. Finally the streak was mentioned majorly. The druids returning was pretty unique. Ending at 3.58 

Overall- The top 3 matches all attracted viewers. However the complete non-promotion of this show throughout the past week really damaged this show. Very poor for a go-home show. Lets see how WM 29 and beyond pans out


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.12 is pretty decent, considering how terrible the show was.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock marks no where to be found. Upset he was outperformed by the GOAT CM DRAW.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Rock marks no where to be found. Upset he was outperformed by the GOAT CM DRAW.


One hell of an effort by CM Punk gaining viewers in the overrun on the final Raw before the biggest money show in history. Even that jabroni Undertaker, a nothing, a nobody couldn't drag his rating down. Go Punk!


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Rock marks no where to be found. Upset he was outperformed by the GOAT CM DRAW.


It's almost as if that was the 26th promo Rock cut on Cena.

Oh wait it is. It's pretty obvious it was a throw away night for Rock Cena. Why don't you talk when Punk significantly improves a PPV.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

But he has already. MITB, NOC 12, HIAC 12 to name some. Even pulled off a better number without Cena than Cena could do for the same show a year later without Punk.

Not that that has anything to do with this week and Rock/Cena and HHH/Lesnar being outdone by the true main event, GOAT vs. Undertaker.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> But he has already. MITB, NOC 12, HIAC 12 to name some. Even pulled off a better number without Cena than Cena could do for the same show a year later without Punk.
> 
> Not that that has anything to do with this week and Rock/Cena and HHH/Lesnar being outdone by the true main event, GOAT vs. Undertaker.


Apples and oranges. Cena's PPV didn't have a WWE Championship match. Really you're talking about a few minor bumps on C level PPV's.

Can you state how many times the final segment hasn't garnered the most viewers?


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



GillbergReturns said:


> It's almost as if that was the 26th promo Rock cut on Cena.
> 
> Oh wait it is. *It's pretty obvious it was a throw away night for Rock Cena.* Why don't you talk when Punk significantly improves a PPV.


A throw away night on the go home show to the biggest PPV of the year?? Yeah, alright bud. :lmao


----------



## MoveMent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> It's terrible for the go-home show to WRESTLEMANIA. They also have six huge stars there with ROCK, Cena, Lesnar, HHH, HBK and Taker but that's all they can get? (with only Cena being a full-timer)
> 
> It's an okay rating for the rest of the year but not the week before the biggest show.


I don't think it's that bad. All the extra fans that they do manage to draw from the part timers realize that these guys aren't wrestling or even doing anything remotely interesting on RAW or Smackdown which is why when the part timers are on RAW ratings take a slight increase so just like last year they got an average rating but Wrestlemania's buyrate was huge. And the two PPV's Lesnar was featured as long as they're buying them the ratings are the least of their problems.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Don't think wwe cares much for ratings these days when they are making a fuck load of money


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Stad said:


> A throw away night on the go home show to the biggest PPV of the year?? Yeah, alright bud. :lmao


The proof is in the pudding. 2 separate promos and no interaction. At this point there's nothing to build between the 2. They've been going at it for 3 years now.


----------



## K2K12

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

waiting


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

99.0.


----------



## VINT

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

THE CHAMP IS BACK, THE RATINGS ARE BACK! :mark:


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The People's Champion has left and the ratings will probably show it unk3


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The ratings will be similar to the raw before wrestlemania.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Don't think wwe cares much for ratings these days when they are making a fuck load of money


lol exactly. I don't get why people on this site even care about ratings. Last time I checked, this site aren't stockowners of WWE, but even if they were, it still wouldn't make much difference.


The only time where ratings were important to WWE was during mid-late 90s. And that's cause they were competing with another company.


Today, ratings don't mean much at all, WWE isn't competing with anyone, and they'd have to do REAL BAD(like half their USA TV viewers stop watching) in order to even be considered to be in danger of network not wanting them.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RAW opening promo with John Cena probably had the most viewers.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



dxbender said:


> lol exactly. I don't get why people on this site even care about ratings. Last time I checked, this site aren't stockowners of WWE, but even if they were, it still wouldn't make much difference.
> 
> 
> The only time where ratings were important to WWE was during mid-late 90s. And that's cause they were competing with another company.
> 
> 
> Today, ratings don't mean much at all, WWE isn't competing with anyone, and they'd have to do REAL BAD(like half their USA TV viewers stop watching) in order to even be considered to be in danger of network not wanting them.


Yep i honestly think if wwe was under serious threat one day, vince can improve the product quickly and put much more effort in. At the moment wwe are comfortable and until they remain comfortable everything will remain how it is.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



dxbender said:


> like half their USA TV viewers stop watching


Happened already


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I wasn't going to watch and I know a lot of other people weren't going to, either. 

"Shit RAW, watch movies and the NCAA championship game."

Then The Crowd (tm) happened and I didn't even consider watching basketball.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> Happened already


3 million at their worst point last year isn't half of the normal 4-4.5 million.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SPCDRI said:


> I wasn't going to watch and I know a lot of other people weren't going to, either.
> 
> "Shit RAW, watch movies and the NCAA championship game."
> 
> Then The Crowd (tm) happened and I didn't even consider watching basketball.


Yeah, it worked for me too but you need to think of next week, I mean imagine this same RAW with the general crowd, Am I really that invested in anyone on the show to still watch?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_69903.shtml



> -- Monday's three-hour WWE Raw scored 518,787 in social media activity, according to Trendrr.TV, which was easily the highest of the year. It was up 70 percent from last week's Raw leading into WrestleMania.
> 
> The social score is almost identical to last year's two-hour post-Mania show via apples-to-apples comparison. The equivalent number this year would be 345,858 vs. an actual number of 343,333 last year.
> 
> Raw ranked #1 on cable TV Monday night, but was blown away by the NCAA Title game on CBS broadcast television, which drew over 2.0 million in social activity.


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This RAW will be a total bomb in ratings because it didnt have the massive drawing power of CM PUNK


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 1 - 4.49m
Hour 2 - 4.78m
Hour 3 - 4.56m

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...mtv-movie-sneak-peek-bates-motel-more/177080/

Deserved higher.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 4.49m
> Hour 2 - 4.78m
> Hour 3 - 4.56m
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...mtv-movie-sneak-peek-bates-motel-more/177080/
> 
> Deserved higher.


going up against the NCAA Championship game? No Way Jose

They are lucky they got 4.61 million average to watch the show.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

- 2011 - night after Mania: 5.418m and 5.781m
- 2012 - night after Mania: 4.957m and 5.072m
- 2013 - night after Mania: 4.490m, 4.780m and 4.560m

Not good in all honesty.


----------



## fabi1982

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings can go to hell as long as the shows will be like THAT RAW!!!!!!


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah, I've never cared for ratings and after all of us (apart from blind haters) enjoyed last nights Raw, why should anyone care about ratings? You got what you wanted in an exciting and entertaining Raw with shocks, surprises and an unbelievable crowd.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Less than usual after WM tuned into see the NEW WWE CHAMPION? :cena4


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 4.49m
> Hour 2 - 4.78m
> Hour 3 - 4.56m
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...mtv-movie-sneak-peek-bates-motel-more/177080/
> 
> Deserved higher.


When was the Paul Heyman backstage announcement telling us Punk and Lesnar wouldn't appear this week? I wonder if that combined with hearing the HHH and Rock wouldn't be there, and the NCAA game contributed to the ratings because, being honest, last nights show was immense thanks to that amazing crowd!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Crowds should shut up so the TV viewers can enjoy the show. :vince


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Monday's WWE Raw television show drew a 3.45 rating, up from the 3.12 rating the show drew the week before. Raw averaged 4.61 million viewers, up from the 4.3 million average from last week, as noted earlier today.
> 
> Powell's POV: WWE had tough competition from the NCAA college basketball championship game, which averaged 20.71 million viewers for CBS. The game was close late, which didn't do Raw any favors.


3.45 rating


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM DRAW bringing in the ratings

The WWE needs to give him another year long title reign


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Smark crowds = DRAW RATINGS 

:vince MAYBE WE SHOULD PUT THE TITLE ON 'EM

:HHH2 OR MAYBE I SHOULD GO OVER THEM NEXT MONTH


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Pretty poor for the show after Wrestlemania. But it's expected with no Rock, Lesnar, Punk or Triple H.

Crowd probably did all the drawing this week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm predicting Taker/Shield/Team Hell No does peak of the show. 9PM probably brought in a lot of viewers with the Ziggler cash-in, and then more piled in when it was advertised Taker would be appearing right after that. At least in theory that's how I see it happening. If so, has to be the first time in a long time a non-8/9/10/11PM quarter slot got the most viewers in the show.

Of course, maybe the cash-in did peak, the Taker segment lost a little and then they dropped big after that. Will be interesting to see the breakdown, including how well the 8PM segment did with Cena/Henry and it being the direct fallout from Mania.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CROWD BRINGING DEM RATINGZ :mark:


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hmm.. Rating is a disappointment considering the title change and its wrestlemania, but i guess they were facing stiff competition so this is good. 

Anyways, Hall of fame..



> - Tuesday’s WWE Hall of Fame ceremony did 1.63 million viewers, which is down from last years 2.66 million viewers.


Big OUCH! Dat awkward moment when Edge outdraws Bruno,Foley,Booker,Backland and Trish combined. :edge2 :HHH :vince4





But yeah, the real reason was the time slot. Last year HOF aired before RAW 8-9pm, this year's aired on a tuesday night 10:00-11:15pm i think. Also not enough promotion by WWE this year. Still, this is the lowest rated HOF specials in over five years.


----------



## NewJack's Shank

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Uh oh ratings are in time for all you to come out and talk like you understand the business.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bruno's not a draw. Should job to Mahal next week on Saturday Morning Slam.


----------



## NewJack's Shank

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> Bruno's not a draw. Should job to Mahal next week on Saturday Morning Slam.


yea maybe if hes lucky a US title run. Only if Trips allows it though.


----------



## Eulonzo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Defei said:


> Hmm.. Rating is a disappointment considering the title change and its wrestlemania, but i guess they were facing stiff competition so this is good.
> 
> Anyways, Hall of fame..
> 
> 
> 
> Big OUCH! Dat awkward moment when Edge outdraws Bruno,Foley,Booker,Backland and Trish combined. :edge2 :HHH :vince4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But yeah, the real reason was the time slot. Last year HOF aired before RAW 8-9pm, this year's aired on a tuesday night 10:00-11:15pm i think. Also not enough promotion by WWE this year. Still, this is the lowest rated HOF specials in over five years.


The RATED R RATINGZSTAR!! :edge


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



WillMark4NewJack said:


> Uh oh ratings are in time for all you to come out and talk like you understand the business.


Yep. There are so many people out there who think they know more than the wrestlers and promoters themselves. It's hilarious to sit back and read. And I'm not saying that about anyone on this thread, but just in general.


----------



## fastfrosty

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I wish WWE had a way to track their ratings from prated streams & replays of their show. It would be dramatically higher imo. Next week you can expect a lot of people paying attention to Fandango just to see what the hype's all about !


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The numbers aren't that bad when you realize that BROCK and ROCK were not on the show.



Eulonzo said:


> The RATED R RATINGZSTAR!! :edge


Rated R for RATINGS!


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Thinking of rewatching the Sheamus vs Orton ***** GOAT match, the match proved that storytelling > moves, the fans had more chants than moves that were used and it still delivered an epic battle. I especially loved the Randy Savage reversal into an RVD, followed by an epic ECW and X-Pac, only to hit the "End This Match" because the fans were ejaculating so often at that point that it began to hurt physically. Big Show did the greatest run in of all time which led to the appreciation of the fans with their "Thank You BigShow" finisher to finally end their ecstasy.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The numbers aren't that bad when you realize that BROCK and ROCK were not on the show.


Nor Trips or Punk. Four major players gone. They almost _*had*_ to do the cash-in thing just so there would be at least _*something*_ to talk about from the show.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That breakdown is hiding this week, isn't it?


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The John Cena interview and Mark Henry confrontation opened with a 3.74 household rating
Daniel Bryan vs. Big E Langston lost 461,000 viewers
Wade Barrett regaining the IC title from The Miz lost 222,000 viewers 
Backstage stuff with Sheamus and Randy Orton both trying to get matches with Big Show gained 92,000 viewers 

Alberto Del Rio vs. Jack Swagger & Zeb Colter at 9 p.m. gained 151,000 viewers (3.42 HH)
The Dolph Ziggler title win over Del Rio and the Undertaker angle with Kane & Daniel Bryan and The Shield gained 460,000 viewers (3.76 HH)
Santino Marella & Zack Ryder & R-Truth vs. 3MB and a video on the week in New York lost 329,000 viewers 
The Orton/Sheamus backstage stuff, Big Show interview and Orton and Sheamus coming to the ring lost 110,000 viewers

The Orton vs. Sheamus match with the crowd going crazy for everything but the match gained 329,000 viewers at 10 p.m. (3.58 HH)
Show beating down Orton & Sheamus lost 70,000 viewers
Fandango vs. Kofi Kingston with the Chris Jericho beating lost 207,000 viewers
Brodus Clay & Sweet T & Naomi & Cameron vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow & Bella Twins lost 665,000 viewers
John Cena vs. Mark Henry with the Ryback attack at the end gained 887,000 viewers (3.54 HH)


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> John Cena vs. Mark Henry with the Ryback attack at the end gained 887,000 viewers


THAT'S WHAT HE DOES. :henry1


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> The John Cena interview and Mark Henry confrontation opened with a 3.74 household rating
> Daniel Bryan vs. Big E Langston lost 461,000 viewers
> Wade Barrett regaining the IC title from The Miz lost 222,000 viewers
> Backstage stuff with Sheamus and Randy Orton both trying to get matches with Big Show gained 92,000 viewers
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Jack Swagger & Zeb Colter at 9 p.m. gained 151,000 viewers (3.42 HH)
> *The Dolph Ziggler title win over Del Rio and the Undertaker angle with Kane & Daniel Bryan and The Shield gained 460,000 viewers (3.76 HH)*
> Santino Marella & Zack Ryder & R-Truth vs. 3MB and a video on the week in New York lost 329,000 viewers
> The Orton/Sheamus backstage stuff, Big Show interview and Orton and Sheamus coming to the ring lost 110,000 viewers
> 
> *The Orton vs. Sheamus match with the crowd going crazy for everything but the match gained 329,000 viewers at 10 p.m. (3.58 HH)*
> Show beating down Orton & Sheamus lost 70,000 viewers
> Fandango vs. Kofi Kingston with the Chris Jericho beating lost 207,000 viewers
> Brodus Clay & Sweet T & Naomi & Cameron vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow & Bella Twins lost 665,000 viewers
> *John Cena vs. Mark Henry with the Ryback attack at the end gained 887,000 viewers (3.54 HH)*


Accepting report at face value (even though no source).

:ziggler2 

+










+

WM fans = ratings.


----------



## AYSTER

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yet more proof if ever needed that Henry equals ratings. What. He. Does


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT :taker


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol Henry bombs consecutively every week, until he's in the main event with John Cena. How does he equal ratings?


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> Santino Marella & Zack Ryder & R-Truth vs. 3MB and a video on the week in New York lost 329,000 viewers
> 
> Brodus Clay & Sweet T & Naomi & Cameron vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow & Bella Twins lost 665,000 viewers)


Stupid stuff lost them almost 1M viewers combined during the show. But knowing WWE, bellas,tensai,brodus and stuff will be on tv again every single show, making people more than bored.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*Wade Barrett doesn't draw. *


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nice to see Orton & Sheamus gaining viewers for their match. And Cena, MIZARK and Taker doing their thing as usual. Not bad for a show where BROCK, ROCK and HHH were missing.



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> lol Henry bombs consecutively every week, until he's in the main event with John Cena. How does he equal ratings?


You mean to tell me he's supposed to gain viewers in random spots while squashing jobbers or wrestling THE GREAT KHALI? :lol


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Do any of you actually tune out when watching Raw?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So some thoughts on the breakdown:

-Cena/Henry starts off great for the fallout from Mania. Overrun was only a smudge under last week's, but still above what they'd been doing on average
-Sheamus/Orton/Show did very well despite the crowd paying no mind to the Orton/Sheamus match.
-TAKER doing his thing, being a mega draw and all that, leading an odd quarter to being the peak of the show. Not going to deny though that Ziggler's cash-in from the previous quarter going into the first few minutes of Q6 helped give that quarter an edge and made it very eventful with that, Taker, and the Shield/Team Hell No.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> Do any of you actually tune out when watching Raw?


Absolutely. Depends what they are putting on my TV screen at the moment. If it's a good match (rare) or something even somewhat captivating, I'll keep it on. But if it's a useless backstage segment or a worthless match or promo, then depending on what else is on, yeah I might tune out for a few minutes.


----------



## FITZ

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> Do any of you actually tune out when watching Raw?


Not unless one of my sports teams are playing.

If a Raw isn't going well I'm usually on my computer doing something else or even reading a book so Raw basically serves as background noise until something interesting happens.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TaylorFitz said:


> Not unless one of my sports teams are playing.
> 
> If a Raw isn't going well I'm usually on my computer doing something else or even reading a book so Raw basically serves as background noise until something interesting happens.


See, Raw for me is just on in the background, I'm watching it but I never turn it over. I suppose it is much different in America though with it being on at night as opposed to it being on at 1am-4am here. 




ShowStopper '97 said:


> Absolutely. Depends what they are putting on my TV screen at the moment. If it's a good match (rare) or something even somewhat captivating, I'll keep it on. But if it's a useless backstage segment or a worthless match or promo, then depending on what else is on, yeah I might tune out for a few minutes.


Pretty much like above. I suppose you have teams over there that play at the same time, whereas over here it's on so late that nothing else is on TV. Plus I'm usually on the computer in the discussion thread whilst it's on in the background. 

I just find it staggering that THOUSANDS of people turn it over at certain times.


----------



## Emberdon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> -The show opened particularly strong thanks to curiosity stemming from WrestleMania 29 the night before. That's usually the case, and this opened to a 3.74 quarter for John Cena's promo and interruption by Mark Henry.
> 
> -There was a quick drop, of course, that spanned the next two quarters. Daniel Bryan vs. Big E. Langston lost 461,000 viewers before Wade Barrett winning the Intercontinental title back from The Miz lost 222,000 more.
> 
> -The first gain came with Randy Orton and Sheamus both backstage trying to get a match with Big Show, which gained 92,000 viewers.
> The 9 p.m. hour saw a gain of only 151,000 viewers for the Alberto Del Rio vs. Jack Swagger and Zeb Colter match. It got better in a hurry, though, as Dolph Ziggler cashed in his Money in the Bank contract to win the world heavyweight title and Undertaker did an angle with Team Hell No and The Shield that gained 460,000 viewers. It ended up being the highest rated segment of the show at 3.76.
> 
> -Santino Marella, Zack Ryder, and R-Truth vs. 3MB lost 329,000 viewers. The backstage skit with Orton and Sheamus, plus an interview with Big Show, and Orton and Sheamus making their way to the ring for a promo and a poll lost 110,000 viewers.
> 
> -The actual Orton vs. Sheamus match, now infamous for the increasing insanity of the live crowd chanting for everything under the sun that had nothing to do with what was going on in the ring, gained 329,000 viewers. That's at the 10 p.m. hour, which is about right these days.
> 
> -Big Show coming out and beating every down while taking his sweet time lost only 70,000 viewers. Fandango, who got over huge live, had his match with Kofi Kingston and interaction with Chris Jericho lose 207,000 viewers.
> 
> -The biggest loss of the show, and it was shockingly big, was for the match that was cut from WrestleMania 29, Tons of Funk & Funkadactyls vs. Rhodes Scholars & Bella Twins. A staggering 665,000 viewers were lost for this quarter. That's a lot. Like, a ton.
> 
> -Finally, John Cena vs. Mark Henry in the main event with Ryback presumably turning heel gained 887,000 viewers to a 3.54 overrun. That's a very good end for the show.


Mark rating henry!


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Quarter Hours - April 8th, 2013
Q1 - 3.74 rating / 5.00 million
Q2 - 3.40 rating / 4.54 million
Q3 - 3.23 rating / 4.32 million
Q4 - 3.30 rating / 4.41 million <-- aka 'filler quarter' with no reason to care
Q5 - 3.41 rating / 4.56 million
Q6 - 3.76 rating / 5.02 million
Q7 - 3.51 rating / 4.69 million
Q8 - 3.43 rating / 4.58 million <-- aka 'filler quarter' with no reason to care
Q9 - 3.67 rating / 4.91 million
Q10 - 3.62 rating / 4.84 million
Q11 - 3.47 rating / 4.63 million
Q12 - 2.97 rating / 3.97 million <-- aka 'filler quarter' with no reason to care
Overrun - 3.54 rating / 4.86 million


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Taker doing the peak of the show,not a surprise :taker


----------



## Joeyontherun22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> lol Henry bombs consecutively every week, until he's in the main event with John Cena. How does he equal ratings?


you don't know what the hell your talking about. Henry when pushed right NOT in some stupid random ass khali match ALWAYS brings the ratings especially on his main event segments on smackdown.


----------



## MoveMent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Mark "Ratings" Henry.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Mark Henry is the big ratings getter in the company. Why? Because that's what he does.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Quarter Hours - April 8th, 2013
> Q1 - 3.74 rating / 5.00 million
> Q2 - 3.40 rating / 4.54 million
> Q3 - 3.23 rating / 4.32 million
> Q4 - 3.30 rating / 4.41 million <-- aka 'filler quarter' with no reason to care
> Q5 - 3.41 rating / 4.56 million
> Q6 - 3.76 rating / 5.02 million
> Q7 - 3.51 rating / 4.69 million
> Q8 - 3.43 rating / 4.58 million <-- aka 'filler quarter' with no reason to care
> Q9 - 3.67 rating / 4.91 million
> Q10 - 3.62 rating / 4.84 million
> Q11 - 3.47 rating / 4.63 million
> Q12 - 2.97 rating / 3.97 million <-- aka 'filler quarter' with no reason to care
> Overrun - 3.54 rating / 4.86 million


D.M.N. can you repost the breakdown for raw after mania last year

thanks


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> D.M.N. can you repost the breakdown for raw after mania last year
> 
> thanks


I ain't not no D.M.N., but I got da breakdown!



> In the segment breakdown, The Rock opened the show at a 3.6 quarter rating, which is nothing special for the first segment following WrestleMania. Jack Swagger vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. Santino Marella lost 295,000 viewers while Alex Riley vs. Lord Tensai in his debut stayed even. Mark Henry vs. CM Punk gained 148,000 viewers which is bad for that timeslot. The angle with Sheamus and Alberto Del Rio lost 297,000 viewers, which isn’t a bad drop for that part of the show. Kofi Kingston vs. Cody Rhodes stayed even while The Miz vs. Zack Ryder lost 150,000 viewers. The final segment with John Cena and Brock Lesnar’s return gained 1,036,000 viewers for a 3.9 quarter-rating in the overrun.


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The ratings are doing pretty well this year. They seem to have stabilized. 

Lets see how if they can keep it up without de Rock.


----------



## MoneyInc

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm not sure how it effects the rating but people mentioned that the Nation Championship basketball game was on at the same time as Raw too right? That had to affect the rating BIG TIME but I figure these ratings somehow might count DVR'd viewings? But still, the National Championship game is HUUUUGE STUFF.


----------



## Joe Chan-Reichs

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk is a ratings killer then, huh?


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Raw after WrestleMania last year also went up against the title game.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fatcat said:


> The Raw after WrestleMania last year also went up against the title game.


and came down big next week even with lesnars appearance the previous week ie -800,000 viewers.

if raw loses 800k this coming monday vince won't be too happy


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_70042.shtml



> -- Monday's WWE Raw dropped exactly 50 percent in social media activity compared to last week's post-WrestleMania episode.
> 
> Raw scored 259,488 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, compared to 518k last week. It was the second-lowest social activity score of the year. Raw still ranked #1 on cable TV, marking four consecutive weeks.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Generally you can't make a direct one-to-one relationship between the quality of a single show and its TV rating because the TV rating contains a strong random component. That's why you've got to look at the trend over time and correct for seasonality (for example Wrestlemania season will have higher ratings by default). Once I finish my degree I'll make a proper econometric model for RAW ratings and post it on these forums so a better assessment of the ratings evolution can be made.


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM Punk off the show = ratings increase

CM Punk on the show = ratings descrease


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Correlation does not imply causation.


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bossdude said:


> CM Punk off the show = ratings increase
> 
> CM Punk on the show = ratings descrease


unk2 Was wondering how long it'd be until the first "PUNK IS RATINGZ KILLA" comment, didn't even make it to the actual segment breakdown this week...


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Weltschmertz said:


> Once I finish my degree I'll make a proper econometric model for RAW ratings and post it on these forums so a better assessment of the ratings evolution can be made.


My god don't keep me waiting.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ce-bates-motel-dallas-teen-mom-2-more/178061/

Hour 1 - 4.185 million
Hour 3 - 4.026 miilion
Hour 2 - 4.236 million

Average - 4.15 million


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ce-bates-motel-dallas-teen-mom-2-more/178061/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.185 million
> Hour 3 - 4.026 miilion
> Hour 2 - 4.236 million
> 
> Average - 4.15 million


Not good, not good at all.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena doesn't draw. HHH should bury him.


----------



## CenaSux84

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The ratings drop begin. Wait til end of the year we'll get 2's every week til January.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Back down to 4 million already? Well that didn't take long.

:vince3


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> JRsBBQ
> Monday Night Raw was the most watched entertainment show on cable


JR always trying to be positive.


----------



## Kane-UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm pretty sure that most people won't have been particularly bothered to watch wrestling on Monday night. I rather think they would've been more interested in the news channels...


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

final rating - 3.08


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What the fuck even classifies as "entertainment" anyway? Most watched entertainment show on cable? Compared to what?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Jeesus, Punk should drop the title...

... oh wait.


----------



## checkcola

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I gotta think the 50-50 booking is demoralizing viewers.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena holding the title means ratings will drop. I don't usually make comments like that but seeing as the punk haters were doing it for 434 days i will do it when i can


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So, like obviously, Cena can't draw as champion. They should like immediately strip him of the title, right? :hayden3


----------



## ywall2breakerj

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just put the God damn belt on Henry already and let him squash Rock, Brock and HHH in a gauntlet match. 23.4 RATING


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just put the damn belt on Ryback.

:cena3


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The ratings drop has nothing to do with John Cena, who's a "DRAW" or whatever, it's how they present this part of the year. Royal Rumble to (night after) Mania is presented as everything, this is their cool-off period. Do ratings ever NOT drop for Raw the week after Wrestlemania?


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The question I have is will ratings actually go below a 2.0 by the end of the summer?


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Coffey said:


> The question I have is will ratings actually go below a 2.0 by the end of the summer?


Almost certainly not I'd say. They seem to have a 2.7/8 baseline of viewers for Raw, I don't think it'll ever go below that for more than a week or two, if at all.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The damage done by making The Rock drop the Title to Cena, is starting to show and it will only get worse. All of the part-timers are pretty much gone right now, so I fully expect ratings to fall into the low 2.0's. It doesn't matter if it is Cena or Punk, no one wants to see any of these "PG guys" running around with the 2 "big" titles. Trips needs to be the WHC amd Rock needs to be the WWE Champ, that is just the way it is now. The part-timers are the only ones who main-event and everyone else, including Cena, is mid-card and below. The only way you get to main-event is if you are attached to a part-timer. That is the sad truth.

The WWE has ruined itself by not doing that Attitude Era vs. PG Era story line last year. Not only would it have kept interest in the product, it also would've allowed the PG Era guys a chance to win over some of the older fans who refuse to move on. Ignoring this opportunity was total stupidity on their part. You release a game about it and you let Punk and Cena face the part-timers, so why not build a storyline around it, since all of the storylines are built around the part-timers anyways? 

It literally takes only 15-30 minutes to build a two year feud, which would culminate in mega matches and stars being established by the end of WM 30. This is totally inexcusable on the WWE's part and they deserve every low rating that they receive.


----------



## Guy LeDouche

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Murph said:


> The ratings drop has nothing to do with John Cena, who's a "DRAW" or whatever, it's how they present this part of the year. Royal Rumble to (night after) Mania is presented as everything, this is their cool-off period. Do ratings ever NOT drop for Raw the week after Wrestlemania?


Couldn't have said it better myself. :clap


----------



## Crosses

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They drew the same rating they did last year this week, I expect it to be drawing flat 3.0's

I don't blame it on the Boston coverage, RAW got better ratings during the 9/11 and Iraq war coverage


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Murph said:


> The ratings drop has nothing to do with John Cena, who's a "DRAW" or whatever, it's how they present this part of the year. Royal Rumble to (night after) Mania is presented as everything, this is their cool-off period. Do ratings ever NOT drop for Raw the week after Wrestlemania?


No they don't. it depends on the quality of the product, current stories, who#s on top amd many other factors. Ratings going down after Mania is not a guarantee as proven in the past. From 1998-2004, ratings were up the week after mania.


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nothing to be excited for anymore.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Coffey said:


> The question I have is will ratings actually go below a 2.0 by the end of the summer?


Last year saw a low of 2.2. By the end of the year, it's possible.


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> No they don't. it depends on the quality of the product, current stories, who#s on top amd many other factors. Ratings going down after Mania is not a guarantee as proven in the past. From 1998-2004, ratings were up the week after mania.


Comparing the night after to the next week:

1999: 6.5 to 5.8 *(down .7)*
2000: 6.4 to 6.2 *(down .2)*
2001: 5.7 to 5.4 *(down .3)*
2002: 5.3 to 5.4 *(up .1)*
2003: 3.7 to 3.5 *(down .2)*
2004: 3.8 to 3.9 *(up .1)*

Out of these 6 years, only two years saw an increase: 2002 and 2004, and both by 0.1. Would you say 2002/2004 had better stories/bigger draws on top in comparison to 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2003? Hogan/HHH and Benoit/HHH were the two top Raw programmes at these times, were they better than Austin as Champ, HHH vs Rock, the Two Man Power Trip? It's very usual for the numbers to fall the week after Wrestlemania, no matter what's going on. I haven't even looked up 2005-2012, but I'd say they dropped most of the time. 

It's all how they present it, and since they present Wrestlemania as the zenith, the immediate aftermath will naturally not feel as important.


----------



## Striketeam

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Coffey said:


> The question I have is will ratings actually go below a 2.0 by the end of the summer?


Hopefully.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Murph said:


> The ratings drop has nothing to do with John Cena, who's a "DRAW" or whatever, it's how they present this part of the year. Royal Rumble to (night after) Mania is presented as everything, this is their cool-off period. Do ratings ever NOT drop for Raw the week after Wrestlemania?


So true

RTWM is the hottest time for ratings.After that ratings drop regardless of Rock/Brock performing or even if Austin comes back to give Mr.Mcmahon another stunner.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Murph said:


> Comparing the night after to the next week:
> 
> 1999: 6.5 to 5.8 *(down .7)*
> 2000: 6.4 to 6.2 *(down .2)*
> 2001: 5.7 to 5.4 *(down .3)*
> 2002: 5.3 to 5.4 *(up .1)*
> 2003: 3.7 to 3.5 *(down .2)*
> 2004: 3.8 to 3.9 *(up .1)*
> 
> Out of these 6 years, only two years saw an increase: 2002 and 2004, and both by 0.1. Would you say 2002/2004 had better stories/bigger draws on top in comparison to 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2003? Hogan/HHH and Benoit/HHH were the two top Raw programmes at these times, were they better than Austin as Champ, HHH vs Rock, the Two Man Power Trip? It's very usual for the numbers to fall the week after Wrestlemania, no matter what's going on. I haven't even looked up 2005-2012, but I'd say they dropped most of the time.
> 
> It's all how they present it, and since they present Wrestlemania as the zenith, the immediate aftermath will naturally not feel as important.


Both 2002 and 2004 had the drafts in those weeks, I think.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wwe will need to realise they need to change shit up, but by Summerslam i reckon ratings will be back up again.


----------



## omikse.

*The ratings should be lower*

Despite a declining product WWE RAW ratings have remained fairly steady for the last 10 years. In other places of the world I know they've dropped by as much as half though in the US they've been around the same since 2003..


----------



## blackage316

*Re: The ratings should be lower*

You can thank :rock4 for that if he didn't come back the ratings would have been 2.4 or even lower.

It won't last long because people are going to be sick of part timers sooner than later and the wwe are going to blame only themselves because of their reliance on only 1 main eventer and ruining the rest of the roster.


----------



## omikse.

*Re: The ratings should be lower*



blackage316 said:


> You can thank :rock4 for that if he didn't come back the ratings would have been 2.4 or even lower.
> 
> It won't last long because people are going to be sick of part timers sooner than later and the wwe are going to blame only themselves because of their reliance on only 1 main eventer and ruining the rest of the roster.


But even still you compare a show in 2013 to a show in 2003 you would think the rating would be alot lower considering how bad the product has become


----------



## Hbk96rRko09

*Re: The ratings should be lower*

The product isn't nearly as bad as most make it seem ik plenty of people who watxh regularly and happy witb the product as I am 
, its not perfect but it never has been or will be. The match quality is good and I usually get at least a couple things positive out of every raw although this. Weeks was a huge letdown


----------



## omikse.

*Re: The ratings should be lower*



Hbk96rRko09 said:


> The product isn't nearly as bad as most make it seem ik plenty of people who watxh regularly and happy witb the product as I am
> , its not perfect but it never has been or will be. The match quality is good and I usually get at least a couple things positive out of every raw although this. Weeks was a huge letdown


If you compare it to any show from even 2003 - 2007 This show was unbearable as have all been for the most part


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Both 2002 and 2004 had the drafts in those weeks, I think.


you are wrong
the drafts took place,on both years,on the second RAW after WM


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Murph said:


> Comparing the night after to the next week:
> 
> 1999: 6.5 to 5.8 *(down .7)*
> 2000: 6.4 to 6.2 *(down .2)*
> 2001: 5.7 to 5.4 *(down .3)*
> 2002: 5.3 to 5.4 *(up .1)*
> 2003: 3.7 to 3.5 *(down .2)*
> 2004: 3.8 to 3.9 *(up .1)*


Right, but my point was that ratings went up after Mania in those years, not specifically the week after. From 1998-2002 ratings peaked after Mania.

98: 5.7 in May without Nitro; 5.4 in June with Nitro
99: 8.1 in May without Nitro competition; 7.1 in July with Nitro
00: 7.4 in May
01: 5.7 in July
02: 5.4 in March


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's entirely Cena's fault.

He's the top star.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think a lot of people in America probably weren't in the mood for 'wrasslin' Monday night so I'll give this week's ratings a pass.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



YoungGun_UK said:


> I think a lot of people in America probably weren't in the mood for 'wrasslin' Monday night so I'll give this week's ratings a pass.


Maybe you're right.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



uknoww said:


> you are wrong
> the drafts took place,on both years,on the second RAW after WM


Yes, which is exactly what Murph is comparing - the night after Mania versus the second RAW after Mania.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena being the champ and top guy should take the flakk for this. Totally unacceptable


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



uknoww said:


> you are wrong
> the drafts took place,on both years,on the second RAW after WM


Then he's right, because that's the show we're talking about.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, the show didn’t open strong with a match with Randy Orton & Sheamus vs. Big Show at 3.06. That either speaks of low interest coming out of last week or people are used to John Cena or C.M. Punk opening and talking. The segment with 3MB out, Brock Lesnar destroying them and Paul Heyman cutting a promo gained 113,000 viewers. Kofi Kingston’s U.S. title win over Antonio Cesaro lost 111,000 viewers. A replay of the Dolph Ziggler title win over Alberto Del Rio lost 10,000 viewers. The Dolph Ziggler interview with Del Rio, Jack Swagger and Zeb Colter coming out gained 241,000 viewers at 9 p.m. and did a 3.23 quarter. Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. Prime Time Players and the Ryback interview gained 33,000 viewers. Wade Barrett vs. R-Truth lost 397,000 viewers. Great Khali & Santino Marella vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow lost 84,000 viewers. The Fandango interview at 10 p.m. gained 69,000 viewers which is terrible for the top of the hour, doing a 2.95 quarter. Ziggler vs. Swagger lost 232,000 viewers. The C.M. Punk interview gained 344,000 viewers which was very good for that point in the show. Kaitlyn vs. Nikki Bella gained 20,000 viewers. And the final segment with John Cena and Ryback in the ring and The Shield coming out gained 647,000 viewers to a 3.53 overrun. Most of the overrun gain was Males 18-49 going from a 2.7 to 3.2.


Observer Newsletter


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The Fandango interview at 10 p.m. gained 69,000 viewers


DEM RATINGZ :fandango



> The C.M. Punk interview gained 344,000 viewers


unk2



> Kaitlyn vs. Nikki Bella gained 20,000 viewers


DEM BELLAS GAINED VIEWERS. :cena2



> And the final segment with John Cena and Ryback in the ring and The Shield coming out gained 647,000 viewers


:ambrose :cena3 :ryback



> Ziggler vs. Swagger lost 232,000 viewers


:rock3


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Quarter Hours - April 8th, 2013
> Q1 - 3.74 rating / 5.00 million
> Q2 - 3.40 rating / 4.54 million
> Q3 - 3.23 rating / 4.32 million
> Q4 - 3.30 rating / 4.41 million <-- aka 'filler quarter' with no reason to care
> Q5 - 3.41 rating / 4.56 million
> Q6 - 3.76 rating / 5.02 million
> Q7 - 3.51 rating / 4.69 million
> Q8 - 3.43 rating / 4.58 million <-- aka 'filler quarter' with no reason to care
> Q9 - 3.67 rating / 4.91 million
> Q10 - 3.62 rating / 4.84 million
> Q11 - 3.47 rating / 4.63 million
> Q12 - 2.97 rating / 3.97 million <-- aka 'filler quarter' with no reason to care
> Overrun - 3.54 rating / 4.86 million


Quarter Hours - April 15th, 2013
Q1 - 3.06 rating / 4.16 million
Q2 - 3.14 rating / 4.27 million
Q3 - 3.06 rating / 4.16 million
Q4 - 3.05 rating / 4.15 million
Q5 - 3.23 rating / 4.39 million
Q6 - 3.25 rating / 4.43 million
Q7 - 2.96 rating / 4.03 million
Q8 - 2.90 rating / 3.94 million
Q9 - 2.95 rating / 4.01 million
Q10 - 2.78 rating / 3.78 million
Q11 - 3.03 rating / 4.13 million
Q12 - 3.05 rating / 4.15 million
Overrun - 3.53 rating / 4.79 million


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Yes, which is exactly what Murph is comparing - the night after Mania versus the second RAW after Mania.


my bad


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT unk in a random quarter. His feuds with Rock and Taker have turned him into a strong quarter ratings guy. Hasn't had a bad one in months. Of course now he's taking a break and that could change after his return, but great stuff in the meantime.

Also, great gain for Cena/Ryback. Ryback has done some strong TV numbers in the past and paired with Cena, they had one hell of an overrun, which in terms of gains and overall ratings was under last week's by a little bit, but last week's show had a much higher overall show rating, so you could say this week's was more impressive by a bit.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT CM GOAT once again gaining big in a random segment.

Ryback/Cena/Shield overrun did well, but I'll credit that mostly to Cena, obviously.


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If Punk was in Attitude Era his seg would get a 10.0 every week. Please hurry back GOAT :jose


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM DRAW, you know, drawing. WWE gonna miss the GOAT


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestling Observer said:


> In the segment-by-segment, the show didn’t open strong with a match with Randy Orton & Sheamus vs. Big Show at 3.06. That either speaks of low interest coming out of last week or people are used to John Cena or C.M. Punk opening and talking.


Now why does it mean either of those & not "no one gives a flying fuck about a rematch from three days prior between three boring guys that no one was clamoring to see in the first place, where the basic rules of pro-wrestling are broken to give the babyfaces the advantage over the heel?"

I mean, that's where I would lean...

People could have just as easily switched on the show, saw that shit & changed the channel, which would explain the rating too, no?


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not sure if mentioned before, but something to consider about ratings...maybe the stuff in Boston impacted ratings abit? Cause tv shows in general this past mondays seemed to do fairly lower than usual.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM GOAT DRAW! The guy can do no wrong. He will be missed


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Also can't help but laugh at them putting Fandango at the 10 PM hour. Did they expect him to do well just because his theme song is getting minor attention? I'm glad this is bombing.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



LovelyElle890 said:


> Trips needs to be the WHC amd Rock needs to be the WWE Champ, that is just the way it is now. The part-timers are the only ones who main-event and everyone else, including Cena, is mid-card and below. The only way you get to main-event is if you are attached to a part-timer. That is the sad truth.


vince has done an amazing job of amassing $2.5 billion in revenue since 2008 with just midcarders 



roadkill_ said:


> Last year saw a low of 2.2. By the end of the year, it's possible.


last year that 2.2 fell on christmas eve, raw also fell on new years eve and went head to head with the final presidental debate for the first time in 20 years on another week, none of that stuff will happen this year


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM "Ratings Killer" Punk 

unk unk2


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And once again, CM Punk proves that he is a draw. All doubters be damned!


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I wanna see how much Cena gains when not in the ME all the time.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan's average impact is +28, higher than any other mid-carder on the roster. Swagger's average impact is -129 () - this despite the fact that he basically walked into a world title feud.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No Rock..show is almost in the 2s again. Nuff said. Good luck with Cena and Punk carrying the show.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AthenaMark said:


> No Rock..show is almost in the 2s again. Nuff said. Good luck with Cena and *Punk* carrying the show.


LOL unk2


----------



## WWE

Not trying to start anything here but In my opinion. The only reason the punk segment drew as much as it did was because it was hyped for a week and and he was returning.. Just my opinion 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Main segments of the show that they promoted did well. Can't argue with that. So far the Cena/Ryback program has people interested and just like they did before with Punk, they hyped up that he has something important to say and it had people interested. Promotion = results. 

Although 9pm and 10pm didn't do as well as usual, I actually like that they didn't put what you would normally expect them to put in there for a change. The show had a really different feel to it. It started with a match instead of a promo, we had Brock Lesnar appearing out of nowhere, a hyped Ryback promo that happened at a random time and then a Punk promo that happened at a random time too. Made for a less predictable show in terms of what was coming next and I like it. That's not to say it should happen all the time mind you, but giving Fandango a little bit of spotlight at 10pm and Ziggler at 9pm, even if they didn't set the world on fire, it still highlights them as something important and positions them that way for the audience which is what they need to be doing. 

Overall though, dropping back down to barely just over 4 million so quickly isn't a good sign. They should be aiming to hover around the 4.5 million mark. That's a good place to be for non-hyped portions of the wrestling year.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They'll be OK heading into Extreme Rules with Brock and Triple H bringing up those numbers but depending on how long Punk is gone for, it will be interesting to see how Cena carries the show being the only big name around.


----------



## Elijah89

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> And once again, CM Punk proves that he is a draw. All doubters be damned!


Anomaly. It was a once in a blue moon thing. Happens with Punk all the time. He is still a work in progress though. Hopefully this break will give him that extra boost of popularity when he gets back. I am not saying he is unpopular right now, I am just saying when he comes back he will hopefully be seen as a bigger star than he already is.



Cycloneon said:


> Not trying to start anything here but In my opinion. The only reason the punk segment drew as much as it did was because it was hyped for a week and and he was returning.. Just my opinion
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


That's what I believe as well. Punk usually is best at drawing with someone who is a bigger name.



Cmpunk91 said:


> Cena being the champ and top guy should take the flakk for this. Totally unacceptable


Punk was losing viewers in his own segments when he was champion. Not his fault though. Like I said, he can only draw with guys who are bigger names. People like Dolph Ziggler and Daniel Bryan are not going to help Punk gain any viewers. At least not right now. Hopefully some time in the future, because I am ready to see these guys get heavily featured within the next year or two.Despite the fact that I am a HUGE Cena fan, it does suck that he is the only full time guy who can draw no matter who he is feuding with.

So when people blamed Punk for low ratings during his title reign, they blamed him because he was also a HUGE part of that ratings decline. Honestly, Cena was the one who drew during Punk's reign of 434 days. Whether he was feuding with Brock Lesnar, Big Show, Johnny Ace, Ziggler, etc.. He was the one gaining, while everyone almost was losing viewers (Didn't happen like that all the time, but it happened quite a bit). That is why people gave Punk alot of shit during his reign. Cena's current reign just started and it is a small sample size, but he is drawing so far. That is why no one is blaming any ratings decline on Cena.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Didn't Cena's feud with Ziggler bomb in the ratings department? And didn't the Punk/Bryan/AJ saga obtain strong overruns in the buildup to MITB?


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

AJ and Bryan definitely were getting big numbers in the main event spot..an AJ segment did almost 800k. She was the changing factor while Punk was in that same position weeks before and was getting some of the worst overruns since 1997.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And here we go with exaggerations again. :lmao


----------



## Apex Rattlesnake

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Daniel "Ratings" Bryan to save Raw tonight?


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Don't reckon anyone would save a taped RAW rating.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_70178.shtml



> -- Monday's WWE Raw dipped 15 percent in social media activity for a taped show from London.
> 
> Raw scored 220,567, according to Trendrr.TV, which was the second-lowest score of the year, only topping the January 21 show.
> 
> Raw also fell out of the #1 or #2 spot on cable TV for the first time since Jan. 21. Raw ranked #3 behind "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" and the Bulls-Nets NBA Playoffs game.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_70178.shtml


I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the Shield match was the high point by far.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE's ratings always dip on a taped show.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It was definitely either the 6 man tag match or the opening segment that did the high point. Can't really see any other point in the show doing very well.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_70178.shtml


My Chicago Bulls bringing dem ratingz.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Love and Hip Hop Atlanta was the night's top-rated original with a 1.7 adults 18-49 rating, up from last week's 1.4. *WWE Raw came in second Monday night with a 1.7 adults 18-49 rating during its most-watched hour, up from last week's 1.6
*
LOVE & HIP HOP ATLANTA: 1.7
*WWE Entertainment 9:00 PM: 1.7
WWE Entertainment 10:00 PM: 1.6*
Teen Mom II SSN 4: 1.6
NBA PLAYOFFS: 1.5
T.I. AND TINY 3: 1.4
*WWE Entertainment 8:00 PM: 1.4*

tvbythenumbers


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Viewership was 4.19m, 4.65m and 4.36m.


----------



## Carlito1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

the fact that they call jerichos loss to Fandango "the biggest upset in wrestlemania history" is a huge rub for fandango


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 1 - 4.19 million
Hour 2 - 4.65 million
Hour 3 - 4.36 million

Average - 4.4 million


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT :taker wit dem shield peeps and tag champs bringing da number up!


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

For the second week running they didn't schedule all their big shit at the usual slots and I liked it. It really helps make the show a little unpredictable since we're not all waiting for 9pm and 10pm for something to happen. I think it's good that they're starting to switch things up a bit tbh. The Taker/Shield match should do the best of the night which is great. The more people who get to see the Shield the better. The opening hour was low but that was the case last week as well iirc. At least they were able to draw more people in as the show progressed. An overall of 4.4 million is spot on. If they can maintain that over the next couple of months then they'll be on the right track heading into the summer.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Every time there is a night of t.v. with a bunch of marquee shows that black people watch, WWE Ratings go in the toilet.

Black people love wrestling.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^Is that why R-Truth has been given a slight push the past couple of weeks? lol

But I think being pre-recorded and posting spoilers on the web also hurt. I didn't watch live after I read the spoilers. Just watched high spots on YT.


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Great "ratings" Britain. I think this is obvious that people just love us.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DEM :taker :reigns :rollins :ambrose :fandango :bryan :kane BRINGING RATINGZ. :mark:


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.1 final rating


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not bad considering it was taped.


----------



## WWE

:cena3

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, the show opened at a 3.04 rating for the segment with Paul Heyman and HHH to set up the cage match. R-Truth vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 163,000 viewers. Brodus Clay vs. Damien Sandow, and a Dolph Ziggler, A.J., Vickie Guerrero and Brad Maddox backstage segment gained 153,000 viewers. Chris Jericho vs. Ziggler gained 439,000 viewers which is strong growth these days, doing a 3.35 at the 9 p.m. mark. Cody Rhodes vs. Tensai lost 224,000 viewers. Big E Langston vs. Zack Ryder lost 139,000 viewers. Undertaker & Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. The Shield gained 581,000 viewers, which was strong growth, doing a show high 3.50 quarter at 10 p.m. Fandango vs. William Regal lost 949,000 viewers to a 2.83 quarter. More people tuned out in this segment (basically they lost one out of every five viewers) than nearly any in recent years. This shows the difference between the disconnect of a cult TV audience and the real viewing audience and also the big picture impact of a cult thing on television, not to say that in time this won’t change, but it does give you the real perspective of where it is now. The Divas Battle Royal gained 302,000 viewers. The in-ring Mick Foley, Ryback, John Cena and The Shield final segment gained 548,000 viewers in the overrun, which is good but not great, finishing at a 3.43 overrun.


Wrestling Observer Newsletter


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

AJ DRAWS.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Chris Jericho vs. Ziggler gained 439,000 viewers


:taker



> Undertaker & Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. The Shield gained 581,000 viewers


:ambrose :dazzler :rollins



> Fandango vs. William Regal lost 949,000 viewers





> The Divas Battle Royal gained 302,000 viewers


What a joke :lmao :lmao


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nothing strange for the most part.

That said, FAN-DAN-GOers wont be happy.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm here to draw the world...:ziggler3


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's about what I expected from this show. I won't say all, but the majority of Fandango marks are bandwagoners like the Zach Ryder fans of old. Once they see him wrestle more and see him try and cut real promos outside of the catchphrase, they'll realize he's nothing more than a reliable midcarder with average ring work, and a good amount of charisma. I think this picture below rings true here.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cody needs to seriously get away from that pointless feud against Clay and Tensi.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> That's about what I expected from this show. I won't say all, but the majority of Fandango marks are bandwagoners like the Zach Ryder fans of old. Once they see him wrestle more and see him try and cut real promos outside of the catchphrase, they'll realize he's nothing more than a reliable midcarder with average ring work, and a good amount of charisma. I think this picture below rings true here.


So true 

:lmao

lol'd at the Ryder merch in the can.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

-Heyman/HHH start off weak. Terrible number not just for those two, but period. One of the weakest opening numbers of the year.

-Jericho/Ziggler doing well is good to see, but it's also worth noting had Jericho won, he would've been in the WHC match. If people heard about this, it might've given them more incentive to tune in. It'd show though that making matches be more than just meaningless matches to give a guy a win or a loss and when something is on the line really does help. Good stuff.

-Taker, Kane, and Bryan against The Shield doing top of the night. Monster rating for the 10PM slot given the overall show number. Granted, there was a higher rating 10PM slot a couple of weeks ago due to the higher rating for the whole show, but this 10PM is the highest gain and probably the most impressive 10PM timeslot taking into account gain, rating, and quarter ratingverall rating ratio. Taker's return to action on Raw impresses.

-Ryback/Cena program drawing pretty consistent numbers. This week was a bit down from last week but still strong.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I guess people tune in to see hot Divas, cuz it damn sure ain't the match quality.


----------



## SUPER HANS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

People on here used to say Undertaker can't draw. :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh yeah. DAT 3.1 HUGE rating :argh: :lol


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Would have been a lot worse without Taker.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WOW!

Looks like Fandango's not liked much in the end.


----------



## robertdeniro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Oh yeah. DAT 3.1 HUGE rating :argh: :lol


It's a good rating considering it was a taped show.


----------



## vanboxmeer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



robertdeniro said:


> It's a good rating considering it was a taped show.


Taped vs Live as something affecting ratings is a massive false ideal. It has not mattered at all. In fact, the average of the taped shows ratings have actually been higher than live.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



vanboxmeer said:


> Taped vs Live as something affecting ratings is a massive false ideal. It has not mattered at all. In fact, the average of the taped shows ratings have actually been higher than live.


Really? Do you have any proof of that? I'm not doubting what you said but it would be interesting to see an aggregate for both to compare!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



robertdeniro said:


> It's a good rating considering it was a taped show.


They've been hovering around that number even during the RTWM, sadly.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LOL at the two most over guys on the show drawing the least amount of ratings. Fandango is terrible. His theme only got over because some smarks wanted to entertain themselves because the show wasn't doing it for them. He should be buried. Someone send in the expert.












THANOS said:


> Really? Do you have any proof of that? I'm not doubting what you said but it would be interesting to see an aggregate for both to compare!


Vanboxmeer is right. If you look at a history of ratings for live vs taped shows there is no indication that live shows led to an increase of ratings. TNA is the best example. They started doing live shows a few months ago and the ratings have stayed the same. Even before this they had live shows sporadically, and for the most part the ratings wouldn't go up for these shows. I believe TNA even held a test group focus a year or two ago, and they showed the group a live and taped episode. All throughout the live episode the announcer kept mentioning that the show was live. When the test group was asked which episode was live and which one was taped, the test group didn't know. This shows the majority of wrestling fans don't know or care if the show is live. They don't read spoilers, so the show is new to them either way. Live vs Taped only really affects the hardcore, internet audience that tend to read spoilers.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> LOL at the two most over guys on the show drawing the least amount of ratings. Fandango is terrible. His theme only got over because some smarks wanted to entertain themselves because the show wasn't doing it for them. He should be buried. Someone send in the expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vanboxmeer is right. If you look at a history of ratings for live vs taped shows there is no indication that live shows lead to an increase of ratings. TNA is the best example. They started doing live shows a few months ago and the ratings has stayed the same. Even before this they had live shows, and for the most part the ratings stayed the same. I believe TNA even did test group a year or two ago, and showed the group a live and taped show. All throughout the live episode the announcer kept mentioning that the show was live. When the test group was asked which episode was live the test group didn't know. This shows the majority of wrestling fans don't know or care if the show is live. They don't read spoilers, so the show is new to them either way. Live vs Taped only really affects the hardcore, internet audience that tend to read spoilers.


This is very true, good post. You need to think how a casual views wrestling : They do NOT read anything regarding the show, they can only be easier pressed to watch if there's an appealing advertisment, but otherwise they'll just tune in whenever they feel like without regarding whether it's live or not.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cookie Monster said:


> AJ DRAWS.


DAMN RIGHT. Ziggles doing nice, and Shield?...well come on now. :cool2

FANDANGO WTF happened bro? :taker


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Terrible rating for a terrible episode.


----------



## The.Rockbottom

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The huge Fandango loss probably has less to do with him and more to do with the fact most people were watching the show to see Undertaker and Hell No vs The Shield, once they saw that they turned off.

I was surprised myself when it came on in the middle of the show instead of going on last, but then again of course WWE wanted to put Cena on at the end.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Every segment AJ was in drew halfway big....once again carrying Raw.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Zigglers cash in got that huge reaction the week before, nobody gives a shit about AJ.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dexter Morgan said:


> I guess people tune in to see hot Divas, cuz it damn sure ain't the match quality.


When a segment loses a million viewers, the following segment is almost certainly going to gain. The opposite is also trye


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Taker was the reason that show had any decent number about it. Wwe already missing Punk. Cena is not a big a draw as people think he is.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> DEM :taker :reigns :rollins :ambrose :bryan :kane BRINGING RATINGZ. :mark:


Fix'd.


----------



## Monterossa

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LOL @ Fandango...

the new Zack Ryder.

and LOL @ english crowd.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It was stupid of them to put Fandango in a segment with Regal.

Nobody has ever cared about Regal....ever.

You're supposed to protect these guys so they get a TV rub by pairing them with acts people care about.

It did wonders for Punk.


----------



## Das Wunderberlyn

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Taker was the reason that show had any decent number about it. Wwe already missing Punk. Cena is not a big a draw as people think he is.


Punk is the biggest draw dammit. unk2


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Goldfinger said:


> Punk is the biggest draw dammit. unk2


Nah not really but he's a much bigger draw than AJ Styles. :troll


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Nah not really but he's a much bigger draw than AJ Styles. :troll


Please no AJ bashing, he's already emo enough as it is. How can you critisize a man who 5 episodes in a row has done nothing but stand there with the grim look like he's waiting for his heroin dealer to arrive, realize he's not coming and walking off the stage whenever people expect him to do something as a return. However, he still looks great doing it, best hairstyle in the biz right now










GOAT.


----------



## Das Wunderberlyn

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Nah not really but he's a much bigger draw than AJ Styles. :troll


Punk has been on top like 4 years straight and wwe has gone leaps and bounds on ratings so much so obama became a punk mark. :troll


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


> Please no AJ bashing, he's already emo enough as it is. How can you critisize a man who 5 episodes in a row has done nothing but stand there with the grim look like he's waiting for his heroin dealer to arrive, realize he's not coming and walking off the stage whenever people expect him to do something as a return. However, he still looks great doing it, best hairstyle in the biz right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GOAT.


Oh I agree with you and actually really like AJ Styles. His new brooding character is very intriguing to me as well. I only made that remark to take a jab at Goldylocks .


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Oh I agree with you and actually really like AJ Styles. His new brooding character is very intriguing to me as well. I only made that remark to take a jab at Goldylocks .


Ignore him, he's a troll lol. He's the AJ Styles equivalent of the stupid Rock marks trying to downgrade Rock by making one stupid mark post after another. Must be the first ever AJ Styles mark that doesn't like Cesaro or CM Punk. Wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't mark for AJ either but just uses his gimmick to make AJ marks look worse.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


> Ignore him, he's a troll lol. He's the AJ Styles equivalent of the stupid Rock marks trying to downgrade Rock by making one stupid mark post after another. Must be the first ever AJ Styles mark that doesn't like Cesaro or CM Punk. Wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't mark for AJ either but just uses his gimmick to make AJ marks look worse.


I've also found it strange that he hates me and red reps me messages like, "indy mark..huff..puff", when AJ Styles was just as indy as Punk, Cesaro, Bryan, etc. at one point :lol.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_70301.shtml



> -- Factoring in the post-WrestleMania Lull Period and a lack of newsworthy events Monday night, WWE Raw scored the lowest Social Media Score of 2013.
> 
> Raw scored 202,321, according to Trendrr.TV, which is down 8 percent compared to last week's U.K. Raw. The previous 2013 low was 208k on January 21.
> 
> Raw ranked #3 on cable TV Monday night for the second consecutive week, trailing "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" and the Bulls vs. Nets NBA Playoffs game.


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^^^ CM Punk's fault unk2


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well duh. Shit and uneventful show is shit and uneventful.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Show falls apart without CM GOAT.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ates-motel-defiance-warehouse-13-more/180187/

Hour 1 - 4.287 Million
Hour 2 - 4.311 Million
Hour 3 - 4.257 Million

Average - 4.285 million


----------



## xdryza

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This is the part where we blame Punk, right?


----------



## Nimbus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



xdryza said:


> This is the part where we blame Punk, right?


This is when we thank punk, the show was horrible but still gets better ratings than when he was around as a champ.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The NBA Playoffs was the night's top-rated cable program with a 1.8 adults 18-49 rating.WWE Raw and Teen Mom 2 tied for second Monday night with a 1.7 adults 18-49 rating . Raw was even with last week while Teen Mom 2 was up from a 1.6.

NBA PLAYOFFS: 1.8
WWE Entertainment 10:00 PM: 1.7
WWE Entertainment 9:00 PM: 1.7
Teen Mom II: 1.7
LOVE & HIP HOP ATLANTA: 1.5
WWE Entertainment 8:00 PM: 1.5

tvbythenumbers

Once again very low first hour.


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena really bringing in those ratings.


----------



## Ashly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Shitty ratings for a shitty show. I say it's evened out well :lol


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Ashly said:


> Shitty ratings for a shitty show. I say it's evened out well :lol


4.3 million for a 3 hour show head to head with the nba playoffs is far from shit, its what they were doing for some shows back in feb and march with no compeition and rock, punk, taker, lesnar, hhh on screen http://www.pwmania.com/211-wwe-raw-...unk-rock-shields-brawl-team-cena#.UYAx8aI3tdk http://www.pwmania.com/318-wwe-raw-rating-breakdown-triple-paul-heyman-cm-punk-undertaker


----------



## Ashly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> 4.3 million for a 3 hour show head to head with the nba playoffs is far from shit, its what they were doing for some shows back in feb and march with no compeition and rock, punk, taker, lesnar, hhh on screen http://www.pwmania.com/211-wwe-raw-...unk-rock-shields-brawl-team-cena#.UYAx8aI3tdk http://www.pwmania.com/318-wwe-raw-rating-breakdown-triple-paul-heyman-cm-punk-undertaker


My mistake but the show sucked anyway


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I love that "head-to-head with NBA playoffs stuff" when trying to find excuses for low ratings. In 1999/2000, they used to get over 9 million viewers against the NBA.

I do realize that times have changed and everything but it's like every week there is another show on another program that is responsible for a low rating. It's ridiculous.


----------



## Gang

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's surprisingly good for current product and period of time. I gonna wait till the money in the bank. There's really no reason watch right now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> I love that "head-to-head with NBA playoffs stuff" when trying to find excuses for low ratings. In 1999/2000, they used to get over 9 million viewers against the NBA.
> 
> I do realize that times have changed and everything but it's like every week there is another show on another program that is responsible for a low rating. It's ridiculous.


Very true.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Teen Mom II :lmao


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> I love that "head-to-head with NBA playoffs stuff" when trying to find excuses for low ratings. In 1999/2000, they used to get over 9 million viewers against the NBA.
> 
> I do realize that times have changed and everything but it's like every week there is another show on another program that is responsible for a low rating. It's ridiculous.


its a called a boom period, boom period ended when wcw ended, anyway there was a ton of people on here last night saying they would be watching the nba

i am sure vince will console himself with the fact raw was easily the most watched show on cable again last night oh and the fact that wwe in 1999 were bringing in $12.2m in tv revenue $7.1 of that domestic while in 2012 wwe brought in $139.5m in tv revenue, $88.9m of that domestic


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> I love that "head-to-head with NBA playoffs stuff" when trying to find excuses for low ratings. In 1999/2000, they used to get over 9 million viewers against the NBA.
> 
> I do realize that times have changed and everything but it's like every week there is another show on another program that is responsible for a low rating. It's ridiculous.


You obviously don't realize because if you did you wouldn't compare ratings from 12 years ago because there is literally no merit to doing it


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

For those who care about social media ratings...
http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/791634-breaking-news-raw-going-live-canadian-viewers.html

That should help out ratings a fair amount. Canadians don't tweet as often during Raw since it's taped(since going on twitter during raw means everything gets spoiled) but with it live now, more people will be on!


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.1 final rating


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Give it a couple of weeks and it'll be below 3.0


----------



## SaviorBeeRad™

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



dxbender said:


> For those who care about social media ratings...
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/791634-breaking-news-raw-going-live-canadian-viewers.html
> 
> That should help out ratings a fair amount. Canadians don't tweet as often during Raw since it's taped(since going on twitter during raw means everything gets spoiled) but with it live now, more people will be on!


Live doesn't really matter sorry to break it to you


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dec_619 said:


> Give it a couple of weeks and it'll be below 3.0


Indeed, and you-know-who is nowhere in sight to heap the blame upon.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SaviorBeeRad™ said:


> Live doesn't really matter sorry to break it to you


How does it not matter? If the show isn't live, lots of people wouldn't bother to even go online cause there'd be "spoilers" all over the internet.

And WWE talking about ____ trending worldwide, it'd be trending even more now cause you'd have dozens of thousands of more people talking about a certain topic the exact same time as rest of the world.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> 3.1 final rating


Not bad considering the lack of star power.


----------



## rjsbx1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> The NBA Playoffs was the night's top-rated cable program with a 1.8 adults 18-49 rating.WWE Raw and Teen Mom 2 tied for second Monday night with a 1.7 adults 18-49 rating . Raw was even with last week while Teen Mom 2 was up from a 1.6.
> 
> NBA PLAYOFFS: 1.8
> WWE Entertainment 10:00 PM: 1.7
> WWE Entertainment 9:00 PM: 1.7
> Teen Mom II: 1.7
> LOVE & HIP HOP ATLANTA: 1.5
> WWE Entertainment 8:00 PM: 1.5
> 
> tvbythenumbers
> 
> Once again very low first hour.


*I'm more shocked that people actually watch Teen Mom II. Goddammit, MTV.*


----------



## BlueRover

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yep. While we love to bash the WWE, just remember that people out there are watching stuff like "Teen Mom." Tons of Funk are Shakespearean creations compared to most of the stuff on reality Tv.


----------



## lil_miss_erica

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> 3.1 final rating


Where did you get that? 

The source I got said it was 3.07 (Second lowest rating of the year)

That was from pwtorch.

A lot of people like to say how WWE was the most watched show on TV on Monday like it's a big deal.

There are more shows on right now than there was years ago.. Just because you were the most watched show in that time slot, that fails to show that there are more people not watching your show.

NBC's the voice had a 4.1 rating Monday.. so what does that mean?
Howcome people still say that Raw was the most watched show if other shows had higher ratings and more viewers?


----------



## Dub

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



lil_miss_erica said:


> Where did you get that?
> 
> The source I got said it was 3.07 (Second lowest rating of the year)
> 
> That was from pwtorch.
> 
> A lot of people like to say how WWE was the most watched show on TV on Monday like it's a big deal.
> 
> There are more shows on right now than there was years ago.. Just because you were the most watched show in that time slot, that fails to show that there are more people not watching your show.
> 
> NBC's the voice had a 4.1 rating Monday.. so what does that mean?
> Howcome people still say that Raw was the most watched show if other shows had higher ratings and more viewers?


On CABLE is one of the most watched shows on Monday, and usually when its 3.06, 3.07, etc, the rating gets rounded up(3.1)


----------



## Mr Talley

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I always get depressed when I see the low ratings of Raw


----------



## lil_miss_erica

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Mr Talley said:


> I always get depressed when I see the low ratings of Raw


I don't.. for me it makes me think that things will change the more they go down.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Mr Talley said:


> I always get depressed when I see the low ratings of Raw


Sorry  you must have wwe stock. Ratings mean absolutely nothing to me on the other hand.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Depressed? lol. Seriously?


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



lil_miss_erica said:


> Where did you get that?
> 
> The source I got said it was 3.07 (Second lowest rating of the year)
> 
> That was from pwtorch.
> 
> A lot of people like to say how WWE was the most watched show on TV on Monday like it's a big deal.


on cable tv, network tv is completely different and free to millions of more homes than cable, being number one on cable any given night is a pretty big deal to the tv network, the only night of the week usa wins is monday, raw beat out both nba playoff games this past monday, now imagine if raw was broadcast in every bar across america, if wwe shared the backpages with the nba or if raw was built up on places like espn...


----------



## xdryza

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Mr Talley said:


> I always get depressed when I see the low ratings of Raw


Give people a reason to watch, and they'll watch. Its still kinda funny that it depresses you, lol. Let them worry about it.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I


> n the segment-by-segment, Ricardo Rodriguez vs. Zeb Colter vs. Big E Langston opened at a 3.10. Randy Orton vs. Cody Rhodes lost 10,000 viewers. Brie Bella vs. Naomi lost 136,000 viewers. An interesting note is the script for the show called for Nikki to be the one wrestling and Brie being the one who switched in for the pin, and the announcers called it Nikki and not Brie when they were talking about the match coming up next. The Shield interview, with 3MB coming out as well as Kane & Daniel Bryan coming out, gained 431,000 viewers to a 3.31 quarter at 9 p.m. Dolph Ziggler vs. Kofi Kingston lost 326,000 viewers. Backstage stuff as well as the promotional video building the Brock Lesnar vs. HHH match showing HHH pedigreeing Paul Heyman lost 175,000 viewers. Jack Swagger vs. Zack Ryder and the Mark Henry tug-of-war segment with Tensai and Brodus Clay gained 270,000 viewers. The reason the announcers brought up and were talking about a bullrope match and not a tug-of-war, is because the script listed this as a bullrope match. However, they must have been clued in on tug-of-war since they did their tug-of-war research and had notes, so I’m guessing they were told tug-of-war, did their research and notes, then were told later it was changed to a bullrope match (explaining why they talked about it and why it was in the script), and then it ended up a tug-of-war. Henry vs. Sheamus in a tug-of-war gained 102,000 viewers at 10 p.m., which is weak for the slot, which did a 3.21 quarter. Alberto Del Rio vs. Antonio Cesaro 408,000 viewers. The Fandango vs. Great Khali dance contest gained 44,000 viewers. John Cena & Bryan & Kane vs. The Shield in the main event gained 513,000 viewers, which is an average overrun, ending at 3.32.


-


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Did Rio gain or lose?


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

4.3 is right around where they always get. It's the same number they got last year at this time period. I'm not seeing the problem.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Jack Swagger vs. Zack Ryder and the *Mark Henry* tug-of-war segment with Tensai and Brodus Clay *gained 270,000 viewers*. *Henry* vs. Sheamus in a tug-of-war *gained 102,000 viewers *




LOL!


----------



## EternalFlameFilms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*










just thought this was interesting, wonder where 2013 will be for wwe


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Tug of War and Dance off with gains lol


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Did Rio gain or lose?


It lost, I looked on another site. Can't say I'm surprised, maybe WWE should mix it up and give Del Rio some new opponents?


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ChromeMan said:


> It lost, I looked on another site. Can't say I'm surprised, maybe WWE should mix it up and give Del Rio some new opponents?


Damn. And I am surprised none of the contenders for the triple threat touched one another's match.


----------



## Marcos 25063

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The wrestling fights lost views,But the dance contest won?
:bosh2


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> The reason the announcers brought up and were talking about a bullrope match and not a tug-of-war, is because the script listed this as a bullrope match. However, they must have been clued in on tug-of-war since they did their tug-of-war research and had notes, so I’m guessing they were told tug-of-war, did their research and notes, then were told later it was changed to a bullrope match (explaining why they talked about it and why it was in the script), and then it ended up a tug-of-war.


Holy shít this is the worst quality of writing by an author that I have ever read.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:fandango bringing on DEM RATINGZ. Push this guy!

:lol at AdR losing so many viewers. Stop pushing this guy. It is not working.

:adr


----------



## Quasi Juice

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I hoped they'd lay off Del Rio after WM but they keep pushing him, it's so boring and obviously not working. An ADR/Ricardo tag team run needs to happen, it would help ADR get over and we can finally see Ricardo do his thing in the ring.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

GOAT being in the two highest right segments of the night. Time to push him to the top.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I blame CM Punk! Oh, wait a second...

unk2 :lol


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> GOAT being in the two highest right segments of the night. Time to push him to the top.


Who? Ambrose? :cool2


----------



## Guy LeDouche

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quasi Juice said:


> I hoped they'd lay off Del Rio after WM but they keep pushing him, it's so boring and obviously not working. An ADR/Ricardo tag team run needs to happen, it would help ADR get over and we can finally see Ricardo do his thing in the ring.


That's actually a pretty good idea. The WWE could use a strong tag team for their pretty much nonexistent WWE tag team division. Team Hell NO will break up as a pairing eventually so a Del Rio/Ricardo tag pairing wouldn't hurt.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> GOAT being in the two highest right segments of the night. Time to push him to the top.


Bryan is probably the freshest guy in the company. He gets the loudest pop of the night despite being booked as a comedy figure. It's time to push him.


----------



## Nige™

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Bryan is probably the freshest guy in the company. He gets the loudest pop of the night despite being booked as a comedy figure. It's time to push him.


:yes


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Would love a DBRY push


----------



## WashingtonD

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Marcos 25063 said:


> The wrestling fights lost views,But the dance contest won?
> :bosh2


Wrestling matches have never drawn in history. Probably because they're always boring and predictable. This is why the Monday Night War era was such a success - because it was a time when wrestling was promo heavy, so people gave a shit about the characters.

I know when I was watching this episode of Raw, I lifted my head up to watch the dancing contest - because it was something out of the ordinary, not necessarily because it was good.


----------



## WashingtonD

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> I blame CM Punk! Oh, wait a second...
> 
> unk2 :lol


3.0 still > 2.2

:cena


----------



## WashingtonD

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



EternalFlameFilms said:


> just thought this was interesting, wonder where 2013 will be for wwe












FTFY


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



EternalFlameFilms said:


> just thought this was interesting, wonder where 2013 will be for wwe


would be better if someone actually gave the average in millions of viewers per year, using that chart it looks like wwe have lost alot of viewers since 2007 on average which isn't the case

2007 = 4.81 million viewers
2008 = 4.84 million viewers
2009 = 5.25 million viewers
2010 = 4.82 million viewers
2011 = 4.81 million viewers
2012 (pre raw 1000) = 4.54 million viewers

this is very interesting though, wwe are making 10 times as much money from tv today than back in 1999 

wwe tv revenue
2012 ... $139.5m ($88.9m domestic)
2011 ....$131.5m ($80.3m domestic)
2010 ....$127.0m ($81.6m domestic)
2009 ... $111.9m ($72.8m domestic)
2008 ....$100.7m ($63.5m domestic)
2007 ....$92.4m ($59.6m domestic)
2005 ....$81.5m ($53m domestic)
2004 ....$78m ($53.2m domestic)
2003 ....$71.1m ($48.3m domestic)
2002 ....$58.5m ($38.8m domestic)
2001 ....$53.3m ($35m domestic)
2000 ....$35.2m ($20.9m domestic) 
1999 ....$12.2m ($7.1m domestic)
1998 ....$9.1m ($5m domestic)


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Bryan is probably the freshest guy in the company. He gets the loudest pop of the night despite being booked as a comedy figure. It's time to push him.


They need to have team hell no lose the titles to the shield (rollins and reigns) then let kane turn heel to feud with DB (face). That way when that feud is done DB go move on to the WWE or WHC title. And I would do a face vs face if you had to go Cena vs DB. It would still work


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



birthday_massacre said:


> They need to have team hell no lose the titles to the shield (rollins and reigns) then let kane turn heel to feud with DB (face). That way when that feud is done DB go move on to the WWE or WHC title. And I would do a face vs face if you had to go Cena vs DB. It would still work


I'd be all for that. Would be something very fresh with Shield holding the tag titles, and a Bryan/Cena feud. Sign me up.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

ADR is pure viewership cancer. He loses hundreds of thousands of people whenever he wrestlers. 

Drop this "perro" down the card already.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quasi Juice said:


> I hoped they'd lay off Del Rio after WM but they keep pushing him, it's so boring and obviously not working. An ADR/Ricardo tag team run needs to happen, it would help ADR get over and we can finally see Ricardo do his thing in the ring.


I like that idea. Could be a good team for Shield to feud with after they win the Tag titles at ER. I mean, who else are they going to feud with after Hell No?


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Bryan is probably the freshest guy in the company. He gets the loudest pop of the night despite being booked as a comedy figure. It's time to push him.


I have no doubt in my mind that if Bryan were given half the push CM Punk received this past year the ratings would be higher and Bryan would be over far more than Punk is now, but it will never happen. Vince prefers bodybuilders over work horses. And so Vince will keep Cena at the top and everyone else in a holding pattern with an occasional tryout for a Ryback (who will fail miserably) until the next Batista comes along. If Batista came back tomorrow does anyone really doubt for a second CM Punk would be bumped from his number 2 spot over night?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^TBH, I think Bryan's a special case, in where the fact he's been mis-treated as caused his long-time fans to support him more and more, and with the comedy gimmick he's had it's led him to getting WWE's current target audience, kids, to get on his side as well. I wonder where he'd really be as over as he is now if he got the push Punk got? Maybe now if he got it, but back in late 2011-early 2012? I wouldn't put money on it.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> ^TBH, I think Bryan's a special case, in where the fact he's been mis-treated as caused his long-time fans to support him more and more, and with the comedy gimmick he's had it's led him to getting WWE's current target audience, kids, to get on his side as well. I wonder where he'd really be as over as he is now if he got the push Punk got? Maybe now if he got it, but back in late 2011-early 2012? I wouldn't put money on it.


May have to read over it one more time, but it seems about right.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Shield holding things together. Nice to see them get the spotlight, they more than deserve it. Cena/Ryback is doing well so far too. Not masses of hype surrounding the product right now but they're steady enough. I'd say 4.5 million viewers a week is what they should be aiming for from now until the summer but the occasional dip is going to happen every now and then. So long as they stay over 4 million for now I think they'll be happy because they are most certainly going to be dipping below that when we reach the end of the year as things take a dip before the RTWM begins again.


----------



## Prayer Police

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The camera is already close, brah.


----------



## sizor

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> GOAT being in the two highest right segments of the night. Time to push him to the top.


this^
GOAT deserves better than this comic hing.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> I have no doubt in my mind that if Bryan were given half the push CM Punk received this past year the ratings would be higher and Bryan would be over far more than Punk is now, but it will never happen. Vince prefers bodybuilders over work horses. And so Vince will keep Cena at the top and everyone else in a holding pattern with an occasional tryout for a Ryback (who will fail miserably) until the next Batista comes along. If Batista came back tomorrow does anyone really doubt for a second CM Punk would be bumped from his number 2 spot over night?


Bumping Punk over a guy who probably would only do a few matches and not even show up to half the Raws? Yeah, not gonna happen.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_70436.shtml#.UYkp6b_3DfY



> -- Monday's WWE Raw hit a year-low in Social Media Activity for the second consecutive week. Raw scored 195,239, according to Trendrr.TV, down four percent from last week's year-low score.
> 
> Raw is now entering territory of scoring lower than a handful of two-hour Raw episodes in 2012 prior to the expansion to three-hour shows.
> 
> On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #4 in social activity behind two NBA Playoffs games and "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" on VH1. The #4 rank ties for the lowest of the year.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:cena :HHH :ryback





unk2


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

SAVE_US PHILLIP_BROOKS

unk5


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:cena3 save us all.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 1 - 3.97 million
Hour 2 - 3.87 million
Hour 3 - 3.91 million

Average - 3.92 miilion

Top rated cable viewership was Bulls - Heat Game 1 ( average 5.5 million viewers). (Great Game BTW)


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

God's speed CM Punk, God's speed.


----------



## kendalag

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Hour 1 - 3.97 million
> Hour 2 - 3.87 million
> Hour 3 - 3.91 million
> 
> Average - 3.92 miilion
> 
> Top rated cable viewership was Bulls - Heat Game 1 ( average 5.5 million viewers). (Great Game BTW)


Wow, that is simply awful. Better push John Cena even more. :lmao Demo was down to 1.3 to 1.4, from 1.7 a few weeks ago. Those 5 million viewer hours are looking like a distant memory. It's like this repeating cycle ... decent build to WM ... fall off a cliff in the months following.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So maybe now we can finally cut out the whole "DURR PUNK KILLZ DA RATINGZ!" crap. I mean the numbers are even more awful considering they had Lesnar/Heyman/HHH advertised, specifically with the whole HQ invasion thing. Terrible, and we aren't even through ER yet.


----------



## kendalag

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> So maybe now we can finally cut out the whole "DURR PUNK KILLZ DA RATINGZ!" crap. I mean the numbers are even more awful considering they had Lesnar/Heyman/HHH advertised, specifically with the whole HQ invasion thing. Terrible, and we aren't even through ER yet.


It's not one person in particular killing that ratings ... it's the show just sucking as a whole. People are squashed before getting titles ... then they expect them to draw in viewers as champions ... everyone has to lie down to the one true god John Cena ... and before doing so, he buries every aspect of their character ... same thing Triple H does. Lesnar destroys his office and terrorizes a few people ... his response is essentially, who gives a shit ... and proceeds to bury Heyman & Lesnar. 

The only thing the writers having going correctly now is Shield. They win every week ... and very rarely look weak. SHOCKING that they are an interesting group for fans to show interest in. 

However, nothing really matters on this show, so why should viewers tune in each week.

Fandango & Jericho in a dance off next week. SMELL THE RATINGS !!!


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Hour 1 - 3.97 million
> Hour 2 - 3.87 million
> Hour 3 - 3.91 million
> 
> Average - 3.92 miilion
> 
> Top rated cable viewership was Bulls - Heat Game 1 ( average 5.5 million viewers). (Great Game BTW)


:vince4


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Fuck, they need to take the belt of Punk fast.


----------



## Awesome22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Too much good stuff on TV and Raw is boring.


----------



## kendalag

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Awesome22 said:


> Too much good stuff on TV and Raw is boring.


Ding, Ding, Ding ... the RIGHT answer. Well, not necessarily that too much good stuff on tv, but Raw is boring right now and I have a hard time watching.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kendalag said:


> It's not one person in particular killing that ratings ... it's the show just sucking as a whole. People are squashed before getting titles ... then they expect them to draw in viewers as champions ... everyone has to lie down to the one true god John Cena ... and before doing so, he buries every aspect of their character ... same thing Triple H does. Lesnar destroys his office and terrorizes a few people ... his response is essentially, who gives a shit ... and proceeds to bury Heyman & Lesnar.
> 
> The only thing the writers having going correctly now is Shield. They win every week ... and very rarely look weak. SHOCKING that they are an interesting group for fans to show interest in.
> 
> However, nothing really matters on this show, so why should viewers tune in each week.
> 
> Fandango & Jericho in a dance off next week. SMELL THE RATINGS !!!


You're preaching to the choir, buddy.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That damn CM Punk is a ratings killer...

Oh wait...

What's the excuse now? unk2


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Awesome22 said:


> Too much good stuff on TV and Raw is boring.


Totally. I got so into the Warriors/Spurs game that I decided to stay on that channel and watch the finish of the game. It was so entertaining and much more enjoyable to watch than what I was seeing on RAW.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Under 4 million? Time to take the belt of the part time plumber vanilla midget John Cena. He needs to go back to wrestling in high school gyms.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why do they push Cena so much? He's gone over everyone including legends like Triple H, HBK and even _THE ROCK_! He's had countless title reigns and he's the main focus of every show, yet RAW can barely do 4 million viewers these days.

He didn't start a boom period and the company is clearly less popular with him at the top, but he's treated like a God. Why?


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Is Vince going to worry much about the Ratings though?


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



RatedR10 said:


> That damn CM Punk is a ratings killer...
> 
> Oh wait...
> 
> What's the excuse now? unk2


People preferred watching :noah & :bron going at it. You want to see OVACOMING TEH ODDZ, watch the Chicago Bulls, not Cena's bullshit injury excuse and facing a guy who hasn't won a ppv match since like last summer.

Let's be honest, :rose3 sitting on the bench in a suit & tie is more interesting than most of the stuff on Raw these days.


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dec_619 said:


> Is Vince going to worry much about the Ratings though?


I highly doubt it.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.9 final rating


----------



## ric6y

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.9 no comment


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yikes. They need to push MORE main event people at this time. The Shield is good, but more is needed.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.9 YEAHHHH SON


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> 2.9 final rating


It'll hover around this mark i'd say. What was the lowest we got last year, was it a 2.5?


----------



## Teh_TaKeR

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lol @ 2.9 rating. TAKE THE BELT OFF PUNK!!! Oh wait.... unk2

Where are your excuses now?


----------



## etched Chaos

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dec_619 said:


> It'll hover around this mark i'd say. What was the lowest we got last year, was it a 2.5?


It's dropping from week to week and there is no sign of that slide slowing.


----------



## sonicslash

People watched because of punk. punk garnered average rating while competing with Monday night football and without him the nba playoffs are killing raw. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good. I hope it continues to slide until they put a good product out.


----------



## virus21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol this is probably why Rock left after they refused to turn Cena.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

For those who wanna shoot their load, don't just yet as these numbers are still above what they got for the second half of 2012. (where they got 2.7 mostly)

That said, I don't even care about who draws at this point, I'm glad whenever they do bad numbers because the shows are just horrible.

GET THE BELT BACK ON THE ROCK! :rock4


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*


----------



## The Hardcore Show

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> Why do they push Cena so much? He's gone over everyone including legends like Triple H, HBK and even _THE ROCK_! He's had countless title reigns and he's the main focus of every show, yet RAW can barely do 4 million viewers these days.
> 
> He didn't start a boom period and the company is clearly less popular with him at the top, but he's treated like a God. Why?


Because he's the only guy that can hold up WWE's PC/PG image. No one else can do that not Orton Sheamus Danielson Punk. WWE after the Benoit tragedy became an image obsessed company so they can't be blamed the next something like that happens and John Cena is the one guy that can represent that whole family friendly never give up/be a star image that Vince & Stephanie feel is right for business.


----------



## xdryza

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.9 rating, you say? Where are the Punk haters now? It's only gonna get lower.


----------



## JigsawKrueger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just give Mark Henry the freaking WWE Championship Vince.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Amazing how the myth is John Cena is the only draw in WWE. He has the title back right? Ratings probably arent that bad when you look at who they were up against :bron2


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.9? :lmao


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not surprised. Cena isn't THAT big of a draw anymore.


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Obviously being a non-Murican' basketball isn't exactly a sport i watch very often, but Raw was boring the shit out of me so i turned it over out of curiosity. Safe to say it was a hell of a lot more enjoyable than anything i'd seen on Raw last night. 

See this is what John Cena does to a person, i'll be watching Baseball next.:delrio


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh look how bad the ratings are, looks like giving Cena the belt was a bad idea!!! 

Not that I actually think its his fault. But this is just for you idiot Cena marks who were blaming Punk for the low ratings last year. How do you like it when this same idiotic argument is used against you? 

The product needs to be improved. Build up some more legitimate stars! Stop jobbing your WHC, IC, US, and tag team champions on a nightly basis.


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bring back HLA


----------



## TrentBarretaFan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Give Mark "Ratings" Henry WWE Championship!


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.9 is only the start, in September it can be worse than last year. At least last year the 3 hour concept was relatively fresh, this year when it's already unbearable can affect the audience even more.


----------



## Chan Hung

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



I-Am-DashingRKO said:


> :vince4


:lmao classic gifs!!

you know..this shit doesn't surprise me with wwe tv being crap lately..they deserve shit ratings :lol


----------



## Dash24

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> 2.9 final rating


YESSSS

I haven't been watching Raw but reading the recaps, I can already tell its shit. Hopefully more ratings like this will push WWE to put the belt on someone else. 

As far Cena not being a ratings draw anymore: does anyone recall a year or two ago when they hotshot the title between John Cena and Del Rio for a couple months hoping it would cause a boost in ratings and in the end it didn't (not sure if ratings were actually worse during the span)?


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Do people really think that's a bad rating nowadays? It's pretty much expected. WWE was barely drawing 3.5 with The Rock as the WWE Champion, an all-time great during the hottest season of the year, and with Lesnar, Taker and Triple H as additional support cast. Lesnar barely appears now and even if he does it doesn't matter cause the feud with Triple H is terrible, Rock is gone, no Taker and no hype for anything. You need to compare the numbers to PRE-WM Season and you'll realize that anything 2.7 and up isn't bad by WWE 2012-2013 Standards anymore. I'm pretty sure WWE will hit several 2.5s and under this year, the ratings just started dropping and they will continue to drop a while until they stablize hovering around 2.7-2.9s. The days of 3.0s beeing considered bad, or even average are gone, in 2013 a 3.0 is a success and a high drawing show.


----------



## alliance

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

i dont have hope in wwe doing any damn thing right, just a bunch of failures, and i dont mean just ratings wise the product is sooooooooooooooo boring and SUCH a chore to watch man,


----------



## peowulf

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The show is bad no matter who the champion is. Being a "draw" as a champion doesn't mean a whole lot when nothing interesting happens.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT DRAW. :cena4

:vince5


:lmao

What a couple of douche-nozzles those two are.

And yes, I know it's not _all_ one guy. But shit, literally every other champion past and present got shit on when ratings were down, so, fair is fair.


----------



## Avon Barksdale

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SJFC said:


> Obviously being a non-Murican' basketball isn't exactly a sport i watch very often, but Raw was boring the shit out of me so i turned it over out of curiosity. Safe to say it was a hell of a lot more enjoyable than anything i'd seen on Raw last night.
> 
> See this is what John Cena does to a person, i'll be watching Baseball next.:delrio


Do it osey2


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



xdryza said:


> 2.9 rating, you say? Where are the Punk haters now? It's only gonna get lower.


Didn't Punk get 2.2 ratings? I'd say this is still a step up.

Anyway, no Rock=no care. I haven't watched since he left.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ChromeMan said:


> People preferred watching :noah & :bron going at it. You want to see OVACOMING TEH ODDZ, watch the Chicago Bulls, not Cena's bullshit injury excuse and facing a guy who hasn't won a ppv match since like last summer.
> 
> Let's be honest, :rose3 sitting on the bench in a suit & tie is more interesting than most of the stuff on Raw these days.


I agree with this guy. My Bulls are overcoming odds & proving the naysayers wrong every night with their passionate play.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> Didn't Punk get 2.2 ratings? I'd say this is still a step up.


:lmao Poor Punk marks. Even while bragging they come off retarded.


I'm suprised Bork Laser going extreme on an obviously fake ass office didn't draw though.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> :lmao Poor Punk marks. Even while bragging they come off retarded.


:lmao Poor Punk haters. Don't even know what the average ratings were during Punk's reign.


----------



## dan the marino

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Better bring The Rock back ASAP, that'll fix everything. :vince3


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This time last year Raw did a 3.1 rating.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I knew it after WM that the ratings will fall back to where they were around the end of last year.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> :lmao Poor Punk haters. Don't even know what the average ratings were during Punk's reign.


You're right. It was a 2.3 back in October of 2012. :lmao

A) Push D-Bryan. He's one of a small few actually getting a reaction at this point.
B) Turn CENA heel. I get that Vince doesn't wanna lose the good PR from Make a Wish, but what good is that PR if no one is watching his product, or buying the merch and PPVs?


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk does not equal ratings. Fact is product was not that good when he was champ, and its def. not good now.

And the ratings show that.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> You're right. It was a 2.3 back in October of 2012. :lmao


:lmao

Poor Punk haters. Still don't know the average rating for Raw back then.

Don't worry, I'll help using your example, October 2012:

Oct 1- 2.54
Oct 8- 2.8
Oct 15- 2.81
Oct 22- 2.48
Oct 29- 2.95

Average= 2.71, certainly no 2.3.

And with the way it's looking, ratings will be lower than that by the time October 2013 rolls around unless a guy like Rock, Lesnar, or Taker gets the title.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



GOD said:


> Punk does not equal ratings.


Very few main eventers pop a rating, and even then it is only for a matter of time. Hogan did for a while, then SCSA did, then the Rock....etc. I'm a huge Jericho mark, but I wouldn't for a second con myself or others into believing he was a ratings king. I wish Punk marks did the same. Punk never has popped a rating. His supporters would do well to remember that when comparing him to the greats of all time.



Gamblor said:


> Oct 1- 2.54


This is the show I was referring to. Dunno where you got that number, but the one I saw for that date was 2.3 something. That was the show that cost Brian Gerwitz his spot at (not so) creative.


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Drop in ratings isn't a surprise, nor is it indicative of much besides the loss of The Rock. Ratings were expectedly going to drop after he was no longer around to carry the show, and now it's happening.



chronoxiong said:


> Totally. I got so into the Warriors/Spurs game that I decided to stay on that channel and watch the finish of the game. It was so entertaining and much more enjoyable to watch than what I was seeing on RAW.


I agree completely. That was a fantastic game, at least at the end once the Warriors started to choke and the Spurs finally shook off the rust.



sonicslash said:


> People watched because of punk punk garnered average rating while competing with Monday night football and without him the nba playoffs are killing raw.


That's not a very good argument man. You're attaching very undue and credit to Punk that has no facts supporting it. Punk was getting all time low ratings the longer his push went. Ratings dropped significantly and stayed there every single time he retained his title at a PPV until The Rock came back. Look at the ratings list, that's the pattern.

Punk would not help the ratings now, he would only hurt them. If they were dropping that much with the title on him, exactly how would him being on the show and god forbid already be going for the title already help at all? Even less people would be watching. Fans would be faced with a choice of Cena or a guy who is arguably even worse than Cena.

When faced with such a shitty choice, people aren't going to stick around. That would only keep around drama queen Punk marks. . . which based on the ratings aren't very many people. More people are still watching than they did during Punk's reign post-Rock/Lesnar. And that's despite them choking out interest in most angles with The Shield being ram-rodded into them and being forced over everyone, and them bastardizing their most over wrestler (after Punk and Cena) by turning him heel for no reason rather than try to work angles with him as a face.


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just realized this entire thread is a facade for a Punk marks vs Cena marks debate LOL


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Time to change the champion. Go in a new direction, perhaps? Someone _alittle_ more fresh, maybe? :vince4

Everytime John Cena cuts a terribly cheesy promo on Raw (like to open the show this week) alittle bit of the company's illustrious history dies alittle bit.

On second thought, color me shocked that the Cena opening cheesy promo didn't help lure the audience in the for the night. How could that _not_ happen? :cena4


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AmWolves10 said:


> Just realized this entire thread is a facade for a Punk marks vs Cena marks debate LOL


That is all this forum really is. Half the threads are about people who are not even on the show every week.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

We all know CM Punk drew poor ratings. People obviously wanted to see Cena and the like more than they did Punk, but that was _over a year ago_. Ever since his heel turn and feud with The Rock, he's been gaining good numbers. 

It was the first time people had seen a top babyface WWE champion who wasn't John Cena in a long time, fans were skeptical, but he's proven himself since then and he's grown at a steady pace. 

Nobody on the main roster working below main event level would draw big numbers, so picking on Punk is utterly pointless. Think of any mid-carder right now, and honestly tell me they'd do better than 2.3 (or whatever it was) if put into the main event scene and given a run with the WWE title.


----------



## BKelly237

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

How the hell do people expect Punk to improve ratings when he's a heel? Was Stone Cold a ratings magnet when he was feuding with Bret Hart, or when he was the Ringmaster? Aww Hell NO. Punk was there to put the babyface over (Cena, Ryback, Rock, Undertaker). If you're gonna blame the ratings on somebody, blame the superstars WWE pushes the fans to get behind.


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> We all know CM Punk drew poor ratings. People obviously wanted to see Cena and the like more than they did Punk, but that was _over a year ago_. Ever since his heel turn and feud with The Rock, he's been gaining good numbers.
> 
> It was the first time people had seen a top babyface WWE champion who wasn't John Cena in a long time, fans were skeptical, but he's proven himself since then and he's grown at a steady pace.
> 
> Nobody on the main roster working below main event level would draw big numbers, so picking on Punk is utterly pointless. Think of any mid-carder right now, and honestly tell me they'd do better than 2.3 (or whatever it was) if put into the main event scene and given a run with the WWE title.


Not to mention Cena was the main event during Punk's entire title reign, therefore if you want to put the blame for the ratings during that time period on any individual it would be him. And when Punk finally started main eventing instead of Cena, the numbers improved a lot. And yes, I know that that coincided with the Rock returning.


----------



## SpeedStick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RAW suck , 3 hours? No Midcard? Bad Commentators? Why is this shit still going on


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Are people forgetting that CM Punk and Ryback were the two guys that consistently gained viewers in their segments during the second half of 2012? Both of them did it in all different time slots as well. The blame should never be put on one wrestler. We live in a world where even The Rock can't bring in these incredibly high standards people have for ratings.


----------



## lil_miss_erica

Loudness said:


> Do people really think that's a bad rating nowadays? \


yes, when other shows on television get much higher ratings, it's a bad rating.

WWE is in the "entertainment" business, that means they are competing with everything on television.

WWE will try to say top show on "cable" but there are so many channels which are not considered to be "cable"

and one or two wrestlers will not = ratings... do people who think that, forget the show is 3 hours?

If CM Punk is on the show for 20 minutes, he is only one the show for 13.33 percent of the show 11.11 percent if you count commercials.. don't forget the the other 86 percent of the show is not cm punk..

just because cm punk is or not the champ, does not mean people will watch the entire show. They may just watch that one segment that he is in.

to get good ratings for the show, you need an overal good product. something wwe does not have now.

WWE needs to bring back "crash tv"


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

At the end of the day, the biggest draw in the WWE is the WWE brand name itself. The rating suck because the company sucks. Nothing to do with anybody on or not on the show. Vince and his Hollywood writing staff are creatively bankrupt. Once the NFL season starts we may be looking at Raw potentially doing less than that 2.3 or whatever it was last year.


----------



## lil_miss_erica

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

and one small segment does not affect the overall rating.. the entire show affects the entire rating.
as soon as it gets boring they change the channel..

why should the person in the main event be blamed for people switching the channel and finding something better when they see fandago dancing?


----------



## Farnham the Drunk

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> Are people forgetting that CM Punk and Ryback were the two guys that consistently gained viewers in their segments during the second half of 2012? Both of them did it in all different time slots as well. The blame should never be put on one wrestler. We live in a world where even The Rock can't bring in these incredibly high standards people have for ratings.


Nobody can blame Punk now, lol


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> *You're right. It was a 2.3 back in October of 2012.* :lmao
> 
> A) Push D-Bryan. He's one of a small few actually getting a reaction at this point.
> B) Turn CENA heel. I get that Vince doesn't wanna lose the good PR from Make a Wish, but what good is that PR if no one is watching his product, or buying the merch and PPVs?


LOL wut? is this true?


----------



## lil_miss_erica

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fatcat said:


> At the end of the day, the biggest draw in the WWE is the WWE brand name itself. The rating suck because the company sucks. Nothing to do with anybody on or not on the show. Vince and his Hollywood writing staff are creatively bankrupt. Once the NFL season starts we may be looking at Raw potentially doing less than that 2.3 or whatever it was last year.


EXACTLY!


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I can't wait to see what numbers Punk puts up when he returns, I wouldn't be shocked if he's the top full time draw they have now.


----------



## antdvda

WashingtonD said:


> FTFY


I know there were a lot more variables at the time but GOD DAMN give Austin some props for being able to pull that off. 

Looking at it retrospectively just shows how much of a special wrestler he was. 

Like I said, there were a lot more variables that contributed to that spike but Austin was the main reason.

Simply amazing...


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WashingtonD's graph pretty much sums it up. It doesn't matter who you push ratings are going down until the market for wrestling rises.

It's why you gotta have everyone rolling. It's a shame that guys like Orton, Sheamus, Bryan, Miz, Del Rio, and Swagger are directionless after title pushes. Completely devalues the belt when half the roster is former champ and nobodies championship over.

Really it seems like people are solely chasing Cena's top spot and anything less than that makes you irrelevant. You can't make stars under those conditions.


----------



## The People's Champ

*How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

Just read about how this was the lowest ratings for RAW and SD this year, and basically i wish they would continue to sink...but im sure by next week itll be back up to over 3.0 in some manner. But if it were to continue to sink, im sure something would be done but what exactly is a plausible scenario? 

If lets say the ratings finally got to that point, what exactly would Vince do? Would he just continue on as normal and figure things would change? Or do you guys feel something might actually be done to better the product if it were to really get down in the ratings?


----------



## WWE

Well to be fair last night had heat vs bulls and a very intense match up with the spurs and warriors. But then again I don't care about the ratings. They'll get their shit together. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## 11Shareef

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

Well the product has been very tame and save lately. They haven't really given us anything to be excited about. They need to shake things up a little.


----------



## Schrute_Farms

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

There is a good sporting event every week, NFL Monday Night Football for 17 weeks, NBA playoffs for 2 months. Not a valid excuse.


----------



## Stone Cold Steve Urkel

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

If Vince is still making the money, then the show will continue the way it's going.


----------



## The People's Champ

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

But what would be a shakeup to you guys that would work, or that you feel would work?


----------



## dxbender

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

Regardless if Raw gets 5.5M or 3.5M, they're still one of the most watched cable tv shows out there on monday nights, so unless 4M suddenly becomes like 10-20th of all cable tv shows, nothing will change. Don't get why people bash WWE getting 4M viewers anyways, when you compare it to all other cable tv shows, 4M is better than 99% of them.


----------



## etched Chaos

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Hardcore Show said:


> Because he's the only guy that can hold up WWE's PC/PG image. No one else can do that not Orton Sheamus Danielson Punk. WWE after the Benoit tragedy became an image obsessed company so they can't be blamed the next something like that happens and John Cena is the one guy that can represent that whole family friendly never give up/be a star image that Vince & Stephanie feel is right for business.


He's so PG he cheated on his wife with a pornstar...


----------



## Terminus

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

Low 1.0 range


----------



## Chrome

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

Probably under a 2.0 or something.


----------



## fulcizombie

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I never understood the theory that the ratings are on the shoulders of the champ. Its the whole product that is out of touch with what the mainstream wants . The world is going forward and the wwe has done a half-assed return to eighties, without having someone as charismatic as hulk hogan . Of course it was stupid to blame CMpunk (whose reign was awful anyway, IMO) but it's also not cena's fault that the ratings are what they are even though one could argue that what cena represents has brought wwe to the irrelevant company that they are today .


----------



## Evolution

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Considering Punk wasn't closing shows or even opening them most of the time while he was champion throughout 2012 I think blaming him for the overall rating of the show is unfair.

He did consistent gains for the night in his segments too, it's just a shame the rest of the product was utter shit and was doing dives around him. He and Ryback salvaged the ratings to average out to what they are...

Also: RATINGZ!


----------



## Bob-Carcass

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

i personally dont think they care that much as long as they sell merch and full up arenas they'll continue in this vein. the only thing that would make the wwe change for the better is competition, e.g. tna becomes huge and are getting more viewers than them. Which unfortunately wont happen, too many kids love the product now.


----------



## FourWinds

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*



Bob-Carcass said:


> i personally dont think they care that much as long as they sell merch and full up arenas they'll continue in this vein. the only thing that would make the wwe change for the better is competition, e.g. tna becomes huge and are getting more viewers than them. Which unfortunately wont happen, too many kids love the product now.


Pretty much this. Vince won't do a thing unless he feels threatened and backed into a corner. As of today, there really isn't anyone in the wrestling world that can touch him or his company. TNA can't do it, they don't have the almost unlimited funding that Ted Turner provided to WCW to snipe talent out from under Vince's hands. 

The arenas are still filling up, merch is still being bought by the truckload I imagine, so there really isn't anything to shake the WWE out of its torpor that its gotten into due to having no dangerous competition for over a decade.


----------



## Rayfu

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

Guys they are not low, please compile a list of shows on mondays that beat raw in raitings then come talk to me


----------



## FourWinds

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*



Rayfu said:


> Guys they are not low, please compile a list of shows on mondays that beat raw in raitings then come talk to me


Who said we wanted to talk to you?


----------



## Chris90

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

To the point of negative financial effects. But there are so many WWE sheep that they will rake in the merch and ppv buys to keep them going until... whenever.


----------



## Monterossa

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

everything Cena does on the latest show was terrible. I blame him.


----------



## Culebra75

A lot of Other shows on tv wish they were getting 3 million viewers a week or better


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Quintana

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

The lower rating was likely expected, they would have to lose a significant amount of viewers to even be alarmed. Even then I don't know that it would matter, as long as they're one of the top shows during their time slot, and USA Network is happy they probably don't care.


----------



## Sonny Crockett

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

What to do?They need to do something new and fresh and what's most important CREATIVE and SURPRISING.Then people will start to give a damn about what's going on.Make some young talent wwe champion Cody Rhodes or someone from The Shield for example.Make some controversial segments,angles like this with Brock destroying HHH's office.And for fucksake get rid of this goddamn dance!This is world WRESTLING entertainment not world dancing entertainment.


----------



## Fabregas

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fatcat said:


> At the end of the day, the biggest draw in the WWE is the WWE brand name itself. The rating suck because the company sucks. Nothing to do with anybody on or not on the show. Vince and his Hollywood writing staff are creatively bankrupt. Once the NFL season starts we may be looking at Raw potentially doing less than that 2.3 or whatever it was last year.


This.

Sadly the WWE probably won't care much about a 2.9 rating. It's when the ratings do get down to that low 2 area that they might actually feel pressured to make the product better.


----------



## The People's Champ

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

The point isnt that they are still getting decent ratings, its that the show used to get 5.0+ and 4.0+ regularly during the attitude era, that is when things were awesome. So i compare it to that and how it seems so low in comparison.

What ill never understand is why even with the PG rating cant we get some better writing, or like people have said something shocking, or twists and turns.


----------



## Rayfu

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*



The People's Champ said:


> *The point isnt that they are still getting decent ratings, its that the show used to get 5.0+ and 4.0+ regularly during the attitude era, that is when things were awesome. So i compare it to that and how it seems so low in comparison.
> *
> What ill never understand is why even with the PG rating cant we get some better writing, or like people have said something shocking, or twists and turns.


But no show, no matter how awsome, gets that anymore, raitings are out of date, they cant see who watches the show if its not on tv and live

with dvr's, online playing, and many more soruces I'd be surpised if the raitings show even half the pepole who watched it


----------



## Chan Hung

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*



The People's Champ said:


> Just read about how this was the lowest ratings for RAW and SD this year, and basically i wish they would continue to sink...but im sure by next week itll be back up to over 3.0 in some manner. But if it were to continue to sink, im sure something would be done but what exactly is a plausible scenario?
> 
> If lets say the ratings finally got to that point, what exactly would Vince do? Would he just continue on as normal and figure things would change? Or do you guys feel something might actually be done to better the product if it were to really get down in the ratings?


This is likely Vince's response :lmao

"It's not that we have a bad quality product or repetitive matches, we give our audience must see TV. Look at what money we made after that amazing Road to Wrestlmania. Reason our ratings is low is simply due to basketball for the time being!" :vince


----------



## The People's Champ

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

I think thats the thing that drives me nuts, as much as i want to rip my own skin off when i see Sheamus anymore, or when i see Brodus and Tensai dancing..... i cant seem to just walk away from it completely. Its more or less me hoping every week something changes, but it never does.

Vince has our balls in a vice.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

change what exactly, raw did a 1.86 rating on the road to mania 13 in march 1997 and vince continued doing what he was doing, raw did a 1.75 rating in october 1996 with an austin vs hbk main event and 18 months later that match would main event mania 14, wwe raw continues to occupy the top 10 most watched cables shows of the week http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ership-for-the-week-ending-may-5-2013/181310/


----------



## Felipe Yoshio

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

Let's face it: most of the people doesn't like wrestling nowadays. :/


----------



## R. Silver

*Re: How low do ratings have to go until something big changes? And what to do?*

The ratings are decent. I mean we are in 2013 after all. You can't expect people to watch TV when they can stream and shit.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ouch. Thought they would have been able to hover around the 4.5 million viewer mark for a while but obviously not. A 2.9 in May isn't good, especially when you know things are only going to go down. By the time we hit Sept - Dec they very well could be looking at overall numbers in the 2.3 to 2.5 range which will probably scare them. 2.9 isn't good but it isn't disastrous either. If they dip lower though then I guess it really becomes a question of whether having the third hour and the money they make from it is a better deal than cutting back down to 2 so they can up the ratings and make money off that. None of us are in a position to speak on that but I imagine that will be the main question in Vince's mind if this keeps up and things continue to drop. There's also the fact that they have this new half hour pre-show with Yahoo starting in the summer. The WWE product is completely over-saturated. They have content everywhere which comes with it's positive and negatives. Maybe the pre-show is their way of testing the waters for a possible way out of the 3 hour Raw's. I'm sure they're getting money from Yahoo for the content and maybe that's enough to cancel out the money they get from the third hour of Raw on TV. That would open up the door to cut back down to 2 hours with the Yahoo pre-show to end up with 2.5 hours of Raw every week. Just a thought. 

On the Cena front, John Cena is a draw and anybody saying otherwise is being silly. But, and there is a but, I don't think it's a secret that his ability to draw purely on his name alone works to the degree that it used to. Cena vs. Lashley in 2007 is not Cena vs. Ryback in 2013 if that makes sense. They can't just stick him with anybody and expect it to work miracles any more. I also think that Cena winning the title, absolutely nothing changing and WWE going back to square one with him at the top of the baby face mountain has hurt them. They're still in the mindset of turning others and changing everything to fit around a face John Cena rather than changing the actual problem in Cena himself. But it is what it is.

They have Brock Lesnar and Triple H at their disposal and they don't advertise or apparently use them either which doesn't help matters. I suspect they'll go all out next week as a final big sell for the PPV next Sunday.

I'm not even touching the Punk stuff. You can't argue with delusion and Punk marks, well....I'll say no more.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> This is the show I was referring to. Dunno where you got that number, but the one I saw for that date was 2.3 something. That was the show that cost Brian Gerwitz his spot at (not so) creative.


He got it from the Observer, of course. The big question is where you got your number? Not letting facts get in the way of telling your story, right?


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

There just isn't a whole lot going for Raw after WrestleMania right now. The extended gap from Mania to Extreme Rules is necessary if WWE wants to sell more PPVs, but it's hurting the TV product with WWE stretching to fill three hours of TV without a PPV to lead into or follow up on. Raw was definitely hurt by the head-to-head NBA Playoffs game staying very competitive until the end featuring the star-driven Miami Heat and the big-wrestling-market Chicago Bulls.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Raw on 5/6 did its worst ratings so far this year, doing a 2.89 rating and 3.92 million viewers.
> 
> The major reason for the downturn was going head-to-head with strong NBA playoff games on TNT. The Chicago Bulls vs. Miami Heat, featuring the league’s best drawing team and biggest drawing star, LeBron James, went against the first two hours of Raw. That game did a 4.15 rating and 5.54 million viewers. They kept the audience late night for the Golden State Warriors vs. San Antonio Spurs game which did 4.14 rating and 5.46 million viewers. Raw was third for the night on cable.
> 
> The show did a 1.8 in Male teenagers (down 22% from last week), a 2.3 in Males 18-49 (down 12%), 0.8 in Girl teens (up 60%) and 0.9 in Women 18-34 (down 25%). The audience was 69.6% male.
> 
> There was interest in the show at the start, and it faded. The first segment, with John Cena and Ryback setting up the stipulations for their Extreme Rules match, did a 3.29 first quarter. Randy Orton vs. Damien Sandow lost 725,000 viewers, including 19% of all Males 18-49 tuning out during the match. The Chris Jericho interview gained 124,000 viewers. Fandango vs. R-Truth lost 146,000 viewers, down to a 2.74 quarter. Dolph Ziggler vs. Alberto Del Rio at 9 p.m. gained 228,000 viewers to a to a 2.91. The Shield vs. Uso Brothers & Kofi Kingston lost 206,000 viewers. Antonio Cesaro vs. Zack Ryder gained 26,000 viewers. The star segment of the show was Brock Lesnar destroying HHH’s office in Stamford, CT, and then a Paul Heyman/HHH verbal battle, which gained 899,000 viewers at 10 p.m. and the rating was boosted to a 3.44. The boost was almost entirely male, as male teens grew 35% during the segment and Males 18-49 drew 38%. Kaitlyn & Cameron & Naomi vs. Bella Twins & A.J. Lee lost 921,000 viewers, with drops of 17% among teenage boys and 21% in Males 18-49. Mark Henry/Sheamus confrontation and Sheamus vs. Wade Barrett gained 146,000 viewers. Ryback vs. Kane and the post-match with Daniel Bryan, John Cena and The Shield gained 163,000 viewers, weak for a main event, and did a 2.99 overrun.


Wrestling Observer Newsletter


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Great 10PM gain. Largest of the year, and overall one of the best 10PM numbers of the year, the best since Taker+Hell No vs. The Shield from a couple of weeks ago. They planted the seeds perfectly and drew in the viewers with the whole Lesnar/Heyman invading WWE HQ, and then Heyman/HHH kept the attention of the fans. And good to see a gain like that for this segment as well as even though the latter half was weak, the first half with Lesnar/Heyman invading HQ was awesome and deserved it.

Weak as hell overrun with the fact they had Cena, Ryback, and The Shield all in the same segment. The feud's been drawing well otherwise, but it was shit this week... well at least the overrun. Opener was the best since the night after Mania. 

Nothing else to really talk about. DA BARRETT BARRAGE in a gaining segment is cool, but yeah... meh.


----------



## PBens21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lol I swear last year at this time it was the same ppl saying "wait until those 2.3 ratings once football starts" god damn some things never change, probabally why I haven't came into this waste land cry baby thread in a year.

And shut up with AE ratings. There was no such thing as DVR or Internet streaming, or re-runs. Give up on the god dam. AE argument it's one of the most overused irrational arguments.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol at that overrun. What happens when you put Ryback in a top program.

Lesnar doing huge. RAW is nothing without the Paul Heyman Guys.


----------



## Guy LeDouche

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



PBens21 said:


> Lol I swear last year at this time it was the same ppl saying "wait until those 2.3 ratings once football starts" god damn some things never change, probabally why I haven't came into this waste land cry baby thread in a year.
> 
> And shut up with AE ratings. There was no such thing as DVR or Internet streaming, or re-runs. Give up on the god dam. AE argument it's one of the most overused irrational arguments.


Preach. :clap


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well they actually promoted the Lesnar segment so no real shock there


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



PBens21 said:


> Lol I swear last year at this time it was the same ppl saying "wait until those 2.3 ratings once football starts" god damn some things never change, probabally why I haven't came into this waste land cry baby thread in a year.
> 
> And shut up with AE ratings. There was no such thing as DVR or Internet streaming, or re-runs. Give up on the god dam. AE argument it's one of the most overused irrational arguments.


Not really a weak argument at all when you take into consideration the WWF had actual direct competition to RAW in those years. Like an actual SHOW, on another channel, at the SAME time Raw was on. And they still drew the ratings that they drew. Some people seemingly forget that little factoid. Interesting.


----------



## Felipe Yoshio

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

As I said, the world hates wrestling today. That's the unfair truth.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So a Jericho interview gains viewers but an Orton match loses almost three quarters of a million. Sounds about right.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE needs to let a full-timer feud with Lesnar, he's going to do as much good for whoever he feuds with as Rock did for Punk. Also Shield can't carry a quarterhour all by themselves, match against Usos bombed terribly considering their booking and importance to the show. Nice numbers for Ziggler/ADR and Henry, otherwise not much to write home about except that all the viewers that Lesnar gained instantly tuned off as soon as he left the screen.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol glorious, WWE continues to get DAT ASS SPANKED by the NBA Playoffs. Next Monday Bulls/Heat game 4. :rose1


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:lol at The Shield losing viewers and Randy Orton losing almost 1 million viewers. Ridiculous. Do something with Orton. 



> Ryback vs. Kane and the post-match with Daniel Bryan, John Cena and The Shield gained 163,000 viewers


Dear God, this is bad. :lmao


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Interesting breakdown, very interesting. Obviously the star of the show was the Brock/Heyman/HHH stuff. What do you know, eh? You put on an entertaining and outside the box segment, promote it the duration of the show and it gives you the best result in that timeslot in ages. It was a brilliant segment and I'm not surprised it did so well but a gain of 900k? Very impressive.

The rest of the stuff is interesting though. I think that's the best opening quarter they've had for about 3 weeks which would have been a good sign had people actually stuck around. A 700k drop straight after however is not good and had them playing catch up for the rest of the night. The big surprise is The Shield but then again, look who they were fighting and it was a complete throwaway match so not all that surprising when you think about it. The main event and overrun did pretty poorly but you have to consider the fact that they were battling against a 900k+ drop in the previous segments. It still isn't great but this is the first time the Cena/Ryback program hasn't performed well so it's nothing to freak out over for WWE. 

INTERDASTING BRAKDOWNZ

:brock :heyman :jpl


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

[email protected] Cena doing 160k in the overrun..disgusting.


----------



## Guy LeDouche

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AthenaMark said:


> [email protected] Cena doing 160k in the overrun..disgusting.





Starbuck said:


> The main event and overrun did pretty poorly but you have to consider the fact that they were battling against a 900k+ drop in the previous segments. It still isn't great but this is the first time the Cena/Ryback program hasn't performed well so it's nothing to freak out over for WWE.


Starbuck sums it up perfectly. :jpl


----------



## kiguel182

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Most of the gaining segments are because of males 18-49 and they still make most of the show for the kids, that makes a lot of business sense....

And putting Ryback vs Kane was a bad decision for a main-event, not surprised it didn't payed off.


----------



## Felipe Yoshio

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Conservative parents, that's it.
As they're not appealing too much, they wouldn't in a perfect booking.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

18-49 are still the majority, but their shows cater to the minority; kids.


----------



## MoveMent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The NBA playoffs are on of course men in that age group isn't gonna watch.



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Not really a weak argument at all when you take into consideration the WWF had actual direct competition to RAW in those years. Like an actual SHOW, on another channel, at the SAME time Raw was on. And they still drew the ratings that they drew. Some people seemingly forget that little factoid. Interesting.


We remember WCW we were watching it in '96 when Shawn was champion.


----------



## kendalag

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



MoveMent said:


> The NBA playoffs are on of course men in that age group isn't gonna watch.


There is some truth in that, BUT, the 18-49 demo that would watch that sure did show up during the Lesnar-Heyman segment ... they just immediately turned the channel when they saw the divas (who aren't over with the general population) wasting time on TV. 

It's like they show you a segment that peaks the interest of this young male demo ... and they immediately say to them ... yeah, we have that potentially cool stuff, but we really are about this (Cena, Brodus Clay, Hornswaggle, etc) ... you know, stuff for kids, so they turn away.


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kiguel182 said:


> Most of the gaining segments are because of males 18-49 and they still make most of the show for the kids, that makes a lot of business sense...


WWE never makes smart business decisions in regards to the television show because they are not concerned with making decisions based on the better of the business for RAW. They are concerned with the television show appealing to Vince McMahon, Jr. & him solely. The entire creative team do not try to write compelling television, they try to write what they think Vince McMahon, Jr. wants. They're trying to appease him, individually, and not the viewing (and potentially paying) at home audience.

As far as business is concerned, WWE seemingly cares more about everything else other than the television show(s). Such as video game sales, toy sales, Shopzone.com merchandise sales, DVD sales, etc. WWE Monday Night RAW is a 3-hour Home Shopping Network commercial & the "Superstars" are simply walking billboards.


----------



## Rayfu

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Coffey said:


> WWE never makes smart business decisions in regards to the television show because they are not concerned with making decisions based on the better of the business for RAW. They are concerned with the television show appealing to Vince McMahon, Jr. & him solely. The entire creative team do not try to write compelling television, they try to write what they think Vince McMahon, Jr. wants. They're trying to appease him, individually, and not the viewing (and potentially paying) at home audience.
> 
> As far as business is concerned, WWE seemingly cares more about everything else other than the television show(s). Such as video game sales, toy sales, Shopzone.com merchandise sales, DVD sales, etc. WWE Monday Night RAW is a 3-hour Home Shopping Network commercial & the "Superstars" are simply walking billboards.


is this not a smart business decisions in regards to the television show? you make more money for doing less.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



CHIcagoMade said:


> lol glorious, WWE continues to get DAT ASS SPANKED by the NBA Playoffs. Next Monday Bulls/Heat game 4. :rose1


NHL Playoffs are on as well.


----------



## kendalag

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Stad said:


> NHL Playoffs are on as well.


NHL playoffs on cable gets ratings that would make Impact Wrestling embarrassed. They don't even get a .3 demo (Raw on a crap week does 1.3-1.4) Of course, they're on NBCSports & CNBC ... so who would ever know they're on.


----------



## vanboxmeer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Amusing the AJ Brigade no sells her match losing almost a million viewers (1/5th of the men turned off after seeing this juvenile Nickelodeon vanity project washout), and the other Raw Kaitlyn vs AJ match also losing tons of people before Mania.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



MoveMent said:


> The NBA playoffs are on of course men in that age group isn't gonna watch.
> 
> 
> 
> We remember WCW we were watching it in '96 when Shawn was champion.


My point exactly. But it's not mentioned here near enough when comparing the ratings of the two eras.

And hey, WCW had the much better overall product and roster at that time. Also, that turned out to be brilliant with all of the classic matches some missed during that title reign, eh? Nothing like watching a bunch of dinosaurs talk in a ring, when you can be watching great matches from an all time great, in his prime. :hbk2


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



MoveMent said:


> We remember WCW we were watching it in '96 when Shawn was champion.


:jordan3


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And how'd that work out? :lol

It is downright sad the trouble WWE has drawing when they don't even have any wrestling competition on the same night. Pathetic.


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Stad said:


> NHL Playoffs are on as well.


Ah yes, all 20 of DEM viewers. . .


----------



## Felipe Yoshio

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

NBA, NFL, MLB, even NHL.
If you guys still think any wrestling company can beat all of this, I can say nothing about that.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Swagger still doing the damn thing. Just let the WHC be between the WWE title match and HHH vs Brock at ER, it's only fair.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No one is expecting them to beat NFL, MLB, NBA. But they've done much better with competition in the past.


----------



## Felipe Yoshio

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Unfornately, guys like Hogan and Rock really helped to do a better competition. Even SCSA was an awesome performer, but not so good in ring skills... and as a person.
Buuut...


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I haven't even barely watched the past couple weeks, mainly because of playoffs and because Punk isn't around at the moment.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE needs to bring back some edginess in their rather dull programming.


They had such good opportunity to turn Cena heel and concentrate on elevating their current(new) stars,but wait who cares.


----------



## Schrute_Farms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Felipe Yoshio said:


> Unfornately, guys like Hogan and Rock really helped to do a better competition. Even SCSA was an awesome performer, but not so good in ring skills... and as a person.
> Buuut...


Stone Cold was a better wrestler than Rock or Hogan could ever dream of being.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nah...that's a little absurd


----------



## THE BWO HAVE POSSESSION OF ME

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AthenaMark said:


> Nah...that's a little absurd


Austin was a better worker/wrestler than both Hogan and Rock. Rock was a better performer. Pick em' how you plead though.


----------



## Felipe Yoshio

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

/\ Even doubteous, this is true.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AthenaMark said:


> Nah...that's a little absurd


It isn't. As a wrestler, Austin was lightyears ahead of both.


----------



## kendalag

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



roadkill_ said:


> It isn't. As a wrestler, Austin was lightyears ahead of both.


100% true ... even after his neck injury, he was a better overall worker in the ring ... prior though, he was WAY better. 

Austin >>> Rock >>> Hogan


----------



## Annihilus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings are going down the tubes again as expected.. 2.9 this week, I predict we will be back down to 2.5 in another few months, and perhaps reach all new lows this year with how shitty the product is right now.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm curious what little gimmick nights Vince will come up with for the rest of the year. Bret Hart Appreciation Night being the first. After all this time Vince still hasn't caught on to the fact that once you lose a viewer, it is almost impossible to get them back no matter how much you try. Enough gimmicks, push new talent....other than Punk, Cena, and Meat Head.


----------



## Tim Legend

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's what he does... 

beat em up 
beat em up 
Break his neck 
Break his neck 
Split his wig...

:henry1

edit: hahaha wrong thread, suppose to be in the live raw thread oh well Henry does = ratings after all :lol


----------



## SUPER HANS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I can't see it looking to good for this week. Needs more :henry1


----------



## Eulonzo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ashes11 said:


> I can't see it looking to good for this week. Needs more :henry1


I'm sure the ratings will be great this week due to the WWE App. :vince Better than "RATINGZ HENRY". :vince2


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



roadkill_ said:


> It isn't. As a wrestler, Austin was lightyears ahead of both.


AthenaMark seemingly lives in a fantasy world, and doesn't pay much attention to reality.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Eulonzo said:


> I'm sure the ratings will be great this week due to the WWE App. :vince Better than "RATINGZ HENRY". :vince2


I swear to god if the ratings go up because of WWE App I will laugh my fucking ass off. :lol


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> -- Monday's WWE Raw jumped 16 percent in Social Media Activity compared to last week's year-low score. However, Raw scored its lowest ranking of the year, #6, on cable TV Monday night.
> 
> Raw scored 226,339 in social activity, the highest in one month. In the cable rankings, Raw trailed both NBA Playoffs games, both NHL Playoffs Game 7's, and "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" on VH1 to rank #6 on the night.


]

via PWTorch


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Dat love and hip hop killing us in the ratings. :cena3


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So, what happened to the people claiming that Cena as champ would bring in the ratings?


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Went up 16% in social media activity last night. I wonder why... 

#WWEApp 

:vince2


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE App is a draw. They should keep promoting it.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



I-Am-DashingRKO said:


> Went up 16% in social media activity last night. I wonder why...
> 
> #WWEApp
> 
> :vince2


No. We already know why-
WWE Raw Results: Dolph Ziggler Steals the Show on Twitter
:ziggler3


----------



## virus21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wait, they actually rate social media?fpalm


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

People were tuned into that classic game the Bruins/Leafs gave us last night.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LOL VH1?


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ight-raw-teen-mom-ii-bates-motel-more/182591/

3.79m, 4.10m and 4.23m - some nice hour gains there.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ight-raw-teen-mom-ii-bates-motel-more/182591/

Hour 1 - 3.79 million
Hour 2 - 4.10 million
Hour 3 - 4.25 million

Average - 4.05 million


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Still a mediocre average, but good on third hour for doing fairly well, and the first time it's done the best number in forever. It had the Lesnar/Heyman/HHH segment and the end of the Shield match.


----------



## sonicslash

SerapisLiber said:


> No. We already know why-
> WWE Raw Results: Dolph Ziggler Steals the Show on Twitter
> :ziggler3


Lol that's gold. Not a good sign that the go home show did so mediocre 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They had an upward trend this week which can only be a good thing. First hour dipping below 4 million viewers isn't a good sign though. Then again, they were able to pull it back over the course of the show. Some positives in that I guess.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The fact that the last hour drew so well indicates WWE needs to push Brock Lesnar hard after Extreme Rules. One feud WWE should entertain doing is Brock vs. Randy Orton. Orton is way over with the crowds even people refuse to admit it.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Boy Wonder said:


> The fact that the last hour drew so well indicates WWE needs to push Brock Lesnar hard after Extreme Rules. One feud WWE should entertain doing is Brock vs. Randy Orton. Orton is way over with the crowds even people refuse to admit it.


He'll be gone next week until Summerslam at the earliest lol. Same goes for HHH. I think that's when Raw will start to fully realise the Wrestlemania hangover effect because at that stage, it literally just leaves John Cena holding the fort. We might be in for some interesting stuff though considering the fact that they have all the usual big time slots to fill (show open, 9pm, 10pm, show close/overrun) and no stars to fill them with. It's going to give a lot of guys the opportunity to get those time slots and perhaps get some spotlight. I see Shield, Seamus, Ziggler etc all reaping the benefit from that. Whether or not they can get people to tune in however, is another matter.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Did Brock sign the extended contract? I have to say, I can't see them using the same formula all the way till Summer Slam. Something big should happen with Cena and his title reign to build in to Summer Slam. LOL if they're really forced to bring Punk back earlier than expected.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Orton vs Brock is definitely one match that needs to happen. Brock has signed another two years so they should squeeze as much as possible instead of keeping him exclusive to the part-timers and John Cena club. (and maybe CM Punk)


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I imagine all Brock's programs are going to be this way whether he extended the contract or not. He'll be there a handful of times to build the match but that's about it. It's unfortunate but it is what it is. He doesn't want to work a full time schedule. Hell, he doesn't even want to work a part time schedule by the looks of it lol. 

I'm also doubtful of Brock working with anybody who isn't in the elite club. He's had Cena. He's had HHH 3 times. I think Rock is pretty much a lock for Mania XXX and if not Rock then Taker. These guys are all on another level to everybody else they have and are the guys Brock will make the most money with. Maybe he doesn't want to work with anybody else? Truth be told, the stop start nature of the HHH program can sort of slide because at the end of the day, it's still Brock Lesnar vs. Triple H. That's not going to fly with Brock Lesnar vs. Randy Orton or Brock Lesnar vs. CM Punk. He'll need to be there to build those programs. Even if they happen, they'll most likely suffer from his schedule too which is going to suck but sparse Brock is better than no Brock at all I guess.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I imagine all Brock's programs are going to be this way whether he extended the contract or not. He'll be there a handful of times to build the match but that's about it. It's unfortunate but it is what it is. He doesn't want to work a full time schedule. Hell, he doesn't even want to work a part time schedule by the looks of it lol.
> 
> I'm also doubtful of Brock working with anybody who isn't in the elite club. He's had Cena. He's had HHH 3 times. I think Rock is pretty much a lock for Mania XXX and if not Rock then Taker. These guys are all on another level to everybody else they have and are the guys Brock will make the most money with. Maybe he doesn't want to work with anybody else? Truth be told, the stop start nature of the HHH program can sort of slide because at the end of the day, it's still Brock Lesnar vs. Triple H. That's not going to fly with Brock Lesnar vs. Randy Orton or Brock Lesnar vs. CM Punk. He'll need to be there to build those programs. Even if they happen, they'll most likely suffer from his schedule too which is going to suck but sparse Brock is better than no Brock at all I guess.


Would be a shame, if you ask me. HHH has worked with Punk, and Rock has worked with Punk and so has Taker. Taker has also worked with Ambrose and that turned out really well, so I don't see why Vince has all of a sudden dropped the whole having HUGE stars put over the current guys formula. Like C2D said, Orton vs Brock would be something real nice.

Edit: Ah yea, the whole appearance thing is still kinda messed up, I agree.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I enjoy Brock's work, but I would love to see him toss Orton for the F5 only for Orton to land on his feet and his Brock with the RKO. Those two could put on a hell of a match.


----------



## lil_miss_erica

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.92, not very good lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Another 2.9? Ruh roh. :cena5


----------



## Redwood

I can see Brock vs. Rock happening. WWE have plenty of time to resurrect a feud that happened 11 years ago.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

There getting consistent 2.9's with HHH and Brock on the show.

The lols will start next week or so when they don't have that star power.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> There getting consistent 2.9's with HHH and Brock on the show.
> 
> The lols will start next week or so when they don't have that star power.


What if we do indeed get a HUGE return? If things don't at least shift on something like that. *shrugs*


----------



## Werb-Jericho

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If i did affect the ratings i think i'd be one of the reasons for the dip. There's very little over 3 hours thats keeping me interested. 
Brock
Shield
Jericho

Thats about 20 minutes of the 70 minutes of actual content we get


----------



## The_Jiz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lesnar hhh feud barely had legs in their first fight. Even wwe are fully aware of lesnars limited dates this definitely needed to be a 3 parter.... Even if they have nothing left to say to each other.


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rating are down, but WWE is happy about it as they are repeating the same shit all over again.


----------



## P5YC40D3L1C

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Boy Wonder said:


> I enjoy Brock's work, but I would love to see him toss Orton for the F5 only for Orton to land on his feet and his Brock with the RKO. Those two could put on a hell of a match.


----------



## Chan Hung

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Brock vs SOMEONE BESIDES TRIPLE H PLEASE!?!?!?!


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I suspect they'll try 'something' because next week Brock is going back into hiatus. I think either we'll get someone like RVD return or they'll try and shock us by putting the belt on Ryback. I suspect that was the reason Cena needed to be injured going in and even then Ryback won't beat him clean, Shield will interfere and they'll do a Armageddon 03' rip off with them standing tall with gold.


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Save us Phil Brooks. You are our only hope.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> There getting consistent 2.9's with HHH and Brock on the show.
> 
> The lols will start next week or so when they don't have that star power.


yeah everyone is tuning in for hhh and will bolt when he is no longer on screen


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They should accept a massive ratings hit from May to July, but use it to build people properly.

They should, but they won't. It'll dip to a 2.5 or something, and rather than address the problem, they'll panic and "bring somebody back". This cycle will stop eventually, though.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, the Jericho/Fandango dance contest opening angle did a 3.00. Ryback vs. Zack Ryder lost 125,000 viewers. Prime Time Players vs. Brodus Clay & Sweet T plus Teddy Long’s announcement regarding the Dolph Ziggler situation lost 263,000 viewers. Kofi Kingston vs. Damien Sandow lost 136,000 viewers (to a show-low 2.62 rating). The Mark Henry-Sheamus interview and strap confrontation, Brock Lesnar videos and 12 Rounds trailer gained 397,000 viewers at 9 p.m. to a 2.91. Randy Orton vs. Antonio Cesaro and The Miz vs. Heath Slater lost 160,000 viewers. John Cena & Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. The Shield in the long elimination match gained a strong 623,000 viewers, ending at a show high 3.24 rating. Jack Swagger vs. Big E Langston lost 274,000 viewers. A.J. vs. Natalya lost 279,000 viewers. And the HHH/Brock Lesnar angle gained 465,000 viewers, pretty much normal levels, doing a 3.18 overrun.


Wrestling Observer Newsletter


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chronoxiong said:


> Save us Phil Brooks. You are our only hope.


Hope for what? More people tuning out. Enough Cena, enough Punk. Push Bryan.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Wrestling Observer Newsletter


Just about what I expect to see from that rating. Cena, Hell No, and Shield bringing in the highest number is expected, but I'm surprised the Brock/HHH confrontation didn't beat it when it was promoted the entire show?  I guess the casuals are tiring of that feud just like the rest of us.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena is raws only reliable draw. punk was doing alright before he left.. 

What a sad state the wwe is now in.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Amuroray said:


> Cena is raws only reliable draw. punk was doing alright before he left..
> 
> What a sad state the wwe is now in.


terrible state doing over 4 million for a 3+ hour show and being the most watched show on cable outside the nba playoffs, last month wwe doing its biggest revenue show in history, tlc, rumble, ec all sold out weeks in advance, summerslam sold out first day tickets went on sale last month


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> terrible state doing over 4 million for a 3+ hour show and being the most watched show on cable outside the nba playoffs, last month wwe doing its biggest revenue show in history, tlc, rumble, ec all sold out weeks in advance, summerslam sold out first day tickets went on sale last month


Sorry vince


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Currently :lol ing at Ryback, Triple H and Lesnar. First one isn't a surprise, he's never impressed in the ratings, but I expected more from Triple H and Lesnar. But with such a shitty feud, it's a no brainer. Them draws~


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Sheid/Cena match was a big attraction because of the Elimination rules, everyone expected a finish of either The Shield losing or Cena getting pinned. 

Other than that, unless someone like Punk or RVD is added to the show in the coming weeks, I think things will get really bad in 2 or 3 weeks.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Don't the numbers normally take a giant shit come May? I figured the only reason they pushed this ppv all the way to May 19 was to try to keep the numbers up, since they do pretty good at least up until the first post-WM ppv. But clearly isn't working, and by the time Payback comes around, I expect early 2s again.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ouch at that overrun. Not that it's THAT bad, but it's very disappointing considering it was Lesnar/HHH in the same ring, and it was pretty hyped up. Poor rating number considering that, and the gain isn't anything special either. Wasn't the top segment either, which it should've been all things considered.

Shield match against Cena and Team Hell No doing best of the night is interesting, as for the second week in a row, the 10PM slot is top slot. Now it didn't do anywhere near as well as the Lesnar/Heyman take over with Heyman/HHH back and fourth last week, but still a good number and gain. 

And rest of the breakdown... well... lol.


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> terrible state doing over 4 million for a 3+ hour show and being the most watched show on cable outside the nba playoffs, last month wwe doing its biggest revenue show in history, tlc, rumble, ec all sold out weeks in advance, summerslam sold out first day tickets went on sale last month


Are you the same validreasoning as the prick from boards.ie?


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RAW has been sub-3.0 since the Triple H/Brock borefest and this mong got the WWE title...

:cena5

SAVE_US PHILLIP_BROOKS

unk2


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Shield getting DAT RATING.

:ambrose :rollins :reigns


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Once again Daniel Bryan is in the highest rated segment of the show. They'll be able to get back in 4.0's if they push him in the ME.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, the Jericho/Fandango dance contest opening angle did a 3.00. Ryback vs. Zack Ryder *lost 125,000 viewers*. Prime Time Players vs. Brodus Clay & Sweet T plus Teddy Long’s announcement regarding the Dolph Ziggler situation *lost 263,000 viewers*. Kofi Kingston vs. Damien Sandow *lost 136,000 viewers* (to a show-low 2.62 rating). The Mark Henry-Sheamus interview and strap confrontation, Brock Lesnar videos and 12 Rounds trailer gained 397,000 viewers at 9 p.m. to a 2.91. Randy Orton vs. Antonio Cesaro and The Miz vs. Heath Slater *lost 160,000 viewers*. John Cena & Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. The Shield in the long elimination match gained a strong 623,000 viewers, ending at a show high 3.24 rating. Jack Swagger vs. Big E Langston *lost 274,000 viewers*. A.J. vs. Natalya *lost 279,000 viewers*. And the HHH/Brock Lesnar angle gained 465,000 viewers, pretty much normal levels, doing a 3.18 overrun.


Fuck lol. 

It's probably worrying for them that by 9PM they weren't even on the 3.0 mark yet. Talk about an uphill battle all night long. Everything lost apart from the 3 main segments. I think they should be very pleased with 9PM and Seamus/Henry. That's a great showing for them all things considered. The 6 man at 10 did great. Put the Shield in an interesting situation and people are going to watch them. Of course they also had Cena in there too let's not forget about that. This is a far cry from what happened with them last week. Just goes to show you. Good for them. The main event/overrun was spot on and pulled back what they lost from the 6 man. Sort of a role reversal from last week and this with the 10PM and overrun slots changing participants but keeping similar numbers. 

It's going to be interesting to see who/what they use to fill all these time slots next week when Brock/HHH are gone. That marks the official start of no part timers. No Rock. No Taker. No Brock. No Trips. And of course no Punk. It's just Cena. Who wants to bet that instead of putting different people in there we'll get Cena to open, at 9, at 10 and in the main event?

:cena5 :cena5 :cena5 :cena5 :cena5

:vince2 :vince2 :vince2 :vince2 :vince2

:cena2 :cena2 :cena2 :cena2 :cena2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> Once again Daniel Bryan is in the highest rated segment of the show. They'll be able to get back in 4.0's if they push him in the ME.


Sorry John-boy, there's a new sheriff in town. :bryan


----------



## CenaSux84

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Isn't it bad that WWE can't draw 3's in fucking May now? May used to get very good ratings.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not bad... until you remember that this was the final RAW before a PPV, and now the rating just looks pathetic.


----------



## DesolationRow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Outside of The Shield and the decent Henry/Seamus feud there is positively nothing in the entire product at the moment that is remotely interesting. I mean, I wish I cared about the Lesnar/Triple H feud but at this point I couldn't care less, sadly. They are so far off course with so many guys and angles, I can barely comprehend who is being promoted, who they're high on or anything anymore. The World Heavyweight Title feels like the Intercontinental Championship from about three years ago in importance, at best, the United States Champion loses every time he appears and the Intercontinental Championship feels like it's being held by Chyna (who's holding it right now?). Vince and friends have completely lost the ability to create any stars because they have no patience and no plan. Blowing off Ryback/Cena like this is further proof of that. None of the "new stars" can stand out when there is no standard midcard outside of which they can be outstanding. The whole situation is ridiculous.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

MARK HENRY = RATINGS


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Fuck lol. It's going to be interesting to see who/what they use to fill all these time slots next week when Brock/HHH are gone. That marks the official start of no part timers. No Rock. No Taker. No Brock. No Trips. And of course no Punk. It's just Cena. Who wants to bet that instead of putting different people in there we'll get Cena to open, at 9, at 10 and in the main event?
> 
> :cena5 :cena5 :cena5 :cena5 :cena5
> 
> :vince2 :vince2 :vince2 :vince2 :vince2
> 
> :cena2 :cena2 :cena2 :cena2 :cena2


My early prediction (because the only way I can enjoy the show is by making it my very own personal bingo game:jose) 

is that we'll have Cena open, and then close the show by getting taken out by The Shield, new WWE Champion Ryback will have a promo or match at 9 or 10.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_70751.shtml#.UZu7KL_vzfY



> -- After struggling to generate social media buzz since WrestleMania in April, Monday's WWE Raw scored the highest social score since the night after WrestleMania.
> 
> Raw scored 267,714 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, up 18 percent from last week's Raw leading into Extreme Rules.
> 
> Raw, which ranked #1 on cable TV Monday night, is still well-below the first quarter of the year. From January to April 8, every episode scored above this week's score.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_70751.shtml#.UZu7KL_vzfY




Time for people to start "Axel=Ratings" threads lol


----------



## TromaDogg

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

People were expecting the third Paul Heyman guy to be RVD.

How many will tune in next week to support 'Curtis Axel'?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ates-motel-defiance-warehouse-13-more/183649/

Hour 1 - 4.035 million
Hour 2 - 4.295 million
Hour 3 - 4.307 million

Average - 4.21 million


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ates-motel-defiance-warehouse-13-more/183649/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.035 million
> Hour 2 - 4.295 million
> Hour 3 - 4.307 million
> 
> Average - 4.21 million


3.0?


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's hardly any PPV bump... that is not good at all really.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

good.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

HHH bringing up the third hour.... thing is he was almost exclusively in the overrun, so not sure if it was him... At the same time, nothing else I would think was responsible for it except maybe Thr Shield match, but there was no Taker or Cena this time around so I doubt that. Must've been DA GAME WITH DAT EPIC BURIAL ANTICIPATION!


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 3 probably got to 5 million with the The Shield vs Team Hell No and Kofi still going on, but then dropped once people realized HHH is wrestling.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena not on RAW and ratings go up?

Hmm


----------



## virus21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DatKidMog said:


> Cena not on RAW and ratings go up?
> 
> Hmm


Its almost if people are sick of him? Nah


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Final Rating - 2.96


----------



## BKelly237

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.96, up from 2.92 last week

More app plugs on the way :vince5


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Still no 3.0?

WWE won't be seeing that then until the fallout from Summerslam, if at all. Maybe the build as well, but even then that depends.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> Still no 3.0?
> 
> WWE won't be seeing that then until the fallout from Summerslam, if at all. Maybe the build as well, but even then that depends.


I'm sure hyping Punk and Brock's return should bump it.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

At least they're building on the audience as the show progresses these past 2 weeks. That's always a good sign and I maintain that hovering around the 4 million viewer mark is where they ought to be at this time of the year so if they can keep that up then they should be looking good for the summer.


----------



## BKelly237

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lucky there were no NBA playoff games last night


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3 straight 2.9's. Hope Vince loves that number. :vince4


----------



## TromaDogg

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

On the one hand, a not too bad rating that's slightly up from last week.

On the other, a 15% drop in ratings from the post Extreme Rules Raw show last year.

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...on_to_Last_Year_s_Post-Extreme_Rules_RAW.html


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



BKelly237 said:


> 2.96, up from 2.92 last week
> 
> More app plugs on the way :vince5


WWE App already entering the WWE title picture :vince2


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

When HHH and Brock are gone from Raw, the ratings will die.

HHH and Lesnar have been a band aid for Raw after Punk had gone. And they still couldn't hit a three. They fucked yo.


----------



## XFace

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



BKelly237 said:


> 2.96, up from 2.92 last week
> 
> More app plugs on the way :vince5


Anyone seriously getting creeped the fuck out by this? 

Not to mention the godamn twitter plugs, and all the other subliminal advertising.

I feel like im being fucking brainwashed. :|


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> Still no 3.0?
> 
> WWE won't be seeing that then until the fallout from Summerslam, if at all. Maybe the build as well, but even then that depends.


anyone still using ratings and not viewership is probably still stuck using alta vista as their main search engine

this show back on feb 11 did a 3.16 rating with the same number of viewers as this past monday....



> Raw scored a 3.16 rating, down 11 percent from a 3.56 rating last week. Comparatively, the Royal Rumble lead-in episode on January 21 scored a 3.04 rating.
> 
> - Raw averaged 4.26 million viewers


 http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_68600.shtml#.UZx4iKI3tdk


----------



## Schrute_Farms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



XFace said:


> Anyone seriously getting creeped the fuck out by this?
> 
> Not to mention the godamn twitter plugs, and all the other subliminal advertising.
> 
> I feel like im being fucking brainwashed. :|


There's nothing subliminal about it, WWE has been brainwashing for years.

WWE APP, get the APP, WWE APPP, get the APP, WWE APP, its on the WWE app, you want the app, you need the app, get the app, WWE APP, exclusively on the WWE APP, Get the app. :vince5


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

A 2.96 IS a 3.0, you round up or down depending on the second number after the point.

2.96 = 3.0
2.94 = 2.9


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> anyone still using ratings and not viewership is probably still stuck using alta vista as their main search engine
> 
> this show back on feb 11 did a 3.16 rating with the same number of viewers as this past monday....
> 
> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_68600.shtml#.UZx4iKI3tdk


Good to see that some people understand the value, or lack thereof, of such relative numbers.


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The ratings are fine. Last year raw wasn't even getting 3's. IMO 2.5 is like the lowest raw can dip. It won't reach that level this year because the champ won't have as long a title reign.

That being said it will dip, without Rock.

I predict an average of 3.1-2 this year, which is far better than last year.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



hardysno1fan said:


> The ratings are fine. Last year raw wasn't even getting 3's. IMO 2.5 is like the lowest raw can dip. It won't reach that level this year because the champ won't have as long a title reign.


Actually last year around this time they were.

However, I don't know what the viewership numbers were and on top of that, Raw was only 2 hours a year ago.


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



hardysno1fan said:


> The ratings are fine. Last year raw wasn't even getting 3's. IMO 2.5 is like the lowest raw can dip. It won't reach that level this year because the champ won't have as long a title reign.
> 
> That being said it will dip, without Rock.
> 
> I predict an average of 3.1-2 this year, which is far better than last year.


This time last year, Raw drew a 3.03.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Last year was also 2 hours.

The ratings haven't been all that bad after all this year. Same thing this week too.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

TBH, I'm certain the only reason this week's and the last few week's haven't been disastorous and actually been pretty decent were a combination of these factors:

1) The fallout from ER (for this week)
2) Lesnar being there when he was (The Raw with the corporate takeover segment and last week's)
3) HHH being there (most of the last few weeks)
4) HHH wrestling on Raw for the first time (for this week)
5) Taker wrestling on Raw for the first time in over 3 years (on the week he faced the Shield, on a taped show no less)

Those last two especially are huge factors for those respective Raws as it's two of the greatest of all time competing on RAW (I mean hell, the hour of the Taker match did 4.65 million viewers), so while they didn't have as much going for them as they did for Mania, there were still big things to make up for that.

HHH probably won't be on Raw next week, Lesnar seems to be gone for the time being, Taker's gone for the time being, Rock's gone for the time being, and Punk is gone for the time being. Raw is on Cena's shoulders from here till the build for Summerslam most likely and we've seen Raw dip below 4 million viewers and get 2.9 ratings already with some of those factors above, so I'm certain things will drop a lot next week or the week after... whenever people realize those draws mentioned above won't be there and it's all on Cena. We're probably going to see fall-level ratings in June, and then in the fall this year, they'll probably drop even lower unless one of those part-timers come back for a run to keep things afloat.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> HHH probably won't be on Raw next week, Lesnar seems to be gone for the time being, Taker's gone for the time being, Rock's gone for the time being, and Punk is gone for the time being.


You can also add Henry and Show to the list. And Jerichos always on and off. You're right, for the time being, Cena is Raw and that is something none of us shall be looking forward to.


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fatcat said:


> This time last year, Raw drew a 3.03.


So it drew a 3.0, exactly what it drew this week.


----------



## Evil Peter

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Murph said:


> So it drew a 3.0, exactly what it drew this week.


The word "exactly" doesn't fit well together with round-offs. It's close though but again the number says a lot less than the actual number of viewers.


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Murph said:


> So it drew a 3.0, exactly what it drew this week.


Poster above me said that Raw wasn't even drawing a 3 last year, and I was providing evidence that it was.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

last year on may 20th night after over the limit ppv raw did

10:00PM.............4.144	
9:00PM..............4.168

average of 4.156m so viewers are up slightly this year

show dropped to average of 3.914m the next week on memorial day so expect a similar drop this monday


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why is everybody obsessed with the number they drew on the same week last year? Why is that important? 

A better way to analyze a rating is to look at all ratings within the last year. Raw 1000 was the highest rated Raw within the last year. That's the audience, 6 millions in numbers that they still have in theory. It has to be the goal to get that number on a regular basis and build on it. 

Now I know a lot will now come and claim "Raw 1000 is an anomaly". Well, it's not because this shows proves there are still 6 million people that would like to watch Raw live on a Monday night if the show that is on is worth watching.

Not that a 3.0 in this day and age is a bad rating, it's not. But it's not great either.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

raw 1000 was built for 3 months on tv, the week of the show they did wall to wall advertising on usa during every ad break

using that logic the superbowl does 100+ million so nfl should be trying to get that audience to watch every game....

getting 4 million to watch a live 3+hr broadcast of wrestling in this day and age of streams, youtube, dvr and 17,000+ cable weekly cable shows is a great achievement, we know usa are delighted when raw does 5 million average because they released two press releases so far this year when the show did that number (night after rumble and old school raw)


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> this shows proves there are still 6 million people that would like to watch Raw live on a Monday night if the show that is on is worth watching.
> 
> Not that a 3.0 in this day and age is a bad rating, it's not. But it's not great either.


It shows that there are at least 6 million people in USA who'd watch the show live(meaning not on internet stream,not DVR,not downloaded ect). Add in all the people from around the world, and it's easily in the double digits(meaning over 10M)


And 4M or so people per show is a GREAT number for a cable tv show. Don't get why people act like it's a bad number. WWE is one of the most watched non sporting events on cable tv, for any day of the week, so why are people mad about that?


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Raw 2k was effectively a free PPV. Whilst it shows there is still curiosity, the fact ratings sap the next week shows there's a lot of apathy.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Raw on 5/20 did a 2.97 rating and 4.23 million viewers. The number was up, largely because they didn’t have any NBA playoff competition this week, and there was probably a slight bump coming the day after a PPV.
> 
> The show did a 2.5 in teenage boys (up 32% from last week), 2.4 in Males 18-49 (up 4%), 1.3 in teenage girls (up 86%), and 1.0 in Women 18-49 (down 9%). The show drew 67.8% male viewers.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, The Miz & Chris Jericho vs. Fandango & Wade Barrett lost 360,000 viewers. Sheamus vs. Titus O’Neil gained 206,000 viewers which is very good for a match like that. Paul Heyman’s introduction of Curtis Axel gained 365,000 viewers. The continuation of that segment with HHH come out, gained 13,000 viewers at 9 p.m. to a 3.10. Alberto Del Rio vs. Big E Langston and Layla vs. A.J. lost 47,000 viewers, but I’d consider that a success. Cody Rhodes vs. Zack Ryder with Ryback killing Ryder lost 358,000 viewers. The Shield vs. Kofi Kingston & Daniel Bryan & Kane gained 298,000 viewers to a 3.03 quarter. Randy Orton vs. Jack Swagger gained 237,000 viewers. The HHH vs. Curtis Axel overrun gained 551,000 viewers to a 3.44 quarter.


Wrestling Observer Newsletter


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



hardysno1fan said:


> Raw 2k was effectively a free PPV. Whilst it shows there is still curiosity, the fact ratings sap the next week shows there's a lot of apathy.


or that some fans just tune into shows when they feel like it, there can be no other explanation for a drop of 20% between this show @ 10pm http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...fe-of-the-american-teenagerpawn-stars/127242/ and the next week at 9pm http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ican-teen-la-las-full-court-life-more/128247/

that raw was one of the finest in the shows 20 year history and you had the big brock lesnar return to boot and yet 20% of those watching didn't bother tuning in the next week


----------



## TrentBarretaFan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Triple H vs Curtis Axel gained 551,000 viewers?

Curtis Axel = ratings !!!


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Daniel Bryan again bringing in the ratings. And Paul Heyman. It's so obvious who people pay to see, just listen to the crowd: they love Bryan, they love to hate Heyman. Hopefully the WWE can see this.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> raw 1000 was built for 3 months on tv, the week of the show they did wall to wall advertising on usa during every ad break
> 
> using that logic the superbowl does 100+ million so nfl should be trying to get that audience to watch every game....


So Raw 1000 is WWEs equivalent to the Superbowl?! I thought that was Wrestlemania. Silly me!

By the way, Raw the week before got a 3.44 and Raw in January this year did 3.54. That is not that far away from Raw 1000 so it proves the audience is still there and willing to watch, if, and that is a big if, the show they put out is worth spending three hours on a Monday night watching it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That breakdown seems to be missing some stuff... 

But anyway, it's good that they gained all throughout the final hour. I'd assume that would have something to do with people checking in to see HHH wrestle. That gain itself in the overrun is a great gain and the best overrun since 4/15 (which was the first Cena/Ryback confrontation). It's very impressive though as HHH did that pretty much all on his own... and then again, it is the first time HHH wrestled on Raw in three years, so that certainly helped things. But great overrun, and got a lot of eyes on Axel. 9PM though only gained... 13,000? lol, that's a testament to how big of a draw Heyman is, that he could gain 300,000+ viewers in a random slot before the 9PM, leaving the 9PM with a very weak gain, even though HHH appeared right at the 9PM and was there long enough to have made a difference I think.

The Shield match... seems like the two quarters were combined here. They started at the 9:45 quarter, but I remember they went into the 10:00... for how long, I don't know, but I'm going to assume that gain is for the 10PM. Obviously no where near as good as the last few Shield matches in the 10PM slot (which had Cena in the last one and Taker in the one before that), but still decent, and it's a gain so that's good. Although it does seem to be one of the worst 10PM segments of the year, so that's something to think about and I think ultimately the Shield still aren't big draws or anywhere near that as their only big numbers have come with big/mega draws like Cena and Taker. 

Orton/Swagger gaining is a shocker, but as I said above I contribute that to people waiting to see HHH wrestle. However it's still a very good number for them either way in that time slot.

Overall though, a pretty messy breakdown with quite a few missing quarters it seems.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Paul Heyman’s introduction of Curtis Axel gained 365,000 viewers. The continuation of that segment with HHH come out, gained 13,000 viewers at 9 p.m. to a 3.10. Alberto Del Rio vs. Big E Langston and Layla vs. A.J. lost 47,000 viewers, but I’d consider that a success. Cody Rhodes vs. Zack Ryder with Ryback killing Ryder lost 358,000 viewers. The Shield vs. Kofi Kingston & Daniel Bryan & Kane gained 298,000 viewers to a 3.03 quarter. Randy Orton vs. Jack Swagger gained 237,000 viewers. The HHH vs. Curtis Axel overrun gained 551,000 viewers to a 3.44 quarter.


??? 9pm heyman was still on his promo. Good to see shield match gain. Curtis Axel match ending with a show high is a great start for him although it was probably all HHH.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT GAME

:HHH2

Seriously though. For a random as fuck appearance on Raw to an even more random as fuck match announcement against a complete and utter nobody, that is impressive. When you consider the fact that a lot of the number for the Swagger/Orton match can more than likely be attributed to people tuning in for DA GAME and it's even more impressive. You have to wonder what that could have done had they actually advertised and hyped it even a week in advance like they did with the Taker match a few weeks back. Even still they're basically even in terms of numbers. 

Random HHH match on Raw is random but successful.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Here is every Raw overrun/main event rating of the 3 hour era, from highest rated to lowest rated.

7/23/12 – CM Punk vs. John Cena – 4.43 rating
1/28/13 – Vince McMahon/Paul Heyman job review with Brock Lesnar return – 4.00
2/25/13 – John Cena vs. CM Punk – 3.9
7/30/12 – John Cena vs. Big Show – 3.86
3/4/13 – CM Punk vs. Randy Orton vs. Sheamus vs. Big Show with Undertaker appearance – 3.7
2/4/13 – John Cena/Ryback/Sheamus/Shield brawl – 3.63
4/1/13 – Undertaker/CM Punk confrontation – 3.58
4/8/13 – John Cena vs. Mark Henry – 3.54
4/15/13 – John Cena/Ryback/Shield segment – 3.53
2/11/13 – The Rock/CM Punk confrontation – 3.48
3/25/13 – The Rock/John Cena legends panel – 3.47
10/8/12 – Vince McMahon vs. CM Punk – 3.46
5/12/13 – Triple H vs. Curtis Axel – 3.44
8/13/12 – Triple H/Brock Lesnar confrontation – 3.44
4/22/13 – John Cena/Ryback/Mick Foley/Shield segment – 3.43
2/18/13 – The Rock unveils new WWE title – 3.39
8/20/12 – John Cena/CM Punk confrontation – 3.36
8/27/12 – CM Punk vs. Jerry Lawler – 3.35
1/7/13 – The Rock/CM Punk confrontation – 3.34
4/29/13 – John Cena & Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. The Shield – 3.32
8/6/12 – John Cena vs. Daniel Bryan – 3.27
10/29/12 – Mick Foley/CM Punk segment – 3.26
11/5/12 – John Cena & Ryback vs. CM Punk & Dolph Ziggler – 3.22
1/14/13 – The Rock/CM Punk segment – 3.20
3/18/13 – Brock Lesnar/Triple H contract signing – 3.19
5/13/13 – Brock Lesnar/Triple H confrontation – 3.18
3/11/13 – CM Punk vs. Kane with Undertaker appearance – 3.18
9/17/12 – John Cena & Sheamus vs. CM Punk & Alberto Del Rio – 3.14
10/15/12 – Vince McMahon/CM Punk/John Cena/Ryback contract signing – 3.10
9/10/12 – Bret Hart/CM Punk/John Cena segment – 3.10
12/17/12 – John Cena & Vickie Guerrero vs. Dolph Ziggler & AJ – 3.00
9/3/12 – John Cena vs. Alberto Del Rio – 2.99
11/12/12 – John Cena vs. CM Punk – 2.99
5/6/13 – Ryback vs. Kane – 2.99
1/21/13 – Royal Rumble participants brawl – 2.98
12/10/12 – Shield brawl with John Cena/Ryback/others – 2.96
12/31/12 – John Cena/Dolph Ziggler/AJ segment – 2.9
10/22/12 – CM Punk vs. Sheamus – 2.89
11/19/12 – CM Punk championship celebration – 2.87
12/3/12 – CM Punk/Miz lie detector test – 2.86
9/24/12 – CM Punk/Mick Foley/Ryback confrontation – 2.74
10/1/12 – Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. CM Punk & Dolph Ziggler – 2.70
11/26/12 – CM Punk vs. Kane – 2.66
12/24/12 – John Cena vs. Alberto Del Rio – 2.3


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loader230 said:


> ??? 9pm heyman was still on his promo. Good to see shield match gain. Curtis Axel match ending with a show high is a great start for him although *it was probably all HHH*.


It wasn't "probably"

It WAS all HHH


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Swaggie and Orton doing proper.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> So Raw 1000 is WWEs equivalent to the Superbowl?! I thought that was Wrestlemania. Silly me!


you could argue raw 1000 was built better than mania yes, the amount of stuff happening that night dx return, bryan/aj wedding, punk and cena, punks turn, rock/lesnar/undertaker returns



> By the way, Raw the week before got a 3.44 and Raw in January this year did 3.54. That is not that far away from Raw 1000 so it proves the audience is still there and willing to watch, if, and that is a big if, the show they put out is worth spending three hours on a Monday night watching it.


i pay no attention to ratings and only focus on viewership, there is a huge difference between viewership for raw 1000 and those other two episodes

raw 1000
10pm......6300	
9pm ......6318	
8pm.......5439
*average 6.02 million over 3hrs (6.31m over normal 2hrs)*

week before raw 1000
10pm .... 5.038	
9pm ......4.720
*average 4.879 million*

night after rumble (and it only took rock winning title for first time in 11 years and cena the rumble to achieve this number)
8pm......4.86
9pm......5.27
10pm.....4.93
*average 5.02 million*


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> you could argue raw 1000 was built better than mania yes, the amount of stuff happening that night dx return, bryan/aj wedding, punk and cena, punks turn, rock/lesnar/undertaker returns
> 
> 
> 
> i pay no attention to ratings and only focus on viewership, there is a huge difference between viewership for raw 1000 and those other two episodes
> 
> raw 1000
> 10pm......6300
> 9pm ......6318
> 8pm.......5439
> *average 6.02 million over 3hrs (6.31m over normal 2hrs)*
> 
> week before raw 1000
> 10pm .... 5.038
> 9pm ......4.720
> *average 4.879 million*
> 
> night after rumble (and it only took rock winning title for first time in 11 years and cena the rumble to achieve this number)
> 8pm......4.86
> 9pm......5.27
> 10pm.....4.93
> *average 5.02 million*


5 million viewers is still a hell of a lot better than 4 million viewers, don't you think? And that was just 4 months ago. 

On Raw 1000, you're right that in the end a lot more happened on that night than at mania. But you're talking about build. Now let's take a look what they had really built for that show:

dx return: promoted even though no mention of Outlaws and Pac returning
bryan/aj wedding: advertised but Vinces, Punks and Rocks appearances and subsequent GM announcement and Rumble title match promo weren't
punk and cena, punks turn: yes but the heel turn had no build at all
rock/lesnar/undertaker returns: Takers return wasn't advertised

As you can see, the built for that show was really not that great. The show itself was great and had lots of surprises. Therefore 6 million fans saw it. If every Raw had this much going on, maybe, just maybe, they could get those 6 million viewers every now and then.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Their biggest draw The Rock is gone.Their biggest legend Undertaker is gone.And other big draws/stars like Brock and HHH are about to depart.So the future as far as ratings go is not looking very bright,IMO.

Who knows,they may even hit last year's low this year as well and perhaps even sooner,until something drastic happens.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Been quite a while since I last posted here. Ratings aren't tanking completely, the 3 hours is still holding them down but having roughly 4 million viewers is good enough for this time frame. Let's see how they progress into Summer.


----------



## Marcos 25063

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I believe that summer does not pass,when start NFL...


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> - WWE Raw topped cable TV in social media activity for the second straight week, topping the Spurs-Grizzlies NBA Playoffs close-out game and Blackhawks-Red Wings NHL Playoffs game.
> 
> With the benefit of a 30-minute post-show centered on Bret Hart, Raw scored 257,490 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, only slightly below last week's score of 267,714 for the Extreme Rules PPV fall-out.


via PWTorch


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.993m, 3.950m and 3.891m.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 1 - 3.993 million
Hour 2 - 3.950 million
Hour 3 - 3.891 million

it was second watched event on cable behind Spurs/Grizzlies game 4


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Hour 1 - 3.993 million
> Hour 2 - 3.950 million
> Hour 3 - 3.891 million
> 
> *it was second watched event on cable* behind Spurs/Grizzlies game 4



I think things like that are what people should care about WAY MORE than the amount of viewers the show gets. I'd rather Raw get 3M viewers a week and be top 3 shows on cable TV every week, over getting 6M viewers and being like 10th among cable TV shows.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



dxbender said:


> I think things like that are what people should care about WAY MORE than the amount of viewers the show gets. I'd rather Raw get 3M viewers a week and be top 3 shows on cable TV every week, over getting 6M viewers and being like 10th among cable TV shows.


I care more about gains and losses for some reason.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Hour 1 - 3.993 million
> Hour 2 - 3.950 million
> Hour 3 - 3.891 million
> 
> it was second watched event on cable behind Spurs/Grizzlies game 4


And they finally dip under 4 million viewers for the entire 3 hours. Just about but they're still under. Not good. If this keeps up then Sep-Dec are going to end up producing some pretty bad numbers but I guess this week it was to be expected since it was legitimately the first show without any star power outside Cena. I doubt they'll sweat it too much, it might just be a one off, but if things do hover around this mark or even drop lower, they'll probably start to worry a bit.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> And they finally dip under 4 million viewers for the entire 3 hours. Just about but they're still under. Not good.


pretty much identical to last years numbers on memorial day, averaged 3.914m over 2 hours last year and 3.945m over 3 hours this year


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE don't care about ratings anymore, if they drop below 3M they'll do something about it


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> pretty much identical to last years numbers on memorial day, averaged 3.914m over 2 hours last year and 3.945m over 3 hours this year


Forgot that it was Memorial Day. That probably had an impact.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

yeah,every Holiday dents the ratings.

Not alot of people were watching tv at that time if wwe was top of the cable ratings.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow those numbers aren't good. I don't know about you guys, but I would feel uncomfortable watching RAW if they went below 3.3 million viewers. But then again, it can be a blessing in disguise that the WWE needs. Also, the wrestlers need to do their part(talking about the wrestlers like Kofi who are lazy). I can only imagine what the ratings are going to be like in 3-6 months...not looking to good. I expect a huge increase if Rocky decides to return though.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> Wow those numbers aren't good. I don't know about you guys, *but I would feel uncomfortable watching RAW if they went below 3.3 million viewers*. But then again, it can be a blessing in disguise that the WWE needs. Also, the wrestlers need to do their part(talking about the wrestlers like Kofi who are lazy). I can only imagine what the ratings are going to be like in 3-6 months...not looking to good. I expect a huge increase if Rocky decides to return though.


:HHH2

What? Please be trolling.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> :HHH2
> 
> What? Please be trolling.


He's trolling, he must be.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Huh? I meant 3,300,000 viewers... Has it happened recently?


----------



## Marv95

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LOL at the Memorial Day excuse. They've gotten better numbers before on the same day not too long ago.


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> Wow those numbers aren't good. *I don't know about you guys, but I would feel uncomfortable watching RAW if they went below 3.3 million viewers.* But then again, it can be a blessing in disguise that the WWE needs. Also, the wrestlers need to do their part(talking about the wrestlers like Kofi who are lazy). I can only imagine what the ratings are going to be like in 3-6 months...not looking to good. I expect a huge increase if Rocky decides to return though.


How does the number of viewers the show average affect whether you enjoy it or not? Quantity and quality are two completely different things. You shouldn't care about what others think/say about a certain something when you personally enjoy it.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Below the 4 million mark they need, however it was a holiday, so it's not much to take into account at this moment.



messi said:


> I don't know about you guys, but I would feel uncomfortable watching RAW if they went below 3.3 million viewers.


'Cause we all know that we can only watch shows everyone else does, right?


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Eh I thought RAW was quite good.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



hazuki said:


> Eh I thought RAW was quite good.


Same


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Punkholic said:


> How does the number of viewers the show average affect whether you enjoy it or not? Quantity and quality are two completely different things. You shouldn't care about what others think/say about a certain something when you personally enjoy it.


Because it says a lot about the product. As soon as I started to think of wrestling from a business perspective, ratings became important to me. I like to know who is a draw and who isn't and the ratings help me decide.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> Because it says a lot about the product. As soon as I started to think of wrestling from a business perspective, ratings became important to me. I like to know who is a draw and who isn't and the ratings help me decide.


Why? Do you own shares in the WWE? Who gives a shit if other people like something, if you follow popular opinion then you are a sheep and disingenuous to your own self interests. The only reasonable test of quality is to decide weather or not you personally enjoy something. And where did 3.3m come from? Such an arbitrary number, which seems to be based on nothing but a ridiculous whim you had when posting that. It's absurd and it makes sense on no level.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Memorial Day isnt a holiday like Christmas Eve so the holiday excuse is meh.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> Why? Do you own shares in the WWE? Who gives a shit if other people like something, if you follow popular opinion then you are a sheep and disingenuous to your own self interests. The only reasonable test of quality is to decide weather or not you personally enjoy something. And where did 3.3m come from? Such an arbitrary number, which seems to be based on nothing but a ridiculous whim you had when posting that. It's absurd and it makes sense on no level.


Because I'm concerned about the business I grew up watching(not to mention that I'm currently studying business so I can relate). I think it's funny when certain members bring up that argument, it seems to be the people who are fans of wrestlers who can't draw. Are you a Punk fan? This is called the ratings thread last time I checked, and I honestly thought this would be the last place people would ask me why do I care about ratings, lol. I don't think many people realize how big of a deal the ratings are. There is only so much fans can take and with the way this company is heading, I wouldn't be surprised if we consider 2 million viewers average.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> Because I'm concerned about the business I grew up watching(not to mention that I'm currently studying business so I can relate). I think it's funny when certain members bring up that argument, it seems to be the people who are fans of wrestlers who can't draw. Are you a Punk fan? This is called the ratings thread last time I checked, and I honestly thought this would be the last place people would ask me why do I care about ratings, lol. I don't think many people realize how big of a deal the ratings are. There is only so much fans can take and with the way this company is heading, I wouldn't be surprised if we consider 2 million viewers average.


I'm a fan of professional wrestling as such I'm a fan most wrestlers, punk included. So fucking what? And thanks for the negative rep, very mature of you. Ratings are important to all TV shows, everyone knows that, to claim otherwise is silly. However, to say that ratings are in anyway indicative of weather or not you should enjoy something is utterly pointless, serves no point and shows how fucking petty you are. I don't care if you studied business, I've also studied business and I still don't let ratings dictate my opinions of what it good or bad. Your argument is idiotic, and you've still not answered how you reached the 3.3M figure, but as I suspect, you've arbitrarily reached it for no fucking reason other than your whim. By the way, that threshold was reached on Christmas Eve (Or new year, can't remember, doesn't matter), guess you better stop watching.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh, and mr. Business student, is it not quite a good sign that the WWE is continuously increasing its income and profits?


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Final number- 2.82
http://www.twnpnews.com/2013/05/final-raw-rating-is-in/

Won't be surprised to see a remark like "see, the very mention of Punk's name and the ratings drop back to when he was champ! lulzherpderp"


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> I'm a fan of professional wrestling as such I'm a fan most wrestlers, punk included. So fucking what? And thanks for the negative rep, very mature of you. Ratings are important to all TV shows, everyone knows that, to claim otherwise is silly. However, to say that ratings are in anyway indicative of weather or not you should enjoy something is utterly pointless, serves no point and shows how fucking petty you are. I don't care if you studied business, I've also studied business and I still don't let ratings dictate my opinions of what it good or bad. Your argument is idiotic, and you've still not answered how you reached the 3.3M figure, but as I suspect, you've arbitrarily reached it for no fucking reason other than your whim.


I guess you're immature as well considering you just red repped me, but I don't care. I don't really think you comprehend my posts at all and you seem really clueless. I just pointing out a pattern I started noticing with Punk fans. I just think we should just stick to the topic though. if the ratings are poor, it generally means the product sucks. I don't watch RAW then come on here to look at the ratings to decide if I enjoy something. But the ratings do tell you what guy draws and what guy doesn't. Do I like wrestlers who can draw? Yes because it lets me back up my opinion with facts.


----------



## NO!

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

"Da Silva" is definitely correct here. If you allow ratings and the opinion of the masses to control your mind and tell you what to think, you're pretty much the definition of a parasite... how you can argue that is abstruse. It's also funny to bring up that CM Punk argument. So many people have blamed him for being THE reason for poor ratings in the past, even though they've had horrendous numbers without him. That's why it's kind of silly to sit back and over-analyze the ratings and use them as a tool to rate individual performers, let alone allowing them to form your own opinions for you. I'm not sure why so many people can't just think for themselves, and take interest in something that entertains them after giving it a fair opportunity.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> I guess you're immature as well considering you just red repped me, but I don't care. I don't really think you comprehend my posts at all and you seem really clueless. I just pointing out a pattern I started noticing with Punk fans. I just think we should just stick to the topic though. if the ratings are poor, it generally means the product sucks. I don't watch RAW then come on here to look at the ratings to decide if I enjoy something. But the ratings do tell you what guy draws and what guy doesn't. *Do I like wrestlers who can draw? Yes because it lets me back up my opinion with facts.*


The WWE has a long term fixed contract with its broadcasters which is under practically no threat. It's one of USA's biggest attractions and it provides them with over 150 hours of original programming every year. Do you think they would have pushed the WWE for an extra 52 hours a year if they were worried? If you, with your business course, don't understand how valuable that it to a network then you really aught to take a less challenging course.

And as for the bold part, err. Okay. That's not really proof of anything, other than who draws. Drawing is not indicative of a good product. Do you know what else draws? Aggressive marketing campaigns, I guess the adverts for RAW 1000 are the GOATS of wrestling because they were responsible for possibly the biggest short term gain ever.

And I mainly red repped you out of revenge, which is rather petty of me, but I don't really care.


----------



## xD7oom

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings without Axel = 3.9
Ratings one week after Axel's debut = Lowest Rating of the Year


----------



## NO!

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> I guess you're immature as well considering you just red repped me, but I don't care. I don't really think you comprehend my posts at all and you seem really clueless. I just pointing out a pattern I started noticing with Punk fans. I just think we should just stick to the topic though. if the ratings are poor, it generally means the product sucks. I don't watch RAW then come on here to look at the ratings to decide if I enjoy something. But the ratings do tell you what guy draws and what guy doesn't. Do I like wrestlers who can draw? Yes because it lets me back up my opinion with facts.


Those aren't facts though. Hulk Hogan isn't factually the best of all time just because he is the most popular. Ratings and lucrative success hardly ever means proof for something being worth the time. This is why most successful forms of entertainment today lack importance... because they seem to easily sucker in the vast majority. People think that if something is PERCEIVED as the best, that it automatically is. That's basically the equivalent to being incurious and letting others think for you. 

Wrestlemania 19, for instance, was a much better show than most Wrestlemanias have been in the entire history of the event... yet it also had a disappointing buyrate at the same time.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NO! said:


> Those aren't facts though. Hulk Hogan isn't factually the best of all time just because he is the most popular. Ratings and lucrative success hardly ever means proof for something being worth the time. This is why most successful forms of entertainment today lack importance... because they seem to easily sucker in the vast majority. People think that if something is PERCEIVED as the best, that it automatically is. That's basically the equivalent to being incurious and letting others think for you.
> 
> Wrestlemania 19, for instance, was a much better show than most Wrestlemanias have been in the entire history of the event... yet it also had a disappointing buyrate at the same time.


Exactly. Let's also look at this from a different approach using the movie industry. Daniel Day Lewis has won around 3 Oscars for best male actor but according to messi's logic he's a worse actor than the Rock because his movies haven't made as much money as the Rock's movies have. Is Twilight a better movie than the Godfather because it made wayyyyy more money? I think this sums up that horrible theory that "what appeases to the masses is automatically better than what doesn't".

Also, CM Punk is very much a ratings draw now and has been ever since his heel turn last year and especially since his feud with the Rock, so he shouldn't even be bringing Punk into this discussion.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> The WWE has a long term fixed contract with its broadcasters which is under practically no threat. It's one of USA's biggest attractions and it provides them with over 350 hours of original programming every year. Do you think they would have pushed the WWE for an extra 52 hours a year if they were worried? If you, with your business course, don't understand how valuable that it to a network then you really aught to take a less challenging course.
> 
> And as for the bold part, err. Okay. That's not really proof of anything, other than who draws. Drawing is not indicative of a good product. Do you know what else draws? Aggressive marketing campaigns, I guess the adverts for RAW 1000 are the GOATS of wrestling because they were responsible for possibly the biggest short term gain ever.


WWE is making tons of profit right now, but look at the freaking ratings! Every year they keep on dropping, that doesn't mean the WWE will cancel anytime soon and I wasn't trying to imply that. I can guarantee you by that end of their "long" term contract, the ratings will be around the 2.3-2.5 range. Which means less ppv buys, less audience attendance, and more importantly less revenue. That is what I'm considered about, I love the production aspect of the WWE(which is why I don't watch TNA anymore) and I expect nothing but the best from them.





NO! said:


> Those aren't facts though. Hulk Hogan isn't factually the best of all time just because he is the most popular. Ratings and lucrative success hardly ever means proof for something being worth the time. This is why most successful forms of entertainment today lack importance... because they seem to easily sucker in the vast majority. People think that if something is PERCEIVED as the best, that it automatically is. That's basically the equivalent to being incurious and letting others think for you.
> 
> Wrestlemania 19, for instance, was a much better show than most Wrestlemanias have been in the entire history of the event... yet it also had a disappointing buyrate at the same time.


Huh? THESE ARE THE ONLY FACTS. We all have a favorite wrestlers, but someone that is the best to you may be the worst to someone else. Ratings is the only facts we can go by to determine the biggest stars of the business. Your last statement is true and I agree with you.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I still want you to explain to me how you reached the 3.3m figure. And as I said earlier, aggressive marketing is a very successful and proven tactic. If the WWE is ever on the brinks of failure then they're making enough money to splash out when the time comes. And nothing can be done about eh gradual decline in ratings, that's happening to everything, the TV market is becoming increasingly overtaken by the internet, all channels and shows suffer. 

Look at a show like breaking bad, it's critically acclaimed and one of the worlds most beloved shows, yet it has less than 3 million viewers. The cost of producing it are much higher than those of RAW and the amount of broadcast hours it provides is less than 15 a year. I guess breaking bad is shit.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> WWE is making tons of profit right now, but look at the freaking ratings! Every year they keep on dropping, that doesn't mean the WWE will cancel anytime soon and I wasn't trying to imply that. I can guarantee you by that end of their "long" term contract, the ratings will be around the 2.3-2.5 range. Which means less ppv buys, less audience attendance, and more importantly less revenue. That is what I'm considered about, I love the production aspect of the WWE(which is why I don't watch TNA anymore) and I expect nothing but the best from them.
> 
> Huh? THESE ARE THE ONLY FACTS. We all have a favorite wrestlers, but someone that is the best to you may be the worst to someone else. *Ratings is the only facts we can go by to determine the biggest stars of the business are.* Your last statement is true and I agree with you.


What about merchandise sales? Wouldn't that be the determining tool of how popular a superstar is? I mean you can completely pin point how many people like someone by who's willing to spend money on their merchandise. With ratings, there are usually several other things we need to consider before you can spotlight someone with it. You have to consider who else is in the quarter, its spot on the card, what preceeded the segment and what is coming directly after it!


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> I still want you to explain to me how you reached the 3.3m figure. And as I said earlier, aggressive marketing is a very successful and proven tactic. If the WWE is ever on the brinks of failure then they're making enough money to splash out when the time comes. And nothing can be done about eh gradual decline in ratings, that's happening to everything, the TV market is becoming increasingly overtaken by the internet, all channels and shows suffer.
> 
> Look at a show like breaking bad, it's critically acclaimed and one of the worlds most beloved shows, yet it has less than 3 million viewers. The cost of producing it are much higher than those of RAW and the amount of broadcast hours it provides is less than 15 a year. I guess breaking bad is shit.


Exactly, everyone I know that watches shows like Breaking Bad either watches them online on sites like watchseries.eu, project free tv, tvlinks, etc. or watches them on Netflix when they are released.

It wouldn't be strange to assume that the IWC is around 30% or more of wwe's viewing public, instead of the 10% that wwe thinks it is. Many people I know stream everything they watch because it's way more convenient for them, and it would be silly to assume many wwe fans don't.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



xD7oom said:


> Ratings without Axel = 3.9
> Ratings one week after Axel's debut = Lowest Rating of the Year


ARE YOU SAYING AXEL SUCKS?


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> I still want you to explain to me how you reached the 3.3m figure. And as I said earlier, aggressive marketing is a very successful and proven tactic. *If the WWE is ever on the brinks of failure then they're making enough money to splash out when the time comes.* And nothing can be done about eh gradual decline in ratings, that's happening to everything, the TV market is becoming increasingly overtaken by the internet, all channels and shows suffer.
> 
> Look at a show like breaking bad, it's critically acclaimed and one of the worlds most beloved shows, yet it has less than 3 million viewers. The cost of producing it are much higher than those of RAW and the amount of broadcast hours it provides is less than 15 a year. I guess breaking bad is shit.


fpalm

First off, I'm pretty sure I understand the business aspects better than you, you're telling me stuff I already know. Second, YES something can be done about it and I guess I will have to explain it to you since you don't understand that either. They can put on better shows for one and if they have to, make RAW 2 hours again. Also, give us better wrestlers that actually have a personality, SO WE CARE ENOUGH TO WATCH THEM. If I don't care about you, what makes you think I'm going to watch you wrestle? I blame mostly the wrestlers instead of the creative team, guys like Kofi who seem to enjoy being mediocre. 

The problem with the bolded part is, the production cuts will ruin it for me on top of a horrible product. That is literally the only thing that the WWE has never lacked and they constantly improve. And yes the rise of the internet put a strain on the ratings, but they can do much better than this.


----------



## buffdadday

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

At least it still isn't a series of weekly of 2.6's like when Punk was the champ.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

We all would prefer the show to be better written, we're not in disagreement there. Where we differ is the assertion that ratings are in any way indicative of a better product.

And what better wrestlers? Is there an infinite pool of them that we're unaware of?


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> What about merchandise sales? Wouldn't that be the determining tool of how popular a superstar is? I mean you can completely pin point how many people like someone by who's willing to spend money on their merchandise. With ratings, there are usually several other things we need to consider before you can spotlight someone with it. You have to consider who else is in the quarter, its spot on the card, what preceeded the segment and what is coming directly after it!



Merchandise sales are overrated. Just because you purchase a coke at the corner store doesn't mean coke is a big draw. Yes, so what you can sell some merchandise, that is good and all, but can you draw in viewers? Can you push ppv sales just by appearing on it? A perfect example I would use is Punk. I actually like Punk now because he proven he can have entertaining feuds and matches(Cena & Triple), but he isn't a big draw yet. Wasn't he champion when RAW received the lowest rating since the 90s? The reason I single out Punk is because he has been given so many opportunities since his shoot and he is a non factor when it comes to drawing. However, in a few months or years, he may become a big draw.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk has been entertaining for years, regardless of how much of a drawing non-factor he was.

Daniel Bryan was very entertaining in the indies, or does the entertainment value die because only 30 people were in some of the gyms he wrestled in?

And coke dominates the world in its market, the only country where it's not the top seller is Scotland, to say that "anyone can buy a coke" is a massive underestimation of how successful that business is.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I said it even last week,with their biggest draw The Rock gone,their second biggest draw Lesnar gone,and HHH gone,ratings are going to suffer.


But one thing is for sure finally WWE has awaken and realized that they need new stars for future and by GOD most new stars especially the trio known as the Shield really have been awesome.And with Wyatt family debut soon happening,the intensity level will only go up.


And hopefully,one or two of these young guns may become a megastar like The Rock,and if not like The Rock then perhaps like Hogan and Austin,and even if that's not possible then perhaps a star of the calibre of Cena!! Lets see...


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> Punk has been entertaining for years, regardless of how much of a drawing non-factor he was.
> 
> Daniel Bryan was very entertaining in the indies, or does the entertainment value die because only 30 people were in some of the gyms he wrestled in?
> 
> And coke dominates the world in its market, the only country where it's not the top seller is Scotland, to say that "anyone can buy a coke" is a massive underestimation of how successful that business is.


He was entertaining sometimes when he was feuding with Jeff Hardy, but I still think the rest was boring until he made his famous shoot that got him over. He was boring for most of his reign -- at that point I stopped watching RAW because he was Cena 2.0 but worse. Heck, he barely main-evented when he was champion so I guess that sums up his drawing ability. 

As for the crowd, we all know how important that is(watch RAW after WM 29), so yes it does diminish the value. If it wasn't for the crowd chanting YES, Bryan wouldn't even be over. Now that I think about it, his chant is more over than him.

And my coke analogy was awful, I should have used something else.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You should stop watching wrestling completely to be frank, because you clearly know nothing about it.

Bryan is over, the chant is simply part of the character. It's what he used to get over and it's what he has kept over, he gets massive pops too.

Punk was not Cena.2, he was corny as fuck for a while but so what? He didn't do it for an entire decade. He was booked below Cena, as everyone else is. That's not his fault, that's just his position in the company.

And yeah, your coke analogy was awful, but then again all your arguments have been.

I'm going to bed now, but if you want dem ratings, feel free to watch Pawn Stars.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Also, CM Punk is very much a ratings draw now and has been ever since his heel turn last year and especially since his feud with the Rock, so he shouldn't even be bringing Punk into this discussion.


Let's not get carried away now. Punk MIGHT have started becoming a draw during his feud with Rock. That drew and the feud with Taker drew. Before that Punk could only draw flies. Now maybe he has finally been accepted by casuals and is draw worthy but we really won't know for sure until he's facing a b lister and has to carry the feud. If he can get casuals interested in a feud with Punk against Del Rio or Sheamus he is officially a draw....if he can't then he isn't. Can Punk get big interest when he is the top guy in a feud or does he need someone bigger to go against to carry the day. That question hasn't been answered....yet.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> I said it even last week,with their biggest draw The Rock gone,their second biggest draw Lesnar gone,and HHH gone,ratings are going to suffer.
> 
> 
> But one thing is for sure finally WWE has awaken and realized that they need new stars for future and by GOD most new stars especially the trio known as the Shield really have been awesome.And with Wyatt family debut soon happening,the intensity level will only go up.
> 
> 
> And hopefully,one or two of these young guns may become a megastar like The Rock,and if not like The Rock then perhaps like Hogan and Austin,and even if that's not possible then perhaps a star of the calibre of Cena!! Lets see...



Excellent post. I completely about the drawing part and The Shield being awesome. But other new guys? The only good new guy is Fandanago. He is the only one with mic skills, good gimmick, good look, and more importantly a PERSONALITY. But there is one thing that is for sure and that's nobody will ever reach The Rock in terms of star power. 





Da Silva said:


> You should stop watching wrestling completely to be frank, because you clearly know nothing about it.
> 
> Bryan is over, the chant is simply part of the character. It's what he used to get over and it's what he has kept over, he gets massive pops too.
> 
> Punk was not Cena.2, he was corny as fuck for a while but so what? He didn't do it for an entire decade. He was booked below Cena, as everyone else is. That's not his fault, that's just his position in the company.
> 
> And yeah, your coke analogy was awful, but then again all your arguments have been.
> 
> I'm going to bed now, but if you want dem ratings, feel free to watch Pawn Stars.



I never said Bryan wasn't over, please read my posts carefully before you decide to post another ignorant comment. And the chant is his whole identity as far as I'm concerned. Yes, it kept him over, but that is kinda pathetic in my opinion and I LOVE Bryan. I can't take him seriously unless he decides to drop his whole "no" gimmick and starts being Danial Bryan, the best technical wrestler today. 

And I'm one of the few people on this forum that actually has any credibility when it comes to wrestling, so please try use another petty insult. And don't lie to us, you are going to bed because I ran you off this thread by proving how silly your arguments are. GG.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> As for the crowd, we all know how important that is(watch RAW after WM 29), so yes it does diminish the value. *If it wasn't for the crowd chanting YES, Bryan wouldn't even be over.* Now that I think about it, *his chant is more over than him.*


..

Right, bedtime for me.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Are you kidding me?

I never said Bryan wasn't over. Can you read? Apparently not. I said if it WASN'T for the crowd chanting yes, he wouldn't be over. That means he is over because the crowd is chanting yes. That doesn't mean Bryan isn't over. Am I going too fast for you?

And I said his chant is more over than him. The keyword being MORE. You should really go to bed, you could use the rest. In fact, I need it after wasting my time arguing with you.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> Are you kidding me?
> 
> I never said Bryan wasn't over. Can you read? Apparently not. I said if it WASN'T for the crowd chanting yes, he wouldn't be over. That means he is over because the crowd is chanting yes. That doesn't mean Bryan isn't over. Am I going too fast for you?
> 
> And I said his chant is more over than him. The keyword being MORE. You should really go to bed, you could use the rest. In fact, I need it after wasting my time arguing with you.


Nope you're still wrong. His chant is NOT more over than him. They only chant YES! in support of the guy, and chant "Daniel Bryan" almost as frequently as YES!. They don't chant Yes during his backstage segments either but he still gets IMMENSE reactions when he pops up in a segment, not to mention his entrance pops.

You are trying to insinuate that without his catchphrase he would not be over, which is complete bullshit and he's simply calling you out on it.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Nope you're still wrong. His chant is NOT more over than him. They only chant YES! in support of the guy, and chant "Daniel Bryan" almost as frequently as YES!. They don't chant Yes during his backstage segments either but he still gets IMMENSE reactions when he pops up in a segment, not to mention his entrance pops.
> 
> You are trying to insinuate that without his catchphrase he would not be over, which is complete bullshit and he's simply calling you out on it.


Yes it is and you can easily tell by looking at his career since he has arrived in the WWE. Nobody except the smarks really cared about him until the whole "yes" chants, which took a whole new turn the night after his 18 second loss at WM. If you did a poll asking the fans of the WWE, "What is one thing you like about Daniel Bryan?" the most popular answer will be the whole "yes" chants, then probably followed by his goatee. He does get good pops, but I am sure if there was no yes chants he would barely get a decent pop every week. Fans just like to be involved and that's what Daniel Bryan does, and that's the reason why they get excited to see him. I am not saying anything bad about him, I am just stating a fact.


----------



## Goku

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> And I'm one of the few people on this forum that actually has any credibility when it comes to wrestling, so please try use another petty insult.


What the fuck? :lmao

Football, sure. But what does Messi know about wrestling?


----------



## Annihilus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why is anyone surprised the ratings are going down the tubes again? the product hasn't been interesting since before Wrestlemania, theyre going to keep losing ratings every week until they do something different and exciting.

WWE PG = boring as fuck, stale ass programming that is killing the business. It's the opposite of "must see".. its "must miss" because you know instead of sitting through 3 hours, you can just watch 5 minutes on youtube later to see the only good part of the show.


----------



## Jingoro

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

the casuals are obviously into d bryan and not just cuz of the chant. maybe at point that was the case, but clearly not now.


----------



## xD7oom

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Curtis Axel = Ratings killer.


----------



## fulcizombie

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



xD7oom said:


> Curtis Axel = Ratings killer.


John cena and everything he represents= ratings killer , for many years .


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Hour 1 - 3.993 million
> Hour 2 - 3.950 million
> Hour 3 - 3.891 million
> 
> it was second watched event on cable behind Spurs/Grizzlies game 4


Last year on Memorial Day:

Hour 1 - 3.317 million (for NCIS)
Hour 2 - 3.918 million (for WWE Raw, hour 1)
Hour 3 - 3.911 million (for WWE Raw, hour 2)

So USA Network gets an extra hour of RAW with no drop, and an increase on NCIS's ratings.

Yeah, they're happy.


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> Because it says a lot about the product. As soon as I started to think of wrestling from a business perspective, ratings became important to me. I like to know who is a draw and who isn't and the ratings help me decide.


The way ratings are measured in the US isn't even accurate. Not even 0.30% of the households owning a television are taken into account.

How do ratings affect your enjoyment of the show? Does the WWE having high ratings give you money? No, therefore, it shouldn't be important to you when deciding whether to watch/enjoy the product or not.


----------



## BKelly237

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Last years Memorial Day show: 2.72
This years: 2.82

The App-itude Era is just beginning :vince5


----------



## ChickMagnet12

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bit poor by 2013's standards so far, to be expected with all the big draws gone and the rather extended WM season has ended. Things look good with The Shield, Curtis Axel and the Wyatts soon to be debuting and Punk to return. I anticipate this summer's ratings will be up on last year.


----------



## WWE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Some of you guys are funny :lol


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> Merchandise sales are overrated. Just because you purchase a coke at the corner store doesn't mean coke is a big draw. Yes, so what you can sell some merchandise, that is good and all, but can you draw in viewers? Can you push ppv sales just by appearing on it? A perfect example I would use is Punk. I actually like Punk now because he proven he can have entertaining feuds and matches(Cena & Triple), but he isn't a big draw yet. Wasn't he champion when RAW received the lowest rating since the 90s? The reason I single out Punk is because he has been given so many opportunities since his shoot *and he is a non factor when it comes to drawing.* However, in a few months or years, he may become a big draw.


That is a complete fallacy. Please stop talking shit.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> Merchandise sales are overrated. Just because you purchase a coke at the corner store doesn't mean coke is a big draw. Yes, so what you can sell some merchandise, that is good and all, but can you draw in viewers? Can you push ppv sales just by appearing on it? A perfect example I would use is Punk. I actually like Punk now because he proven he can have entertaining feuds and matches(Cena & Triple), but he isn't a big draw yet. Wasn't he champion when RAW received the lowest rating since the 90s? The reason I single out Punk is because he has been given so many opportunities since his shoot and he is a non factor when it comes to drawing. However, in a few months or years, he may become a big draw.


Your coke analogy makes literally no sense. That is the worst analogy I've ever heard. And merchandise sells don't matter? Seriously? Money is money, and merchandise sells are a huge revenue driver. TV ratings are becoming less and less important with each day. Not to mention with the hundreds of ways to consume media now, they are becoming less and less reliable and more volatile as well.

And even still, Punk has been consistently drawing TV numbers for the past few months.


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Was there a breakdown of figures for the episode posted yet?


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



123bigdave said:


> Was there a breakdown of figures for the episode posted yet?


I thought it would be up by now. But I don't think so.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:lmao

*Messi *straight up trolling and Punk marks taking the bait.

unk2


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



123bigdave said:


> Was there a breakdown of figures for the episode posted yet?


next week due to the holiday


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> :lmao
> 
> *Messi *straight up trolling and Punk marks taking the bait.
> 
> unk2


While you might be right, what gives away he's trolling and that he's not just a complete moron (without knowing any of his former posts)?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> While you might be right, what gives away he's trolling and that he's not just a complete moron (without knowing any of his former posts)?


I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Either way, some folks are getting all riled up by his posts. Whether he's trolling or not, it's still funny lol.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Either way, some folks are getting all riled up by his posts. Whether he's trolling or not, it's still funny lol.


Fair enough. He's just as funny though. The whole coke analogy had me in hysterics, not to mention him discrediting merchandise sales, probably just because unk2 did very well in that department :lol:

But it's true some of us Punk marks (even myself sometimes... or anyone I mark for sometimes) needs to just let haters hate and in some case acknowledge truth in some posts, like Punk not being a game changing draw and all that. I suppose the problem is though if no one responded, shit like Punk not being a draw at all would appear to be what the majority of the IWC thinks (and that may already be the case), granted there are some legit arguments for that pre-Punk/Rock, though him not being there the last few weeks and ratings being just as low or lower than they were last year around this time (even with Lesnar and HHH there) shows that maybe, just maybe, it was just the average yearly decline and again, maybe, Punk as champion was keeping it from dropping even further.

Lots of maybes. unk3


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Be secure in your thoughts. I'm pretty sure that the majority of people know they're reading shit when they're reading shit. Just because they may not speak out, doesn't mean they agree with what's being said. You see, this is why a lot of folks think Punk marks are touchy lol. You all say this guy *messi *is talking crap and or/trolling yet so many of you are here losing your shit over his posts. 



> I suppose the problem is though if no one responded, shit like Punk not being a draw at all would appear to be what the majority of the IWC thinks...


Don't really know how to respond to this tbh. So what if that's what the majority thinks? Is it really going to bother you if the majority of the IWC thinks CM Punk isn't a draw? Why do you care lol?


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I just like calling stupid people stupid, that's pretty much the only reason I ever pop into this thread. It literally makes no difference to my enjoyment of wraslin' what some random person on the internet thinks of drawing.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Be secure in your thoughts. I'm pretty sure that the majority of people know they're reading shit when they're reading shit. Just because they may not speak out, doesn't mean they agree with what's being said. You see, this is why a lot of folks think Punk marks are touchy lol. You all say this guy *messi *is talking crap and or/trolling yet so many of you are here losing your shit over his posts.


But that applies to every mark, especially of big time stars. If someone says Rock is above Austin, or vice-versa, you see the marks of the one who gets put under losing their shit. Same thing if someone puts Taker, HBK, or HHH at the bottom of that pack. Again, generally marks will lose their shit. It's not some exclusive thing to Punk and I don't believe Punk marks are the worst of the bunch. Hell, Messi also attacked Bryan to a degree, stating "his chant is more over than him", which was responded to the same.



> Don't really know how to respond to this tbh. So what if that's what the majority thinks? Is it really going to bother you if the majority of the IWC thinks CM Punk isn't a draw? Why do you care lol?


Generally I don't care (not that I know if you were picking me out specifically), but sometimes the stupidity/ignorance of posts should be addressed/corrected. Now I don't believe someone going around and saying "OH YOU'RE SUCH A FUCKING MORON YOU PIECE OF SHIT GO DIE YOUR THOUGHTS ARE SUX!" is ever right, but generally the responses to Messi have been level-headed and not just flaming (for the most part at least. Only really skimmed through the arguments tbh).


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> *Don't really know how to respond to this tbh. So what if that's what the majority thinks? Is it really going to bother you if the majority of the IWC thinks CM Punk isn't a draw? Why do you care lol?*


Truthfully, this is the exact reason why Punk marks aren't easy to have a discussion with. They get touchy over the slightest things. If you don't think that Punk is the greatest wrestler ever, then they label you as stupid for not liking Punk to the extent that they do. My favorite wrestler is Sheamus. I know that he is overwhelming hated on this forum but I don't go around making threads about "why don't you guys like Sheamus" and responding to every negative post about him. I don't care if no one else likes him, it actually makes me happy that I am the only one who likes him because I have him all to myself. It is wonderful. I don't have to worry about sharing him with the other girls on this forum and that is all that matters at the end of the day. :lmao :lmao



RAW is so bad right now. We can't even stand to talk about ratings for more than a page or two. We now have to resort to bashing Punk because there is nothing else to do. I think that we should just blame everything on Curtis Axel until all of the big draws come back. 

:angel


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Saying Punk isn't a draw at this point is just dumb and ignorant, but that's why it's so easy to point out who is and isn't a troll with those posts. The posts that shine in ignorance are easy to spot as troll posts.

But on topic,

SAVE_US.CMGOAT


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



LovelyElle890 said:


> I don't care if no one else likes him, it actually makes me happy that I am the only one who likes him because I have him all to myself. It is wonderful. I don't have to worry about sharing him with the other girls on this forum and that is all that matters at the end of the day. :lmao :lmao


That's so sweet...or creepy...maybe both. 





Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Saying Punk isn't a draw at this point is just dumb and ignorant


:banplz: We don't know that for certain yet. I go into why you are wrong here.


----------



## Shenmue18

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Glad to see WWE's ratings falling, maybe they'll finally start improving if they get close to 2.0 mark. That being said it'd be good if the rating go up when Punk returns so they actually treat him like the top tier talent he is and don't job him out to that no talent piece of trash Cena.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Except the ratings are not falling, actually they are level year-on-year.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> Fair enough. He's just as funny though. The whole coke analogy had me in hysterics, not to mention him discrediting merchandise sales, probably just because unk2 did very well in that department :lol:
> 
> But it's true some of us Punk marks (even myself sometimes... or anyone I mark for sometimes) needs to just let haters hate and in some case acknowledge truth in some posts, like Punk not being a game changing draw and all that. I suppose the problem is though if no one responded, shit like Punk not being a draw at all would appear to be what the majority of the IWC thinks (and that may already be the case), granted there are some legit arguments for that pre-Punk/Rock, though him not being there the last few weeks and ratings being just as low or lower than they were last year around this time (even with Lesnar and HHH there) shows that maybe, just maybe, it was just the average yearly decline and again, maybe, Punk as champion was keeping it from dropping even further.
> 
> Lots of maybes. unk3


Punk has drawn for all his QHs though. He's never going to be on the level of The Big Three or Brock Lesnar, he doesn't have their ridiculous appeal or charisma but he's been one of WWEs top draws since his feud with The Rock. He's not going to set the world on fire like Austin and Rock did but I'd realistically say that he spikes rating by around 10% when he's there, he's definitely adding to ratings.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Saying Punk isn't a draw at this point is just dumb and ignorant, but that's why it's so easy to point out who is and isn't a troll with those posts. The posts that shine in ignorance are easy to spot as troll posts.


You're right, that's why the ratings have reached record low 1.3 and 1.5s ever since he's been absen-... oh wait!


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


> Punk has drawn for all his QHs though. He's never going to be on the level of The Big Three or Brock Lesnar, he doesn't have their ridiculous appeal or charisma but he's been one of WWEs top draws since his feud with The Rock. He's not going to set the world on fire like Austin and Rock did but I'd realistically say that he spikes rating by around 10% when he's there, he's definitely adding to ratings.


LOL... Since when did Lesnar have "ridiculous charisma"?


----------



## TheGreatBanana

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> LOL... Since when did Lesnar have "ridiculous charisma"?


Read that again

"Ridiculous *appeal*" or "charisma".

Lesnar has that level of appeal, he can be charismatic in his own way, but nothing compared to what others portray.


----------



## Kenny

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh, this thread is still going. :lmao


----------



## EternalFlameFilms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE better hope the heat win tomorrow


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk returning will help increase the ratings. Haters gon' hate


----------



## PUNKY

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cmpunk91 said:


> Punk returning will help increase the ratings. Haters gon' hate


agreed. if he really is a ratings killer as some people say then why would they announce his return weeks beforehand, its obviously because they know it will attract more ppv buys so saying he kills ratings doesnt really make sense.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



england66 said:


> agreed. if he really is a ratings killer as some people say then why would they announce his return weeks beforehand, its obviously because they know it will attract more ppv buys so saying he kills ratings doesnt really make sense.


Exactly! But no the haters on here seem to feel they know more than the wwe. *sigh*


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> LOL... Since when did Lesnar have "ridiculous charisma"?


Lesnar does have charisma. Enough that he can just walk around the ring and start a "Holy shit" chant. That is... unless you believe "charisma" is the same thing as "mic skills", in which case you're terribly mistaken.


----------



## Goku

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I wouldn't call what Lesnar has 'charisma'. But he has that freakish appeal, same as this guy:


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lesnar has extremely little charisma. He has an incredible look, believability and aura, but not charisma. Getting a ton of post-wrestlemania fans marking out because they haven't seen the guy in 8 years means nothing. The proof is every single other time he's come out to the arena in dead silence.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Lesnar has extremely little charisma. He has an incredible look, believability and aura, but not charisma. Getting a ton of post-wrestlemania fans marking out because they haven't seen the guy in 8 years means nothing. The proof is every single other time he's come out to the arena in dead silence.


Dead silence? :brock


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lesnar doesn't always come out to dead silence (and I'm talking outside his returns), but he has had a lot more than the likes of guys who are on/above his level like Rock, Taker, and HHH. Crowd has been dead for Lesnar quite a few times from what I recall.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I didn't know my opinion would cause a riot. I will admit that I was wrong about Daniel Bryan so please disregard everything I said about him. He is more over than his chant(I just watched the last 3 weeks of his matches). But everything I said about Punk is right on the money. Once someone shows me proof of him drawing in big numbers then I will get off his case. Also Lesnar does have charisma, he is the second biggest draw the WWE has besides The Rock.

Ironically, when I troll nobody pays attention, but when I state my real opinion then all hell breaks loose lol. I don't want people getting the impression that I hate Punk, but I will not tolerate him not drawing big numbers given what he has received in the last 2 years. It's not just Punk, I will call out any big name that doesn't draw and criticize them too, along with the rest of the roster who loses a ton of viewers for their segments.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Told you, he's just stupid.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> Told you, he's just stupid.


Lol, throwing around insults instead of showing me facts...and you call me stupid.


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> I didn't know my opinion would cause a riot. I will admit that I was wrong about Daniel Bryan so please disregard everything I said about him. He is more over than his chant(I just watched the last 3 weeks of his matches). But everything I said about Punk is right on the money. Once someone shows me proof of him drawing in big numbers then I will get off his case. Also Lesnar does have charisma, he is the second biggest draw the WWE has besides The Rock.
> 
> Ironically, when I troll nobody pays attention, but when I state my real opinion then all hell breaks loose lol. I don't want people getting the impression that I hate Punk, but I will not tolerate him not drawing big numbers given what he has received in the last 2 years. It's not just Punk, I will call out any big name that doesn't draw and criticize them too, along with the rest of the roster who loses a ton of viewers for their segments.


I can show you numbers that show Punk is a financial success when it comes to selling merchandise.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The fans don't want to boo lesnar. He's a badass that people want to cheer yet they insist on booking him like a shit heel which leaves people apathetic towards him.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Punkholic said:


> I can show you numbers that show Punk is a financial success when it comes to selling merchandise.


That's nice and all, but merchandise is not what I asked for. This is called the ratings thread not the merchandise thread. I wont disagree with you that Punk is a draw when it becomes to selling merchandise(at one point he was number one).


----------



## rbhayek

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's not the wrestlers that draw, it's the product and storylines itself. John Cena wrestling in the main event would get the same rating as CM Punk if the storyline was just as bad, which for the most part it is. Especially these days.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hardcore Punk marks are literally the worst in this thread.


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Pacers just beat Heat to bring their Conference Final to Game 7 (final possible game for those of who don't know)

RAW will be up against that match.

#PrayForRaw


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So is there no quarter hour breakdown this week or what?


----------



## TheVoiceless

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



123bigdave said:


> Pacers just beat Heat to bring their Conference Final to Game 7 (final possible game for those of who don't know)
> 
> RAW will be up against that match.
> 
> #PrayForRaw


:wade Calling a 2.85 for monday


----------



## Kenny

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE's booking is ruining teh ratingz


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> So is there no quarter hour breakdown this week or what?


Someone in here mentioned it will be sometime this week due the holiday.


----------



## tor187

*It's Official: Raw Ratings Will Fall This Week*

The Indiana Pacers just beat the Miami Heat to force a Game 7 in the NBA Eastern Conference Finals to be held Monday night at 8:30PM EST. To those who don't believe this game will have an effect on Raw ratings, let me assure you that Game 4 drew a 5.1 rating with over 8,000,000 million viewers. Considering this is Game 7, there is sure to draw at least 10+ viewers.

There is also an NHL playoff game and Raw will once again be without Ziggler, Punk, and the part timers (Brock, HHH). 

I predict a 2.8 rating.


----------



## EternalFlameFilms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



123bigdave said:


> Pacers just beat Heat to bring their Conference Final to Game 7 (final possible game for those of who don't know)
> 
> RAW will be up against that match.
> 
> #PrayForRaw


:george 

you can blame george being a beast!!!


----------



## TheVoiceless

*Re: It's Official: Raw Ratings Will Fall This Week*



tor187 said:


> The Indiana Pacers just beat the Miami Heat to force a Game 7 in the NBA Eastern Conference Finals to be held Monday night at 8:30PM EST. To those who don't believe this game will have an effect on Raw ratings, let me assure you that Game 4 drew a 5.1 rating with over 8,000,000 million viewers. Considering this is Game 7, there is sure to draw at least 10+ viewers.
> 
> There is also an NHL playoff game and *Raw will once again be without Ziggler, Punk, and the part timers (Brock, HHH). *
> 
> I predict a 2.8 rating.


But they have :cena3

:vince5 :vince5 :vince


----------



## Kenny

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RAW sucks nowadays. I usually skip through most of it.


----------



## FingazMc

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Include me watching fecking fake episodes of raw (people playing wwe13) on youtube and those ratings shoot up!!


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: It's Official: Raw Ratings Will Fall This Week*



tor187 said:


> The Indiana Pacers just beat the Miami Heat to force a Game 7 in the NBA Eastern Conference Finals to be held Monday night at 8:30PM EST. To those who don't believe this game will have an effect on Raw ratings, let me assure you that Game 4 drew a 5.1 rating with over 8,000,000 million viewers. Considering this is Game 7, there is sure to draw at least 10+ viewers.
> 
> There is also an NHL playoff game and Raw will once again be without *Ziggler*, Punk, and the part timers (Brock, HHH).
> 
> I predict a 2.8 rating.


Non factor.

Anyways I'll definitely be watching game 7. Haven't watched RAW live in months.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Hardcore Punk marks are literally the worst in this thread.


Why single out Punk marks - "hardcore", or otherwise?


----------



## Schrute_Farms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't understand how/why an individual would sit down for THREE hours on a Monday night and watch an entire Raw. All those commercials and on show ads and wasted segments. Just PVR the show and fast forward through all the crap and watch the 20 minutes - 1 hour that is worth watching(depending on how low your standards are it MIGHT be close to an hour) and use the other 2 hours to study/workout/play with your kids/get a Girl friend/walk your dog/ vacuum... anything more useful than watching movie trailers or Jerry Lawler ordering pizza.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Why single out Punk marks - "hardcore", or otherwise?


I said hardcore Punk marks because they defend Punk to a horrible straw and I'm sure the bitching just because people were saying he couldn't draw on the ME is what led to this being a sticky in the first place. It's the same thing with hardcore DB marks who thought DB was GODs gift to SD and was the sole reason the rating for that brand were rising on the road to mania nearing the biggest dream match in a long time.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

To be fair, the hardcore punk marks are better than the hardcore ratings marks.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> To be fair, the hardcore punk marks are better than the hardcore ratings marks.


X a million


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> To be fair, the hardcore punk marks are better than the hardcore ratings marks.


Lol the gains and losses should just be for fun imo. Someone gains *insert first name* RATINGS *insert last name*.

I'm not a business guru like the dude who lets ratings determine whether he likes WWE or not. But I do like to discuss potential reasons as to why certain parts of the show lose viewers.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

well yeah anyone that chooses Raw over Game 7 of the ECF... sorry but i have no respect for you


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

With game 7 on tonight I cant see Raw doing well at all.


----------



## BKelly237

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Expect record low ratings tonight with Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Finals


----------



## LVblizzard

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I haven't missed Raw in months - but there's a good chance I'm watching game 7 tonight. Not sure how many wrestling fans care about the NBA, but ratings will suck big time.


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Even in the UK, the NBA game(on the main sky sports channel) is taking precedence over Raw(Sky Sports 3)

Raw is gonna get got tonight.


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RAW will get owned by Game 7 tonight. I expect it to average under 3.5 million.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Raw's gonna get a 2.6, a 2.8 if HHH shows up.

Edit: Looks like HHH will be on Raw tonight. And since he's wrestling, I'll bump my prediction up to a 2.9.


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SJFC said:


> Even in the UK, the NBA game(on the main sky sports channel) is taking precedence over Raw(Sky Sports 3)
> 
> Raw is gonna get got tonight.


WWE programming is exclusive to Sky Sports 3 so this point is pretty much null.


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I suppose if there is going to be any saving grace for Raw it's that Game 7 of the Conference Finals has pretty much been a shut-out since half-time.

Rating will still be terribad but not to the depths that it could have possibly been with a close game.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Given how this game is going and hockey game also being blow out.

Vince lucked out of a 2.5-2.6 rating range. Instead he will probably get 2.8-2.9 range. Congrats to him I guess


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Still no A18-49 breakdown, but way better than the Meltzer breakdown.


> PWTorch has received minute-by-minute and quarter-hour TV ratings for last Monday's Memorial Day Raw episode on March 27. The ratings are for the key demographic of males 18-49, which captures the widest range of WWE's viewing audience.
> 
> Third Hour Highlights
> 
> - As expected, the over-run rating scored the highest m18-49 rating and averaged the most m18-49 viewers of the night. (Going forward all ratings references are for the m18-49 demo to avoid redundancy.)
> 
> In the six-minute over-run for John Cena vs. Curtis Axel, Raw averaged 1.20 million viewers and scored a 1.92 rating. By comparison, the overall show averaged 953,676 viewers and scored a 1.52 rating.
> 
> - Prior to the over-run, the peak rating was the Chris Jericho & Paul Heyman Highlight Reel segment in Q9 at the top of the third hour. The segment averaged 1.05 million viewers and scored a 1.68 rating.
> 
> - Three-Hour Raw Viewer fatigue set in during Q10 following the Highlight Reel. The Q10 block averaged 949,000 viewers and scored a third-hour-low 1.52 rating, down from a 1.68 rating in Q9.
> 
> Raw then rebounded to a 1.56 rating in Q11 and 1.57 rating in Q12 leading to the 1.92 over-run rating.
> 
> First & Second Hour Highlights
> 
> - Looking at the first-half of the show, there was a very slow start at 8:00 p.m. EST. Q1 averaged a show-low 810,000 viewers and the entire first hour only averaged 835,833 viewers.
> 
> - The Shield vs. Daniel Bryan & Kane Tag Title match delivered a significant bump at the top of the second hour. Raw went from a 1.31 rating in Q4 to a 1.47 rating in Q5 for the Tag Title match.
> 
> Q5-Q6 pattern: 901,000 viewers at 9:00 p.m., 994,000 viewers at 9:06 p.m. leading to a mid-match commercial, 1.03 million viewers at 9:14 p.m., and peak viewership of 1.13 million viewers at 9:16 p.m. when the match concluded.
> 
> - Fandando was a draw this week. Fandango's segment & match against Wade Barrett in Q7 drew the highest rating of the show prior to the Highlight Reel in Q9.
> 
> Looking within Q7, the quarter-hour started with 877,000 viewers, grew to 1.10 million viewers five minutes later, and peaked with 1.18 million viewers before Raw went to commercial.
> 
> - OVERALL: The m18-49 pattern reflected the Three-Hour Raw Theory - the adult male audience is slow to tune in during the new first hour, the audience grows at 9:00 p.m. for the original start time, peaks around 10:00 EST, slips off during the third hour, and returns for the over-run at 11:00 EST.
> 
> M18-49 Show Summary
> 
> Hour 1 - 1.34 rating / 835,833 viewers
> Hour 2 - 1.56 rating / 974,900 viewers
> Hour 3 - 1.58 rating / 988,750 viewers
> Over-Run - 1.92 rating / 1.20 million viewers
> OVERALL - 1.52 rating / 953,676 viewers
> 
> M18-49 Quarter-Hours
> 
> Q1: 1.30 rating
> Q2: 1.41 rating
> Q3: 1.33 rating
> Q4: 1.31 rating
> HOUR: 1.34 rating
> 
> Q5: 1.47 rating
> Q6: 1.53 rating
> Q7: 1.64 rating
> Q8: 1.59 rating
> HOUR: 1.56 rating
> 
> Q9: 1.68 rating
> Q10: 1.52 rating
> Q11: 1.56 rating
> Q12: 1.57 rating
> HOUR: 1.58 rating
> 
> Over-run: 1.92 rating
> OVERALL SHOW: 1.52 rating


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well fuck. They were very clearly panicked last night given the fact that they rolled out the big guns in Vince/Steph for Raw along with teasing a HHH match. I don't think it will do much to help given the magnitude of Game 7 though. I don't think even Rock could help in a situation like that. At least they created some hooks to watch next week and it was actually a pretty good show for my money. 

:bryan2


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> Still no A18-49 breakdown, but way better than the Meltzer breakdown.


Memorial Day on March 27th..........lol


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> -- Monday's WWE Raw dropped 23 percent in social media activity despite the return of the McMahons and various items trending throughout the show. This week, the competition was too tough for Raw to overcome.
> 
> Raw scored 198,827 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, topping only the May 6 episode to avoid being the least-socially-active episode of the year.
> 
> Raw ranked #4 on cable TV, trailing 3.1 million in social activity for the Heat vs. Pacers Game 7 in the NBA Playoffs, nearly 1.0 million in social activity for "Teen Wolf" on MTV, and third-place "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" on VH1.


via PWTorch


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 1 - 3.62m / 1.2 18-49 rating
Hour 2 - 3.62m / 1.1 18-49 rating
Hour 3 - 3.80m / 1.3 18-49 rating

I'm more concerned by the horrific 18-49 ratings...

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...y-night-raw-nhl-hockey-teen-wolf-more/185651/


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 1 - 3.62 million
Hour 2 - 3.62 million 
Hour 3 - 3.80 million

Game 7 was 11.57 million viewers. Record rating for TNT playoff game


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> *Hour 1 - 3.62 million*
> Hour 2 - 3.62 million
> Hour 3 - 3.80 million
> 
> Game 7 was 11.57 million viewers


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And down and down and down they go. Granted, they had stiff competition, but on a show with Vince, Stephanie, an advertised HHH match and HHH himself, it's still pretty bad. Wonder what the rating comes out to.


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not surprised. Was expecting low viewership due to the NBA game.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The McMahon's coming back to pop a rating is long over. Time to start pushing over stars like Bryan to the next level and stop resting on their laurels or pushing people no one will ever care about like Del Rio. Why is something so easy so hard for them to figure out?


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> The McMahon's coming back to pop a rating is long over. Time to start pushing over stars like Bryan to the next level and stop resting on their laurels or pushing people no one will ever care about like Del Rio. Why is something so easy so hard for them to figure out?


Vince invested a shit ton in Rio. Vince's pride is at stake here. But if Vince tries the John Cena effect on DB like he did Ryder, Punk, and Ryback, and others...:flip


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't think anybody will be surprised by those numbers. I mean, having Vince/Steph/HHH appear is great and all but if you don't advertise it then nobody knows. They left it very late in that regard and in the McMahon's case, didn't even advertise at all. Even still, they could have had Rock, Taker, Brock, HHH, Vince, Steph on this show and it still probably would have done the same or marginally better. Some things you just can't compete with. This is one of them. If things don't pick up next week and continue to drop then obviously it will become a problem but I don't think they'll be sweating too much over this. It was expected.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

final rating - 2.66


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's still got to sting despite the circumstances lol. 

:vince2


----------



## TKOW

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think we'll have a more accurate indication of a rating next week. Sure, they didn't advertise Vince and Stephanie's return, as well as the Triple H appearance, but now that it looks like it's leading somewhere, people may tune in next week.

Or they may not.

I don't even RECORD Raw to watch the next day now.


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm sure they'll do something "interesting" if the ratings continues to fall.

I found the show really enjoyable last night. Boy did I mark out when Steph/Vince came out.


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.66 = 2.7 final rating. Round to the second number after the decimal :maddow2

Bad rating, but not the end of the world. I've only just gotten into basketball lately and still watched more of the NBA game on Sky Sports 1 than I did of Raw on Sky Sports 3. This week's Raw was a nothing show really. Some really good moments, but nothing that was hyped to be of crucial importance. A summer-long storyline from Payback to Summerslam is a must, they can't afford to go into July/August with nothing intricate planned.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> final rating - 2.6


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow, that's worse than I thought the rating would be.


----------



## BKelly237

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Damn... WWE can't wait for Punk to come back


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:cena3 What's that, almost on par with SmackDown?


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

SAVE US, PHILLIP! JOHN AND VINCE CAN'T DRAW!

unk2


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Totally well deserved.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE is slowly dying. Nobody will save it, nobody will boost ratings. It is what it is.


----------



## connormurphy13

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Last night's edition was actually pretty well done imo. Obviously it wouldn't compete with NBA or NHL playoffs combined, but that's going to change in a few weeks when both of those are done.

The interesting thing is that when they're backs are placed against the wall (Monday Night Wars), Vince manages to put some of his best stuff out there. There hasn't been much competition in terms of wrestling in the last decade or so, so you see the brand start to fall off a bit. I'd love if TNA was actually watchable so both could compete and bring out the best in each other.


----------



## TNAWinsLOL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



connormurphy13 said:


> Last night's edition was actually pretty well done imo. Obviously it wouldn't compete with NBA or NHL playoffs combined, but that's going to change in a few weeks when both of those are done.
> 
> The interesting thing is that when they're backs are placed against the wall (Monday Night Wars), Vince manages to put some of his best stuff out there. There hasn't been much competition in terms of wrestling in the last decade or so, so you see the brand start to fall off a bit. I'd love if TNA was actually watchable so both could compete and bring out the best in each other.


Oh god so much WWE fanboy in this post. RAW was awful last night maybe the 1st hour was decent but seriously count out in NO DQ? Axel being told he is not on HHH level thus making him look weak?

I'm no TNA mark but Slammiversary was 10x better than anything WWE has put on recently.


----------



## Maelstrom21

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I really hope Daniel Bryan doesn't take the fall for this. The crowd was so into him. I was flipping back and forth between Raw and hockey and there were very few times I stayed on Raw.

Y2J and Heyman was a disappointing segment. Curtis Axel puts me to sleep. I don't care about Triple H or the McMahons or Ryback/Cena. How about some backstory and direction for someone like Cody Rhodes or some of the mid-card? I'm a fan of Cody and Sheamus as in-ring performers but I didn't watch the match because I knew the result and there was no build.


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lol at that rating. Well deserved although last night's show was better than normal. Time for the WWE to shake things up if they don't want to go lower than 2.66.


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Man, I just hope Bryan doesn't take the blame for this. He was exceptional yesterday night.


----------



## TNAWinsLOL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chronoxiong said:


> Lol at that rating. Well deserved although last night's show was better than normal. Time for the WWE to shake things up if they don't want to go lower than 2.66.


Why does everyone say this every week? "RAW was much better than normal" is normal a steaming pile of dog turd mixed with cat and cow turd but this week it was just minus the cow? 

Man WWE is making you guys nuts thinking it's shows are getting good lol.


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TNAWinsLOL said:


> Why does everyone say this every week? "RAW was much better than normal" is normal a steaming pile of dog turd mixed with cat and cow turd but this week it was just minus the cow?
> 
> Man WWE is making you guys nuts thinking it's shows are getting good lol.


Because it was. Bryan wrestled in two matches and both of them were great. The tag team match in which The Usos took part was also good.

Yesterday's show was better than normal. Will be kind hard to make someone who's anti-WWE like you understand, though.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Punkholic said:


> Man, I just hope Bryan doesn't take the blame for this. He was exceptional yesterday night.


Why would he? Curtis has been the ME for what, 3 weeks now? DB as usual turning anything into gold and John having to be a part of his glory by running in for the save and soaking it up.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Phillip come back now dammit :vince3


----------



## connormurphy13

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TNAWinsLOL said:


> Oh god so much WWE fanboy in this post. RAW was awful last night maybe the 1st hour was decent but seriously count out in NO DQ? Axel being told he is not on HHH level thus making him look weak?
> 
> I'm no TNA mark but Slammiversary was 10x better than anything WWE has put on recently.


I'm no TNA mark, says TNAWinsLOL.

D-Bry vs. Ryback was a great match, Cena vs. Axel was well-executed and I think they're trying to make a distinction between No DQ and No Holds Barred as you can still be counted out in some No DQ matches.

Can't say anything to counter the HHH argument though, you got me there. All I'm saying is that this is the best Raw I've seen in a long time, and the product has actually been more decent since Extreme Rules for some reason. Overall, I still think they've got a long way to go, but they're closer than TNA right now, by a long shot.


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

But wasnt CM Punk the one who dropped the ratings? Lol. I hope trolls stop saying that crap.

Imo, these last Raws havent been so bad. In fact they have been pretty decent, Shield, transformation of Bryan, Heyman,Y2J, HHH, the hype of the Wyatt family... But duh, this Cena vs Ryback feud is just bad. Nobody wanted Cena as champion again, and less if you are going to make him feud against Ryback... I guess that they are paying the price of focusing the whole product in part timers who end up leaving after a while.


----------



## Theproof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

OUCH

Well, what can you say? Shit show shit ratings. As crappy as the WWE has been over the last five years I'm surprised their even still in the 2's. If it wasn't for the WWE name they would be in serous trouble right now.

The lower the ratings the better. Maybe they'll eventually get their act together.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Theproof said:


> OUCH
> 
> Well, what can you say? Shit show shit ratings. As crappy as the WWE has been over the last five years I'm surprised their even still in the 2's. If it wasn't for the WWE name they would be in serous trouble right now.
> 
> The lower the ratings the better. Maybe they'll eventually get their act together.


That's just being really negative, mondays raw was pretty good. I enjoyed it, but they had alot of competition


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Why would he? Curtis has been the ME for what, 3 weeks now? DB as usual turning anything into gold and John having to be a part of his glory by running in for the save and soaking it up.


I don't see why he would, but considering we're talking about the same company that blamed Miz for the Survivor Series low buy rate, nothing would surprise me anymore.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Why would he? Curtis has been the ME for what, 3 weeks now? DB as usual turning anything into gold and John having to be a part of his glory by running in for the save and soaking it up.


Didn't the ratings go up for the main event? granted cena was in it so..


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



BKelly237 said:


> Damn... WWE can't wait for Punk to come back


??? They were getting these kind of numbers during Punk's WWE title reign. Punk's not going to be the savior Vince needs. No one person is. The WWE has to start pushing the right people, not these boring (Del Rio) juice head (Ryback) losers (Axel...aka Tensai the "American" edition) that never have/will catch on.




MaybeLock said:


> But wasnt CM Punk the one who dropped the ratings? Lol. I hope trolls stop saying that crap.


Yes he was, and me too.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

While CM Punk isn't the answer to the ratings problems, let's not kid ourselves. When Punk was champion and the ratings were this low, he was facing strong competition week in week out AND he didn't have the likes of the McMahons/HHH/Lesnar there every week to back things up and still get these ratings. Plus when he was out for the most part with the injury, ratings still stayed very low. If anything, these ratings just prove how those low numbers during Punk's reign weren't on Punk's shoulders. I mean if you're going to start saying he killed the ratings, start saying HHH/Lesnar/Vince/Stephanie killed the ratings as well, because ratings are falling just as much as they did back then, and that's been the center of these last few weeks.

I know, it's stupid, right? As said, it's clearly down to booking and them not being creative enough/smart enough to find and push the right people correctly. Sheamus and Del Rio are perfect examples of this, and they botched Punk's 2011 severely. And then they just go back to relying on Cena and part-timers, though Cena's not much of a draw anymore and guys like Rock, Taker, Lesnar, HHH, etc. aren't going to be around for that much longer.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> While CM Punk isn't the answer to the ratings problems, let's not kid ourselves. When Punk was champion and the ratings were this low, he was facing strong competition week in week out AND he didn't have the likes of the McMahons/HHH/Lesnar there every week to back things up and still get these ratings. Plus when he was out for the most part with the injury, ratings still stayed very low. If anything, these ratings just prove how those low numbers during Punk's reign weren't on Punk's shoulders. I mean if you're going to start saying he killed the ratings, start saying HHH/Lesnar/Vince/Stephanie killed the ratings as well, because ratings are falling just as much as they did back then, and that's been the center of these last few weeks.
> 
> I know, it's stupid, right? As said, it's clearly down to booking and them not being creative enough/smart enough to find and push the right people correctly. Sheamus and Del Rio are perfect examples of this, and they botched Punk's 2011 severely. And then they just go back to relying on Cena and part-timers, though Cena's not much of a draw anymore and guys like Rock, Taker, Lesnar, HHH, etc. aren't going to be around for that much longer.


Not exactly. Punk as WWE champ was the big storyline of last year and ratings fell. He was a new face in the main event and didn't catch on. Ratings dropped on his watch so to speak. HHH/McMahons are not fresh faces. That is the problem. What ever juice they once had has been used up. They aren't causing the ratings drop because they aren't the focus of the show but they aren't helping either. Not even a little bit. Same can't be said for Cena though. He is the major storyline on Raw and he is causing ratings to drop like Punk did. No one cares. So no one watches.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Not exactly. Punk as WWE champ was the big storyline of last year and ratings fell. He was a new face in the main event and didn't catch on. Ratings dropped on his watch so to speak. HHH/McMahons are not fresh faces. That is the problem. What ever juice they once had has been used up. They aren't causing the ratings drop because they aren't the focus of the show but they aren't helping either. Not even a little bit. Same can't be said for Cena though. He is the major storyline on Raw and he is causing ratings to drop like Punk did. No one cares. So no one watches.


Punk was champion and ratings fell. Punk gets injured and Cena gets the spotlight again and ratings remain down and even fall a bit more as the year comes to a close. Then fast forward past Wrestlemania season and we're back to those numbers, only now with Cena as champ and Lesnar/HHH and now HHH/The McMahons being the big storylines of the show. Therefore ratings were down not because of Punk, but due to the overall show. Fact is if shows where HHH, The McMahons, and/or Lesnar are the main points are producing similar or slightly higher/lower numbers to what Punk as champion was getting, that should be all the proof someone needs to show it's not Punk, it's not Cena, it's not HHH or the McMahons, it's the overall quality. The only time one person who had any sort of true impact on the ratings is Rock earlier this year, and even then his impact may be exaggerated as he returned and won the title just as Mania season started, which naturally gets higher ratings than the rest of the year. I have no doubt he made the numbers a bit higher than they would've been without him, but not by an astronomical amount. Again, because the overall show's quality needs to be better.


----------



## Schrute_Farms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

people realize the NBA and NHL playoffs have been on tv every year right? same with Monday Night Football 17 nights per year. If people want to watch wrestling they will watch it's that simple. 

Seems like every week people try to defend the rating by saying, ''yeah but _________ was on last night'' well no shit you can say that every week.


----------



## TheGreatBanana

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk failed as a face because he had *NO CREDIBLE HEEL* to back him up. 

A face is only as good as the heel who helps him.

Just look at the time when Punk was face. We had Cena, Orton, Sheamus as major faces. Their was no support guy for Punk and ultimately his run as face frizzled and he turned heel; his natural state.

Punk can be a great anti-hero face, just give him a really good heel and he will deliver. Cena has had all his contemporaries (Edge, Orton, Batista, Punk) face him as heels, heck Ryback is facing him as a heel too. Even Hogan had his share of heels like Piper, Andre, Savage, Dibiase, etc. You need heels to make a face work. 

Unfortunately for Punk there wasn't such a guy and he lost a lot of steam because of it since there was no real reason to support him other than him being a champion.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> it's the overall quality.


That is true, but the buck stops with the guy at the top...fair or not. Last year that was Punk, now it is Cena. It's not all their fault but they have to take quite a bit of the responsibility....again fair or not. The quest for the WWE title is USUALLY the main storyline of Raw. All other feuds are built around who is champ and who is chasing the champ. Therefore the people in those 2 slots are vitally important to people tuning in and more importantly staying tuned in as those feuds are usually reserved for hour 3.

FYI ratings are close to where they were at the end of Punk's reign but still higher. Punk lost ratings, Rock brought them back, now Cena is killing them again.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I almost had a heart attack when I saw the ratings. I thought we would see that number in a few years from now when we lose all the main-eventers/part-timers, but oh my gosh this is terrible. I feel like I was too quick to blame Punk instead of looking at the bigger picture. I noticed the ratings got lower as soon as Raw went 3 hours. That is their problem, 3 hours and 3/4 of it is fillers and commercials. Also, the quality starting decreasing as soon as they went 3 hours, and most of the roster is lazy. Guys like Kofi Kingston who are happy being mediocre and feel content with their spot. You guys get the point and have heard this 1000 times already. Once Punk returns, the ratings will be up a bit, but then it will go straight back down. The solution is better talent.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TheGreatBanana said:


> Punk failed as a face because he had *NO CREDIBLE HEEL* to back him up.
> 
> A face is only as good as the heel who helps him.
> 
> Just look at the time when Punk was face. We had Cena, Orton, Sheamus as major faces. Their was no support guy for Punk and ultimately his run as face frizzled and he turned heel; his natural state.
> 
> Punk can be a great anti-hero face, just give him a really good heel and he will deliver. Cena has had all his contemporaries (Edge, Orton, Batista, Punk) face him as heels, heck Ryback is facing him as a heel too. Even Hogan had his share of heels like Piper, Andre, Savage, Dibiase, etc. You need heels to make a face work.
> 
> Unfortunately for Punk there wasn't such a guy and he lost a lot of steam because of it since there was no real reason to support him other than him being a champion.


Which is why someone like Bryan should have beat him for the title last May. A major heel has to be built up with wins over credible opponents, not these chicken shit heel tactics every "bad guy" uses. Instead Punk ran over everyone who got in his path..the end result...audience boredom.


----------



## redban

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DatKidMog said:


> Didn't the ratings go up for the main event? granted cena was in it so..


The Pacers - Heat game became a blow-out near the end. People started changing the channel then.

Had the game remained close, the RAW ratings would not have went up at the end, Cena regardless.


----------



## Annihilus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You guys are just making excuses for WWE.. here are the facts: WWE and Wrestling in general have been becoming more and more irrelevant every year since the attitude era & Monday Night Wars ended. They always had stiff sports competition in the past and stars were always coming and going, the reason the ratings are getting as low as they've ever been now is because of the PG era and the way its made wrestling into a sterile, safe, boring, uninteresting product that is no longer must-see.

I don't even watch Raw half the time anymore and it doesn't matter, because I know nothing interesting happens. Ratings will continue to slide, we might even see Raw drop down to 1.9 in the coming years. I don't know what they can do about that short of going back to PG-13 and making the product edgy again. The "making wrestling family entertainment" experiment is a big time fail, the only question is will WWE realize that before its too late?


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.66 rating. Not great but not a complete disaster. If it gets to 2.5 levels again then its a disaster.


----------



## DualShock

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's what you get when you have family entertainment instead of a blood sport


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It was actually a decent show in my opinion. The ending to the main event was retarded, but overall, it wasn't that bad. I think they deserved a better rating than that.

Seeing Vince and Steph just makes for good TV, and having them be involved in Triple H's current storyline has breathed some new life into it.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lol. :lmao :lmao

Watching the Miami Heat while hoping they fail *>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>* Monday Night RAW. 

People desperately wait for LeBron to slip up. And had the game been closer, then the ratings would have been way worse than that.

It didn't matter who was on RAW. It was not going to do well against that game, especially at the start. Don't underestimate the degree to which people hate LeBron, Wade, and that entire team.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I don't think even Rock could help in a situation like that.


Even as an ardent Rock fan,I completely agree.One man no matter how big of a superstar he is or the biggest like The G.O.A.T. himself,can't save the show when the entire show is full of crap.

Also,enough is enough man,WWE now should better go back to 2 hours,watching 3 hours of wrestling especially in this state of RAW is very tiresome.


Hope they go back to being a 2 hour show,and continue their focus on the new talent.Eventually it will play great dividend ,am damn sure.


2.6 is not the end,but only the beginning if they don't (in Ryback's voice): WAKE UP!


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> I almost had a heart attack when I saw the ratings. I thought we would see that number in a few years from now when we lose all the main-eventers/part-timers, but oh my gosh this is terrible. I feel like I was too quick to blame Punk instead of looking at the bigger picture. I noticed the ratings got lower as soon as Raw went 3 hours. That is their problem, 3 hours and 3/4 of it is fillers and commercials. Also, the quality starting decreasing as soon as they went 3 hours, and most of the roster is lazy. Guys like Kofi Kingston who are happy being mediocre and feel content with their spot. You guys get the point and have heard this 1000 times already. Once Punk returns, the ratings will be up a bit, but then it will go straight back down. The solution is better talent.


Dude, you act as if you own stock in the WWE. How does Raw having a low rating affect you in any way? :lmao


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just doing a routine shit-ratings check in here. I didn't watch RAW this week, didn't watch it last week and won't watch it next week. But I'll sure take the opportunity to gloat over this shit ratings, because this company deserves it pushing vanilla midgets and seasame street.


----------



## Striketeam

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The lower the ratings the better the change that the quality of the product improves. Hoping for low 2's across the board for the rest of the year, that should make them realize that people don't want to watch a boring show with little to no plot and mostly filler matches.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DualShock said:


> That's what you get when you have family entertainment instead of a blood sport


unk3


----------



## fulcizombie

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DualShock said:


> That's what you get when you have family entertainment instead of a blood sport


Exactly . Going PG and kiddie friendly was the kiss of death for the wwe .All that is left is the wrestlemania period and the guest stars , like the rock and lesnar . The product needs ahuge change towards something more extreme than the attitude era to have a chance at better ratings .


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Last Week:



> In the segment-by-segment numbers, Alberto Del Rio vs. Big E Langston lost 215,000 viewers; Backstage stuff with Team Hell No and Bret Hart lost 363,000 viewers. Dean Ambrose vs. Kofi Kingston for the U.S. title lost 67,000 viewers. Roman Reigns & Seth Rollins vs. Daniel Bryan & Kane for the tag titles in the 9 p.m. hour gained 119,000 viewers and finished at 2.72. Wade Barrett vs. Fandango with Miz as referee gained 73,000 viewers. Brodus Clay & Sweet T & Great Khali vs. 3MB lost 48,000 viewers. The Highlight Reel segment with Chris Jericho and Paul Heyman gained 317,000 viewers at 10 p.m. and did a 2.97 quarter. Kaitlyn & Natalya vs. Bella Twins lost 421,000 viewers. Sheamus & Randy Orton vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow gained 80,000 viewers. And the John Cena vs. Curtis Axel main event and overrun gained a solid 627,000 viewers to a show-high 3.16 overrun. The key to this is not that Axel necessarily brought new viewers in, but they put in a newer guy in the spot and the segment still did well.


This WeeK:



> Raw on 6/3 did a 2.65 rating and 3.68 million viewers. The rating was the third lowest for a non-holiday Raw in the last 15 years, trailing two shows this past fall that went against blockbuster NFL games. It was also the lowest rating for a Raw show not on a holiday night or during football season since July 7, 1997, which was when they had head-to-head competition by Nitro at its peak.
> 
> The culprit was Game Seven of the Miami Heat vs. Indiana Pacers series, which did an 8.24 rating and 11.57 million viewers. That’s the end of Raw’s major sports issues until football season as the final series has no Monday games scheduled. Raw was third for the night on cable. The Stanley Cup playoffs with the Boston Bruins vs. Pittsburgh Penguins did a 2.1 rating and 2.60 million viewers on NBC Sports Network.
> 
> The show did a 1.8 in teenage boys (down 22%), 1.9 in Males 18-49 (down 14%), 0.8 in Girl teens (down 11%) and 0.9 in Women 18-49 (down 10%). The audience was 67.9% male.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, the opening segment with Stephanie and Vince McMahon opened at 2.72, which is very low, and the game didn’t start until 8:30, so it appeared a lot of the usual audience that decided to watch the game didn’t even bother to tune in to Raw before the game started. The Shield vs. Daniel Bryan & Kane & Randy Orton gained 1,400 viewers. Keep in mind they kept this match going until after 8:30 when the game started, by design, and the fact they were ahead at the end of the match then the start, given the start of the game, is a feather in their cap. Usos vs. Prime Time Players lost 450,000 viewers to a show low 2.39, but that is to be expected. Alberto Del Rio vs. Big E Langston gained 258,000 viewers at 9 p.m. to a 2.58. Sheamus vs. Cody Rhodes gained 18,000 viewers, which is better than I’d have expected. Fandango vs. Great Khali lost 252,000 viewers. Wade Barrett vs. The Miz in a non-title match and first part of the Chris Jericho/Paul Heyman contract signing 338,000 viewers. The second part of the contract signing and Bellas & A.J. Lee vs. Kaitlyn & Naomi & Cameron gained 116,000 viewers to a 2.74 quarter at the 10 p.m. quarter. Bryan and Kane backstage and The Wyatt Family vignette lost 328,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Ryback gained 463,000 viewers at 10:30 p.m., which is tremendous for that time slot. John Cena vs. Curtis Axel gained 430,000 viewers to a show peak of a 3.14 overrun.


breakdown via Observer


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Jesus those are some awful numbers. Pretty bad showing from The Shield, Hell No, Vince, Trips and Stephanie. The only saving graces are Cena, and the Heyman/Jericho segments. Just mentioning CM GOAT brings in the viewers. 

unk

Bryan/Ryback did very well though, which is nice to see. But it isn't impressive when the show high is only a 3.1. That kind of blows hard. Not good at all.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> final rating - 2.66


:lmao


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Very nice for DB/Ryback.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WOW at that Bryan/Ryback gain!


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



CHIcagoMade said:


> :lmao


:lol

:bryan :ryback Bringin in DEM RATINGZ!


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

D-Bry wrestling = ratings. Further proof they need to push him to the top.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Has a seg ever gained more than the ME?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Has a seg ever gained more than the ME?


Well, while the breakdown does indicate the gain was in the 10PM segment, I distinctly remember the far majority of the match taking place in the quarter before it, and only took up a few minutes of the 10PM. What I'm referring to is the Taker match with The Shield on Raw (which coincidentally enough had Bryan in it). Here's the breakdown from that night:



> In the segment-by-segment, the show opened at a 3.04 rating for the segment with Paul Heyman and HHH to set up the cage match. R-Truth vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 163,000 viewers. Brodus Clay vs. Damien Sandow, and a Dolph Ziggler, A.J., Vickie Guerrero and Brad Maddox backstage segment gained 153,000 viewers. Chris Jericho vs. Ziggler gained 439,000 viewers which is strong growth these days, doing a 3.35 at the 9 p.m. mark. Cody Rhodes vs. Tensai lost 224,000 viewers. Big E Langston vs. Zack Ryder lost 139,000 viewers. Un*dertaker & Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. The Shield gained 581,000 viewers, which was strong growth, doing a show high 3.50 quarter at 10 p.m.* Fandango vs. William Regal lost 949,000 viewers to a 2.83 quarter. More people tuned out in this segment (basically they lost one out of every five viewers) than nearly any in recent years. This shows the difference between the disconnect of a cult TV audience and the real viewing audience and also the big picture impact of a cult thing on television, not to say that in time this won’t change, but it does give you the real perspective of where it is now. The Divas Battle Royal gained 302,000 viewers. *The in-ring Mick Foley, Ryback, John Cena and The Shield final segment gained 548,000 viewers in the overrun, which is good but not great, finishing at a 3.43 overrun. *


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> D-Bry wrestling = ratings. Further proof they need to push him to the top.


Well it looks like that's going to happen.

will94 posted this in the Bryan Discussion thread. He says it was from this weeks Wrestling Observer Newsletter.



> For those who think the company doesn’t see Bryan as a main eventer, right now the penciled in main event for Money in the Bank on 7/14 in Philadelphia is Cena vs. Bryan, with Bryan still as a babyface, as the title match. As you should be aware, everything is subject to change. It’s pretty much a sure thing Bryan will be cheered in that match, given the city, and they are fully aware of that. The impression is they won’t try and make him Bryan a heel, but that’s certainly something that can change.
> 
> source: f4wonline


If true, then :yes


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena vs. Bryan on PPV would be fucking bananas. :mark: Yes please.

I do not look forward to the thousands of Bryan-loving threads/posts though.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Well it looks like that's going to happen.
> 
> will94 posted this in the Bryan Discussion thread. He says it was from this weeks Wrestling Observer Newsletter.
> 
> 
> 
> If true, then :yes


So basically... we might get Bryan/Cena, face vs. face, or we might not...

Well, if it is true, then that's awesome. Bryan right now is probably the most over face in the company, and against Cena in Philadelphia, it'll be very interesting to see if the Cena heat rivals what he's gotten in Chicago, MSG, and Miami (I don't expect anything to rival ECW ONS 06 though).


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Really hope they go through with Bryan vs Cena for MITB. Could be an absolute classic.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Cena vs. Bryan on PPV would be fucking bananas. :mark: Yes please.
> 
> I do not look forward to the thousands of Bryan-loving threads/posts though.


I think they are doing a "Summer of Bryan" storyline just as I expected, in line with the "Summer of Punk 2011" one two years ago. If this means Bryan cuts another promo like below to promote his match then I'm all for it.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> So basically... we might get Bryan/Cena, face vs. face, or we might not...
> 
> Well, if it is true, then that's awesome. Bryan right now is probably the most over face in the company, and against Cena in Philadelphia, it'll be very interesting to see if the Cena heat rivals what he's gotten in Chicago, MSG, and Miami (I don't expect anything to rival ECW ONS 06 though).


Holy shit I just thought of something. MITB is in Philly, just like where ROH was based out of . They might actually go through with a shoot promo before the payperview where Bryan talks about being the king of ROH and how, "Next Sunday in Philly, where I became who I am today, you won't see Daniel Bryan, you will see the American Dragon Bryan Danielson, and he's going to KICK YOUR HEAD IN" :mark:


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't think it would be nearly as impactful/meaningful as the Summer of Punk. I think Bryan could make the most of it, but I don't think the WWE would let it happen. Unfortunately I think it would just be Cena's filler program for between Ryback and whatever they have planned for him at Summerslam. 

0% chance Bryan beats Cena for the belt.

^ Thanos, don't get too excited. :lol I can't ever see that happening.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I don't think it would be nearly as impactful/meaningful as the Summer of Punk. I think Bryan could make the most of it, but I don't think the WWE would let it happen. Unfortunately I think it would just be Cena's filler program for between Ryback and whatever they have planned for him at Summerslam.
> 
> 0% chance Bryan beats Cena for the belt.
> 
> ^ Thanos, don't get too excited. :lol I can't ever see that happening.


Could you have seen that happening with Punk before the shoot? Because I certainly didn't. Anything can happen in this industry and Bryan is even more over then Punk ever was "before" the shoot, so it could go over just as well. It won't be delivered as well because Punk's the best promo guy for a reason, but it could definitely be as impactful.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah, even as a Bryan supporter (not a huge one, tho) and a Punk detractor, I don't think a summer of Bryan will have the same impact. We've already seen something "out of the box" there and the touch of real behind the scenes stuff from that summer will be absent or extremely fake this time should they go for it.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No, it won't be as impactful, because the reason Summer of Punk was so impactful was because Punk was legit frustrated, and legit was on his way out the door. That was fucking real, must see TV at that time. Bryan has nothing to really be frustrated over, he was pushed very well throughout his WWE career. Besides, if they go that route with Bryan, the general consensus would be that the angle is just a rip-off. The Summer of Punk storyline at this point is untouchable.

Bryan's an underdog right now, and he'll try to prove that he is not only not the weak link, but that he can beat the champ. Enter good guy Cena, gives Bryan the match, back and forth with Cena coming out on top, but Bryan looking strong. If this program happens, I'm almost positive that's the way it'd go down.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Yeah, even as a Bryan supporter (not a huge one, tho) and a Punk detractor, I don't think a summer of Bryan will have the same impact. We've already seen something "out of the box" there and the touch of real behind the scenes stuff from that summer will be absent or extremely fake this time should they go for it.





Wrestlinfan35 said:


> No, it won't be as impactful, because the reason Summer of Punk was so impactful was because Punk was legit frustrated, and legit was on his way out the door. That was fucking real, must see TV at that time. Bryan has nothing to really be frustrated over, he was pushed very well throughout his WWE career. Besides, if they go that route with Bryan, the general consensus would be that the angle is just a rip-off. The Summer of Punk storyline at this point is untouchable.
> 
> Bryan's an underdog right now, and he'll try to prove that he is not only not the weak link, but that he can beat the champ. Enter good guy Cena, gives Bryan the match, back and forth with Cena coming out on top, but Bryan looking strong. If this program happens, I'm almost positive that's the way it'd go down.


These are great points and you guys are probably right, but that doesn't change the fact that it would be amazingly awesome to see him get called the "American Dragon" and come out in Philly to the Final Countdown on WWE television :mark:. It would be surreal as fuck to see.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I would probably man-cry, yes.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Final Countdown would be hella awesome. Daniel Bryan should convince WWE to let him use it for one night when he challenges Cena for the WWE title in ROH country.


----------



## TromaDogg

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I am now officially 7 weeks clean of WWE programming, asides from a very quick flick through a downloaded copy of Extreme Rules.

WWE only have themselves to blame for their shitty rating, they can't be making excuses about basketball games and whatever being on the other channels. If they've managed to finally alienate me, who stuck with them throughout the mid 1990's, then fuck only knows what people who've only been watching since 1998 onwards think of how the product is today.


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Last Week:
> 
> 
> 
> This WeeK:
> 
> 
> 
> breakdown via Observer


Pretty good to see Bryan drawing those numbers! :yes


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That bryan/ryback gain is incredible

how the fuck did that happen


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



kokepepsi said:


> That bryan/ryback gain is incredible
> 
> how the fuck did that happen


Maybe because wrestling fans tune in to watch an amazing wrestler like Bryan wrestle? Wacky concept, I know.




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> 0% chance Bryan beats Cena for the belt.


I dunno. I could see a Bret Hart/SCSA finish where Cena gets locked in the NO Lock and refuses to tap leading to his passing out and Bryan winning the strap. It would cement Bryan as a bad ass submission expert underdog and take nothing away from Cena. Plus it is a fresh finish that hasn't been used recently.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

6/3 Raw:


> *All ratings & viewership references below are for the m18-49 demographic to avoid redundancy.
> *
> Second & Third Hour Highlights
> 
> - Raw did not reach 1.0 million viewers until the middle of the second hour (9:30 p.m. at the start of Q7) when Paul Heyman and Vince McMahon spoke in McMahon's office, then Fandango and Summer Rae were shown walking down the hallway.
> 
> Raw did not get back to 1.0 million viewers until 9:54 p.m. for the start of the Paul Heyman and Chris Jericho contract signing. For the second week in a row, Heyman-Jericho delivered a significant boost at the end of the second hour leading into the third hour.
> 
> The contract signing segment peaked with 1.137 million viewers at 9:58 p.m., then finished with 1.101 million viewers at 10:04 p.m. prior to a commercial.
> 
> During the peak audience range, Q7 scored a 1.22 rating, Q8 jumped to a 1.47 rating, and Q9 stayed the same at a 1.47 rating.
> 
> - When the NBA game was clearly a blow-out, Raw jumped to a 1.57 rating in Q11 and 1.62 rating in Q12 to conclude the third hour. Both quarter-hours topped last week's Q11 and Q12 ratings by small margins.
> 
> The key for Q11 was Daniel Bryan vs. Ryback. Q11 started with 1.037 million viewers, then after a commercial, the match peaked with 1.116 million viewers at 10:43 p.m. for the conclusion of the match.
> 
> The key to Q12 was John Cena vs. Axel. The match peaked with 1.217 million viewers at 10:59 p.m., which was the most viewers for any minute of the show until the over-run.
> 
> - The five-minute over-run jumped to a show-high 1.93 rating (vs. 1.92 rating last week) and averaged 1.209 million viewers (vs. 1.199 million viewers last week).
> 
> The final five minutes of Raw: 1.198 million viewers, 1.180 million viewers, 1.198 million viewers, 1.229 million viewers, and a show-high 1.239 million viewers for Ryback standing tall over John Cena to close the show.
> 
> First Hour Highlights
> 
> - Raw opened with a dismal 0.95 rating and averaged 592,000 viewers in Q1 for the unadvertised McMahon Family reunion, reflecting a very slow start for the males 18-49 audience. Last week's Q1 scored a 1.30 rating and averaged 810,000 viewers.
> 
> The audience picked up with a 1.27 rating in Q3 for the end of The Shield vs. Team Bryan & Orton & Kane in a six-man tag match, but dropped back to a 1.24 rating in Q4 for the Usos vs. Prime Time Players and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> - The peak audience during the first hour was 983,000 viewers at 8:44 p.m. for the McMahons arguing backstage, piggybacking off a rising audience for the end of the six-man tag.
> 
> M18-49 Show Summary
> 
> Hour 1 - 1.15 rating / 716,750 viewers
> Hour 2 - 1.33 rating / 828,250 viewers
> Hour 3 - 1.50 rating / 940,000 viewers
> Over-Run - 1.93 rating / 1.21 million viewers
> OVERALL - 1.37 rating / 857,615 viewers (down 10.1% from last week)
> 
> M18-49 Quarter-Hours
> 
> Q1: 0.95 rating
> Q2: 1.12 rating
> Q3: 1.27 rating
> Q4: 1.24 rating
> HOUR: 1.15 rating
> 
> Q5: 1.35 rating
> Q6: 1.26 rating
> Q7: 1.22 rating
> Q8: 1.47 rating
> HOUR: 1.33 rating
> 
> Q9: 1.47 rating
> Q10: 1.35 rating
> Q11: 1.57 rating
> Q12: 1.62 rating
> HOUR: 1.50 rating
> 
> Over-run: 1.93 rating
> 
> OVERALL SHOW: 1.37 rating (vs. 1.52 rating last week)


PWTorch


----------



## fulcizombie

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ryback destroying Cena and then having a long program vs. Bryan (with Bryan being the underdog face and Ryback the monster heel champion) with Bryan winning at the end (not the first match) would be 1000000000000000000000 times better than having that buffoon cena being the good guy giving the "inferior" bryan "a chance" .


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I wish PWtorch put a full minute-by-minute breakdown on the website, or a graphical version. Much better than the F4WOnline garbage. Either way, the audience is liking Bryan and Axel, looking at the numbers.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Last week there were some random segments able to make admirable gains and/or not horrible losses must be encouraging. Outside of that there isn't much to see here. For the level of viewership they had for that show, 9pm, 10pm and the overrun all did what you would expect them to do. Nothing outstanding by any means but nothing a flop either. 



> In the segment-by-segment, the opening segment with Stephanie and Vince McMahon *opened at 2.72*, which is very low, and the game didn’t start until 8:30, *so it appeared a lot of the usual audience that decided to watch the game didn’t even bother to tune in to Raw before the game started.* The Shield vs. Daniel Bryan & Kane & Randy Orton gained 1,400 viewers. Keep in mind they kept this match going until after 8:30 when the game started, by design, and the fact they were ahead at the end of the match then the start, given the start of the game, is a feather in their cap. Usos vs. Prime Time Players lost 450,000 viewers to a show low 2.39, but that is to be expected. Alberto Del Rio vs. Big E Langston gained 258,000 viewers at 9 p.m. to a 2.58. *Sheamus vs. Cody Rhodes gained 18,000 viewers*, which is better than I’d have expected. Fandango vs. Great Khali lost 252,000 viewers. Wade Barrett vs. The Miz in a non-title match and first part of the Chris Jericho/Paul Heyman contract signing 338,000 viewers. The second part of the contract signing and Bellas & A.J. Lee vs. Kaitlyn & Naomi & Cameron gained 116,000 viewers to a *2.74 quarter at the 10 p.m. quarter*. Bryan and Kane backstage and The Wyatt Family vignette lost 328,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Ryback gained 463,000 viewers at 10:30 p.m., which is tremendous for that time slot. John Cena vs. Curtis Axel gained 430,000 viewers to a show peak of a 3.14 overrun.


You don't advertise then people don't know and they don't watch. I think it would be a safe bet to say that had WWE advertised the McMahon's kicking off the show, a lot of those people who didn't bother to tune in before the game would have tuned in had they known who was going to be there. This was a random as fuck Raw where nobody was expecting Stephanie or Vince. I don't think this is a reflection on the drawing power of the McMahon's at all. Vince alone has proven to be more than enough to lift an entire show. I have no doubt that had people actually known about this, it would have done better. They were on for a total of about 15 minutes, 5 of which were backstage segments. They aren't miracle workers, especially unadvertised miracle workers on a night where a lot of their audience isn't even watching the show.

Seems like Seamus is making small and steady gains every week no matter what segment they put him in. They're minimal but given the fact that he's doing fuck all, it's a good sign for him. He's not drawing in masses of people of course but he isn't losing them either which is decent. 

The opening segment and 10pm were basically even at 2.72 and 2.74 with nothing in between doing better. Nothing to see here. The top 2 segments of the show up to that point had the same audience. I think it basically proves that with the basketball game on, this was the peak of their audience. The same people who were watching at the start came back for the contract signing but nobody new. Once the game became a blow out, then they were able to make some gains and draw in different people who hadn't decided to watch up until that point. 

Then comes the big gain for Bryan/Ryback which is a great sign to see given how great the Bryan storyline is. On a night where nobody was doing that well, this has to be a good reflection upon Bryan. I also think the fact that they built it up throughout the show helped a great deal too. It wasn't just a random match. They gave us a reason to want to see it. It's only one night though but as usual everybody is getting carried away. It means nothing.....yet. Let's see if it can be consistent and the story progresses.

When a show's peak is only 3.1, you can't expect miracles. When a show's overall is only 2.6, a 3.1 peak is actually rather impressive. You can't expect them to go pulling in massive numbers when the audience is simply not there. In this case, a lot of the regular Raw audience was watching the game. 

On the Punk vs. Bryan front, a babyface rise to the top can be just as impactful/entertaining as anything out there and we haven't had one since Jeff Hardy in 2008. Besides, all the Punk stuff didn't set the world on fire ratings wise either. It was must see TV for a lot of people around these parts, myself included, but let's not go pretending that masses of people started tuning in out of nowhere to see it. They didn't, and the only time those segments did really well was when they had Vince/Cena/HHH or even fucking Nash in them. It was a great program (up to a certain point before they dropped it as usual) but it was most certainly not a line in the sand as far as successfully rated wrestling programs go. That has nothing to do with anybodies personal enjoyment of it btw. That's just purely going on the numbers.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Daniel Bryan didn't lose viewers to a Miami Heat Game 7 and then gained half a million
viewers on a sub 4 million viewer show. Our bodies are ready. Give him a heavyweight title face run.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'd love to see RAW go head to head with the NBA Finals.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Loved the Bryan Ryback match
Angry Bryan is awesome


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



CHIcagoMade said:


> I'd love to see RAW go head to head with the NBA Finals.


They currently are, and failing big time


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE must be happy about how things are going now. No more NBA finals games happening on same day as Raw.

And NHL finals are happening on same day as Raw, but NHL finals(at least in USA) are numbers WWE can beat.

At least in USA they can beat them, in Canada, ratings for Raw will drop big time. Especially since Canadians will care more about this historic matchup(original 6 teams in the finals) than people in USA would.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah but people will still use the NHL as an excuse if Raw gets a low rating.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



GOD said:


> Yeah but people will still use the NHL as an excuse if Raw gets a low rating.


People will blame anything for Raw ratings being "low" even though Raw is one of the most watched cable TV shows on Mondays. Cause people on this site would rather Raw get 8-9M viewers and be 15th among cable tv shows, over getting 4M viewers and being 1-3 among cable tv shows.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



dxbender said:


> People will blame anything for Raw ratings being "low" even though Raw is one of the most watched cable TV shows on Mondays. Cause people on this site would rather Raw get 8-9M viewers and be 15th among cable tv shows, over getting 4M viewers and being 1-3 among cable tv shows.


(Y)


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good to read that Daniel Bryan vs Ryback did ok for their match. They advertised it like 2 or three times before the match. Was a good match too.


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



dxbender said:


> People will blame anything for Raw ratings being "low" even though Raw is one of the most watched cable TV shows on Mondays. Cause people on this site would rather Raw get 8-9M viewers and be 15th among cable tv shows, over getting 4M viewers and being 1-3 among cable tv shows.


Uhhhhhhh... I think 8 million is better than 4 though. Not that it really matters if the show is still shit, but to argue it's better to be "ranked higher" with less viewers than to have more viewers is just... well.. it makes no sense.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Kabraxal said:


> Uhhhhhhh... I think 8 million is better than 4 though. Not that it really matters if the show is still shit, but to argue it's better to be "ranked higher" with less viewers than to have more viewers is just... well.. it makes no sense.


Would 8M be better than 4M if:
When you get 8M viewers, the average on TV is 10M
When you get 4M viewers, the average on TV is 2M


I'd rather get 4M when average of other shows is 2M, then get 8M when average of other shows is 10M. Cause it means you're doing better than most shows on TV.

Last monday for example, minus sports, the average viewers per TV show on monday night between 8-11pm was 1.5M viewers.

Raw getting more than DOUBLE the CABLE TV AVERAGE! How is that not good?!


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Imagine if Bryan had won vs Ryback last week. Man, the ratings would've been even higher for that match.


----------



## Lok

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

HHH u mad.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Orton or Bryan to turn heel on Sunday then.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> -- Monday's WWE Raw improved four percent in Social Media Activity from last week's near-year-low performance.
> 
> Raw scored 206,962 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, which was good for #3 on cable TV Monday night. Raw trailed MTV's "Teen Wolf" and VH1's "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta."


\

via PWTorch


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wonder what the final rating is and if anyone can get the breakdown of viewership throughout the show each segment will get a green!


----------



## Osize10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If Bryan vs Rollins lost viewers I will post in my sig whatever KO Bossy wishes


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.893m, 4.085m and 3.992m.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...rimes-switched-at-birth-longmire-more/186745/


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> 3.893m, 4.085m and 3.992m.
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...rimes-switched-at-birth-longmire-more/186745/


:vince3


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> :vince3


Better than I expected


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol at those numbers, especially the first one since that was where the HHH match was advertised. Breakdown will be interesting to see. Overall though numbers aren't looking good... I mean this is with the likes of HHH and Vince trying to keep them afloat.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

4 million flat or less on a competition free Monday. All the Vince, Triple H and Steph hooplah was sub-4 million.
So much for "big summer angle," huh?

:vince3 :HHH2


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> I mean this is with the likes of HHH and Vince trying to keep them afloat.


vince and hhh are actually killing momentum on raw, the entire show was built around them when it should have been built around the orton/bryan storyline

what was raw doing before this whole hhh/mcmahon soap opera crap began...


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

1st hour the lowest again? even with Triple H and the Mcmahons featured in the majority of the first hour and all over the show as a whole?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Don't know what some peeps are finding funny or horrible about the numbers tbh. They're back to being on/around 4 million viewers and it's June. What are you expecting them to be doing right now? The last 2 weeks, those were bad numbers. This week they're back to where they ought to be. The only time they're able to average 5 million, if they're lucky, is during the RTWM. Any other time, 4 million viewers is the average number of viewers for Raw these days during off peak times of the year.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> vince and hhh are actually killing momentum on raw, the entire show was built around them when it should have been built around the orton/bryan storyline
> 
> what was raw doing before this whole hhh/mcmahon soap opera crap began...


Agreed. I'm surprised so many are happy the Mcmahon drama is back. It's old.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Their average isn't 2.8 with no competition. With the Mcmahons and Triple H wrestling, it should be higher. Especially the first hour.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The average should be higher than just 4 mil with a Vince/HHH storyline. Just because it's slightly above the last few weeks doesn't make it good. Hour 2 was alright, but the other two were below par, and the first was bad considering what was advertised (thouh we'll have to wait for the breakdown to see how well the HHH/Axel match did on it's own).


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DB :clap


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They aren't going to go from a 2.6 to a 3.5 in 1 week. That's completely unrealistic no matter who you have on the show.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> They aren't going to go from a 2.6 to a 3.5 in 2 weeks. That's completely unrealistic no matter who you have on the show.


Not even with...:brock :rock4 :austin and Dixie along with Shane to make a special announcement :side: and the return of Jeff Hardy and RVD? :russo


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Vinces face right now

:vince3


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Not even with...:brock :rock4 :austin and Dixie along with Shane to make a special announcement :side: and the return of Jeff Hardy and RVD? :russo


Not even with all that....well, maybe with all that but they'd have to do some serious promotion to let people know about it beforehand lol. They aren't going to magically pull an extra 1 million+ average viewers who weren't previously there out of nowhere just because they have the McMahon's back on TV again. How foolish to even think that tbh.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> 3.893m, 4.085m and 3.992m.
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...rimes-switched-at-birth-longmire-more/186745/


Bryan/Rollins match is highest hour. Shocking isn't it. :lol

Don't follow ratings too closely. How often does hour 2 beat hour 3 given the over run...it props up hour 3 usually, right?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Bryan/Rollins match is highest hour. Shocking isn't it. :lol
> 
> Don't follow ratings too closely. Given the over run, how often does hour 2 beat hour 3?


There doesn't seem to be a set pattern. For a while the first hour was highest and the show continued to dip. Then for a while after that the first hour was the lowest and the show picked up viewers until the end. Some weeks it's just random as fuck. You don't really know anything until the breakdown comes in though.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Was there a game on Monday or were they unopposed ?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Unopposed as far as I know.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.04 rating according to the torch


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cliffy Byro said:


> Was there a game on Monday or were they unopposed ?


No game. If fact they are unopposed for the rest of the NBA finals.




Starbuck said:


> There doesn't seem to be a set pattern. For a while the first hour was highest and the show continued to dip. Then for a while after that the first hour was the lowest and the show picked up viewers until the end. Some weeks it's just random as fuck. You don't really know anything until the breakdown comes in though.


Really? I thought the over run boosted hour 3. Guess that's a thing of the past too. Thanks for the info.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Really? I thought the over run boosted hour 3. Guess that's a thing of the past too. Thanks for the info.


It used to and a lot of the time still does but since they brought in the 3 hour format, there have been a few occasions where the third hour has had less viewers than the other two, more than likely from viewer exhaustion. 3 hours is a long time.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Next week, I predict that viewership will be up to around 4,060,000.


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not surprised as I was expecting this since there was no NBA to compete against last night.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wonder how good the fallout to Payback will be. Ziggler's next opponent, and the aftermath of Jericho vs Punk, and if Orton truly does turn heel, and not to mention HHH is gonna wrestle. What if we have a new champion as well? Should spike interest.


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.0 is a really good rating in todays day. I defo think they will do better on average than last year.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Does anyone have a break down of the viewership?


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

There was no game on Monday but it was E3 and I decided to watch the PlayStation reveal event instead of RAW. I was watching E3 all day, to be honest.

Truthfully, Microsoft employees should be hired to work as heels in the WWE because they know how to rile up the marks hard. I want Don Mattrick as WWE Champion. :lmao :lmao :lmao

Also, I learned that Sony is more over than any face on the entire WWE roster.:cool2


----------



## Marcos 25063

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

last week make 2.66 and now 3.04


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

In the segment-by-segment, the first segment with HHH vs. Curtis Axel and Vince McMahon calling it off twice did a 3.11 opening quarter. The backstage follow-up plus Dean Ambrose vs. Kane lost 299,000 viewers. The Kane vs. Ambrose post-match with Bryan & Orton and Rollins and Reigns as well as backstage stuff lost 67,000 viewers. The Miz vs. Cody Rhodes gained 116,000 viewers. The Chris Jericho interview, with Dolph Ziggler, Big E Langston and A.J. Lee out, gained 316,000 viewers at 9 p.m. and did a 3.16 quarter. Jericho vs. Langston lost 185,000 viewers. Antonio Cesaro vs. Sin Cara lost 19,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs Roman Reigns lost 100,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Seth Rollins at 10 p.m. gained 223,000 viewers to a 3.20 quarter. The Bryan vs. Rollins post-match lost 62,000 viewers. The Kaitlyn reveal with Langston and A.J. gained 74,000 viewers. Damien Sandow vs. R-Truth lost 362,000 viewers. The overrun with the Vince, HHH and Stephanie McMahon backstage and the John Cena/Ryback angle and pull-apart, gained 521,000 viewers and finished at 3.33.

Via Observer


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.11 for the opening... certainly muuuch better than last week's,. In the grand scheme of things though it's average for the year since WM-season ended, but lolworthy for an advertised (since last week) HHH match, and everything that ensued which lasted the whole quarter. Disappointing in that regard, not to mention it wasn't the peak or one of the top 3 segments of the show, AND Sony's E3 didn't even start until after 9. So actually it's pretty poor when you consider all things. Loss afterwards was about what you'd expect. Miz vs. Cody gaining was a shock, and it'd be interesting to find out what caused that to say the least. 

Bryan/Rollins getting the best 10PM in about a month is good, and the match deserves it imo. The Kaitlyn stuff gaining... wow, who would've thunk a divas angle could draw some viewers in? Cena/Ryback overrun doing very well is a good sign and it's the best overrun since the HHH/Axel match on Raw a few weeks ago, and the second best by a distance since the last Raw in April. 

Overall, one very good thing to take from the breakdown, it's that certain things did gain where you'd expect losses and it seemed like there was an upwards progression of ratings throughout the show, and despite E3 going from 9-11, it didn't seem to have much of an impact on the viewership. What worries me (well... lol, as much as RATINGS could possibly "worry" me) is that this is what they get without any true televised competition. They weren't at the top of the night on cable, either. Things honestly can't get better from here unless they brought in Taker and Brock to do something (whether separately or individually) in addition to the whole McMahon family drama stuff. Things might get a little better for Summerslam, but after that things will just sink lower than even last year.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The divas can gain with a good amount of build at least.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Decent gains, not much to talk about here. Opener should have done far better though.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You people worry about Cena and HHH numbers everyweek as if they are some two new guys who just made their debut on the show. Don't you guys realize they are firmly established on the top spot? Cena more than HHH, who is closer to retirement anyway. These ratings everyweek, up or down makes no difference to them, HHH's at his tail end of his career(maybe this ongoing mcmahon saga is his retirement storyline, who knows?) and Cena is sacred to Vince, he can't be touched at any cost.

Really, you need to be discussing Curtis Axel here, because he's the one getting the quick push in such a short period of debut and yet the charisma vaccum doesn't seem to be making any progress. The guy is doomed to fail in my opinion.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Defei said:


> You people worry about Cena and HHH numbers everyweek as if they are some two new guys who just made their debut on the show. Don't you guys realize they are firmly established on the top spot? Cena more than HHH, who is closer to retirement anyway. These ratings everyweek, up or down makes no difference to them, HHH's at his tail end of his career(maybe this ongoing mcmahon saga is his retirement storyline, who knows?) and Cena is sacred to Vince, he can't be touched at any cost.
> 
> Really, you need to be discussing Curtis Axel here, because he's the one getting the quick push in such a short period of debut and yet the charisma vaccum doesn't seem to be making any progress. The guy is doomed to fail in my opinion.


Because they're (Cena and HHH) the ones you expect to bring in the gains, not Axel. Though Axel's overruns the past few weeks were good, but of course they were with those two guys. How he does on his own remains to be seen, but this week's opening wasn't good.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

PWTorch has received new TV viewership insight on wrestling programming, including the Monday, June 10 episode of WWE Raw leading into the Payback PPV.

Most notably, two things are happening in the third hour of Raw - viewers are coming over from "Family Guy" on TBS and viewers are leaving for "Pawn Stars" on History Channel.

*This is based on viewership in-flows and out-flows among adults 18-49.* Because the viewership data captures both males and females, it's worth noting that Lifetime provided a significant lead-in for the first hour of Raw, which is the "general family hour" at 8:00 p.m. EST.

Tune-In Break Down

- Raw's First Hour: 20,000 viewers switched over from "American Pickers" on History, 16,000 viewers switched over from Syfy, 13,000 switched over from Lifetime, 12,000 switched over from G4, and 9,000 switched over from TBS.

The majority of Raw's first hour viewership came from viewers simply tuning in at the start of Raw. The break down - 45 percent tune-in, 30 percent lead-in from previous USA Network programming, and 5 percent from "switch in" viewership. (The total does not add up to 100 percent for incomplete data.)

- Raw's Second Hour: Only one percent of Raw's audience was from viewers "switching in" to Raw. The top source was VH1, which provided 19,000 viewers following the conclusion of "Hit the Floor."

- Raw's Third Hour: Four percent of Raw's audience was from viewers "switching in." This was led by TBS providing 31,000 viewers following the conclusion of "Family Guy," which was the top source of the night. CBS also provided 13,000 viewers following the conclusion of "Mike & Molly."

Tune-Out Break Down

- Raw's First Hour: The least amount of "switching out" came during the first hour. This only made up one percent of the audience out-flow, led by 10,000 viewers switching to VH1.

- Raw's Second Hour: There was a significant out-flow to Great American Country during the second hour. 35,000 viewers left for GAC, followed by 4,000 to TBS.

- Raw's Third Hour: The largest tune-out of the night occurred when 39,000 viewers flocked to "Pawn Stars" on History Channel. This was followed by 14,000 viewers to "American Dad" on Adult Swim, 13,000 viewers to TBS, and 7,000 viewers to ESPN for Red Sox vs. Rays MLB baseball.

Overall Break Down

- In-Flows: Overall for all three hours of Raw, TBS was the top provider of new viewers, followed by History Channel, Teen Nick, VH1, and Syfy.

- Out-flows: Overall for all three hours of Raw, viewers left mostly for History, followed by Great American Country, TBS, Adult Swim, and VH1.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:lol Gamblor and Punkfan35. The two of you in here every week doing everything you can to convince yourselves that the McMahon's don't draw. 

4.0 OUTTA NOWHERE!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> :lol Gamblor and Punkfan35. The two of you in here every week doing everything you can to convince yourselves that the McMahon's don't draw.
> 
> 4.0 OUTTA NOWHERE!!!!!!!!!!


:lmao who said they don't draw?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> :lmao who said they don't draw?


Starbuck is very protective when it comes to Triple H.


----------



## mark66

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I enjoyed the show.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Starbuck is very protective when it comes to Triple H.


That's rich coming from you.


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I expect tonight's Raw to get a pretty good number considering yesterday's PPV was pretty good.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Punkholic said:


> I expect tonight's Raw to get a pretty good number considering yesterday's PPV was pretty good.


They usually get a bump after a PPV and considering the amount of things that happened last night, it should be enough to pull in some more people. I'd guess maybe 4.2 million or so with them slowly starting to crawl their way back up the viewership ladder as things start to tick into the summer. Isn't there a hockey game on tonight though? That may steal some viewers away. Who knows.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They'll get around 4,080,000.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Weltschmertz said:


> They'll get around 4,080,000.


Oddly specific for a rough guesstimate.


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hopefully tonight's show will get a good rating. It was the best Raw in years.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This Raw... hoping it does well. Raw actually deserves a strong number this week.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nothing but gains for this one. Henry must have pulled the biggest with those GOD like mic skills.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't know if we can use this as an indicator, but I don't recall this forum ever getting anywhere near 3,000 active viewers on a Raw night (2,000 I think were viewers the Raw forum at one point)... granted I don't keep tabs on that, but it did seem like there was A LOT more activity on here than normal. And twitter seemed pretty active from a WWE standpoint as well. 

I'm hoping all that reflects in the viewership.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> I don't know if we can use this as an indicator, but I don't recall this forum ever getting anywhere near 3,000 active viewers on a Raw night (2,000 I think were viewers the Raw forum at one point)... granted I don't keep tabs on that, but it did seem like there was A LOT more activity on here than normal. And twitter seemed pretty active from a WWE standpoint as well.
> 
> I'm hoping all that reflects in the viewership.


lol didn't even notice that. Man, WWE really going in for the Summer.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah, if Raw doesn't get a big rating this week, then man, I don't know when it'll ever get a big rating again.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Yeah, if Raw doesn't get a big rating this week, then man, I don't know when it'll ever get a big rating again.


It will prove that WWE has kept us waiting for far too long.


----------



## EternalFlameFilms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

just because it was a good raw, doesnt mean it generates viewers, i rember that raw after wrestlemania this year everyone was going crazy for but it did worse than previous years in viewership


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



EternalFlameFilms said:


> just because it was a good raw, doesnt mean it generates viewers, i rember that raw after wrestlemania this year everyone was going crazy for but it did worse than previous years in viewership


thats true, this time last year raw was averaging 4.9-5 million viewers thanks to the bryan/aj/punk stuff and everyone online was shitting on it, what attracts the casuals usually the iwc find terrible...big show crying added more than 1 million viewers, the whole of 1999


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If any show deserves to pop a huge rating it's this one. Such a wonderful show from top to bottom. But they aren't going to pull an audience out of thin air, they need to gradually start drawing people back in and making them stay. I reckon they will get the usual post PPV bump but they also might be able to hold on to/pull in some extra people because of how good the show was as a whole. They had plenty going on and lots of stuff that people will want to see. The opener will probs be better than recent weeks down to the PPV fallout, Bryan/Orton, AJ/Steph, Cena/Henry etc. They also positioned the main event at 10.45 which is usually an indicator that something is going to happen when it starts that early. I think Lesnar was walking out around 11.05 ish so anybody turning over for the next show would have seen him. I hope this show does well. Maybe it will send a message (lulz) that when you produce a quality show across the board, people will watch it. I'm sticking with a 4.2 or 4.3 (viewership) average.


----------



## SUPER HANS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

EDIT - Wrong discussion. 

Agree with Starbuck. Consistent shows like this will be sure to boost the rating.


----------



## connormurphy13

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*









YALL CAN THANK ME FOR THE RATINGS, PUPPETS


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm really hoping yesterday's show gets a good rating. It was amazing and it completely deserves it.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_71369.shtml#.UcCJlZX3DfY



> -- Monday's WWE Raw surged 56 percent in social media activity compared to last week's Payback PPV lead-in show.
> 
> Raw scored 323,847 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, which was the highest score and first time Raw has hit 300k since the night after WrestleMania.
> 
> The score pushed Raw to the #1 spot on cable TV Monday night, edging out hit shows "Teen Wolf" on MTV and "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" on VH1, plus Game 3 of the NHL Stanley Cup Finals.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_71369.shtml#.UcCJlZX3DfY


Awesome.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I dont expect the ratings for this week to suddenly to have a significant gain. however if they continue to put on consistent shows like this, those ratings WITH MARK HENRY in the main event, will grow.


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The ratings are going to go absolutely mental next week with Henry in the ME.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Does anyone have the breakdown of ratings?


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_71369.shtml#.UcCJlZX3DfY


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

9:00 PM.............	4.26m	
10:00 PM................4.17m	
8.00 PM................ 4.03m

average 4.15m


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


>


Raw beat the NHL finals game as well? Holy shit that's great. Honestly, I expect almost every quarter other than Jericho/3MB and Sheamus/Rhodes Scholars to do really well and provide big gains or really small loses. Chief amongst the gains should be Henry's GOAT segment, and the overrun.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Still not great, but good numbers. However this was the night after the PPV and I'm sure things will only go down as a whole except on key segments/storylines like Punk/Lesnar:


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> 9:00 PM.............	4.26m
> 10:00 PM................4.17m
> 8.00 PM................ 4.03m
> 
> average 4.15m


Damn not bad

Mark Ratings Henry you beast


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> Oddly specific for a rough guesstimate.


You can get a good idea of where the rating will be by using a regression against previous raw ratings, previous smackdown ratings and whether the show follows a PPV (like this week). So the model's prediction this week, for example, was only 1.7% off target. It's more than just guesswork.

Key point is: the quality of a show is not reflected in the current rating, but future ratings.


----------



## Osize10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I hope the nip slip caused record ratings

Also pretty sure GOAT vs Orton was slated for 9:00


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not much of a rise, especially for a post PPV show. 

The hours are holding steady, not much of a drop or much of a rise. But the average is poor. Atleast 1 hour should be sniffing 4.5 million viewers.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Osize10 said:


> I hope the nip slip caused record ratings
> 
> Also pretty sure GOAT vs Prton was slated for 9:00


Nip slip? And you're right that match did happen in that hour! When did Henry/Cena occur? Hour 3?


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Pretty decent numbers. Thank you, Henry.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> Pretty decent numbers. Thank you, Henry.


Can I steal your sig?


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Henry has nothing to do with this rating - most of it is explained by post-PPV bump. "Henry effect" will only start to kick in for Smackdown on Friday and RAW next week (if such an effect exists at all).


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DatKidMog said:


> Can I steal your sig?


Sure.


----------



## Osize10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Nip slip? And you're right that match did happen in that hour! When did Henry/Cena occur? Hour 3?


I remember for sure Orton's entrance was 8:56 PM

Cena's entrance for his promo was exactly 10:00 PM so yes, Henry was in the third hour

Oh and yes, kaitlyns boob popped out...when aren't they really.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Nip slip? And you're right that match did happen in that hour! When did Henry/Cena occur? Hour 3?


Cena/Henry segment occurred at 10 PM which is start of hour 3. Although it started off with a lengthy, boring Cena speech which might have turned a few people off but even at worst, Cena has his haters listening to every word with lots of hatred so I doubt they missed the Henry greatness that followed immediately.

Hope 9 PM and 10 PM do great numbers as they are well deserved. Orton/Bryan match ended around 9:13 or something. It started right before 9 PM.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not much of a jump for post PPV show.


----------



## Osize10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Cena/Henry segment occurred at 10 PM which is start of hour 3. Although it started off with a lengthy, boring Cena speech which might have turned a few people off but even at worst, Cena has his haters listening to every word with lots of hatred so I doubt they missed the Henry greatness that followed immediately.
> 
> Hope 9 PM and 10 PM do great numbers as they are well deserved. Orton/Bryan match ended around 9:13 or something. It started right before 9 PM.


Yeah You're right...Cena was on exactly at ten.


I distinctly remember seeing 8:56 after Orton's entrance...so this means our boys contributed to the biggest draw of the night. Good for them


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

nice rating.

cena as champ does the biz


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Amuroray said:


> nice rating.
> 
> cena as champ does the biz


:cole1


----------



## Osize10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Amuroray said:


> nice rating.
> 
> cena as champ does the biz


As Bryan-Orton kicked off the highest drawing hour...


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DatKidMog said:


> :cole1





Osize10 said:


> As Bryan-Orton kicked off the highest drawing hour...


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Raw beat the NHL finals game as well? Holy shit that's great. Honestly, *I expect almost every quarter other than Jericho/3MB and Sheamus/Rhodes Scholars to do really well and provide big gains or really small loses.* Chief amongst the gains should be Henry's GOAT segment, and the overrun.


Why would you expect that? Given the low fluctuation of viewership for each hour, I doubt there will be massive gain after massive gain all night long. There can't be when there is no sign of a dramatic rise or fall in viewership. Things are pretty much even here. There's no real room for a massive gain unless something has a massive fall beforehand if that makes sense. 

Anyway, I said 4.2 million and I was almost right. 4.1 in the end but at least they're over 4, slowly ticking over 4 but getting there.


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good to see RAW got these types of numbers. 

Was a very good show! I'm sure a lot of others loved it also.

Will this equal to a 3.1/3.2 rating?


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Osize10 said:


> Yeah You're right...Cena was on exactly at ten.
> 
> 
> I distinctly remember seeing 8:56 after Orton's entrance...so this means our boys contributed to the biggest draw of the night. Good for them












This man and Orton will be money working together.

As Funaki would say, INDEED!


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> 9:00 PM.............	4.26m
> 10:00 PM................4.17m
> 8.00 PM................ 4.03m
> 
> average 4.15m


Solid numbers. I expect next week's ratings to increase as yesterday's show was great and led to many questions that will probably be answered next week.


----------



## Dec_619

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Monday’s episode of Raw scored a 3.0 rating, down a tick from the 3.04 rating the show drew last week. As noted earlier, Raw averaged 4.15 million viewers, up from the 3.99 million viewers from last week.


Source: http://www.pwmania.com/mondays-wwe-raw-rating-drops-from-last-week#ixzz2Wc9oI8Ls

Edit: Hang on, does that even make sense? Last weeks show drew less viewers but pulled a slightly bigger rating? This weeks drew more viewers but had a lower rating? Confused.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dec_619 said:


> Source: http://www.pwmania.com/mondays-wwe-raw-rating-drops-from-last-week#ixzz2Wc9oI8Ls
> 
> Edit: Hang on, does that even make sense? Last weeks show drew less viewers but pulled a slightly bigger rating? This weeks drew more viewers but had a lower rating? Confused.


Ratings are based on the amount of viewers you have in comparison to the overall number watching TV. Less people were watching TV last week in comparison to this week so the rating went down. The rating system is a bit pointless really, viewership is what actually matter. Viewership from the demographic the adverts are being sold for, more specifically.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good Job Summer, beautiful weather, bright sun, and breezy skies. :clap


----------



## Hydra

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Awesome. RAW is actually getting really good. They actually deserve these ratings.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk's back.

Of course viewership would go up.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dec_619 said:


> Source: http://www.pwmania.com/mondays-wwe-raw-rating-drops-from-last-week#ixzz2Wc9oI8Ls
> 
> Edit: Hang on, does that even make sense? Last weeks show drew less viewers but pulled a slightly bigger rating? This weeks drew more viewers but had a lower rating? Confused.


in simple english it means there was more tv households switched onto raw last week but there was more people per household watching raw this week


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TheRockPwnsAll said:


> Awesome. RAW is actually getting really good. They actually deserve these ratings.


Brock/Punk/Heyman. Shield. Bryan/Orton. Wyatt coming. Ziggler/Del Rio double turn. Vince segments. Keep Ryback off TV. Keep Cena segments short and away from the last segment of the show. Filling up 3 hours like this makes the show really good.

The thing that could be improved is the commentary as Cole seems to bury any segment with jokes that doesn't involve Cena. He laughs at anything anyone says, but Cena. If they take segments more seriously, the entire TV show could be improved I think.


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TheLooseCanon said:


> Brock/Punk/Heyman. Shield. Bryan/Orton. Wyatt coming. Ziggler/Del Rio double turn. Vince segments. Keep Ryback off TV. Keep Cena segments short and away from the last segment of the show. Filling up 3 hours like this makes the show really good.
> 
> *The thing that could be improved is the commentary as Cole seems to bury any segment with jokes that doesn't involve Cena. He laughs at anything anyone says, but Cena. If they take segments more seriously, the entire TV show could be improved I think.*


Completely agreed with this. If it isn't Cena or a part-timer, they have Cole bury it 9 times out of 10. It detracts from their own product.


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Mr Ratings strike again!



> The angle involving Mark Henry and John Cena topped WWE Raw with a 3.6 quarter-hour rating. The overrun segment with C.M. Punk, Brock Lesnar, Alberto Del Rio, and Dolph Ziggler scored a 3.4 quarter-hour rating.
> 
> Powell's POV: The main event match with Punk and Del Rio scored a 2.9 rating during the final full quarter-hour, which included a commercial break. The Randy Orton vs. Daniel Bryan match produced a 3.1 in the fifth quarter-hour, and the sixth quarter-hour that features A.J. Lee, Stephanie McMahon, and Kaitlyn scored a 3.2 rating. No other quarter-hour produced more than a 3.0 rating.
> Prowrestling.net


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

unk2




:cena2 :HHH2 :vince2


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RATINGS! THAT'S WHAT I BRING! - :henry1


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Damn, that divas business was in a random quarter too, right? Fucking amazing.

And that Punk/Del Rio match doing that number pre-overrun ain't too good, but it was in a random quarter. What I'm more interested in is how the opener did, as if nothing else did over a 3.0, that includes the opener and that's really bad if the case for a direct fallout from the PPV.

Now we want to talk about anti-draws? Look no further than Del Rio. The man consistently has some of the worst numbers in segments he's in, was involved in the worst overrun last year against JOHN CENA, and now opens the show with a 5 minute promo before Punk comes out, and his match against Punk didn't do too well... though it doesn't seem like anything besides the turn of the hour segments and that divas one (with Stephanie McMahon mind you) did better it so that's something positive to take away from it at least. But on Del Rio, I think he was also involved in the worst rated quarter in the last 15 years at some point late in 2012.

At least Henry/Cena and Punk/Lesnar have started off doing well, with the latter being the best overrun in weeks (and depending on gain, maybe even longer than that). HENRY's segment especially doing a 3.6 in the 10PM slot, the weakest of the 4 big slots is very very strong. Henry's finally given a main event feud on Raw and now we see if he can boost Raw's ratings up consistently like he did ECW and Smackdown.


----------



## xhc

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Mark Henry's segment bringing the ratingz up in the roof? Well, that just makes sense.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Will Punk EVER reach the point where he can draw consistently in segments without needing Cena/Rock/Brock/Undertaker/Trips with him? If his first match back (regardless of opponent) can't even do a 3.0 it doesn't bode well.

Say what you will about Cena, but his ratings consistency is incredible. He could probably main event against Curtis Axel or Heath Slater and still do a steady number while the Punk's or the Orton's would bomb if they were put in the same spot.

Mark Henry always seems to do well too. Even before this segment, Cena and Henry have been the biggest full time ratings draws these past couple years so finally putting them together should result in a healthy buyrate for Money In The Bank.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Blaming Punk? Come on. ADR didn't draw good numbers with John fucking Cena when they had their program. 

No surprise on Henry, though. There's a reason his name is Mark 'RATINGS' Henry.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It should be noted that while Punk/Del Rio did a 2.9 in the last quarter, the overrun still did a 3.4 and normally the overrun is what's taken into account unless otherwise noted or if there's a match that solely takes place in the overrun. So while the 2.9 is far from good, that wasn't the number for the overrun and the overrun number is what should be compared to previous weeks. And frankly, I have my doubts anyone can pull a good number with Del Rio.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

He strikes again! :henry1


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lol @ the final ratings. Punk couldn't draw if you gave him a paper and pencil to save his life with anyone that isn't a bigger star than him. I tried to give him a chance, but enough is enough. You feud with THE ROCK then UNDERTAKER and now BROCK LESNAR. All 3 proven and established draws. What happens when you put Punk with somebody who isn't an established draw? 3.4 happens. We must accept the fact that Punk as good as he is in the ring and on the mic, isn't what casuals are interested in. And I consider myself a Punk fan now.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Jerichoholic4Life said:


> Will Punk EVER reach the point where he can draw consistently in segments without needing Cena/Rock/Brock/Undertaker/Trips with him? If his first match back (regardless of opponent) can't even do a 3.0 it doesn't bode well.


No, I think what Jim Cornette said about Triple H a while back is extremely accurate about Punk. "He works with the guy who draws money".

*cue angry Punk marks*


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> No, I think what Jim Cornette said about Triple H a while back is extremely accurate about Punk. "He works with the guy who draws money".
> 
> *cue angry Punk marks*


:clap:clap


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well anyway, where's the actual breakdown? Or is that what we're getting this week?


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Who cares! What matters is we got a great show. People are still complaining about it. And who cares if CM Punk can draw or not, he had a good match with Del Rio.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:henry1 :cena unk2 :bryan rton :brock :vince

All of these guys did their job drawing.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.6 rating is about *5 million viewers* for anyone wondering. Fantastic number for Henry/Cena. I suspect the rest of Hour 3, overrun aside bombed as a result.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hm, now I may be mistaken, but is that not the highest rating for a segment since... Cena/Henry after Mania? lol.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nope, highest since Ziggler cashed in, earlier that night!



wb1899 said:


> The John Cena interview and Mark Henry confrontation opened with a 3.74 household rating
> Daniel Bryan vs. Big E Langston lost 461,000 viewers
> Wade Barrett regaining the IC title from The Miz lost 222,000 viewers
> Backstage stuff with Sheamus and Randy Orton both trying to get matches with Big Show gained 92,000 viewers
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Jack Swagger & Zeb Colter at 9 p.m. gained 151,000 viewers (3.42 HH)
> The Dolph Ziggler title win over Del Rio and the Undertaker angle with Kane & Daniel Bryan and The Shield gained 460,000 viewers (3.76 HH)
> Santino Marella & Zack Ryder & R-Truth vs. 3MB and a video on the week in New York lost 329,000 viewers
> The Orton/Sheamus backstage stuff, Big Show interview and Orton and Sheamus coming to the ring lost 110,000 viewers
> 
> The Orton vs. Sheamus match with the crowd going crazy for everything but the match gained 329,000 viewers at 10 p.m. (3.58 HH)
> Show beating down Orton & Sheamus lost 70,000 viewers
> Fandango vs. Kofi Kingston with the Chris Jericho beating lost 207,000 viewers
> Brodus Clay & Sweet T & Naomi & Cameron vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow & Bella Twins lost 665,000 viewers
> John Cena vs. Mark Henry with the Ryback attack at the end gained 887,000 viewers (3.54 HH)


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh yeah, forgot about that. Cash-in with awesome crowd+Taker promo and Shield interruption followed by Kane and Bryan coming out combined is the only thing that could out-do DA RATINGZ MACHINE! :henry1


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

All did well. Punk/Del Rio was half that quarter, and had a commercial in between the match. The number that matters is the overrun of 3.4, which I credit to both the match and Lesnar's face off with Punk.

Surprised Henry/Cena topped the night, but I shouldn't be. That was a fucking phenomenal segment.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk's return to RAW = lower rating than last week. His segments do poorly... if this was the Rock's return to RAW Punk marks would be having a field day with this rating performance. However, seeing how it's Punk it is suddenly a good rating because viewership went up like 100k (probably solely attributable to PPV bump rather than Punk). LOL


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I find it amusing that Henry's segments draw so well. I know he's one of the more beloved workers on this site, but I wouldn't think he'd be as over with the casuals. I guess numbers don't lie, but it's a bit of a mystery to me. Good for him, though.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Henry may not be as beloved by the casuals as he is with fans online, but perhaps the casuals find him interesting though they may not be excited by him. He's one of the few guys on the roster that actually seems tough.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah, he's one of the few believable threatening heels. Maybe that's part of it. Plus, he's fucking MASSIVE.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I've actually been wondering that myself, TLK. All kidding aside, I do what actually makes Henry so appealing to the casuals. Because I would never think he would, if I didn't see how impressive he can be with the ratings.

But he's inconsistent. Before his return Monday he wasn't impressive at all really. His retirement was hyped on twitter all week and on Monday throughout the show, and Cena was in the ring as well. Not taking anything away from Mark, just saying.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> 3.6 rating is about *5 million viewers* for anyone wondering. Fantastic number for Henry/Cena. I suspect the rest of Hour 3, overrun aside bombed as a result.


That WWE title gonna look beautiful draped over Henry's shoulder. 

AJ LEE needs to hold that title for a while and progress more with Steph. Lita should put AJ over at Summer Slam.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, the show opened at 3.04 for the Alberto Del Rio promo with Paul Heyman & C.M. Punk coming out. Christian vs. Wade Barrett lost 194,000 viewers. You’d hope Christian’s return would have at least held even. Sheamus vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow lost 164,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with HHH, Vickie Guerrero and Brad Maddox plus Team Hell No backstage gained 226,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Daniel Bryan gained 248,000 viewers to a 3.13 at 9 p.m. The A.J. Lee/Stephanie McMahon in-ring and Kaitlyn attack of Lee gained 168,000 viewers, which I’d consider good for the time slot. Dean Ambrose vs. Kane for the U.S. title and the backstage aftermath with Vickie, Vince McMahon and The Shield lost 341,000 viewers. That wouldn’t be so good. Antonio Cesaro vs. William Regal gained 41,000 viewers, which is also a good showing. The star period of the show was the John Cena and Mark Henry in-ring angle, which was one of the strongest periods on the show in a long time, gaining 738,000 viewers to a 3.57 quarter at 10 p.m. However, Mark Henry’s backstage heel interview and Chris Jericho vs. Heath Slater lost 953,000 viewers. People seem to always tune out at 10:15 p.m., but not at that level. Curtis Axel vs. Sin Cara plus the backstage stuff with the McMahons, Guerrero and Maddox gained 112,000 viewers. C.M. Punk vs. Alberto Del Rio with the post-match with Brock Lesnar and Dolph Ziggler gained 636,000 viewers to a 3.42 overrun.
> 
> For the Cena/Henry segment, Male teens went from 2.4 to 3.1, Males 18-49 from 2.4 to 2.9, Girl teens from 1.2 to 1.5 and Women 18-49 from 1.2 to 1.3. For Punk vs. Del Rio, Male teens went from 2.4 to 2.8, Males 18-49 from 2.2 to 2.5, Girl teens from 1.2 to 1.1 and Women 18-49 from 1.0 to 1.1.


Wrestling Observer


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT CENA
DAT HENRY
DAT PUNK
DAT LESNAR

Real good stuff from these guys.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

: DEM GAINS.

Just keep this up WWE. And :lmao @ what HHH said about 3mb and then Heath losing that many viewers.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good lord. Crazy stuff from Cena and Henry.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good stuff from the top programs. CM Punk vs Lesnar and John Cena vs Mark "Ratings" Henry. Plus also good to see the Daniel Bryan stuff is gaining little by little.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Daniel Bryan backstage gained 226,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan's match gained 248,000 viewers to a 3.13 at 9 p.m


The GOAT gaining an impressive 474,000 all by himself. They need to do Henry vs Bryan for the title if they want to rape the competition.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Interesting breakdown. Here are the numbers I got for each quarter:

Q1- 4,205,000 (3.04)
Q2- 4,011,000 (2.9)
Q3- 3,847,000 (2.78)
Q4- 4,073,000 (2.95)
Q5- 4,321,000 (3.13)
Q6- 4,489,000 (3.25)
Q7- 4,148,000 (3.0)
Q8- 4,189,000 (3.03)
Q9- 4,974,000 (3.57) 
Q10- 3,974,000 (2.87)
Q11- 4,086,000 (2.96)
Q12/OR- 4,719,000 (3.42)

Think I got it right. Anyways, because the breakdown combined the quarters, not sure where the 2.9 came from for Q12. Maybe someone better with numbers can figure it out (D.M.N). Only thing I can think of is Q12 lost viewers and then the overrun itself gained them back and then some, which would actually make the overrun gain bigger.

Speaking of which, awesome overrun. Best in weeks and you could even argue best in a couple of months depending on how much weight you put into gains as opposed to ratings.

McMahons ended up doing well this week in their timeslots, well, except the aftermath of the Ambrose/Kane match. But great gains for their timeslots and they led the pack as far as non-big 4 slots go. 

And of course... DAT HENRY! (and yeah, Cena was there too, to be fair)

:henry1 :cena2 unk5 :brock

Edit: Oh dayum, didn't realize Bryan was a part of that first odd quarter gain right before his match with Orton. That plus the match and Bryan is part of bringing in 400,000+ viewers! 

BRYAN/HENRY for the belt @ Mania plz. Let Henry have a long dominant run as champion and drop it to the Rumble winner, Daniel Bryan, at Mania. PLEASE! FOR THE SAKE OF THE RATINGS!


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> The GOAT gaining an impressive 474,000 all by himself. They need to do Henry vs Bryan for the title if they want to rape the competition.


:jay2 that type of number doesn't exist.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> :jay2 that type of number doesn't exist.


True. It'll cause the Nielsen boxes to malfunction and blow up.


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not sure what all the mouth breathers are getting so excited about on the previous page. A 3.4 overrun and 630k + gains isn't bad at all in this day in age.

And i'm not surprised at those huge gains for the Henry segment. What was previously seen as a running gag has been proven time and time again to be an undeniable fact.

Inb4 Money in the bank outsells Wrestlemania :rock3:henry1


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Seems like all the important segments gained so it's good news.

:henry1 :cena3 :brock :bryan rton2


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Seems like all the important segments gained so it's good news.
> 
> :henry1 :cena3 :brock unk :bryan rton2


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Mark Henry got the highest rated segment, D Bry, and AJ got the second highest behind him. Not surprised with that..quality produces.


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> . C.M. Punk vs. Alberto Del Rio with the post-match with Brock Lesnar and Dolph Ziggler gained 636,000 viewers to a 3.42 overrun.


:clap:


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena and henry are the two big draws.

Putting them together will result in monster ratings.


----------



## Muerte al fascismo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That is ridiculous the Henry/Cena jump in ratings. What a draw.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So a constantly hyped and promoted segment, gained big? Who'd have thought it? It was heavily hyped so people would tune in to watch it, so... job done. There would be something wrong if it hadn't pulled a big rating. As for the main-event segment rating, it's not that bad, considering Del Rio was involved. Nobody does big numbers with Del Rio - not even Cena, and IIRC, a match between Orton and Del Rio, once lost a million, or close to a million viewers. Punk is a draw, but he's not a miracle worker.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Gaining 636k for a 3.4 overrun is obviously very good these days, so the main event was definitely a success. There's no point even starting a debate over that.


----------



## Mqwar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So the Post match angles with Lesnar and Ziggler worked well but the match itself bombed with a 2.9? Pretty bad for both guys considering Del Rio is World heavyweight champion and Punk with his first return match back on RAW.


----------



## Osize10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So overall both Bryan segments combined gained >500K.

ok I'll take it!


----------



## Marcos 25063

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

see vince? It's easy :vince2


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

There's not even any denying how big of a draw Mark Henry is. It's ridiculous, yet awesome.

Good overrun number. Pretty sure that's the highest rated segment ADR's been apart of in a while, if I remember correctly.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I take back what I said earlier to THANOS about fluctuating gains and losses because I was dead wrong lol. Wasn't expecting anything like the Henry segment to be possible but there you go. A 3.6 is crazy but oh so well deserved because it was just a genuinely fantastic segment. That's all there is to it really. Cracking start to the WWE title program. WORLDS STRONGEST RATINGS.

So Punk/ADR opened with a 3.0 and their match got a 2.9. Seems about right. Then the overrun jumps to a 3.4 with Lesnar's appearance. Seems about right too. Great sign for the Punk/Lesnar program going forward, not such a great sign for Punk flying solo. Once again the impressive number appears when the bigger star appears. The Punk Police can spin it all they want but it is what it is. I suspect that if he cuts a promo next week it will do a lot better since Punk talking seems to do a hell of a lot better than Punk wrestling. But it's all Del Rio's fault, right? Lesnar gives the best overrun number since HHH/Axel a few weeks back. BORK.

The other big winner of the night has to be the AJ/Stephanie promo clocking in a 3.2. I'm not all that surprised though since I had a feeling it would do well. You give people a reason to watch the Divas and they will. Throw on Stephanie McMahon and there was no reason at all to change the channel here. It was something very different for the Divas and not something we see everyday. Job well done there. 

Orton/Bryan rounding things off with a 3.1. Bryan along with Kane, HHH/Vicke backstage also had considerable gains for that segment too. Going off the past few weeks it's clear that the fans are interested in this storyline and interested in him. Good stuff. 

:henry1 and :brock bringing DAT STAR POWER. 

They should be well set for next week on a lot of fronts. Punk/Lesnar, Henry/Cena, Divas and Bryan all got spotlighted this week not to mention the McMahon thread running through all the shows lately. It will be interesting to see if the quality of this weeks show is able to pull in more people next week. I reckon they'll continue the gradual climb back and hit a 4.3 million viewer average which is where they ought to be imo.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I take back what I said earlier to THANOS about fluctuating gains and losses because I was dead wrong lol. Wasn't expecting anything like the Henry segment to be possible but there you go. A 3.6 is crazy but oh so well deserved because it was just a genuinely fantastic segment. That's all there is to it really. Cracking start to the WWE title program. WORLDS STRONGEST RATINGS.
> 
> So Punk/ADR opened with a 3.0 and their match got a 2.9. Seems about right. Then the overrun jumps to a 3.4 with Lesnar's appearance. Seems about right too. Great sign for the Punk/Lesnar program going forward, *not such a great sign for Punk flying solo*.


Not sure how that's a bad sign considering Punks been a mediocre draw for a good 2 years and they still push him as the #2 guy in the company.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Not sure how that's a bad sign considering Punks been a mediocre draw for a good 2 years and they still push him as the #2 guy in the company.


I didn't mean it in the way that they'll drop him down the card. After all they've invested in him the past 2 years that would be the height of stupidity. I meant it more along the lines that Punk + legit draw = ratings compared to Punk + anybody else = no ratings.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> Interesting breakdown. Here are the numbers I got for each quarter:
> 
> Q1- 4,205,000 (3.04)
> Q2- 4,011,000 (2.9)
> Q3- 3,847,000 (2.78)
> Q4- 4,073,000 (2.95)
> Q5- 4,321,000 (3.13)
> Q6- 4,489,000 (3.25)
> Q7- 4,148,000 (3.0)
> Q8- 4,189,000 (3.03)
> Q9- 4,974,000 (3.57)
> Q10- 3,974,000 (2.87)
> Q11- 4,086,000 (2.96)
> Q12/OR- 4,719,000 (3.42)
> 
> Think I got it right. Anyways, because the breakdown combined the quarters, not sure where the 2.9 came from for Q12. Maybe someone better with numbers can figure it out (D.M.N). Only thing I can think of is Q12 lost viewers and then the overrun itself gained them back and then some, which would actually make the overrun gain bigger.
> [...]


Numbers are to high, especially the third hour:
P2+ from Raw
8:00-9:00: 4,027,000 viewers
9:00-10:00: 4,263,000 viewers
10:00-11:06: 4,172,000 viewers

However thanks for the overview!


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't really get how the Q12/OR and ratings/viewership works. The overrun was really only 5 minutes, so the only way Punk/Del Rio could get that 2.9 rating and still get an excellent number is if the overrun did nearly a million and a half viewers.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I didn't mean it in the way that they'll drop him down the card. After all they've invested in him the past 2 years that would be the height of stupidity. I meant it more along the lines that Punk + legit draw = ratings compared to Punk + anybody else = no ratings.


I agree with most of what you before other than this point, as of yet. You see the thing is, Punk was working with someone who's not just a smaller star, he was working with one of if not the biggest anti-draw in the company right now. Del Rio always does horribly no matter where his segments are placed. You may be able to cherrypick a few instances to contrary but the keyword there is "few". Cena hasn't done all that well with Del Rio either, so I think it's far too early to stay that Punk conclusively will not generate ratings working with lesser stars this soon after finishing his last big feuds. I'm willing to bet that if you put Punk in the ring with someone like Sandow (a much less pushed heel) for instance in that mainevent it does MUCH better.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Torch:


> Mark Henry's fake retirement and ruse on John Cena scored a big TV rating at the top of the third hour Monday night on Raw.
> 
> PWTorch has received quarter-hour TV ratings for the *males 18-49 demographic*, which indicates that Henry-Cena scored a 2.47 rating in the demo. The next-closest rating was a 2.24 rating in the sixth quarter-hour for A.J. Lee vs. Stephanie McMahon.
> 
> By comparison, the over-run featuring the end of C.M. Punk vs. Alberto Del Rio and Brock Lesnar's surprise return scored a 2.14 rating.
> 
> Interestingly, looking at the m18-49 minute-by-minute ratings, the A.J.-Stephanie segment actually contained the most-watched minute of the entire show, narrowly edging out the peak of Henry-Cena.
> 
> At 9:26 p.m. EST, Raw averaged 1.696 million viewers for the peak of A.J.-Stephanie, then went to break with 1.661 million viewers. By comparison, Cena-Henry peaked with 1.663 million viewers at 10:12 p.m. EST. Raw then went to break with 1.594 million viewers.
> 
> Raw did not come close to the peak of Cena-Henry the remainder of the show. The closest was 1.366 million viewers at 11:04 p.m. EST for Brock Lesnar's surprise return to confront C.M. Punk at the end of the show.
> 
> Interestingly, C.M. Punk's Raw TV return in the first segment of the show contained two minutes that drew more viewers than during the over-run. At 8:12 p.m., Raw averaged 1.369 million viewers and at 8:14 p.m., Raw averaged 1.378 million viewers leading to commercial.
> 
> First-Half Highlights
> 
> - Q1: The m18-49 viewers are usually slow to check into Raw in the earlier timeslot, but the audience was there in big numbers for the immediate Payback PPV fallout. This week, Q1 scored a 1.93 rating and averaged 1.206 million viewers. Last week, Q1 scored a 1.38 rating (40 percent increase this week) and averaged 864,000 viewers.
> 
> The most-watched minute of the first hour was the end of Punk vs. Alberto Del Rio on the microphone with 1.378 million viewers at 8:14 p.m. EST.
> 
> - Q4-Q5: After hitting a valley in Q2, Q3, and the first-half of Q4, Raw hit 1.326 million viewers at 8:59 p.m. for the start of Randy Orton vs. Daniel Bryan.
> 
> After a mid-match commercial break, the match built to a peak audience of 1.514 million viewers at 9:12 p.m. when the match was stopped and Bryan stomped off backstage.
> 
> - Q6: After Bryan-Orton, Raw kept up the momentum with the A.J. Lee-Stephanie McMahon segment.
> 
> Inside the Segment: 1.476 million viewers at 9:22 p.m. when A.J. was speaking, jump to 1.618 million viewers at 9:23 p.m. when Stephanie interrupted, peak at 1.696 million viewers at 9:26 p.m., and head to break with 1.661 million viewers at 9:28 p.m.
> 
> Second-Half Highlights
> 
> - Q7-Q8: The Kane vs. Dean Ambrose and Antonio Cesaro vs. William Regal matches held up okay, ranging between 1.3 and 1.4 million viewers, but not reaching 1.5-million-viewers territory.
> 
> - Q9: Cena-Henry delivered in a big way at the top of the third hour.
> 
> Inside the Segment: 1.403 million viewers at 10:00 p.m. EST for the start of Cena's promo, then a jump to 1.549 million viewers at 10:04 p.m. when Henry interrupted. Raw then built to 1.625 million viewers at 10:11 p.m., peaked with 1.663 million viewers at 10:12 p.m., and went to break with 1.594 million viewers at 10:13 p.m.
> 
> - Q10: After Triple H buried 3MB earlier in the show, the Chris Jericho vs. Heath Slater "comedown match" only topped out with 1.320 million viewers at 10:24 p.m. EST.
> 
> - Q11: The McMahons arguing backstage drew peak viewership of 1.350 million viewers at 10:41 p.m. prior to ring introductions for the main event.
> 
> - Q12: There was not significant interest in the C.M. Punk vs. Alberto Del Rio main event from the m18-49 demographic. The match started with 1.114 million viewers, and only peaked with 1.247 million viewers before a mid-match commercial.
> 
> After a mid-match commercial took away part of the audience, Raw only reached 1.205 million viewers at 10:59 p.m. EST leading into the over-run.
> 
> The over-run picked up some steam, though. As Del Rio was counted out, Raw increased 150,000+ viewers to 1.356 million at 11:02 p.m. EST. Dolph Ziggler attacking Del Rio then drew 1.340 million viewers at 11:03 p.m., Brock Lesnar's return increased to 1.366 million viewers at 11:04 p.m., and Raw went off the air with 1.339 million viewers at 11:05 p.m.
> 
> M18-49 Show Summary
> 
> Hour 1 - 1.85 rating / 1.157 million viewers
> Hour 2 - 2.07 rating / 1.293 million viewers
> Hour 3 - 2.00 rating / 1.253 million viewers
> Over-Run - 2.14 rating / 1.336 million viewers
> OVERALL - 1.99 rating / 1.242 viewers (up 22.5% from last week)
> 
> M18-49 Quarter-Hours
> 
> Q1: 1.93 rating (vs. 1.38 last week)
> Q2: 1.85 rating (vs. 1.38 LW)
> Q3: 1.75 rating (vs. 1.46 LW)
> Q4: 1.87 rating (vs. 1.53 LW)
> HOUR: 1.85 rating (vs. 1.44)
> 
> Q5: 2.02 rating (vs. 1.64 LW)
> Q6: 2.24 rating (vs. 1.62 LW)
> Q7: 1.98 rating (vs. 1.61 LW)
> Q8: 2.02 rating (vs. 1.58 LW)
> HOUR: 2.07 rating (vs. 1.61)
> 
> Q9: 2.47 rating (vs. 1.80 LW, 1.47 2WK)
> Q10: 1.87 rating (vs. 1.82 LW)
> Q11: 1.89 rating (vs. 1.75 LW)
> Q12: 1.78 rating (vs. 1.63 LW)
> HOUR: 2.00 rating (vs. 1.75 LW)
> 
> Over-run: 2.14 rating (1.88 LW)
> 
> OVERALL SHOW: 1.99 rating (vs. 1.62 rating last week)


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk bombs again when there's no real draw beside him. Who didn't see that coming?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> I agree with most of what you before other than this point, as of yet. You see the thing is, Punk was working with someone who's not just a smaller star, he was working with one of if not the biggest anti-draw in the company right now. Del Rio always does horribly no matter where his segments are placed. You may be able to cherrypick a few instances to contrary but the keyword there is "few". Cena hasn't done all that well with Del Rio either, so I think it's far too early to stay that Punk conclusively will not generate ratings working with lesser stars this soon after finishing his last big feuds. I'm willing to bet that if you put Punk in the ring with someone like Sandow (a much less pushed heel) for instance in that mainevent it does MUCH better.


I agree that it's too early to tell. Of course it is. He's only been back a week. It's obviously going to take more time but given that this was his first night back on Raw after a hyped PPV return, Del Rio or no Del Rio, it still happened and seems to be something of a trend when he works with somebody who isn't a bigger star than him. It doesn't happen all the time either. There have been cases where he's done just fine on his own but they aren't nearly as frequent as you would think. I just think it's very telling that he works twice will Del Rio and gets practically the same number and then Brock comes and pulls it right up. There's only one conclusion to draw. See what I did there 8*D?

EDIT - Fucking hell they're cranking out minute by minute stuff now lol. The fuck are we supposed to keep up with all that. 

DAT STEPHANIE MCMAHON THO

:HHH2


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

punk failing in the ratings.

color me surprised lol


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Gaining 600k+ to a 3.4 overrun is failing now. Oh, right, it's the same Punk haters that are still grasping at straws. 

Also, didn't Punk's opening segment this week do better than a recent one involving the McMahons? unk


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I see people bashing Punk, who did draw, but nobody is mentioning the fact that Jericho's match nearly lost 1 million viewers. 

Top stars and legends (Jericho falls into this category) are expected to draw big for the company regardless of the match/segment. Jericho failed to do that.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> Top stars and legends (Jericho falls into this category) are expected to draw big for the company regardless of the match/segment. Jericho failed to do that.


Nobody has called Jericho a draw, though. He has never been one and certainly not gonna be when he's directionless and fighting jobbers.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Huge surprise with the divas segment drawing that well. Got to credit AJ but mostly Stephanie for that as her presence made the divas division feel important.

Henry and Cena's gain was ridiculous, really really surprised about that too. Henry really does bring in those numbers. That segment was the best of the year so far so it really really deserves it.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Males 18-49
20:12 - 1.369 million viewers
20:14 - 1.378 million viewers
....
20:59 - 1.326 million viewers
21:12 - 1.514 million viewers
....
21:22 - 1.476 million viewers
21:23 - 1.618 million viewers
21:26 - 1.696 million viewers
21:28 - 1.661 million viewers
....
22:00 - 1.403 million viewers
22:04 - 1.549 million viewers
22:11 - 1.625 million viewers
22:12 - 1.663 million viewers
22:13 - 1.594 million viewers
....
22:24 - 1.320 million viewers
....
22:41 - 1.350 million viewers
....
~22:50 - 1.114 million viewers
~22:55 - 1.247 million viewers
22:59 - 1.205 million viewers
23:02 - 1.356 million viewers
23:03 - 1.340 million viewers
23:04 - 1.366 million viewers
23:05 - 1.339 million viewers

So in the key demographic, the Diva's are on top. Wouldn't have expected that. Poor for Punk vs Del Rio, and really not many eye balls (in comparison to say Cena/Henry) on Lesnar's return.

Edit, the peaks from above...

- 1.696 million / 2.72 rating - Diva's segment
- 1.663 million / 2.65 rating - Cena/Henry segment
- 1.514 million / 2.42 rating - Bryan/Orton
- 1.378 million / 2.20 rating - Punk/Del Rio opener
- 1.366 million / 2.14 rating - Lesnar returns
- 1.356 million / 2.16 rating - Punk/Del Rio
- 1.320 million / 2.11 rating - Jericho/Slater


----------



## ChickMagnet12

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Orton bringing dem nielsen ratings again.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Torch:


> *The information is based on viewership in-flows and out-flows among males 18-49. All references below are for the m18-49 demographic to avoid redundancy.*
> 
> Tune-In Break Down
> 
> - Raw's First Hour: The biggest boost of the night was 30,000 viewers from Discovery's "Fast 'n Loud" show. The hour also received 20,000 from FX's "Two and a Half Men" and 18,000 from Food Network.
> 
> Overall, 43 percent of incoming viewership was from people simply tuning in, 28 percent came from the USA Network lead-in, and 7 percent came from the switch-overs (Discovery, FX, Food).
> 
> - Raw's Second Hour: Only two percent of Raw's audience was from viewers "switching in" to Raw. The top sources were the Stanley Cup Finals on NBC Sports Network and "The Glades" on A&E (both contributed 16,000 viewers).
> 
> - Raw's Third Hour: Four percent of Raw's audience was from viewers "switching in." This was led by TBS providing 22,000 following the conclusion of "Family Guy." Next was 21,000 viewers from another episode of "Fast and Loud" on Discovery and 17,000 viewers from Syfy's "Defiance" show.
> 
> Tune-Out Break Down
> 
> - Raw's First Hour: The least amount of "switching out" came during the first hour. This only made up two percent of the audience out-flow, led by 15,000 viewers switching to A&E.
> 
> - Raw's Second Hour: Because the second hour drew a strong rating this week, outflows again only made up two percent of the audience "switching out." The most significant was 18,000 viewers to ESPN2 for the College World Series, followed by 11,000 viewers to BET.
> 
> - Raw's Third Hour: The largest tune-out of the night occurred during the third hour when viewer fatigue kicked in. Viewers "switching out" made up 10 percent of out-flows (vs. two percent the previous two hours).
> 
> The top destinations were 24,000 to "Pawn Stars" on History, 20,000 viewers to Cubs vs. Cardinals on ESPN, 19,000 to "Street Outlaws" on Discovery, 17,000 viewers to Headline News's "After Dark" show, and 16,000 viewers to FX. There was so much switching out during the hour that an additional total of 78,000 viewers tuned out to other programming.
> 
> Overall Break Down
> 
> - In-Flows: Overall for all three hours of Raw, Discovery was the top provider of new viewers, followed by TBS, Food Network, and NBC Sports Network.
> 
> - Out-flows: Overall for all three hours of Raw, viewers left mostly for BET and History Channel, followed by ESPN, Discovery, and FX.


Nice stuff from the Torch. These are still no A18-49 numbers, but M18-49 ist better than nothing.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

[email protected] being a draw. NO..she's a disaster for ratings. Always has been. She can't keep an audience with her shrill voice and bully demeanor. She's garbage...13 years strong now.


----------



## kiguel182

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Let's hope the quality of the show and the cliffhangers make next weeks show increase viewership. Every segment except the fillers drew and that's great.

Now they just need to get rid of Del Rio and Sheamus and this will be better.


----------



## Cmpunk91

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lol at people still thinking Punk cannot draw. Petty haters.


----------



## Redwood

The "Punk can't draw" trolling ITT is hilarious.


----------



## DesolationRow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> DAT STEPHANIE MCMAHON THO
> 
> :HHH2


:clap :mark: :clap :mark: :clap :mark:

Stephanie is the top draw in WWE! This was so obvious all along!



AthenaMark said:


> [email protected] being a draw. NO..she's a disaster for ratings. Always has been. She can't keep an audience with her shrill voice and bully demeanor. She's garbage...13 years strong now.


:argh: 

Someone's hatin'.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Should be a fall in viewers this week. This week's show won't benefit from the PPV bump effect, plus the Smackdown viewership last week was poor so a weak momentum effect. Central prediction: 3,900,000 viewers. 

*date | prediction |	actual |	error*
_06/17/2013_ 4,080,287 4,153,000 1.8%
_06/24/2014_ 3,858,506


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Weltschmertz said:


> Should be a fall in viewers this week. This week's show won't benefit from the PPV bump effect, plus the Smackdown viewership last week was poor so a weak momentum effect. Central prediction: 3,900,000 viewers.
> 
> *date | prediction |	actual |	error*
> _06/17/2013_ 4,080,287 4,153,000 1.8%
> _06/24/2014_ 3,858,506


Yeah, I see it as well dropping back below 4,000,000 unless Punk/Lesnar works a miracle, which it probably won't. Should be interesting to see how close you are again.


----------



## DRz0mbie

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wonder what ratings will be like this week


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Expecting the main event, Cena's promo and Punk/Heyman to do pretty well, but hefty drops for Punk vs Young, and most of everything else.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hope main event (and opener) will get some good numbers. Maybe it sends them a message to start pushing both Bryan and Orton.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I really want Orton and Bryan to draw good numbers in the main-event. Like C2D said, maybe it sends them a message and they start to push Bryan and Orton to the moon.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> I really want Orton and Bryan to draw good numbers in the main-event. Like C2D said, maybe it sends them a message and they start to push Bryan and Orton to the moon.


They definitely will, the match was awesome


----------



## Awesome22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

13.14 million viewers watched the premiere of Under The Dome on CBS between 10 and 11. Don't expect a great rating.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> -- Monday's WWE Raw social score declined 19 percent compared to last week's show following the Payback PPV.
> 
> Raw scored 261,602 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, which placed Raw #3 on the Monday night cable TV chart. Raw trailed Wimbledon coverage on ESPN and "Teen Wolf" on MTV.


via PWTorch


----------



## Jammy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

As much as I want it to do great numbers, I don't think Bryan/Orton will do anything special.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What is this social media score shit? I never got it.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> What is this social media score shit? I never got it.


Basically how much RAW is talked about on twitter during the night.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not sure what to expect tbh. Bryan/Orton in the main event will be a true testament to Bryan's drawing power and if this push he's received has actually worked. The match has been promoted since last week, started out the night and then should've had those same people who tuned in at the beginning coming back for the end. Plus the overrun went a bit longer (but not so much longer it drives people away) so it should do very well if the whole Bryan thing works. Orton's a small factor (he's not a big draw himself) but for better or worse, this is mostly on Bryan for whether it does well or not.

As for the rest of the show, Punk/Heyman will probably do well, at least the 10PM slot, but I expect the match following to lose a lot. I mean when you go from an amazing segment like that straight down to a random-ass match, expect a big drop, at least all of whatever Punk/Heyman gains.

Will be interesting to see how Henry and Cena's segments do as they were in quarters that don't normally do so well, but they also weren't intensely advertised. Truth be told I had no idea Henry was even coming out until... well... I saw him in the ring (had TV muted and was doing stuff on the computer). I'm not expecting anything more than a small gain, though if I'm not mistaken Henry's segment was right after Punk/Young, so maybe he'll have a strong gain gaining back what was lost in that match. Tough to predict because of that.

And well, I think that covers the major stuff.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 1 – 3.743 million
Hour 2 – 4.287 million
Hour 3 – 3.910 million

Average - 3.98 million


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Hour 1 – 4,027,000
> Hour 2 – 4,263,000
> Hour 3 – 4,172,000
> 
> average viewing audience of 4,154,000 viewers


This can't be right - exactly the same as last week for each hour?


----------



## EternalFlameFilms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

wwe is starting to average under 4 million every week now? Thats not good :/


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> Not sure what to expect tbh. Bryan/Orton in the main event will be a true testament to Bryan's drawing power and if this push he's received has actually worked.


sorry but you simply cannot tell anything from one week (especially up against serious competition in that time frame like raw had last night), by that same token back on october 14 1996 they advertised austin against wwf champ hbk a week in advance was going to headline raw and that one hour broadcast did a 1.75 rating which told us nothing about austins ability to draw 5 months after his big push at kotr 1996


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*










Another better than expected audience this week.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> sorry but you simply cannot tell anything from one week (especially up against serious competition in that time frame like raw had last night), by that same token back on october 14 1996 they advertised austin against wwf champ hbk a week in advance was going to headline raw and that one hour broadcast did a 1.75 rating which told us nothing about austins ability to draw 5 months after his big push at kotr 1996


This. One figure means nothing; it does not matter if the audience or rating goes up or down. More important is the trend over time and whether the audience is higher (or lower) than expected on a _consistent basis_.


----------



## xD7oom

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Weltschmertz said:


> Another better than expected audience this week.


2014?


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Weltschmertz said:


> Another better than expected audience this week.


I'd love to see that historically for the past 6 months and for the next month to see where we are heading if possible?


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.7 to 4.2? What was the second hour of raw? Quite a few people tuned in to see it


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> sorry but you simply cannot tell anything from one week (especially up against serious competition in that time frame like raw had last night), by that same token back on october 14 1996 they advertised austin against wwf champ hbk a week in advance was going to headline raw and that one hour broadcast did a 1.75 rating which told us nothing about austins ability to draw 5 months after his big push at kotr 1996


And maybe at the time Austin just wasn't a draw.

I'm not saying if the overrun fails it means Bryan's going to be a drawing failure, absolutely not. But it will be the best telling sign we have right now as to how this big push he's been getting has been received since this is the biggest opportunity Bryan's been given, and until we can see the trends and if things add up, that's what we have to go by. 

Bryan however did do well last week in that random quarter, and has been doing fairly well in lesser slots, so if anything I'm expecting this main event to do very well based on that.

As far as the hourly numbers... damn, not good at all. Of course it was expected the numbers would drop below 4 million, but without that second quarter (which got that number for fuck knows whatever reason), the overall number would've been pretty fucking poor.

Actually wasn't it the WWE 2k14 cover reveal that took place at the 9PM slot? Crazy if a Rock poster draws, lol.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Hour 1 – 3.743 million
> Hour 2 – 4.287 million
> Hour 3 – 3.910 million
> 
> Average - 3.98 million


Could have been worse.



DatKidMog said:


> 3.7 to 4.2? What was the second hour of raw? Quite a few people tuned in to see it


They tuned in to see Ryback facing Khali.

:axel



Weltschmertz said:


> Another better than expected audience this week.


Where do you see that?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.90

final rating


----------



## Awesome22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not a good rating but not surprised.


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

There was huge competition with the NHL finals and Under the dome show. A drop was expected.


----------



## Mqwar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

At 9PM Jericho/ADR was still on after a commercial break, followed by Triple H/Vickie/Maddox 3 mins backstage seg which ends at 9:06PM, Lawler/Vickie/2k14 Cover reveal segments ends at 9:16Pm and Ryback vs Khali at 9:25PM. 9:30 - 9:37PM John Cena Promo addressing Henry's fake retirement. The triple threat tag match ends at 9:46 and 9:52-10:10PM Heyman/Punk segment.


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



thaimasker said:


> There was huge competition with the NHL finals and Under the dome show. A drop was expected.


lol i knew it was a matter of time before the excuses starting to fly, i never heard these excuses during the AE

nhl not even big in usa, for this so called "global" company that is wwe, they cant even draw a 3.0

why dont you just blame a rerun of i love lucy while your at it

you really think some reality show is the reason why there not drawing 6.0's anymore lol


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chucky101 said:


> nhl not even big in usa, for this so called "global" company that is wwe, they cant even draw a 3.0


Being a global company has nothing to do with US ratings.


----------



## Awesome22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



thaimasker said:


> There was huge competition with the NHL finals and Under the dome show. A drop was expected.


NHL finals? Come on. :lmao


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chucky101 said:


> lol i knew it was a matter of time before the excuses starting to fly, i never heard these excuses during the AE
> 
> nhl not even big in usa, for this so called "global" company that is wwe, they cant even draw a 3.0
> 
> why dont you just blame a rerun of i love lucy while your at it
> 
> you really think some reality show is the reason why there not drawing 6.0's anymore lol


The NHL finals drew 8.31 mil.... and Under the dome drew 10 mil..those are huge numbers

I said that they were reasons for the slight drop...not attitude era numbers...the wrestling boom is over and TV ratings are starting to mean less and less.


----------



## TheFightingFowl

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> Being a global company has nothing to do with US ratings.


:lol


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I bet it was the Punk/Darren Young match where everyone got off in the 3rd hour. 2nd hour had Cena, so that's expected.


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



thaimasker said:


> The NHL finals drew 8.31 mil.... and Under the dome drew 10 mil..those are huge numbers
> 
> I said that they were reasons for the slight drop...not attitude era numbers...the wrestling boom is over and TV ratings are starting to mean less and less.


You just contradicted yourself
First you said those shows got huge ratings, then say ratings means less, which is it?

In fact sports have been drawing record numbers every year, so if tv is shrinking then how do you explain that, I get everything isnt the same as it was, but if you put out a great product people will watch

Raw could be doing at least 5.0 and over every week if they had a better product

My point is you seem to be making excuses instead of focusing on the real problem that the product generally stinks


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chucky101 said:


> You just contradicted yourself
> First you said those shows got huge ratings, then say ratings means less, which is it?
> 
> In fact sports have been drawing record numbers every year, so if tv is shrinking then how do you explain that, I get everything isnt the same as it was, but if you put out a great product people will watch
> 
> Raw could be doing at least 5.0 and over every week if they had a better product
> 
> My point is you seem to be making excuses instead of focusing on the real problem that the product generally stinks


No matter how good RAW gets, it won't draw a 5.0 rating. RAW 1000 was watched by over 6,000,000 people and it didn't even get a 4.0 average rating.


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chucky101 said:


> You just contradicted yourself
> First you said those shows got huge ratings, then say ratings means less, which is it?
> 
> In fact sports have been drawing record numbers every year, so if tv is shrinking then how do you explain that, I get everything isnt the same as it was, but if you put out a great product people will watch
> 
> Raw could be doing at least 5.0 and over every week if they had a better product
> 
> My point is you seem to be making excuses instead of focusing on the real problem that the product generally stinks


I didn't contradict myself at all. If I said that no one gets huge ratings anymore than sure that would be a contradiction. This isn't the 90's anymore, there are multiple ways of viewership now And its going to mean alot less in the future. Huge sport events may be doing well but generally speaking TV viewership is in a decline..people are spending less time watching programs on TV more and more time on the internet,tablets,nextflix, even watching programs On gaming consoles... thats a fact. 

and I don't even see how what I said would even be making an excuse, I admitted that people chose to watch other things over RAW...which ties into quality/preference... but realistically it was expected that shows much bigger than RAW atm would draw away a few viewers, thus the slight decline in ratings doesn't surprise me.


----------



## Smackdown Lights

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ladies and Gentleman,welcome to CM Punk 2.9!


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Smackdown Lights said:


> Ladies and Gentleman,welcome to CM Punk 2.9!


Because as we all know, individual wrestlers are notoriously responsible for the overall success or failure of the show.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> I'd love to see that historically for the past 6 months and for the next month to see where we are heading if possible?












This is since July last year. Green bars represent where a show does better than expected.




Bryan D. said:


> Where do you see that?


Linear regression. A bit nerdy, but the essence is that you predict the next RAW rating by using information about past RAW ratings, past Smackdown ratings and the distance to the next (previous) PPV.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> No matter how good RAW gets, it won't draw a 5.0 rating. RAW 1000 was watched by over 6,000,000 people and it didn't even get a 4.0 average rating.


fpalm


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chucky101 said:


> lol i knew it was a matter of time before the excuses starting to fly, i never heard these excuses during the AE


the attitude era was a boom period, a boom created by a war between two similiar shows where talent frequently swapped places, people would have watched back then if vince walked out and took a dump in the ring, the fact that you have to go back nearly 15 years to a time when bill clinton was still president and BEFORE 9/11, a time before reality tv does say alot though

tv shows have a small window for the most part where they are ultra popular, bart gets a f had 34 million viewers back in 1991, today new episodes of the simpsons do 4 million viewers, the finale of survivor in 2000 had 50 million viewers, the finale in 2012...8 million viewers 
jersey shore was frequently doing 8 and 9 million viewers in 2010-11, its last season this year barely scraped 2 million, ultimate fighter was doing 5-6 million viewers and beating raw in 2009, last season it lost out to main event and the season before that was destroyed by head to head with smackdown and only averaged 800,000 viewers

there also wasn't youtube, streams, dvr and a plethora of other ways to watch it like today, i don't live in the states and had to wait months to get tapes of nitros back then

wrestling existed before the attitude era, raw existed before the attitude era,raw on this date 1996 got a 2.6 and a 2.4 on this date in 1997 (and those are a hell of alot less viewers than a 2.4 or 2.6 would garner today)

the fact that in its 21st year raw is still a top 5 show on cable every week (in this the era of 19,000 weekly shows on cable tv) and wins mondays almost every week outside of nfl season is a huge achievement, the world has completely changed since 1993 and even since 1999 but raw top of the cable charts has remained a constant....oh sorry its not doing 5 ratings right now


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DatKidMog said:


> fpalm


What, you really think a wrestling show can get 5.0 ratings on a regular basis today? Because if you, you're just plain delusional. At the very most, a well booked show with good performers will get 6 or 7 million viewers, and that'll still only be scratching at the 4 ratings.


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

my point was the product generally has stinked since the AE, there has been pockets of goof stuff but the show hasnt been "must see" in years and thats why the decline in ratings happened

good show=good ratings

not saying they will draw AE numbers but it could be a lot better if the show was better

sme of you seem to be putting 100% of the blame on other stuff and not the show itself which clearly plays a part in it

here are some things
-almost half the show is a commercial/recap/beastar stuff
-pushing cena 24/7 when everybody over thr age of 9 hates him
-ruining the summer of punk storyline
-pushing hhh over and over instead of newer stars aka hhh beating lesnar at wrestlemania
-stupid gimmicks all over the place

your defending this show?


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Same arguments back & forth week in, week out. This joint never changes, it's like an endless troll loop. 
Every Tuesday is the same Tuesday


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chucky101 said:


> my point was the product generally has stinked since the AE, there has been pockets of goof stuff but the show hasnt been "must see" in years and thats why the decline in ratings happened
> 
> good show=good ratings
> 
> not saying they will draw AE numbers but it could be a lot better if the show was better
> 
> sme of you seem to be putting 100% of the blame on other stuff and not the show itself which clearly plays a part in it
> 
> here are some things
> -almost half the show is a commercial/recap/beastar stuff
> -pushing cena 24/7 when everybody over thr age of 9 hates him
> -ruining the summer of punk storyline
> -pushing hhh over and over instead of newer stars aka hhh beating lesnar at wrestlemania
> -stupid gimmicks all over the place
> 
> your defending this show?


I don't think anyone is defending the show, barring a few short periods it's been fairly crap for years now. But comparisons to the attitude are aren't very apt. It was a different time, with different circumstances surrounding the ratings.


----------



## DolphZigglerRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE Better not fuck up money in the bank.

The build up so far has been great on raw (ok on smackdown).

The main thing wwe has to do is make Ziggler win the title at mitb or summerslam and not just make someone cash on del rio so ziggler dont get a shoot.


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol the product sucks for the most part, and thats the real problem, nuff said

hopefully the ratings keeps going south


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Jesus, if hockey can do this to RAW, I can't wait till Monday Night Football comes around.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chucky101 said:


> lol the product sucks for the most part, and thats the real problem, nuff said
> 
> hopefully the ratings keeps going south


Really? The product sucks?


----------



## Emberdon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

chucky101 clearly don't know what the fuck he's talking about it. Stop embarrassing yourself son.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LOL, 'the product sucks.' WWE's put out consistently great Raw's for a while now. It's gotten to the point where I feel Heyman is working on creative a bit, it's been real good.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Emberdon said:


> chucky101 clearly don't know what the fuck he's talking about it. Stop embarrassing yourself son.


So, you're saying the product is great, its nothing that will bring attention to it. Most parts of last night was pointless, just because your hero is finally in the mainevent doesn't make it a good/great show.

Last week was much better and we barely get the same product it always turns shit the following week.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chucky101 said:


> lol the product sucks for the most part, and thats the real problem, nuff said
> 
> hopefully the ratings keeps going south


Yet you are on the internet, on a wrestling forum typing up things about it. 
Yeah you must hate the current product.

fpalm


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> Because as we all know, individual wrestlers are notoriously responsible for the overall success or failure of the show.


but...if Punk was the main focal point of the show and it drew record breaking numbers, you Punk fans would be all over it, claiming how big of a draw he is blah blah blah. It works both ways, we are gonna call him out on his failure as a main eventer. The only reason I care about the ratings is to see how much Punk really draws. It's so interesting to me because he has been given so much yet draws so little. Just saying.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

To be honest, if he was doing record breaking numbers and the ratings stuff never got so big in the first place, I don't think us Punk fans would be mentioning anything about the ratings and just continue calling him an amazing talent. Nowadays, yeah, most probably would call him that and rightfully so if he was capable of doing that, but mainly because of how much the haters have pushed a few bad numbers on Punk (even when there are more good-great numbers to go with that). I know telling this to a hater is like telling this to a wall, but Punk isn't a ratings failure.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Weltschmertz said:


> This is since July last year. Green bars represent where a show does better than expected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Linear regression. A bit nerdy, but the essence is that you predict the next RAW rating by using information about past RAW ratings, past Smackdown ratings and the distance to the next (previous) PPV.


Thanks. 

Just out of interest - how many times has Raw done better than expected this year - ie 15 out of 30 for example? And how does that compare with last year - ie is Raw having a better year statistically this year than last?


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Do people realize that the reason why we have these ratings arguments regarding Punk is because guys like Rock316AE and his followers all misinterpreted ratings numbers as a way to attack Punk?


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> PWTorch has received quarter-hour TV ratings and minute-by-minute ratings for the Monday, June 24 WWE Raw episode. Details below are for the males 18-49 demographic, which covers the widest range of Raw's key demos. All references below are for the m18-49 demo to avoid redundancy.
> 
> - Hourly Break Down: 1.75 first hour rating, 1.89 second hour rating, 1.83 third hour rating, and only a 1.84 over-run rating for the conclusion of Daniel Bryan vs. Randy Orton against the fall-out from the Stanley Cup Finals ending.
> 
> - Peak Ratings: 2.01 rating in Q5 for the conclusion of Chris Jericho vs. Alberto Del Rio and 2.01 rating in Q9 for the conclusion of C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman's verbal exchange.
> 
> - Key Comparison: John Cena's promo in the second-half of Q7 scored a 1.89 rating. Mark Henry's promo in the second-half of Q11 scored a 1.90 rating. However, peak viewership in Q11 was for Stephanie McMahon announcing the WWE Title Money in the Bank participants prior to a commercial that led to Henry's speech.
> 
> - Peak Audience: The most viewers during Raw was 1.464 million viewers at 9:01 p.m. when Jericho vs. Del Rio was heating up. The next most-watched minute of the show was 1.433 million viewers at 9:14 p.m. for the "WWE 2K14" video game cover reveal.
> 
> During the third hour, Raw only hit the 1.4 million mark during Q9. Peak viewership was 1.425 million viewers at 10:03 p.m. for Punk-Heyman.
> 
> - Bryan vs. Orton comparison: Q1 jumped out to a strong 1.82 rating for Take One on the Daniel Bryan vs. Randy Orton rubber match. Peak viewership was 1.367 million viewers at 8:06 p.m. when the match heated up.
> 
> However, Take Two in Q12 only scored a 1.65 rating against the conclusion of the Stanley Cup before the over-run scored a 1.84 rating. Peak viewership for the match was 1.195 million viewers at 11:08 when Bryan made Orton tap out. Raw then went off the air with 1.112 million viewers at 11:10 p.m.
> 
> Raw Flow Highlights
> 
> Q1: Raw scored a 1.82 rating for Take One on Bryan-Orton.
> 
> Q2: Raw slipped to a 1.74 rating for Sheamus & Christian vs. Rhodes Scholars and Kaitlyn vs. Aksana.
> 
> Q3: Raw hit a show-low 1.63 rating for videos, non-action segments, and two commercial breaks.
> 
> Q4: Raw rebounded to a 1.82 rating for the first-half of Del Rio vs. Jericho.
> 
> H2 - Q5: Raw increased to a 2.01 rating for the conclusion of Del Rio vs. Jericho, which included peak viewership of the night, and the video game cover reveal.
> 
> Q6: Raw dropped to a 1.76 rating for Ryback vs. Great Khali.
> 
> Q7: Raw jumped back to a 1.89 rating for John Cena's speech.
> 
> Q8: Raw stayed at a 1.89 rating for the first-half of C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman's promo exchange.
> 
> H3 - Q9: Raw jumped to a 2.01 rating for the second-half of Punk-Heyman. This was peak viewership of the third hour.
> 
> Q10: Raw dropped to a 1.75 rating for Punk wrestling Darren Young. However, the audience grew throughout the match and there was a very long commercial break at the end of the quarter-hour.
> 
> Q11: Raw rebounded to a 1.90 rating for the WWE Title MITB match announcement and Mark Henry's speech.
> 
> Q12: Raw dropped to a near-show-low 1.65 rating for the first-half of Orton vs. Bryan against the Stanley Cup conclusion.
> 
> OVER: Raw finished with a 1.84 rating for the conclusion of Orton-Bryan. (Last Five Weeks of Raw over-runs: 1.92, 1.93, 1.88, 2.14, and 1.84 this week.)
> 
> Break Down: Orton-Bryan cut to commercial at 10:54 p.m. with 1.130 million viewers. Raw returned at 10:58 with 1.041 million viewers. Raw re-built to 1.104 million viewers at 11:00 p.m., then went 1.120 million, 1.116 million, 1.135 million, 1.148 million, 1.162 million, 1.192 million, 1.181 million, and peak viewership of 1.195 million viewers at 11:08 p.m. when the match concluded.
> 
> Caldwell's Analysis: Studying the minute-by-minutes the last several weeks, there is a consistent pattern that longer matches do build an audience over time, as opposed to turning viewers away. It points to wrestling viewers wanting to invest in a match if the promotion makes that match feel important and worth their investment. Even though Orton-Bryan delivered a weak over-run rating, the audience grow over time as viewers returned to Raw following the conclusion of the Stanley Cup game (or other programming that ended at 11:00 p.m.).


http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_71547.shtml


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Jericho/Del Rio doing that well? Well I'll be damned...

... should be interesting to see the regular breakdown we get for comparisons sake (since I don't keep these new PWTorch ones on file), but it's pretty interesting to see.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

20:06 - 1.367 million
....
21:01 - 1.464 million
....
21:14 - 1.433 million
....
22:03 - 1.425 million
....
22:54 - 1.130 million
....
22:58 - 1.041 million
23:00 - 1.104 million
23:01 - 1.120 million
23:02 - 1.116 million
23:03 - 1.135 million
23:04 - 1.148 million
23:05 - 1.162 million
23:06 - 1.192 million
23:07 - 1.181 million
23:08 - 1.195 million
23:10 - 1.112 million

Not much to say when you provide a viewership breakdown as vague as that.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

17th June



D.M.N. said:


> Males 18-49
> 20:12 - 1.369 million viewers
> 20:14 - 1.378 million viewers
> ....
> 20:59 - 1.326 million viewers
> 21:12 - 1.514 million viewers
> ....
> 21:22 - 1.476 million viewers
> 21:23 - 1.618 million viewers
> 21:26 - 1.696 million viewers
> 21:28 - 1.661 million viewers
> ....
> 22:00 - 1.403 million viewers
> 22:04 - 1.549 million viewers
> 22:11 - 1.625 million viewers
> 22:12 - 1.663 million viewers
> 22:13 - 1.594 million viewers
> ....
> 22:24 - 1.320 million viewers
> ....
> 22:41 - 1.350 million viewers
> ....
> ~22:50 - 1.114 million viewers
> ~22:55 - 1.247 million viewers
> 22:59 - 1.205 million viewers
> 23:02 - 1.356 million viewers
> 23:03 - 1.340 million viewers
> 23:04 - 1.366 million viewers
> 23:05 - 1.339 million viewers
> 
> So in the key demographic, the Diva's are on top. Wouldn't have expected that. Poor for Punk vs Del Rio, and really not many eye balls (in comparison to say Cena/Henry) on Lesnar's return.
> 
> Edit, the peaks from above...
> 
> - 1.696 million / 2.72 rating - Diva's segment
> - 1.663 million / 2.65 rating - Cena/Henry segment
> - 1.514 million / 2.42 rating - Bryan/Orton
> - 1.378 million / 2.20 rating - Punk/Del Rio opener
> - 1.366 million / 2.14 rating - Lesnar returns
> - 1.356 million / 2.16 rating - Punk/Del Rio
> - 1.320 million / 2.11 rating - Jericho/Slater


24th June



D.M.N. said:


> 20:06 - 1.367 million
> ....
> 21:01 - 1.464 million
> ....
> 21:14 - 1.433 million
> ....
> 22:03 - 1.425 million
> ....
> 22:54 - 1.130 million
> ....
> 22:58 - 1.041 million
> 23:00 - 1.104 million
> 23:01 - 1.120 million
> 23:02 - 1.116 million
> 23:03 - 1.135 million
> 23:04 - 1.148 million
> 23:05 - 1.162 million
> 23:06 - 1.192 million
> 23:07 - 1.181 million
> 23:08 - 1.195 million
> 23:10 - 1.112 million
> 
> Not much to say when you provide a viewership breakdown as vague as that.


What time did Punk and Heyman's segment finish? Didn't do as well as Cena and Henry from last week when you look at the time of the peak.


----------



## God Movement

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk and Heyman did decent anywho.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> 17th June
> 
> 
> 
> 24th June
> 
> 
> 
> What time did Punk and Heyman's segment finish? Didn't do as well as Cena and Henry from last week when you look at the time of the peak.


I think it ended around somewhere between 10:07 and 10:10 EST if memory serves me correctly. Definitely didn't go to the end of the quarter and it actually started about 9:53 I think (that's when Heyman was out there by himself starting it off). So if it went 15 minutes, you could pin it at 10:08


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Knew Bryan/Orton was going to do very mediocrity, it was at the borderline of being bad. Surprised Punk did REALLY well, and of course Cena and Henry do amazing. Cena and Punk are keeping this company afloat, the GOATS of the industry today.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Knew Bryan/Orton was going to do very mediocrity, *it was at the borderline of being bad.* Surprised Punk did REALLY well, and of course Cena and Henry do amazing. Cena and Punk are keeping this company afloat, the GOATS of the industry today.


The match quality itself or in viewers? Because the match was pretty good. Also if you follow the notes that pwtorch actually made, then you'll see that the match began against the winding down minutes of the NHL finals, and the viewers only grew throughout the match.


----------



## AWR

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Horrible Storylines = poor ratings simple as that


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> The match quality itself or in viewers? Because the match was pretty good. Also if you follow the notes that pwtorch actually made, then you'll see that the match began against the winding down minutes of the NHL finals, and the viewers only grew throughout the match.


No, the match was awesome. The rating itself was poor. But yeah NHL probably had something to do with it. Didn't know Hockey was still such a threat lol.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> No, the match was awesome. The rating itself was poor. But yeah NHL probably had something to do with it. Didn't know Hockey was still such a threat lol.


Same lol. I guess my country's sport seems to have made it pretty big down south which is good I guess. I'm probably one of the only Canadians who isn't too fond of hockey lol.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AWR said:


> Horrible Storylines = poor ratings simple as that


the roster walk out on hhh back in 2011 did 5.5 million viewers and the highest numbers during football season for years so i guess using your logic that was the best storyline wwe have done for years...

big show crying added over 1 million viewers last year

ratings have nothing to do with quality unless you think "this is your life" was one of the greatest segments in raw history or something


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think the peak is the usual 9PM bump, nothing to do with Jericho vs Del Rio match. Punk and Heyman held up it seems.
Too bad for Orton/Bryan though, they never gained back the viewers they had at the start of the show. BTW Why don't they report A18-49 rating/breakdown?


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chucky101 said:


> lol i knew it was a matter of time before the excuses starting to fly, i never heard these excuses during the AE
> 
> *nhl not even big in usa*, for this so called "global" company that is wwe, they cant even draw a 3.0
> 
> why dont you just blame a rerun of i love lucy while your at it
> 
> you really think some reality show is the reason why there not drawing 6.0's anymore lol





Awesome22 said:


> NHL finals? Come on. :lmao





> 8.16 Million Viewers Watch Chicago Blackhawks Win Stanley Cup on NBC
> 
> GAME 6
> 
> Last night’s game drew a 4.7 U.S. household rating and 8.16 million viewers on NBC, up 52% and 66%, respectively, vs. last year (3.1 and 4.929 million viewers). This year’s series-clinching contest was the second-most watched Stanley Cup Final Game 6 since 1994, trailing only Chicago’s 2010 series-clinching Game 6 against Philadelphia (6/9/10, 8.279 million).
> 
> Game 6 peaked with 10.424 million viewers from 10:45-11 p.m. ET.


Stop embarrassing yourselves. :lmao


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

edit; never mind


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Stad said:


> Stop embarrassing yourselves. :lmao


Damn @ the 10 million peak. Explains the first half of Orton vs Bryan doing so bad.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> - As noted, the June 24th WWE RAW did a 2.89 cable rating with 3.98 million viewers.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, the opener with Daniel Bryan and Randy Orton did a 2.82 quarter rating, which is very weak. Sheamus and Christian vs. Damien Sandow and Cody Rhodes plus Kaitlyn vs. Aksana lost 124,000 viewers. The promo with AJ Lee making fun of Kaitlyn, a replay of the Mark Henry and John Cena angle plus a Wyatt Family vignette lost 198,000 viewers for a show-low 2.59 quarter rating.
> 
> Chris Jericho vs. Alberto Del Rio gained 333,000 viewers. The post-match happenings and the reveal of the WWE 2K14 cover at 9pm drew 361,000 viewers for a 3.10 quarter rating. Ryback vs. The Great Khali lost 217,000 viewers. John Cena's interview gained 235,000 viewers. Tensai and Brodus Clay vs. The Usos vs. 3MB and the beginning of Paul Heyman's interview gained 19,000 viewers. The segment with Heyman and CM Punk gained 117,000 viewers at 10pm for a show-high 3.21 quarter rating. Punk vs. Darren Young and the post-match happenings lost 598,000 viewers.
> 
> Stephanie McMahon announcing Money in the Bank participants plus backstage segment with Chris Jericho and Ryback plus Heyman and Punk gained 136,000 viewers. The Orton vs. Bryan street fight gained 104,000 viewers - one of the lowest main event gains of the whole year, finishing at a 2.92 overrun.


via F4WONLINE


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Shame Orton vs Bryan didn't draw big, it was the sort of match casuals love.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ouch, Not good for Orton and Bryan. More so Orton because WWE looks at him as an established star and to go out there and do that bad? Not good, the NHL game I'm sure had an affect, but still. Hopefully they continue to push Bryan which I'm sure they will, and hopefully Orton doesn't get lost in purgatory, which he probably will like the last 6 months.

The GOATS Punk and Cena did pretty well. Cena thrown out at a random quarter hour and gained pretty well. Punk was in the highest segment of the night so that's surprising. Punk Vs. Young didn't do too hot but what did you expect? Didn't Y2J/3MB lose like 1 Million in the same time slot? Not to bad. The 9PM slot is a good place to put the WHC feud, because they aren't big draws, but that slot always seems to gain no matter whose involved.

C2D's gonna be pissed with Orton doing Really Bad and Punk doing Really good lol.


----------



## CNB

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

JERICHO = RATINGZ


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Worrying for Bryan's push, I suspect he was placed in both the opener and closer so they could get an idea of how he'd do in those spots.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Putting a guy who the previous week started a feud with Brock Lesnar in a throwaway match with some non-entity like Darren Young lost viewers. What a surprise...

Horrendous match and booking.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Punk vs. Darren Young and the post-match happenings lost 598,000 viewers.


Didn't see that coming. That's a great loss.



> The Orton vs. Bryan street fight gained 104,000 viewers - one of the lowest main event gains of the whole year, finishing at a 2.92 overrun.


That's really bad. Bryan


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



YoungGun_UK said:


> Worrying for Bryan's push, I suspect he was placed in both the opener and closer so they could get an idea of how he'd do in those spots.


It isn't at all. With the NHL game peaking at 10 million during the last quarter, the match was bound to do bad. Can't put the blame on the match.


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Meh, Orton vs Bryan drew just under a 3.0, and I'll bet every fan who watched it enjoyed it, and would be happy to see more matches of that quality. Nobody watching that Main Event would have thought "well that was lame", because it was a great match.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sucks that the main event didn't do big but I guess that damn NHL was huge competition.

EDIT: But what about RATINGS' promo around the 22:30 spot? :henry1 I found nothing about it in that breakdown.


----------



## vanboxmeer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan's been a glorified enhancement talent for the entirety of his WWE career. Every angle he's been in has always been to benefit a different party. The only real time he could've been made into a genuine star was a year ago, and instead he got fed to AJ Lee. Marc Mero'd 2012. It's now too late after a year of being a comedy geek who was losing almost all his singles matches in very short times to turn that around in a month. Casual fans don't view him as a real star, and the stench of being a geek for so long is going to kill any chance of being a real main eventer.

It was over a year ago.


----------



## The GOAT One

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's the end of D Bry.


----------



## vanboxmeer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cranky Vince ‏@CrankyVince 25 Jun
DO YOU THINK THIS ENDS WELL? IT DOESN'T. FUCK YOU.

Cranky Vince ‏@CrankyVince 25 Jun
DON'T GET TOO COMFORTABLE. I AM ABOUT TO SLAM MY VASCULAR COCK INTO YOUR SUMMERTIME HOPES FOR MY PRODUCT. FUCK YOU.


He's tapping to the STF in 12 minutes at Summerslam and Cena gets both Bellas.


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Ouch, Not good for Orton and Bryan. More so Orton because WWE looks at him as an established star and to go out there and do that bad? Not good, the NHL game I'm sure had an affect, but still. Hopefully they continue to push Bryan which I'm sure they will, and hopefully Orton doesn't get lost in purgatory, which he probably will like the last 6 months.
> 
> The GOATS Punk and Cena did pretty well. Cena thrown out at a random quarter hour and gained pretty well. Punk was in the highest segment of the night so that's surprising. Punk Vs. Young didn't do too hot but what did you expect? Didn't Y2J/3MB lose like 1 Million in the same time slot? Not to bad. The 9PM slot is a good place to put the WHC feud, because they aren't big draws, but that slot always seems to gain no matter whose involved.
> 
> C2D's gonna be pissed with Orton doing Really Bad and Punk doing Really good lol.


punk is the GOAT when it comes to beeing the worst drawing main-eventer since 1995

why are you saying the main event did bad when orton and bryan are not even close to beeing booked as top stars and plus they had a big competition going head to head 

and punk did far worse when he main-eveted raw when he not only didn't gain viewers but actually losing alot of viewers and not even having competition going head to head 

and the rock on the cover of WWE 2K14 = huge ratingz

the rock = the goat


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow, that 10PM gain is so low, just 117,000 viewers. Its actually thanks to John Cena's segment doing well before, Heyman and Punk were able to hit the show high at 10 with such a small gain. Punk vs Darren match lost almost 4 times the viewers heyman and punk gained, although it was probably expected. Too bad for Daniel Bryan and Orton main event, it was a phenomenal match.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

unk4 :cena2 :henry1 drawing as usual.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The NHL destroying Raw?

fpalm

How the mighty have fallen. :vince4

I won't blame Orton/Bryan, though. They need more time.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Meh you win some you lose some. I personally saw the hockey game and recorded RAW, well since I am from Chicago. I doubt they will put the blame on Orton and Bryan since they pretty much are mid-card acts given a main event match during the NHL finals. It takes time.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



uknoww said:


> punk is the GOAT when it comes to beeing the worst drawing main-eventer since 1995
> 
> why are you saying the main event did bad when Bryan and *orton are not even close to beeing booked as top stars and plus* they had a big competition going head to head
> 
> *and punk did far worse when he main-eveted raw when he not only didn't gain viewers but actually losing alot of viewers and not even having competition going head to head *
> 
> and the rock on the cover of WWE 2K14 = huge ratingz
> 
> the rock = the goat


Orton is already booked as a top star, even tho hes not in any meaningful storyline but he wins most of the times, been that way since 2009 as for Bryan its different story.

(second part) Thats a fact right? Get real, he has been in the highest gains last year probably more than anyone. Whether you like it or not him and Cena are the two top draws.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan/Orton was bad but it was the first night of Bryan's push. Let's see how the ratings are 2 months from now. Punk had over a year full of fuck ups ratings wise.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

 at Bryan/Orton. Weak overrun number and the gain was weak as well. Not a good sign for Bryan, although hopefully they don't just give up on him because of one unerwhelming overrun. The match deserved better. I suppose the one saving grace is it was still slightly above the rating for Raw as a whole. 

Did Jericho/Del Rio gain that in a random quarter? Or was that part of the 9PM gain? If the former, that's really amazing. Gaining 300,000+ viewers like that at that time is an impressive feat, especially considering Del Rio was involved. If it was in the 9PM segment, that's still pretty impressive all things considered. And then... omg, it's true. Even on a poster Rock draws! :rock

Cena gaining 235,000 in a random quarter is awesome for an odd quarter. It also probably had an impact on the 10PM gain, but never the less, Punk/Heyman ended up at the peak of the night. They gained as being part of the the quarter with that triple threat tag, and then gained the 117,000 viewers on top of that. The key here is they were top of the night and that's important as it shows the Punk/Brock feud (and Punk/Heyman feud while we're at it) has plenty of interest. The loss afterwards for the pointless Punk/Young match is bad, but it's expected with how pointless the match was. A HHH promo with Heyman followed by a random match with Young probably wouldn't have done much better (assuming HHH was wrestling every week). But yeah, not good, but expected.

And where's the Henry segment?


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That was an extremely interesting breakdown. 


> Stephanie McMahon announcing Money in the Bank participants plus backstage segment with Chris Jericho and Ryback plus Heyman and Punk gained 136,000 viewers. The Orton vs. Bryan street fight gained 104,000 viewers - one of the lowest main event gains of the whole year, finishing at a 2.92 overrun.


The most important part. Punk is slowly starting to draw and I can't even dispute that at this point. But then again I attribute that gain to Lesnar, even though he didn't show up when everybody was kind of expecting him to. 

I can't believe how low Orton & Bryan drew for the main event. I'm not going to be a hypocrite and ignore that while I bashed Punk for it all the time. That's absolutely terrible. The fact that these two had hype from Last week's Raw and Smackdown and still did this poor of a job is laughable, you'd expect big gains considering how over Bryan is. I guess Bryan isn't as over as we thought we was.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If Bryan was a musclehead, I bet these numbers wouldn't jeopardize his push.


----------



## Beatles123

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's one off week, yes. After a SD where he was booked as a tweener.

Just saying. We'll see.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I watched the hockey game instead of RAW. Just saying.


----------



## EternalFlameFilms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> If Bryan was a musclehead, I bet these numbers wouldn't jeopardize his push.


problem is he isnt, he looked real short next to randy(not that its a bad thing), its just vince mcmahon probably just doesnt like him that much, hell push him real well but then they will back off his push for any reason he feels necessary, hopefully, im proved wrong


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I thought Daniel Bryan was a draw?


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



EternalFlameFilms said:


> problem is he isnt


No fucking shit.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Only time will tell


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Shit, looks like DB HAS to be paired with Cena. 

:cena3 is a draw no matter what we do.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Seems like the whole show tanked. No segments or matches got particularly huge gains.


----------



## Osize10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lol and Bryan's push lasts a week

Thanks a lot wrestling fans. Bunch of idiots. Killed a good thing so now you'll get what you deserve...more supercena. Enjoy the summer


----------



## NexS.E.S

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Boy Wonder said:


> I thought Daniel Bryan was a draw?


You have a disturbing hatred for him. Seriously, it's really disturbing.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NexS.E.S said:


> You have a disturbing hatred for him. Seriously, it's really disturbing.


It's not like he's wishing death on the dude or hoping for him to get seriously injured like some on here hope for, for the superstars they hate.

Probably just trying to stir up DB marks.


----------



## Vyer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I really don't see that huge of a problem with the Orton/Bryan match. It did managed to *draw* in viewers. It wasn't much probably due to the NHL game, but it did draw. I wonder how Bryan and Orton will do later on.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Can some of you not read? Orton/Bryan did poor because the NHL game was in the final minutes when the Hawks won it and then they celebrated the cup afterwards, it's common sense here people.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Osize10 said:


> Lol and Bryan's push lasts a week
> 
> Thanks a lot wrestling fans. Bunch of idiots. Killed a good thing so now you'll get what you deserve...more supercena. Enjoy the summer


Chill out, dude. His push ain't gonna stop now.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Osize10 said:


> Lol and Bryan's push lasts a week
> 
> Thanks a lot wrestling fans. Bunch of idiots. Killed a good thing so now you'll get what you deserve...more supercena. Enjoy the summer


The Tard Rage is strong with this one.

Punk is arguably one of the worst draws in the history of the company and yet he is the #2 guy in the company. Bryan will be fine.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

[email protected] PUNK and d bryan. Indies dont draw. FACT. 

Time for d bryan to head back down to mid card.

Cena is the only real draw, put him in any quarter and he draws. True champion.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> The Tard Rage is strong with this one.
> 
> *Punk is arguably one of the worst draws in the history of the company* and yet he is the #2 guy in the company. Bryan will be fine.


Why because he was the victim of a 3 hours show, doesnt matter what you thing about him, I have seen all the breakdowns of last year and 95% he was one of the very very few guys who actually gains viewers and draws, and his PPV buyrates as a MainEventer where successfully higher than the previous year/years e.g. Night of Champions, Hell in a Cell, Royal Rumble, Elimination Chamber, and even as a Co-Maineventer, somehow hes a draw but not a very big of a draw, he still needs to accomplish more so that people can pay to see him wrestle or whatever. Also hes a top Merchandise seller, he sells a lot, sometimes as much as Cena too + If hes not a draw, Vince will not tweet about welcoming him back because he obviously brings a lot of money.



Amuroray said:


> [email protected] PUNK and d bryan. Indies dont draw. FACT.
> 
> Time for d bryan to head back down to mid card.
> 
> *Cena is the only real draw, put him in any quarter and he draws. True champion*.


Youre a hypocrite the only reason why he draws is because of his big victories and him constantly pushed as a top guy for more than 6 years, did Vince push Punk or Bryan for that insane amount of time, I even remember reading in many websites back than in 2007 in how Cena did a big decline as a WWE champion in 2007 when in 2005 and 2006 it was getting the highest since the AE, but with that even said he was still pushed to the mainevent and got handed big victories that any superstar will only wish of getting one.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Amuroray said:


> [email protected] PUNK and d bryan. Indies dont draw. FACT.
> 
> Time for d bryan to head back down to mid card.
> 
> Cena is the only real draw, put him in any quarter and he draws. True champion.


What topped the night again? It's right there, just read it.

Anyway, I like the minute-to-minute posts we get now. A lot more helpful in understanding what did well as opposed to the quarter breakdowns. Punk topping the show is great. The minute to minute breakdown posted earlier said that the Punk/Young match gained more viewers as the match went on. I'm assuming it has to do with the PTP entrance that lead to a commercial, and them giving no indication that it was a match with Punk until after the commercial break.

Bryan/Orton didn't do well. Might not look too good for Bryan, but there's no denying the guy is popular with most crowds so the push will continue.


----------



## jarrelka

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

At this point Cena scratching his dick can do better than Bryan-Orton. Not only the match did bad but the opener aswell. Del Rio/Jericho was surprising. Cena that drawing machine.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

and this is what happens when you fail to make any superstar in years. and then when they have a guy nearing cena's levels, they sabotage the momentum (a la Punk Summer'11)


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



GOD said:


> and this is what happens when you fail to make any superstar in years. and then when they have a guy nearing cena's levels, they sabotage the momentum (a la Punk Summer'11)


Exactly, they show no consistency with their guys, if one guy seemingly does poorly in the ratings, it's time to derail there push. Fuck, just go with him for a while, in the closing segments of the show and put him in prominent roles, you can't just be mad after one poor rating. Consistency is key.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Really is pathetic how there is only on true star on the show today. God forbid they take the time to make someone else look good for once. The casual audience doesn't give a fuck about the show outside of Cena, for the most part.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Really is pathetic how there is only on true star on the show today. God forbid they take the time to make someone else look good for once. The casual audience doesn't give a fuck about the show outside of Cena, for the most part.


The failed every chance they had to make a star.

ADR-Flopped, should've won the belt from Edge at Maina.
Christian-Flopped, Lost the title to Orton in 2 days.
Ryback-Mega Flop
CM Punk-Didn't get the win over Triple H or a Clean win over Cena
Sheamus-Gave him an opening match on Mania with a comedy champion

5 Guys they fucked up with in 2 years. They were going good places with Cesaro, but Nope gotta bury em BROTHER.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> The failed every chance they had to make a star.
> 
> ADR-Flopped, should've won the belt from Edge at Maina.
> Christian-Flopped, Lost the title to Orton in 2 days.
> Ryback-Mega Flop
> CM Punk-Didn't get the win over Triple H or a Clean win over Cena
> Sheamus-Gave him an opening match on Mania with a comedy champion
> 
> 5 Guys they fucked up with in 2 years. They were going good places with Cesaro, but Nope gotta bury em BROTHER.


Yep. They've had multiple chances to finally make someone else a star. You could argue they 'kind of-sort of' succeeded with making Punk a star, I guess. But they didn't go all the way with him. He had a long reign as champion, but every step along the way in his reign he was second fiddle to Cena. Talk about sabotage.

They have a chance with Bryan here, but it's difficult to not think they will fuck it up given their track record.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Yep. They've had multiple chances to finally make someone else a star. You could argue they 'kind of-sort of' succeeded with making Punk a star, I guess. But they didn't go all the way with him. He had a long reign as champion, but every step along the way in his reign he was second fiddle to Cena. Talk about sabotage.
> 
> They have a chance with Bryan here, but it's difficult to not think they will fuck it up given their track record.


Seriously after Batista/Cena, who have the WWE made that they went all the way and didn't fuck up one step? I can't think of one.

With Edge they gave him the title, he was getting nuclear heat, but they had to give the belt back to Cena in 3 weeks. They Fucked up MVP and Mr. Kennedy. I guess they kind of got Jeff Hardy Right, but IMO it was a little late. They gave up on John Morrison when he was getting over. The Miz was brought down from Main Event to Mid Card really quickly. And I honestly can't think of anyone else that they've even attempted.


----------



## 123bigdave

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Warrior said:


> *Meh you win some you lose some. I personally saw the hockey game and recorded RAW, well since I am from Chicago*. I doubt they will put the blame on Orton and Bryan since they pretty much are mid-card acts given a main event match during the NHL finals. It takes time.


DAT bandwagon jumper. . .


----------



## Flawless Victory

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LoL at people acting surprised and trying to make excuses about ADR and Jericho drawing, gaining or whatever word you want to use. If some of you actually stopped hating. You'd realize that more often than not. Del Rio's segments/matches GAIN. His opening last week did better then Daniel Bryan opening the show this week. His main event match with punk last week did better then the bryan/orton main event match this week.


----------



## Edgeheadpeeps

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

All this means is that Bryan won't win the title from Cena and they probably won't turn Orton heel anytime soon and will just have him facing random guys which is stupid because they do not realize that what he's missing is a heel turn. He always drew when he was a heel moreso than a face. But you never know with the WWE though because Punk drew some of the worst ratings when he was champ and he still kept the title for 434 days so maybe we're looking to deep into these ratings. Daniel Bryan will be just fine.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just look at the ending of Daniel Bryan and Randy Orton from RAW. Orton was leaving the ring and where were the fans focused? They were looking at Randy Orton, yet the new big star was in the ring. Daniel Bryan is a great talent, but I honestly don't see him as a guy that can be the top face of the company.


----------



## superuser1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

the show opened up with daniel bryan and failed....closed with daniel bryan and failed....i know the marks will try to put the blame on orton but clearly the show was focused around daniel bryan and wether he'd defeat orton proving to not be a weak link....great match but bad rating.


----------



## krai999

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

bryan needs to reinvent himself this whole no stick has gone on to far enough it's very annoying to the casuals not only that but the man needs to trim his beard(not totally clean but a rugid kind of beard. If you're gonna get the company's top prize you're gonna have to be a certain way. My friend who is a casually fan of wrestling was watching the show with me telling me that what bryan does annoys him where he wanted me to turn the channel due bryan keep saying yes he doesn't like it and used to like him. maybe that's the problem bryan needs to reinvent himself. I mean back to the yes shirt? c'mon just focus on being on getting serious and he's already over with the crowd they want to see something diffent show something different like use the weak link angle as a stepping stop for him to snap(which he already did) and keep showing different submissions every week. this whole yes no thing gotten old and his is overshadowing him. Casuals is seeing him as a guy who keeps saying yes no yes no. I'm not saying to move away from it but put it aside alittle so casuals would think of him more like a submission specialist and not the guys only saying yes and no


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^ Yes/No chant is just too over right now and I don't think that he really has that much creative control to really change it atm. He himself said that he found the whole anger management and stuff with kane to be stupid...I'm sure he would prob just want to be a no non-sense guy...just like randy has been dying to be heel for the longest time.


----------



## NexS.E.S

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> It's not like he's wishing death on the dude or hoping for him to get seriously injured like some on here hope for, for the superstars they hate.
> 
> Probably just trying to stir up DB marks.


No, but every post I see of his is him bashing Bryan.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> The failed every chance they had to make a star.
> 
> ADR-Flopped, should've won the belt from Edge at Maina.
> Christian-Flopped, Lost the title to Orton in 2 days.
> Ryback-Mega Flop
> CM Punk-Didn't get the win over Triple H or a Clean win over Cena
> Sheamus-Gave him an opening match on Mania with a comedy champion
> 
> 5 Guys they fucked up with in 2 years. They were going good places with Cesaro, but Nope gotta bury em BROTHER.


Del Rio and Sheamus I agree with, the rest however were sabotaged in their pushes in some way or another.

Christian:- Lost the title 2 days after winning it and was booked as Orton's bitch throughout the entire feud. They never got behind him.

Ryback:- Was booked as a threat yet never won a big PPV and hasn't one on any big PPV matches in the last year. You can't book someone to be a top star without ever winning any credible matches.

Punk:- Lost to Triple H in the hottest period of his career when he needed wins which stalled his momentum. Was then forced to being a generic face after Extreme Rules before turning heel. Could have become Cena's equal or maybe even surpassed him if they handled him right or got behind him the whole way. They did neither. Probably because whilst they know Punk is a main event player and needs to be there, they hate the idea of him being the one to replace Cena as the number 1 guy.


Also the people who are bashing Bryan for not drawing, he is at the beginning of his main event push. These things do not happen overnight. None of the top stars over the past 30 years in WWE (Hogan, Austin, Rock, Cena) became draws without being consistently pushed to the top. Casuals have got to get used to the idea of Bryan being a top player. You can't just snap your fingers with anybody regardless of how talented they are and make them a big star and a draw over night. It doesn't work that way and it never has. And the thing is I believe some of you people are smart enough to know this but choose to ignore it. Which is rather sad.

I'd also like to point out none of the segments had particularly huge gains throughout the show. The whole show pretty much tanked including the Orton/Bryan stuff. The highest gain was 333,000 which is extremely low for Raw.


----------



## Phone Losers Mark

*Daniel Bryan: Ratings Killer?*

From the latest Observer...



> Raw on 6/24 did a 2.89 rating and 3.98 million viewers, making it the fourth lowest number of viewers for a Raw episode this season. Usually I’d say blaming the NHL for a wrestling number (or an MMA number) is a crutch, but no doubt the game hurt Raw.
> 
> The game where the Chicago Blackhawks beat the Boston Bruins to win the finals, a 3-2 game down to the wire, did a 4.66 rating and 8.16 million viewers. This final series was the highest rated overall dating back to at least 1995, and the third most watched individual game of the last decade. The game did a 33.0 rating in Boston and a 30.2 in Chicago.
> 
> However, not all of the decline can be attributed to hockey given male and female teens were both down 21% and hockey’s numbers in that demo were not that strong. Male teens did a 1.9, Males 18-49 did a 2.1 (down 9%), Girls 12-17 did a 1.1 and Women 18-49 did a 1.1 (same as last week). The total audience was 66.6% male, indicating the heavy male hockey audience cut down on male viewers.
> 
> The story of the show isn’t one that a lot of people will want to hear. It was a risk building the show around Daniel Bryan as the main character no matter how loud those in the building cheer for him. And his street fight with Randy Orton did a terrible overrun number, coming off it being the main event on the least watched non-holiday Smackdown show since it started airing on Syfy. For people who complain about John Cena, as a general rule, his segments deliver, particularly in the main event slot.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, the opening segment with Daniel Bryan and Randy Orton on the mic and having their short first match did a 2.82 open which is very weak...
> 
> The Orton vs. Bryan street fight gained 104,000 viewers, one of the lowest main event gains of the year, finishing at a 2.92 overrun.


A shame because this guy truly is skilled, but if he can't move business, then he needs to get depushed. Merchandise sales is not enough justification to put him over buyrate and ratings magnets.


----------



## llamadux

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Who is a rating magnet? Cena? So cena opens and closes the show every week?
Cause I doubt Brock or Rock is showing up.

You cant run and abandon a push the first sign of trouble or you will never get anywhere. WWE needs to take a damn risk for once and stick with it or they will have shit when Cena retires.


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So Bryan should be de pushed due to one poor rating? Jesus Christ no wonder they don't make any new stars. I'm not trying to make excuses but the Stanley cup final was the most watched in 20 odd years and peaked at 10 million viewers at the same time as the Orton/Bryan match.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

People saying NHL doesn't matter...well you're wrong. Game 6 on Monday was the second most watched Stanley Cup finals since 1994. It hurt RAW's rating, just like NFL in late 2012 really ate into RAW's rating(obviously, this not the ONLY reason, but it is a major factor).That said, it is only the start of Bryan's push as this is the first major main-event segment he has worked in a long time. He had a solid star in Orton to work with. From here he should only grow. Although in just plain-view that overrun number IS awful.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SJFC said:


> So Bryan should be de pushed due to one poor rating? Jesus Christ no wonder they don't make any new stars. I'm not trying to make excuses but the Stanley cup final was the most watched in 20 odd years *and peaked at 10 million viewers at the same time as the Orton/Bryan match*.


So what's the excuse for the low, 2.82 rating, then, when Bryan was opening proceedings on the mic? The bottom line is that - as skilled as he is, Bryan hasn't got enough about him to be a headliner. In all honesty, he's not the type of talent that can carry a show... especially not the live, flagship broadcast. He can be a main-eventer/semi main-eventer, certainly - but he can't be THE guy.


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why do people keep mentioning that he can't be the guy? He can still have an extremely successful career without being relied to solely carry the show. Not that he needs to because cena isn't going anywhere....such a random thing to bring up really.

also for the record many top guys have had some bad ratings, you can't judge someones drawing potential on 1 show especially when he has yet to fully establish himself.


----------



## Isotopes

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why is there so much importance placed on television ratings?


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> So what's the excuse for the low, 2.82 rating, then, when Bryan was opening proceedings on the mic? The bottom line is that - as skilled as he is, Bryan hasn't got enough about him to be a headliner. In all honesty, he's not the type of talent that can carry a show... especially not the live, flagship broadcast. He can be a main-eventer/semi main-eventer, certainly - but he can't be THE guy.



If I remember correctly, Punk's match lost nearly 600,000 viewers. But Punk couldn't be THE guy over cena even as a champion, due to ratings. I'm a punk fan and I've heard Punk fans say that it wasn't his fault, etc. They were right, because the whole show barely did above 3.0 right? You can't depend on one guy or two guys to bring up ratings. If Cena was such a draw, he could save the show because he's the TOP guy. But no, RAW has consistently been doing a bit above 3.0 and lower since Rock left. If there was a strong show the whole time, it wouldn't be bleeding viewers before the main event even started. Bryan lost viewers but time is needed, maybe not a year long title reign but more than two weeks of rough ratings to see drawing potential. Who can be THE guy these days anyway? How would even be possible to bring it to the mainstream like in the AE? All I'm saying is Bryan needs a chance.

(I just assumed you were a punk fan due to your sig; punk fan or not, I think my points are still valid.)


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



PsychoticViper2000 said:


> Why is there so much importance placed on television ratings?


It's an IWC thing apparently. This kind of thing appears to actually overshadow the real reasons we like wrestlers and wrestling (ring ability, promos etc.). It supposedly gives us an insight into the business side of things, but ratings are declining all around, and online tv seems to be the way to go over broadcast networks these days. You'd think we have that kind of business insight from ratings, but instead we argue over increasingly pointless numbers related to a slowly dying medium.

I read this over and laughed:lmao. Too much of an explanation, right?


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D-Bry is Fly said:


> It's an IWC thing apparently. This kind of thing appears to actually overshadow the real reasons we like wrestlers and wrestling (ring ability, promos etc.). It supposedly gives us an insight into the business side of things, but ratings are declining all around, and online tv seems to be the way to go over broadcast networks these days. You'd think we have that kind of business insight from ratings, but instead we argue over increasingly pointless numbers related to a slowly dying medium.
> 
> I read this over and laughed:lmao. Too much of an explanation, right?


and thats not even mentioning that ratings aren't even accurate...I think people put so much weight into them because its the only thing we have to judge how many people is watching really lol.

But Vince doesn't even seem to be putting THAT much weight on them these days anyway.


----------



## Isotopes

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D-Bry is Fly said:


> It's an IWC thing apparently. This kind of thing appears to actually overshadow the real reasons we like wrestlers and wrestling (ring ability, promos etc.). It supposedly gives us an insight into the business side of things, but ratings are declining all around, and online tv seems to be the way to go over broadcast networks these days. You'd think we have that kind of business insight from ratings, but instead we argue over increasingly pointless numbers related to a slowly dying medium.
> 
> I read this over and laughed:lmao. Too much of an explanation, right?


Nah, that's actually perfect haha. I feel like the WWE relies heavily on short bursts of entertaining television - usually followed by a quality drought - to help boost ratings...


----------



## WWFECWWCW94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Orton deserves as much blame


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan will never be the guy, hes not gonna be #2/#3 guy either, he is/can be #4 or #5 and thats not bad, as talented as he is, he will never headline a PPV without a big star but sure as hell he can beat some top stars just like Benoit used to.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If Bryan pulled this number in a championship run I might be concerned, but it's no surprise that someone would draw a bad number in his first main event in over a year against another superstar whose been buried in the mid card as well.

People here have insane expectations. If you don't surpass Cena you're a failure. Get it thru yours heads Cena is the face of the company for the foreseeable future. Punk, Bryan, Ambrose, nobody is knocking him off that pedestal. The guy is picking up corporate sponsors left and right. That doesn't mean you can't build stars around him. Macho Man did just fine next to Hogan. 

WWE needs to commit to Bryan and push him to be a peg below Cena and Punk. There's no shame in that.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Jesus christ.

These things take time. Austin wasn't doing 5.0 ratings in 97, i guess Vince should have tossed him aside then.

Give it time.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cliffy Byro said:


> Jesus christ.
> 
> These things take time. Austin wasn't doing 5.0 ratings in 97, i guess Vince should have tossed him aside then.
> 
> Give it time.


People are too stupid to realize this. All they think about is the immediate short term.


----------



## joeycalz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I feel like most hockey fans are fans of WWE and vice versa. I don't know, but I've always had that vibe. For me: football, hockey are far and away my two favorite sports and even without my Rangers in, I still watched the Cup Final. I've also missed RAW the last two week, unfortunately.

Also, this thread kills brain cells at a rapid pace.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Did anybody actually say de push DB? Guess I missed that.

I distinctly remember Rio haters coming in here saying that just because he lost viewers in his repeated matches with Cesaro that the whole Swagger/Rio just wasn't working and they should end it. This thread will never be civil.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I haven't seen a ratings thread draw this big since CM Punk in mid-2012 :bryan .


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That was a nightmare, good and bad.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yup.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow, so people chose rather to watch a brand new championship hockey game instead of the same match they just saw earlier that very same night, three days earlier on Smackdown, and seven days earlier on the previous RAW? What the hell?


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



GillbergReturns said:


> If Bryan pulled this number in a championship run I might be concerned, but it's no surprise that someone would draw a bad number in his first main event in over a year against another superstar whose been buried in the mid card as well.
> 
> People here have insane expectations. If you don't surpass Cena you're a failure. Get it thru yours heads Cena is the face of the company for the foreseeable future. Punk, Bryan, Ambrose, nobody is knocking him off that pedestal. The guy is picking up corporate sponsors left and right. That doesn't mean you can't build stars around him. Macho Man did just fine next to Hogan.
> 
> WWE needs to commit to Bryan and push him to be a peg below Cena and Punk. There's no shame in that.


This. Commitment and consistency. When you read a story and are about to see the hero beat the villain, does a hole in the ground magically appear and suck him in, leaving the villain to say, "Oh well". NO, storylines should be resolved before anyone at the company deides they can't draw. Of course the story would suck if it ended like that. Wrestling is kind of the same way. Ryback gets over as a face, seen as a human wrecking ball... lets job him out at every PPV, he's still a wrecking ball right? Story ended with him getting buried by Cena. Ryback fan or not, where's the consistency? He couldn't even beat Henry at Wrestlemania. He's not ready for the ME but he had his time. Bryan needs more, instead of a snap judgement after one week...


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> I haven't seen a ratings thread draw this big since CM Punk in mid-2012 :bryan .


But Punk doesn't draw


----------



## superuser1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



WWFECWWCW94 said:


> Orton deserves as much blame


i disagree....the whole storyline leading up to the match was can daniel bryan prove hes not the weak link by defeating orton? so obviously people weren't interested in seeing wether daniel bryan would prove that he's not the weak link


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cliffy Byro said:


> Jesus christ.
> 
> These things take time. Austin wasn't doing 5.0 ratings in 97, i guess Vince should have tossed him aside then.
> 
> Give it time.


Austin wasn't the champion till 98 though. People don't usually a fck about you 'till you have the belt.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Hawksea said:


> Austin wasn't the champion till 98 though. People don't usually a fck about you 'till you have the belt.


Bryan isn't champ yet either.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Hawksea said:


> Austin wasn't the champion till 98 though. People don't usually a fck about you 'till you have the belt.


Yeah, he was being pushed since 1996 though, Bryan has been pushed for a whole entire Month.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> But Punk doesn't draw


He doesn't. But Punk had over a years worth of time and push to prove it and rectify that situation. Punk failed. This was the first big win of Bryan's career in WWE. If he's still drawing like this in 6 months I'll be the first to say he's on par with Punk but you can't make that comparison after a week.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Yeah, he was being pushed since 1996 though, Bryan has been pushed for a whole entire Month.


I do not know how do you define "being pushed" but I'm pretty sure Bryan's world title feud with Punk lasted for *more than 3 months*. That's way more than the amount of time Austin was in the world title scene from 96 until early 98.


----------



## TheGreatBanana

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

There are a lot of people who don't even understand ratings yet they run their mouth like they are great experts. 

These morons will never learn.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:lol this thread. Welp. Looks like it's now the turn of the Bryan marks to get butthurt about ratings. What happened 2 years ago with Punk starting to repeat itself. Great...

So they open low and lose viewers for the entire first hour. Never a good sign. The good news is that they get a lot of people back in the second hour. The cover reveal had the highest gain of the night. I don't know whether that's a positive or a negative lol. So they're on 3.1, Ryback/Khali loses 200k+, Cena gets back 200k+ and Punk/Heyman pulls in 117k to bring them up to a 3.2. The highest segment of the night but not particularly impressive by any means. Had they put Cena's promo there instead it probably would have done better tbh. Post promo loses 600k to bring them right back down where they started again. That's a big ask for Bryan/Orton at this stage and considering they were in direct real time competition with the Hockey final, it's not surprising that they did so badly. 

What I don't get is why so many people are losing their shit over this? This was Bryan's first real main event. What the hell were some of you expecting? If he gets to main event for the next couple of months and still pulls 2.9 overruns, then there'll be something to talk about. That isn't the case right now though. Jeebus people. Besides, the peak of the show was only 3.2. They were hardly miles off it. Overall a pretty standard breakdown with nothing doing overly well on the whole.


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> :lol this thread. Welp. Looks like it's now the turn of the Bryan marks to get butthurt about ratings. What happened 2 years ago with Punk starting to repeat itself. Great...
> 
> So they open low and lose viewers for the entire first hour. Never a good sign. The good news is that they get a lot of people back in the second hour. The cover reveal had the highest gain of the night. I don't know whether that's a positive or a negative lol. So they're on 3.1, Ryback/Khali loses 200k+, Cena gets back 200k+ and Punk/Heyman pulls in 117k to bring them up to a 3.2. The highest segment of the night but not particularly impressive by any means. Had they put Cena's promo there instead it probably would have done better tbh. Post promo loses 600k to bring them right back down where they started again. That's a big ask for Bryan/Orton at this stage and considering they were in direct real time competition with the Hockey final, it's not surprising that they did so badly.
> 
> What I don't get is why so many people are losing their shit over this? This was Bryan's first real main event. What the hell were some of you expecting? If he gets to main event for the next couple of months and still pulls 2.9 overruns, then there'll be something to talk about. That isn't the case right now though. Jeebus people. Besides, the peak of the show was only 3.2. They were hardly miles off it. Overall a pretty standard breakdown with nothing doing overly well on the whole.


It's a lack of confidence, although as "smarks" we know pushes are tenuous, especially in WWE lately.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Hawksea said:


> I do not know how do you define "being pushed" but I'm pretty sure Bryan's world title feud with Punk lasted for *more than 3 months*. That's way less than the amount of time Austin was in the world title scene from 96 until early 98.


Meh, he got some shots when HBK was champ. He also won King of the Ring '96, won the Royal Rumble '97, won the tag team titles twice with HBK and Foley, won the IC title twice, had Match of the Year with Brett at WM 13, etc., all prior to '98. Plus I recall him getting mainstream exposure at the time as well, popping up on MTV programs as himself, etc. 

Bryan's done well so far, but not quite close to the above.


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sucks that Bryan vs Orton did low. But there's no reason to freak out, it was a match between two (strong) midcarders after all.



Hawksea said:


> I do not know how do you define "being pushed" but I'm pretty sure Bryan's world title feud with Punk lasted for *more than 3 months*.


Yeah, but it was after he was buried at WM and he wasn't portrayed as a threat to the title, though... and he was feuding with CM Punk.


----------



## connormurphy13

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*










Today I shall eat your tears, WWE Universe, as you realize my 1000 year reign of darkness has just begun


----------



## NathWFC

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



connormurphy13 said:


> Today I shall eat your tears, WWE Universe, as you realize my 1000 year reign of darkness has just begun


Their is literally only man person in the world I can think of that has an equally irritating, punchable face as John Cena:


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D-Bry is Fly said:


> It's a lack of confidence, although as "smarks" we know pushes are tenuous, especially in WWE lately.


More like a complete overreaction as usual. It happened with the Punk marks in 2011 and it looks set to happen all over again with Bryan marks now. Great. 

:bryan2


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Am I right in saying that Raw's rating may be a bit lower with it being July 4th week?


----------



## EternalFlameFilms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I wonder how nervous vince is for the NFL season, the mcmahons havent even raised the ratings in this is the summer season


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> More like a complete overreaction as usual. It happened with the Punk marks in 2011 and it looks set to happen all over again with Bryan marks now. Great.
> 
> :bryan2


Yup (Y)


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Am I right in saying that Raw's rating may be a bit lower with it being July 4th week?


Doesn't this happen every year? I'd say it's fair to assume.


----------



## NoyK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NathWFC said:


> Their is literally only man person in the world I can think of that has an equally irritating, punchable face as John Cena:



Uhm....


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This week's central forecast for the RAW audience: 3,789,892 viewers. That's around a 5% fall from last week's audience.


----------



## zxLegionxz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NoyK said:


> Uhm....


:avit::avit:


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> -- Monday's WWE Raw slipped 15 percent in social media activity compared to last week's show. Raw was down 32 percent from the post-Payback episode two weeks ago.
> 
> Raw scored 221,650 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, down from 261,602 last week. Raw slipped to #4 in the cable TV charts on Monday, trailing "Teen Wolf" on MTV, Wimbledon coverage on ESPN, and "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" on VH1.


via PWTorch


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

not surprised that episode of raw was bad :lol


----------



## EternalFlameFilms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

ah oh :O Time to blame the stanley cup again, i mean there were replays of game 6


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



GOD said:


> not surprised that episode of raw was bad :lol


Yep. I actually enjoyed the main event but other than that, the show was shit and terrible compared to what they did the last two weeks. If the ratings go down for this week, it's actually deserved.


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

that show was terrible, not 1 good thing about it
they deserve a crap rating

wonder what will get blamed this week, maybe a rerun of american pickers, come on fanboys go scramble for an excuse


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Down and down we go. Probably 2.8 this week. Last week was 2.9, right? Vince is going to be crying come September lol.


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I _may_ become a believer in ratings if we slip like .5 or even a full point, I can see it happening with yesterday's ep.


----------



## Chan Hung

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Honestly...there's nothing this past Monday worth talking about...and the ratings reflect that.


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Souless RAW it deserves shit ratings


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No NBA, NHL, or anything else to blame this weeks' rating on.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Damn, dey need DA BORKINATOR!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That awkward moment when Vince realizes he wasted the last 10 years making one star and absolutely nobody else. Compounded by that moment when Vince realizes not even the part timers are the solution anymore. :vince4


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If they're doing this, wait for Monday Night Football. They're so done. Sub 3 the whole football season?


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Weltschmertz said:


> This week's central forecast for the RAW audience: 3,789,892 viewers. That's around a 5% fall from last week's audience.


WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	4.012	1.4
WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4.135	1.3
WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	3.720	1.2

Average is 3,955,667, which is 4.4 percent higher than expected. Good number.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE Entertainment 10.00 PM........... 4.012
WWE Entertainment 9:00 PM.........	4.135	
WWE Entertainment 8:00 PM.........	3.720


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow, that was better than expected.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nice, nice. That was really better than expected.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Better than expected but DAT THIRD HOUR :cena2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Quite a drop in hour 3.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Better than expected but DAT THIRD HOUR :cena2


But the second hour got the highest number... or if you meant lowest, then that was the first.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> But the second hour got the highest number... or if you meant lowest, then that was the first.


Ha. I read it top to bottom without looking at the times. DAT FIRST HOUR.... *insert smiley face of entire Raw MITB match here*


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.9 rating, identical with last week

first hour is now a hindrance and a help to wwe, its dragging ratings down but the 7pm lead in before raw is now pathetic, ncis only drew 1.6m viewers which means we won't see raw going to 2hrs for along time...for reference in 2011 ncis used to draw over 4 million at 7 and 8pm before raw started


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Terrible rating for a terrible show. It is like they just don't try anymore. That opening promo was possibly the most generic and predictable promo I have seen for sometime.
Guy 1 in gimmick match comes out "I am going to win because I am the best"
Guy 2 comes out " I am going to win because I am the best"
Guy 3 comes out etc etc
Punk comes out "I am going to win as I am the best!"

So shit.

The sad thing is no matter how bad the ratings tank they won't change their direction. It's Cena running wild or bust.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They'll probably bump into to the 3.2/3.3 range for Summerslam...if they're lucky I guess. Then it'll be back to the 2.8/2.9 range for the Autumn but God knows where they'll be come Football season.


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> 2.9 rating, identical with last week
> 
> first hour is now a hindrance and a help to wwe, its dragging ratings down but the 7pm lead in before raw is now pathetic, ncis only drew 1.6m viewers which means we won't see raw going to 2hrs for along time...for reference in 2011 ncis used to draw over 4 million at 7 and 8pm before raw started


oh enough
stop blaming other shows, every week its another excuse, raw last night was terrible know doubt about it, it deserves a crap rating

your reaching trying to blame ncis, while your at it you should blame a rerun of i love lucy on nick at night for raws low ratings


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

How were the ratings last year by this time? Any better?


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



chucky101 said:


> oh enough
> stop blaming other shows, every week its another excuse, raw last night was terrible know doubt about it, it deserves a crap rating


we know we know, its terrible, crap rating, something something attitude era, never watching again

till next week at this time then i guess :ex:



Bryan D. said:


> How were the ratings last year by this time? Any better?


last year they were building towards raw 1000 so they were better but again shows were only 2hr
July 2..	3.18 
July 9.....	3.17

2011 was summer of punk storyline
july 4........2.4 (to be expected)
july 11.......2.9
july 18.......3.2 (night after punk wins title at mitb)

2010 was nexus storyline in full swing
june 28........3.2	
july 5 ........3.3	
July 12........3.3

2009 was the whole donald trump buying raw storyline


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

When you look at the ratings they used to get, yeah, it's fucking horrendous. WWE is only around now because of past success, if they tried putting this shit out as a completely brand new show, it wouldn't make it past the third episode.


----------



## NexS.E.S

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I remember when a 3.0 was a horrible rating. Now, we're lucky to get that unless it's Wrestlemania/Summerslam season.


----------



## JamesK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's Daniel Bryan's fault.. He can't DRAW..


----------



## Apex Predator

*Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



> Last week's 6/24 WWE RAW remained among the top 25 shows on cable last week for the week ending 6/30/13. The show came in at No. 6, No. 10 and No. 12. It's a slight dip for the show as it had been ranking among the top 10 shows on cable in the weeks prior.
> 
> UPDATE: Last night's 6/24 WWE RAW drew a final 2.89 (2.9) cable rating, with an average audience of 3.96 million viewers. This is down from last week's show that drew a 2.9 cable rating, with 3.98 million viewers.
> 
> ORIGINAL: The 7/1 WWE RAW drew an average audience of 3.96 million viewers. The first hour drew 3.72 million viewers, the second hour drew 4.01 million viewers and the third hour drew 4.14 million viewers.
> 
> This is down from last week's show that drew 3.98 million viewers.


Source:EwrestlingNews.com

How much lower will ratings dip?


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

You do know theres a Raw Ratings thread right?


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

Bryan vs Orton draws more than cena vs del Rio, what?


----------



## Mountain Rushmore

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

So basically the ratings stayed almost exactly the same? And yes,, this should've just gone in the Raw Ratings Thread. It's going to spark some endless and pointless debate.


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



Boxes-With-Gods said:


> So basically the ratings stayed almost exactly the same? And yes,, this should've just gone in the Raw Ratings Thread. It's going to spark some endless and pointless debate.


Thanks I'll post the details in there next time.


----------



## reDREDD

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

damn.

if the ratings drop any lower i may have to kill myself


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



JOAL.com said:


> damn.
> 
> if the ratings drop any lower i may have to kill myself


B.W.O will get the ratings up. (Y)


----------



## Luchini

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

What they can do is put it back to two hours (but :vince5 loves money) that way the product won't be watered down and use filler matches like Sweet T vs Khali. They should bring back Heat/Velocity on TV if people want to see Jobber matches like that.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



Apex Predator said:


> B.W.O will get the ratings up. (Y)


*Bo Dallas World Order*


----------



## Mountain Rushmore

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



Apex Predator said:


> Thanks I'll post the details in there next time.


Wow.....a poster actually not being a dick after a problem with their thread was pointed out to them? In WF? Sir, :clap


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> *Bo Dallas World Order*


Let the revolution begin. :cool2



Boxes-With-Gods said:


> Wow.....a poster actually not being a dick after a problem with their thread was pointed out to them? In WF? Sir, :clap


I know it's rare these days to find people admitting the truth. I'm posting on the go so I apologize.


----------



## Mojo Stark

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

So, basically, nothing changed? Totally worth mentioning...


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

They'll pick up now with Brock coming back and the Summerslam Buzz, will be interesting to see how they do post Summerslam though.


----------



## Y2Jbabyy

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

I wonder if anyone but Cena was champ if the panic chord would have been pulled by now? You know cause going by most peoples logic, if the ratings are low it is the champs fault! That's all i was reading this time last year anyway.


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



Y2Jbabyy said:


> I wonder if anyone but Cena was champ if the panic chord would have been pulled by now? You know cause going by most peoples logic, if the ratings are low it is the champs fault! That's all i was reading this time last year anyway.


I think fans in general are tired of Cena being handed title shots and always winning main events. It becomes too predictable.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

Drop? Where? Last week averaged 3.98m viewers and this week 3.96m viewers. This is essentially the same.




> Torch..
> 
> WWE Raw on Monday, July 1 scored a 2.89 rating, essentially flat with a 2.90 rating last week.
> 
> Raw opened with a 2.76 rating in the first hour, increased to a 2.96 rating in the second hour, and stayed at a 2.96 rating in the third hour.
> 
> - Raw averaged 3.96 million viewers, essentially flat compared to 3.98 million viewers last week.


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



Y2Jbabyy said:


> I wonder if anyone but Cena was champ if the panic chord would have been pulled by now? You know cause going by most peoples logic, if the ratings are low it is the champs fault! That's all i was reading this time last year anyway.


Yeah Cena marks have a double standard. When the ratings were low last year, they blamed it on Punk even though Cena was main eventing. Now Cena is the champ and he is still main eventing and the ratings are low and no one says a whisper about him.


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



AmWolves10 said:


> Yeah Cena marks have a double standard. When the ratings were low last year, they blamed it on Punk even though Cena was main eventing. Now Cena is the champ and he is still main eventing and the ratings are low and no one says a whisper about him.


When you got the #1 selling merchandise and on the box of fruity Pebbles you get a pass. Some wrestlers are more favorable than others. :cena5


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



Apex Predator said:


> When you got the #1 selling merchandise and on the box of fruity Pebbles you get a pass. Some wrestlers are more favorable than others. :cena5


lol I can't imagine his new white t-shirt selling that well right now, that shirt looks horrendous! If Cena can sell that I'll give him some props!:cheer


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



AmWolves10 said:


> lol I can't imagine his new white t-shirt selling that well right now, that shirt looks horrendous! If Cena can sell that I'll give him some props!:cheer


Make a few appearance for make a wish and salute the troops and parents will sucker in to buy it for their kids. Like him or not the guy is laughing to the bank.

WWE merchandise is horrible I know. :lol

Other ventures make up for losses in other areas.


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



Apex Predator said:


> Make a few appearance for make a wish and salute the troops and parents will sucker in to buy it for their kids. Like him or not the guy is laughing to the bank.
> 
> WWE merchandise is horrible I know. :lol
> 
> Other ventures make up for losses in other areas.


Would parents really buy their kids a t-shirt that has an arrow pointing at their cock with a sign that says "The Champ is here" ? The implication is just a little bit too thick to ignore.


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



AmWolves10 said:


> Would parents really buy their kids a t-shirt that has an arrow pointing at their cock with a sign that says "The Champ is here" ? The implication is just a little bit too thick to ignore.


Some might be too hard headed to go below the belt. :lol


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hey, everybody tore Punk a new asshole when he had trouble drawing in the 3 hour RAWs. Well, 
Cena is the top champ in the company during 3 hour RAW and he's getting sub 3 rating RAWs with
sub 4 million viewers.

You have to look to the champ, right? Cena has been the top guy since 2005 and he's getting the company's top billing
and has since the Rumble and it has done nothing for ratings and viewer numbers. Nothing.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SPCDRI said:


> Hey, everybody tore Punk a new asshole when he had trouble drawing in the 3 hour RAWs. Well,
> Cena is the top champ in the company during 3 hour RAW and he's getting sub 3 rating RAWs with
> sub 4 million viewers.
> 
> You have to look to the champ, right? Cena's has been the top guy since 2005 and he's getting the company's top billing
> and has since the Rumble and it has done nothing for ratings and viewer numbers. Nothing.


Yep but I feel this post and the general meaning behind it will likely be ignored since the Punk bashers know it will be contradictory.


----------



## squeelbitch

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JamesK said:


> It's Daniel Bryan's fault.. He can't DRAW..


maybe he should switch from crayons to pencils?

in all seriousness though it's not just down to one guy, though cena doing the same predictable shit for years on end doesnt help but the overall product feels like it's just thrown together far too much of the time.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> They'll probably bump into to the 3.2/3.3 range for Summerslam...if they're lucky I guess. Then it'll be back to the 2.8/2.9 range for the Autumn but God knows where they'll be come Football season.


I could see 2.4-2.5 caliber ratings. Maybe that will light a fire under their ass, I highly doubt it.


----------



## Berbz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> I could see 2.4-2.5 caliber ratings. Maybe that will light a fire under their ass, I highly doubt it.


or maybe they don't care about ratings as much as the people in this thread?


----------



## BigEvil2012

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*






Seriously, some people worry too much about ratings and things like that, It's not your problem...


----------



## DualShock

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



BigEvil2012 said:


> Seriously, some people worry too much about ratings and things like that, It's not your problem...


True but it shows how much fans turned their back and left comparing to the past and tells a lot about the product and pro wrestling in general


----------



## TheRocksKitchen

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

With the summer drop in ratings and the NFL season starting back up again, the WWE is going to take an ass pounding if they don't improve soon. But in this day and age ratings are not everything. A lot of people watch RAW via stream and download ME and SD which def cuts into the ratings..


----------



## Eclairal

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



DualShock said:


> True but it shows how much fans turned their back and left comparing to the past and tells a lot about the product and pro wrestling in general


Except that unlike before, the fans are just sick of wrestling and won't watch an other product so it doesn't matter because at the end of the day, the WWE is still the biggest wrestling promotion and isn't weaken by those drops, sadly ...


----------



## Farnham the Drunk

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

The Ratings are dropping, it must because of CM Punk's title reign & inability to draw ...

Oh wait, people can't say that anymore.

Anyways ... ratings drop


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

A 2.9. Cool. Who cares? That's pretty much what they get now.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Berbz said:


> or maybe they don't care about ratings as much as the people in this thread?


They fucking care alright. They have "DO YOU KNOW" segments on their viewership every damn week.


----------



## Kelly Kelly fan

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

The shitty product is why ratings are low Vince has to realise this and change the product but he wont


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*










Better than expected again this week - third time in a row. There is roughly a 1/10 chance that this form is luck, and a 9/10 chance that this pattern is meaningful, so it looks like something is going right...


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What's the prediction for next week Weltschmertz? Guessing over 4 million just.


----------



## adprokid

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

Whats the ratings during Mark Henry's segment ?


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> What's the prediction for next week Weltschmertz? Guessing over 4 million just.


Depends on the Smackdown audience on Friday. Predicted Smackdown audience is 2,292,000, so if you plug that into the model it predicts a RAW audience of 3,812,000. 

It's predicting falls because of the downwards trend since the start of this year:










Blue line is prediction, red line is actual audience.

_(P.S. I'm rounding up predictions from now on because it makes more sense given how they are reported)_


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

Suddenly, a wild cat appears.
_ヽ
　 ＼＼ Λ＿Λ
　　 ＼(　ˇωˇ)　
　　　 >　⌒ヽ
　　　/ 　 へ＼
　　 /　　/　＼＼
　　 ﾚ　ノ　　 ヽ_つ
　　/　/
　 /　/|
　(　(ヽ
　|　|、＼
　| 丿 ＼ ⌒)
　| |　　) /
`ノ )　　Lﾉ
(_／.


----------



## Berbz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AthenaMark said:


> They fucking care alright. They have "DO YOU KNOW" segments on their viewership every damn week.


And?

If they get a rating of 3, who's to say they're not happy with that and what they were expecting? Some people get so angry that they get a 3 like it's a bad rating for wrestling in 2013.


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SPCDRI said:


> Hey, everybody tore Punk a new asshole when he had trouble drawing in the 3 hour RAWs. Well,
> Cena is the top champ in the company during 3 hour RAW and he's getting sub 3 rating RAWs with
> sub 4 million viewers.
> 
> You have to look to the champ, right? Cena has been the top guy since 2005 and he's getting the company's top billing
> and has since the Rumble and it has done nothing for ratings and viewer numbers. Nothing.


Yup, this. I don't think it is Cena's fault I think the product itself sucks just like last year, but it is pretty hypocritical of all these Cena marks who were on his balls last year saying how Punk doesn't draw because he was the champ(even though Cena was the main event) when the ratings were low. But look now, no one dares point a finger at Cena. Using the same logic, Cena is main eventing AND he is the champ so it should definitely point to him being the problem. But no, we can't dare say anything wrong about the golden boy Cena here. Complete double standard.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

Ratings are dropping.....We're gonna get fired!

But we don't work for WWE......Our stocks are ruined!

But we don't have WWE stocks.....Our ads aren't being seen by as much people!

But we don't pay for AD time during WWETV........


So why do people on here care about ratings?


----------



## TJC93

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

Tbf i'm surprised this RAW even got ratings that high, it was awful


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



adprokid said:


> Whats the ratings during Mark Henry's segment ?


Mark Henry brings in the ratings . :lawler


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



dxbender said:


> Ratings are dropping.....We're gonna get fired!
> 
> But we don't work for WWE......Our stocks are ruined!
> 
> But we don't have WWE stocks.....Our ads aren't being seen by as much people!
> 
> But we don't pay for AD time during WWETV........
> 
> 
> So why do people on here care about ratings?


I don't think we care as much about the ratings. Just we hate this era and booking and the ratings shows the lack of interest in fans.


----------



## reDREDD

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

except that ratings are down in almost every aspect of television


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

When your only competition is Football and Basketball that blows your product out the water you start to get a wake up call. People have options ...


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

Most of the people use internet nowadays. People watch WWE on internet. Therefore, ratings will obviously drop. 10 years ago you had to watch it on TV. You had to pay to see the PPV. Now you can stream it, download it, watch it on Youtube, Dailymotion or whatever.


----------



## reDREDD

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



Apex Predator said:


> When your only competition is Football and Basketball that blows your product out the water you start to get a wake up call. People have options ...


they do

youtube. torrents. streaming. later views.

nobody really watches tv anymore. except for sports. I literally only turn on the tv for premier league and champions league matches. things i HAVE to watch live


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*

Yeah, football matches are the only times I ever turn on the TV. Maybe if I'm bored and come across a good movie in some channel, but that's it.



dxbender said:


> So why do people on here care about ratings?


It must be the thousandths time you've come to this thread just to say this. We get it, you don't work for WWE so you don't care about ratings.


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



JOAL.com said:


> they do
> 
> youtube. torrents. streaming. later views.
> 
> nobody really watches tv anymore. except for sports. I literally only turn on the tv for premier league and champions league matches. things i HAVE to watch live


You're right. Can't argue with the truth. Most people do and watch Netflix aswell. If you can watch a product for free majority will.


----------



## Osize10

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



dxbender said:


> Ratings are dropping.....We're gonna get fired!
> 
> But we don't work for WWE......Our stocks are ruined!
> 
> But we don't have WWE stocks.....Our ads aren't being seen by as much people!
> 
> But we don't pay for AD time during WWETV........
> 
> 
> So why do people on here care about ratings?


It's an e-penis issue.

All IWC fans hate Cena. Some IWC fans hate their stupid penises too, so they compensate by finding the next flavor of the month. 

So when an actual fan with a normal penis, who can understand its ok to be a fan outside of kayfabe, comes in to talk about wrestling, these morons butt in and scream about inability to draw and rely on these statistics. This is done to pretend to be smart and make it seem like they have a normal penis.

Easiest way to detect these people are to notice how frequently someone changes their sig to the current IWC wrestling fad (see fandango, CURTIS AXEL, and Mark Henry)

This is not to be confused with sarcasm (Bo Dallas)


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I cant wait for the NFL :brady2 to come and :buried the WWE :HHH


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The only thing I don't understand is why do Bryan fans think this is going to get rid of his push? Ratings don't correlate with a wrestlers push these days, look at Punk, mediocre draw, #2 Guy in the company.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> The only thing I don't understand is why do Bryan fans think this is going to get rid of his push? Ratings don't correlate with a wrestlers push these days, look at Punk, mediocre draw, #2 Guy in the company.


Thing is, Punk's the second biggest full-time draw right now, and has been for 2 years without any competition except maybe Ryback in late-2012.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> Thing is, Punk's the second biggest full-time draw right now, and has been for 2 years without any competition except maybe Ryback in late-2012.


The guy who got the worst ratings as champion since Diesel in 1995 is "the second biggest full-time draw right now." Who's ass did you pull that out of? I'd love to see you back this claim up with some proof. C'mon man. Punk doesn't have to be some great ratings getter to justify his talents. Punk can be bad at some things. It's ok. The world won't end.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> The guy who got the worst ratings as champion since Diesel in 1995 is "the second biggest full-time draw right now." Who's ass did you pull that out of? I'd love to see you back this claim up with some proof. C'mon man. Punk doesn't have to be some great ratings getter to justify his talents. Punk can be bad at some things. It's ok. The world won't end.


And who's bigger? Not Bryan, not Orton, not Sheamus, not Ryback anymore. You could make a case for Henry and I suppose his ratings for ECW and SD when he was champ on those shows prove that. But if we're going on the same plane we're basing Punk's on (quarter hours), he hasn't been any more impressive than Punk. 

And I like how you're hatred of Punk has blinded you to the point you can't see I never said that he's some super strong draw being the second biggest draw right now. He's that by default because out of everyone besides Cena, he at least has some good quarters (and if you really want, I'll post them later when I get home)... hell even some great quarters if you're looking qt them in comparison to that show's rating. Him being second though doesn't make him a great draw, and I didn't say it did.


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> The guy who got the worst ratings as champion since Diesel in 1995 is "the second biggest full-time draw right now." Who's ass did you pull that out of? I'd love to see you back this claim up with some proof. C'mon man. Punk doesn't have to be some great ratings getter to justify his talents. Punk can be bad at some things. It's ok. The world won't end.


^ I think this discussion has been had like every month. It's just cyclical, all we can prove is that ratings went down when Punk was champ. That's it. Correlation doesn't imply causality, there could be a dozen reasons why ratings went down. All that matters is if you like a wrestler or not. It's obvious WWE thinks he's talented, he's mostly agreed on as being the #2 guy, blaming ratings on one person to justify an argument is just baseless.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> And who's bigger? Not Bryan, not Orton, not Sheamus, not Ryback anymore. You could make a case for Henry and I suppose his ratings for ECW and SD when he was champ on those shows prove that. But if we're going on the same plane we're basing Punk's on (quarter hours), he hasn't bed any more impressive than Punk.
> 
> And I like how you're hatred of Punk has blinded you to the point you can't see I never said that he's some super string draw being the second biggest draw right now. He's that by default because out of everyone besides Cena, he at least has some good quarters (and if you really want, I'll post them later when I get home)... hell even some great quarters if you're looking qt them in comparison to that show's rating. Him being second though doesn't make him a great draw, and I didn't say it did.


I wouldn't bother, mate... after all, you're talking to someone who genuinely believes that Bryan is now level with Punk, position-wise, and is on the verge of surpassing him as number 2. Oh yes, the delusion is strong in this one.


----------



## SpeedStick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Specialist Rodgers said:


> Hey, everybody tore Punk a new asshole when he had trouble drawing in the 3 hour RAWs. Well,
> Cena is the top champ in the company during 3 hour RAW and he's getting sub 3 rating RAWs with
> sub 4 million viewers.
> 
> You have to look to the champ, right? Cena has been the top guy since 2005 and he's getting the company's top billing
> and has since the Rumble and it has done nothing for ratings and viewer numbers. Nothing.


Now those people can see the problem with RAW is the show.. not the people on the show


----------



## messi

*Re: Raw Ratings Drops Yet Again...Details*



REDEAD RODGERS said:


> they do
> 
> youtube. torrents. streaming. later views.
> 
> nobody really watches tv anymore. except for sports. I literally only turn on the tv for premier league and champions league matches. things i HAVE to watch live


Great point and that's true. 

We can't bash Bryan. Or we can't bash him just yet, give him a few more weeks and then judge him. And he hasn't gotten 1/3 of the push Punk has gotten so it's not really surprising to see his numbers. That's why we hold Punk to a different standard. Raw sucked this week so the numbers aren't surprising.


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



dxbender said:


> So why do people on here care about ratings?


So original. Perhaps because people are simply curious about it and think it's an interesting thing to discuss :argh:


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> I wouldn't bother, mate... after all, you're talking to someone who genuinely believes that Bryan is now level with Punk, position-wise, and is on the verge of surpassing him as number 2. Oh yes, the delusion is strong in this one.


No, I said he could surpass Punk if given a tenth of the push Punk has got. He's not there yet. I've also said numerous times I think Vince will drop the ball with Bryan. Monday's show kind of proves my point. It's like a schizophrenic is booking Bryan. 2 Raws ago he closes the show going over Orton, then last week he's a comedy referee act. WTF? I'd love to see Punk booked like this and be half as believable as he currently is. When he was getting this kind of treatment he was a mid card joke leading New Nexus. A role he obviously has blocked out since 1 member of New Nexus was Curtis Axel.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, the opening segment with Daniel Bryan, Sheamus, Randy Orton, Christian, C.M. Punk and Kane all out talking did a 2.73 opening quarter, so they started way low. Christian & The Usos vs. The Shield lost 28,000 viewers. Dolph Ziggler vs. Jinder Mahal gained 90,000 viewers. The Mark Henry video piece gained 64,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Kane with Daniel Bryan as ref gained 217,000 viewers to a 2.98 quarter. Sheamus vs. Fandango lost 115,000 viewers. Ryback vs. The Miz gained 116,000 viewers. The Mark Henry interview and backstage segment with Vince McMahon gained 0 viewers. C.M. Punk & Curtis Axel vs. Prime Time Players gained 21,000 viewers to a 3.00 rating, which is terrible growth for the 10 p.m. segment. Kaitlyn vs. Alicia Fox with A.J. out, plus Stephanie McMahon backstage lost 123,000 viewers. Antonio Cesaro vs. Cody Rhodes lost 98,000 viewers. And the John Cena vs. Albert Del Rio match gained 567,000 viewers to a 3.25 overrun.


via Observer NewsLetter


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ziggles with that draw.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

looks weak. Good on Ziggles, I guess, for a jobber match.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, the opening segment with Daniel Bryan, Sheamus, Randy Orton, Christian, C.M. Punk and Kane all out talking did a 2.73 opening quarter, so they started way low. Christian & The Usos vs. The Shield lost 28,000 viewers. Dolph Ziggler vs. Jinder Mahal gained 90,000 viewers. The Mark Henry video piece gained 64,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Kane with Daniel Bryan as ref gained 217,000 viewers to a 2.98 quarter. Sheamus vs. Fandango lost 115,000 viewers. Ryback vs. The Miz gained 116,000 viewers. The Mark Henry interview and backstage segment with Vince McMahon gained 0 viewers. C.M. Punk & Curtis Axel vs. Prime Time Players gained 21,000 viewers to a 3.00 rating, which is terrible growth for the 10 p.m. segment. Kaitlyn vs. Alicia Fox with A.J. out, plus Stephanie McMahon backstage lost 123,000 viewers. Antonio Cesaro vs. Cody Rhodes lost 98,000 viewers. And the John Cena vs. Albert Del Rio match gained 567,000 viewers to a 3.25 overrun.


Damn. That's one heck of a breakdown. They started low again but that seems to be the trend these days. They've opened low for the past 2 months now I think it is. Unless they advertise the hell out of something huge happening to open Raw, it's probably going to stay that way. 9PM did well enough. Lower then recent gains but in the context of this show, that's probably considered a success. Lots of random gains in random places too with Ziggler/Mahal and especially Ryback/Miz doing really well. Don't know what to make of that tbh. The Henry interview staying dead even is strange. I've never seen that before. 10PM completely bombed. Big time. Once again Punk fails to deliver when the onus is on him to provide the star power. Cena/Del Rio was the big winner of this show. Big gain and top of the night. 3.2 isn't wildly impressive but again, in the context of this show and given the level of viewership, it's probably all you can expect.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol punk with that lowest gain of the night and at 10:00pm too. The guy is simply hopeless.


----------



## TheGreatBanana

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loader230 said:


> lol punk with that lowest gain of the night and at 10:00pm too. The guy is simply hopeless.


Dude his segment did a 3.0 rating, second highest to the 3.25 rating Cena/ADR got. Stop trying to bash him because its failing bad.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM Punk wrestled The Undertaker at WM and he's just starting a feud with Brock Lesnar, he shouldn't be wrestling stupid matches like that. Pairing him with Curtis Axel against the... PTP? Really? Of course that match isn't going to do big numbers because it absolutely fucking sucks. The PTP shouldn't be anywhere near the likes of CM Punk, they should be down the card wrestling jobber matches.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> CM Punk wrestled The Undertaker at WM and he's just starting a feud with Brock Lesnar, he shouldn't be wrestling stupid matches like that. Pairing him with Curtis Axel against the... PTP? Really? Of course that match isn't going to do big numbers because it absolutely fucking sucks. The PTP shouldn't be anywhere near the likes of CM Punk, they should be down the card wrestling jobber matches.


You can't work with the top names all the time. Nobody can. The whole point of working big feuds against Rock and Taker is to get exposure, to let new fans see what you're all about and to then carry that over when you face some of the lesser names like Curtis Axel or PTP or even ADR. Nobody is asking for a 3.6 every night, it's simply not attainable (unless you're Mark Henry of course), but that is a very bad showing no matter what way you spin it and central to the 'Heyman Guys' storyline. It is what it is. No point getting mad over it.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:ziggler1 and :henry1 bringing on DEM RATINGZ!


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> CM Punk wrestled The Undertaker at WM and he's just starting a feud with Brock Lesnar, he shouldn't be wrestling stupid matches like that. Pairing him with Curtis Axel against the... PTP? Really? Of course that match isn't going to do big numbers because it absolutely fucking sucks. The PTP shouldn't be anywhere near the likes of CM Punk, they should be down the card wrestling jobber matches.


Part of being the star is carrying lesser names and elevating them. Cena works with midcard and lower card wrestlers all the time and it doesn't hurt him. Part of being one of the top guys is to carry people who are no where near your level. 

That being said, the gain sucked but the rating was still average. Nothing to write home about but better than what a segment involving the PTP would normally do. What WWE should be concerned about is that first hour did terrible. The show opening so low indicates people didn't feel the need to turn in to Raw and watch the whole show. No urgency.


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

How did Mark Henry and Mcmahons stay neutral in ratings? I've never heard of gaining losing zero viewers. Someone HAD to change the channel somewhere.

Agree with above post, with the way Raw is going lately, it's getting easier and easier to predict what's going on, or simply not watch at all. 3 hours is a long time to sit in front of a TV.


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Vintage Punk.

:henry1 Henry is fucking unstoppable


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Pretty dire numbers there for Punk's segments considering he is supposed to be the number 2 guy.
To back that up I will show some comparisons. This week his 1st did a 2.73.
The previous numbers for that segment were
24th june - 2.82
17th june - 3.04
10th june - 3.11

And the last segment in the 2nd hour this week did a 3.0 rating. Again in comparison
24th june - 3.21
17th june - 3.57
10th june - 3.20

Pretty bad drops. That isn't saying Punk is the reason for those drops it is saying that they are traditionally good slots (as the segment ratings show) and they are lower then they have been over the past 4 weeks. And Punk was in both those segments.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, the opening segment with Daniel Bryan, Sheamus, Randy Orton, Christian, C.M. Punk and Kane all out talking did a 2.73 opening quarter, so they started way low. Christian & The Usos vs. The Shield lost 28,000 viewers. Dolph Ziggler vs. Jinder Mahal gained 90,000 viewers. The Mark Henry video piece gained 64,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Kane with Daniel Bryan as ref gained 217,000 viewers to a 2.98 quarter. Sheamus vs. Fandango lost 115,000 viewers. Ryback vs. The Miz gained 116,000 viewers. The Mark Henry interview and backstage segment with Vince McMahon gained 0 viewers. *C.M. Punk & Curtis Axel vs. Prime Time Players gained 21,000 viewers to a 3.00 rating, which is terrible growth for the 10 p.m. segment*. Kaitlyn vs. Alicia Fox with A.J. out, plus Stephanie McMahon backstage lost 123,000 viewers. Antonio Cesaro vs. Cody Rhodes lost 98,000 viewers. And the John Cena vs. Albert Del Rio match gained 567,000 viewers to a 3.25 overrun.


:ti


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk better enjoy his feud with Lesnar because when it's over there will be no more year long title reigns or big pay-per-view bouts with part time legends. The best he'll be able to hope for is for his rivalry with Cena to be resumed from time to time.

Just like he usurped Randy Orton as number two full time star in the company a couple years back Daniel Bryan will probably do the same to him within 6-12 months. Don't be surprised if Punk ends up in a role similar to Orton now. When Wrestlemania 30 rolls round at best he'll be in the third or fourth biggest match on the card.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM PUNK LLOLOOOLLOOOLOLOLOOLLOOOOL

typical punk. Without a big name he collapses. CM PUNK CANT DRAW


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> CM Punk wrestled The Undertaker at WM and he's just starting a feud with Brock Lesnar, he shouldn't be wrestling stupid matches like that. Pairing him with Curtis Axel against the... PTP? Really? Of course that match isn't going to do big numbers because it absolutely fucking sucks. The PTP shouldn't be anywhere near the likes of CM Punk, they should be down the card wrestling jobber matches.


Explain why Punk is SOOOOOOOOOOOO above everyone else that he should only face big names? John Cena has wrestled the likes of PTP and Otunga while he was feuding with The Rock and Lesnar yet there was no excuses such as "He's facing jobbers, that's why the numbers are low". That's because Cena is a bigger draw than Punk can ever dream of being and I don't wanna hear any of that "Punk should've been bigger but was held down" crap from any blind marks in response. If Punk is such a huge star, he should be able to elevate the numbers even if he's facing jobbers. He also got the 10 p.m. slot which is usually a big gainer.



Jerichoholic4Life said:


> Punk better enjoy his feud with Lesnar because when it's over there will be no more year long title reigns or big pay-per-view bouts with part time legends. The best he'll be able to hope for is for his rivalry with Cena to be resumed from time to time.
> 
> Just like he usurped Randy Orton as number two full time star in the company a couple years back Daniel Bryan will probably do the same to him within 6-12 months. Don't be surprised if Punk ends up in a role similar to Orton now. When Wrestlemania 30 rolls round at best he'll be in the third or fourth biggest match on the card.


Yeah, Punk marks have been spoiled it seems but now that he's gone through all four of the part-time big names and had his year long title reign - there's nowhere to go but down. His hardcore marks will probably demand rematches with the part-timers because they hate to see him fall but once he's done everything possible, he has no choice but to step down. That's why Orton has fallen down the card in the first place. He had done everything possible (pre-Rock/Brock days that is) so he got sent over to Smackdown and since then has been directionless. Cena is the exception because everything seems to revolve around him.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I honestly dont know how cm punk can fail so badly in the ratings after his longgggg push.

The guy is simply hopeless. Indies really dont draw.


----------



## sontin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Miz with the biggest gain besides 9PM, 10PM and overrun. 

Damn he would be such a beast today if the WWE had him not buried after WM27.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Damn, since Punk returned the ratings have been shit. WWE needs a new #2 guy...


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Falkono said:


> *Pretty dire numbers there for Punk's segments considering he is supposed to be the number 2 guy.*
> To back that up I will show some comparisons. *This week his 1st did a 2.73.*
> The previous numbers for that segment were
> 24th june - 2.82
> 17th june - 3.04
> 10th june - 3.11
> 
> And the last segment in the 2nd hour this week did a 3.0 rating. Again in comparison
> 24th june - 3.21
> 17th june - 3.57
> 10th june - 3.20
> 
> Pretty bad drops. That isn't saying Punk is the reason for those drops it is saying that they are traditionally good slots (as the segment ratings show) and they are lower then they have been over the past 4 weeks. And Punk was in both those segments.


What the fuck is this bullshit?... "HIS 1st did a 2.73"? Punk was out there for all of three minutes. You can blame the 2.73 on Bryan's mediocre opening promo, or Sheamus, or Orton, or whatever bullshit that made up the majority of that segment, 'cos the damage was done before Punk even got out there. It's worth noting that RAW's had two weak openings now, and they've both largely involved Bryan, so make of that what you will. I'm almost certain that if Punk had opened the show, then it would've done better than a 2.73. Oh, and a pointless, throw-away tag match with Punk, featuring Curtis Axel and the PTP, didn't draw in hundreds of thousands of viewers? Well, I am surprised Besides, the segment still gained, and didn't lose, so it's not really an issue, as far as I'm concerned. You put Punk in a segment that people are interested in, and he'll pull in viewers, but he's not going to pulll in viewers in a segment, like he was in Monday - and it's silly to expect him to, because one, nobody is really interested in watching Axel or the PTP... and secondly, he's still never been positioned to be that type of draw. It was clear that the show revolved around Cena, even when he was champ for a year, and also while he was feuding with 'Taker - and it still does now. And on the subject of John Cena, his match against ADR - a "champion vs champion" match they'd been hyping ALL NIGHT LONG btw, drew a smaller number than Punk's match against ADR on the 17th of June did... but yeah, Punk is just hopeless.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, the opening segment with Daniel Bryan, Sheamus, Randy Orton, Christian, C.M. Punk and Kane all out talking did a 2.73 opening quarter, so they started way low. Christian & The Usos vs. The Shield lost 28,000 viewers. Dolph Ziggler vs. Jinder Mahal gained 90,000 viewers. The Mark Henry video piece gained 64,000 viewers. *Randy Orton vs. Kane with Daniel Bryan as ref gained 217,000 viewers to a 2.98 quarter*. Sheamus vs. Fandango lost 115,000 viewers. Ryback vs. The Miz gained 116,000 viewers. The Mark Henry interview and backstage segment with Vince McMahon gained 0 viewers. *C.M. Punk & Curtis Axel vs. Prime Time Players gained 21,000 viewers to a 3.00 rating, which is terrible growth for the 10 p.m.* segment. Kaitlyn vs. Alicia Fox with A.J. out, plus Stephanie McMahon backstage lost 123,000 viewers. Antonio Cesaro vs. Cody Rhodes lost 98,000 viewers. *And the John Cena vs. Albert Del Rio match gained 567,000 viewers to a 3.25 overrun.*


:cena2 unk3 rton :kane :bryan




4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> CM Punk wrestled The Undertaker at WM and he's just starting a feud with Brock Lesnar, he shouldn't be wrestling stupid matches like that. Pairing him with Curtis Axel against the... PTP? Really? Of course that match isn't going to do big numbers because it absolutely fucking sucks. The PTP shouldn't be anywhere near the likes of CM Punk, they should be down the card wrestling jobber matches.


You can't face big names all the time, each and every RAW. And plus, wrestlers are ment to work with lower names to help them grow and give lower names exposure.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Jerichoholic4Life said:


> Just like he usurped Randy Orton as number two full time star in the company a couple years back Daniel Bryan will probably do the same to him within 6-12 months. Don't be surprised if Punk ends up in a role similar to Orton now. When Wrestlemania 30 rolls round at best he'll be in the third or fourth biggest match on the card.


Careful. You get labeled delusional for that kind of thinking.




Choke2Death said:


> Explain why Punk is SOOOOOOOOOOOO above everyone else that he should only face big names? John Cena has wrestled the likes of PTP and Otunga while he was feuding with The Rock and Lesnar yet there was no excuses such as "He's facing jobbers, that's why the numbers are low". That's because Cena is a bigger draw than Punk can ever dream of being and I don't wanna hear any of that "Punk should've been bigger but was held down" crap from any blind marks in response. If Punk is such a huge star, he should be able to elevate the numbers even if he's facing jobbers. He also got the 10 p.m. slot which is usually a big gainer.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, Punk marks have been spoiled it seems but now that he's gone through all four of the part-time big names and had his year long title reign - there's nowhere to go but down. His hardcore marks will probably demand rematches with the part-timers because they hate to see him fall but once he's done everything possible, he has no choice but to step down. That's why Orton has fallen down the card in the first place. He had done everything possible (pre-Rock/Brock days that is) so he got sent over to Smackdown and since then has been directionless. Cena is the exception because everything seems to revolve around him.




:clap It's so beautiful. I'd green rep you if I could.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wait, wait, wait. This is too fucking good. So Punk wrestles with fucking Michael McGillicutty against Darren Young and Titus O'Neal, and does the second best number of the show? And people are saying he did bad?

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

Holy shit. I can't. The trolling really never ends.

So many fucking morons in here.


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> What the fuck is this bullshit?... "HIS 1st did a 2.73"? Punk was out there for all of three minutes. You can blame the 2.73 on Bryan's mediocre opening promo, or Sheamus, or Orton, or whatever bullshit that made up the majority of that segment, 'cos the damage was done before Punk even got out there. It's worth noting that RAW's had two weak openings now, and they've both largely involved Bryan, so make of that what you will. I'm almost certain that if Punk had opened the show, then it would've done better than a 2.73. Oh, and a pointless, throw-away tag match with Punk, featuring Curtis Axel and the PTP, didn't draw in hundreds of thousands of viewers? Well, I am surprised Besides, the segment still gained, and didn't lose, so it's not really an issue, as far as I'm concerned. You put Punk in a segment that people are interested in, and he'll pull in viewers, but he's not going to pulll in viewers in a segment, like he was in Monday - and it's silly to expect him to, because one, nobody is really interested in watching Axel or the PTP... and secondly, he's still never been positioned to be that type of draw. It was clear that the show revolved around Cena, even when he was champ for a year, and also while he was feuding with 'Taker - and it still does now. And on the subject of John Cena, his match against ADR - a "champion vs champion" match they'd been hyping ALL NIGHT LONG btw, drew a smaller number than Punk's match against ADR on the 17th of June did... but yeah, Punk is just hopeless.


WOw calm down mate....You are sounding a bit like that Britney Spears fan who cried....

Firstly "_What the fuck is this bullshit?... "HIS 1st did a 2.73"? Punk was out there for all of three minutes_" I never said he was to blame I said the segment he was in was dire. As much of a fanboy as you are surely even you must admit that is correct? 

Secondly as mentioned he is the number 2 guy, shouldn't he be drawing in number 2 style ratings? If not then he isn't the number 2 guy is he? If you base things off ratings and determine their popularity then Punk is quite far down the list. Along with the other guys you mentioned. 

The difference between Punk, Bryan etc is that Punk has just come off of possibly the best 2 years of any wrestler since the 80's. Longest championship reign, main angles and spotlight. High profile feuds with guys like Rock and Taker. Are you seriously saying his segment in the last quarter of hour two which is traditionally one of the highest rated slots should be drawing crap numbers because he was in with prime time players? Because if so not only are you a deluded Punk smart buy you seem to misunderstand the point of a 'draw'. They pull in ratings no matter who they face. But no doubt your keep telling yourself draws only draw when they fight The Rock or Cena....


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Falkono said:


> The difference between Punk, Bryan etc is that Punk has just come off of possibly the best 2 years of any wrestler since the 80's. Longest championship reign, main angles and spotlight. High profile feuds with guys like Rock and Taker. Are you seriously saying his segment in the last quarter of hour two which is traditionally one of the highest rated slots should be drawing crap numbers because he was in with prime time players? Because if so not only are you a deluded Punk smart buy you seem to misunderstand the point of a 'draw'. They pull in ratings no matter who they face. But no doubt your keep telling yourself draws only draw when they fight The Rock or Cena....


:clap Some of you guys are on a roll today. Testify brother!!!


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Wait, wait, wait. This is too fucking good. So Punk wrestles with fucking Michael McGillicutty against Darren Young and Titus O'Neal, and does the second best number of the show? And people are saying he did bad?
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> Holy shit. I can't. The trolling really never ends.
> 
> So many fucking morons in here.


You obviously need to go look up time trends....

Some segments are more popular then others i.e the start, the end of the 2nd hour and the end of the third hour. Putting Punk in those segments has decreased viewership over the previous weeks segments. You may not like it, may not agree with it, may call people morons for pointing it out. But it is a fact. (insert deal with it gif here).


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Falkono said:


> You obviously need to go look up time trends....
> 
> Some segments are more popular then others i.e the start, the end of the 2nd hour and the end of the third hour. Putting Punk in those segments has decreased viewership over the previous weeks segments. You may not like it, may not agree with it, may call people morons for pointing it out. But it is a fact. (insert deal with it gif here).


Didn't he get the best number of the night last week? Didn't he gain 640k viewers in the overrun the week after his return? Didn't he open the program with a 3.04 the same night, an even better number than this week where, none other than Daniel Bryan opened the night this week?

I swear, sometimes the shit you people spew is hilarious. I'd question the mental state, but I think again about how much you all love to troll this thread.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Falkono said:


> WOw calm down mate....You are sounding a bit like that Britney Spears fan who cried....
> 
> Firstly "_What the fuck is this bullshit?... "HIS 1st did a 2.73"? Punk was out there for all of three minutes_" I never said he was to blame I said the segment he was in was dire. As much of a fanboy as you are surely even you must admit that is correct?
> 
> Secondly as mentioned he is the number 2 guy, shouldn't he be drawing in number 2 style ratings? If not then he isn't the number 2 guy is he? If you base things off ratings and determine their popularity then Punk is quite far down the list. Along with the other guys you mentioned.
> 
> The difference between Punk, Bryan etc is that Punk has just come off of possibly the best 2 years of any wrestler since the 80's. Longest championship reign, main angles and spotlight. High profile feuds with guys like Rock and Taker. Are you seriously saying his segment in the last quarter of hour two which is traditionally one of the highest rated slots should be drawing crap numbers because he was in with prime time players? Because if so not only are you a deluded Punk smart buy you seem to misunderstand the point of a 'draw'. They pull in ratings no matter who they face. But no doubt your keep telling yourself draws only draw when they fight The Rock or Cena....


Excellent post. Would rep again if I could.

One thing that annoys me about Punk marks is how defensive they get when someone doesn't agree with them. I had been out of this whole ratings war for months but then their defensive attitude always drags me back in because they refuse to accept that their hero has any flaws whatsoever. Then they always brag about how they don't care about ratings yet are always lurking in this thread, calling others trolls, morons and other names just because everyone doesn't see things their way.


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Didn't he get the best number of the night last week? Didn't he gain 640k viewers in the overrun the week after his return? Didn't he open the program with a 3.04 the same night, an even better number than this week where, none other than Daniel Bryan opened the night this week?
> 
> I swear, sometimes the shit you people spew is hilarious. I'd question the mental state, but I think again about how much you all love to troll this thread.


Again you don't seem to understand....

If you put a turd in the end segment and had nobody else involved, just left it there doing nothing. It would get a guaranteed 3+ rating because it is in the final segment. People tune in to see the segment. Some will stay if it is someone important i.e say Rock. Which increases the rating. However some will see who is in the segment and think meh I don't really care about them, and tune out. That will lower the segment.
To give you an example, last week in the 2nd hour's last quarter Heyman and Punk talking did a 3.2. But in the Punk vs Young match it dropped 598k viewers. Here is a link so you can see for yourself http://wrestlechat.net/wwe-raw-rati...aniel-bryan-vs-randy-orton-doesnt-draw-twice/
Now if nearly 600k people turned off what does that say? They all must hate Darren Young right? But yet in the same slot this week again we find Punk there and again the numbers are down.
Now like I said in my original post that does not mean Punk is to blame. It means TRADITIONALLY there is a drop in numbers there. It is a 'time trend'.
To get an idea of how people are doing you have to compare the time trends with one another. It makes no difference who has the most gains from segment to segment because by that logic Kaitlyn must be a draw as she had a gain of 400k a few weeks ago!

Draws draw in any segment they are in. But when in the top slots they pull in the big numbers. Rock was pulling in 4+. That is because he is a superstar.
Punk is just another one of the guys.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Falkono said:


> WOw calm down mate....You are sounding a bit like that Britney Spears fan who cried....
> 
> Firstly "_What the fuck is this bullshit?... "HIS 1st did a 2.73"? Punk was out there for all of three minutes_" I never said he was to blame I said the segment he was in was dire. As much of a fanboy as you are surely even you must admit that is correct?
> 
> Secondly as mentioned he is the number 2 guy, shouldn't he be drawing in number 2 style ratings? If not then he isn't the number 2 guy is he? If you base things off ratings and determine their popularity then Punk is quite far down the list. Along with the other guys you mentioned.
> 
> The difference between Punk, Bryan etc is that *Punk has just come off of possibly the best 2 years of any wrestler since the 80's. Longest championship reign, main angles and spotlight. High profile feuds with guys like Rock and Taker.* Are you seriously saying his segment in the last quarter of hour two which is traditionally one of the highest rated slots should be drawing crap numbers because he was in with prime time players? Because if so not only are you a deluded Punk smart buy you seem to misunderstand the point of a 'draw'. They pull in ratings no matter who they face. But no doubt your keep telling yourself draws only draw when they fight The Rock or Cena....


"The best two years of any wrestler since the 80's"? A bit of an exaggeration, don't you think? But yes, granted he had a big push and despite all of those things you mentioned, THE SHOW STILL REVOLVED AROUND JOHN CENA. Cena is the focus, and the b-all and end-all and has been for the last 8-10 years. Give Punk an 8-10 year run as the number one name, and he'll become a draw big enough to pull in viewers to a random match involving Axel and the PTP - or any other lesser name, but not as it stands - and I don't know why anyone expects anything different. Cena is still firmly positioned as the number one draw, and that won't change any time soon - and even his numbers are beginning to wane in this day and age. Punk is undoubtedly the second biggest full-time draw, and he's proved in the past, he can bring in "number 2 style ratings", - he pulled in about 430,000 viewers for a solo promo once. However, admittedly, he is still not at the point yet, when people will tune in to see him in pointless, throw-away matches", or able to rouse special interest in a match like he was in Monday - and nobody else on the roster, apart from Cena, is either. Put Orton or Bryan in that match and I'm guessing it would do just as bad. Also, you said that the segment Punk was in did a dire rating, completely ignoring the fact that Punk was barely a part of it, and it was virtually over by the time Punk appeared, for all of 3 minutes. No way can that poor 2.73 rating - for what was mostly Bryan's segment, be at all attributed to Punk.



Falkono said:


> Again you don't seem to understand....
> 
> If you put a turd in the end segment and had nobody else involved, just left it there doing nothing. It would get a guaranteed 3+ rating because it is in the final segment. People tune in to see the segment. Some will stay if it is someone important i.e say Rock. Which increases the rating. *However some will see who is in the segment and think meh I don't really care about them, and tune out. That will lower the segment.
> To give you an example, last week in the 2nd hour's last quarter Heyman and Punk talking did a 3.2. But in the Punk vs Young match it dropped 598k viewers. Here is a link so you can see for yourself http://wrestlechat.net/wwe-raw-rati...aniel-bryan-vs-randy-orton-doesnt-draw-twice/
> Now if nearly 600k people turned off what does that say? They all must hate Darren Young right?* But yet in the same slot this week again we find Punk there and again the numbers are down.


Well, it doesn't take a genius to work out that if Punk was in a 3.2 rated segment, and than once DARREN YOUNG comes out, nearly 600,000 viewers turn off, then of course it's probably down to Young... because 600,000 didn't switch off when it was just Punk talking. However, there were reports that the match actually gained viewers as it progressed, and I put that down to people not realising Punk was even wrestling at the beginning, 'cos Punk and Heyman abrubtly finished, Young came out, Punk left the ring (and went to the back) they cut to commercial and then after the break the match started. As for this week's segment and your argument that "yet in the same slot this week again we find Punk there and again the numbers are down"... well, guess who else was in that segment Einstein?... DARREN FUCKING YOUNG - only this time O'Neil and Axel were there too. However, unlike last week, the match didn't lose viewers, it actually gained (to the second highest quarter of the night)... although I'd put that down to Punk and Heyman's presence, more than anything else. Anyway, even if the segment didn't gain huge numbers, it still gained and didn't lose, which is the main thing... but because it was a segment involving Punk with lesser names, and it didn't pull in hundreds of thousands of viewers, then of course Punk gets castigated and labelled as "hopeless" by the usual crowd of clowns on here.


----------



## Flawless Victory

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You know I rarely get involved in "draw" discussions. I see however allot of you like to (as the norm around here) shit on my boy. I'd just like to point out that Del Rio's opening promo did a 3.04 a couple weeks ago. Daniel Bryan/Orton/Kane opening promo did a 2.82 last week and the "all star" opening promo this week did a 2.73. Chew on that haters.

:adr Mejor Del Mundo. Putos.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Almost a year into the 3 hour era, here is an updated list of every Raw overrun, from best to worst, since Raw 1000.

7/23/12 – CM Punk vs. John Cena – 4.43 rating
1/28/13 – Vince McMahon/Paul Heyman job review with Brock Lesnar return – 4.00
2/25/13 – John Cena vs. CM Punk – 3.9
7/30/12 – John Cena vs. Big Show – 3.86
3/4/13 – CM Punk vs. Randy Orton vs. Sheamus vs. Big Show with Undertaker appearance – 3.7
2/4/13 – John Cena/Ryback/Sheamus/Shield brawl – 3.63
4/1/13 – Undertaker/CM Punk confrontation – 3.58
4/8/13 – John Cena vs. Mark Henry – 3.54
4/15/13 – John Cena/Ryback/Shield segment – 3.53
2/11/13 – The Rock/CM Punk confrontation – 3.48
3/25/13 – The Rock/John Cena legends panel – 3.47
10/8/12 – Vince McMahon vs. CM Punk – 3.46
5/20/13 – Triple H vs. Curtis Axel – 3.44
8/13/12 – Triple H/Brock Lesnar confrontation – 3.44
4/22/13 – John Cena/Ryback/Mick Foley/Shield segment – 3.43
6/17/13 – Brock Lesnar returns, F5’s CM Punk – 3.42
2/18/13 – The Rock unveils new WWE title – 3.39
8/20/12 – John Cena/CM Punk confrontation – 3.36
8/27/12 – CM Punk vs. Jerry Lawler – 3.35
1/7/13 – The Rock/CM Punk confrontation – 3.34
6/10/13 – John Cena/Ryback confrontation – 3.33
4/29/13 – John Cena & Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. The Shield – 3.32
8/6/12 – John Cena vs. Daniel Bryan – 3.27
10/29/12 – Mick Foley/CM Punk segment – 3.26
7/1/13 – John Cena vs. Alberto Del Rio – 3.25
11/5/12 – John Cena & Ryback vs. CM Punk & Dolph Ziggler – 3.22
1/14/13 – The Rock/CM Punk segment – 3.20
3/18/13 – Brock Lesnar/Triple H contract signing – 3.19
5/13/13 – Brock Lesnar/Triple H confrontation – 3.18
3/11/13 – CM Punk vs. Kane with Undertaker appearance – 3.18
5/27/13 – John Cena vs. Curtis Axel – 3.16
6/3/13 – John Cena vs. Curtis Axel – 3.14
9/17/12 – John Cena & Sheamus vs. CM Punk & Alberto Del Rio – 3.14
10/15/12 – Vince McMahon/CM Punk/John Cena/Ryback contract signing – 3.10
9/10/12 – Bret Hart/CM Punk/John Cena segment – 3.10
12/17/12 – John Cena & Vickie Guerrero vs. Dolph Ziggler & AJ – 3.00
9/3/12 – John Cena vs. Alberto Del Rio – 2.99
11/12/12 – John Cena vs. CM Punk – 2.99
5/6/13 – Ryback vs. Kane – 2.99
1/21/13 – Royal Rumble participants brawl – 2.98
12/10/12 – Shield brawl with John Cena/Ryback/others – 2.96
6/24/13 – Daniel Bryan vs. Randy Orton – 2.92
12/31/12 – John Cena/Dolph Ziggler/AJ segment – 2.9
10/22/12 – CM Punk vs. Sheamus – 2.89
11/19/12 – CM Punk championship celebration – 2.87
12/3/12 – CM Punk/Miz lie detector test – 2.86
9/24/12 – CM Punk/Mick Foley/Ryback confrontation – 2.74
10/1/12 – Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. CM Punk & Dolph Ziggler – 2.70
11/26/12 – CM Punk vs. Kane – 2.66
12/24/12 – John Cena vs. Alberto Del Rio – 2.3


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I really wanna know what this exposure shit is all about, so because Punk had feuds with Rock and Taker he has to draw monster numbers because of them. He lost all those matches and some people here act like the audience are all smart marks and that they know WWE is predetermined, well its not what it used to be. If people really care about exposure they will follow Sheamus and he will gain a lot of viewers, didn't he feud with guys like HHH, and Cena and beat them, why didnt people talk about that, oh that's because nobody cares about Sheamus around here. Same thing can be said about Orton he had tons of exposure (Foley, HHH, Cena, Taker, Michaels, etc) and victories yet he fails to draw good/great numbers with Bryan and many other midcarders and what did SD do in terms of ratings when he was champ? exactly. 

Tbh the only big clean victory Punk had over a big star is Cena (not really), hes not supposed to draw monster numbers, he still has to achieve a lot to do so. Cena didnt become a draw all of a sudden he was pushed to be the #1 guy for 8 straight years, tell me who had that in the current roster. Also when Punk does good numbers nobody says shit but when he does only for very few times, it feels like hell is rising and the war is starting to shit all over him.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This thread is hilarious. 

:ti


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> I really wanna know what this exposure shit is all about, so because Punk had feuds with Rock and Taker he has to draw monster numbers because of them. He lost all those matches and some people here act like the audience are all smart marks and that they know WWE is predetermined, well its not what it used to be. If people really care about exposure they will follow Sheamus and he will gain a lot of viewers, didn't he feud with guys like HHH, and Cena and beat them, why didnt people talk about that, oh that's because nobody cares about Sheamus around here. Same thing can be said about Orton he had tons of exposure (Foley, HHH, Cena, Taker, Michaels, etc) and victories yet he fails to draw good/great numbers with Bryan and many other midcarders and what did SD do in terms of ratings when he was champ? exactly.
> 
> Tbh the only big clean victory Punk had over a big star is Cena, hes not supposed to draw monster numbers, he still has to achieve a lot to do so. Also when Punk does good numbers nobody says shit but when he does only for very few times, it feels like hell is rising and the war is starting to shit all over him.


You killed any argument you had when you brought up Sheamus. His win-loss record is probably better than anyone on the roster and he's not a draw. Proof that non-smarks don't get invested in somebody just because they win. Also all those feuds you talked about for Orton and Sheamus were years ago. Hell, I don't know if the current audience are aware of Orton's feuds with Foley, Taker or HBK.

And exposure and chance to showcase your ability is what makes you a draw. The Rock is probably the least protected top guy ever yet he was a draw because he was that good and given the chance to show what he's got. Punk has gotten the same amount of opportunities in the past 2 years when he's worked with every big name around and won a lot. What have Orton and Sheamus done other than come out and have a random match? Even Cena will lose his drawing abilities if he becomes directionless and for a year+ just comes out every night to wrestle a meaningless match that leads to nothing.

Lastly, what does Punk have left to achieve? 434 days title reign, two time MITB winner, wins over the entire roster, worked with big names like HHH, Taker, Rock and now Lesnar, constantly in the spotlight. His fans might complain about main eventing Wrestlemania but that's it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:lmao @ this thread.

So let me get this straight, Punk is in the second highest segment of the night (after being in the top ones for the past couple of weeks if I'm not mistaken) and he's getting thrashed over it? It's also not like the 10PM segment is a guaranteed number 2 highest segment spot as that varies. I mean don't get me wrong, the number wasn't good. It's bad that the second biggest segment of the night only manages a 3.0, and only gains 21,000 viewers, but anyone who's even slightly annoyed by Punk marks is trying to milk this for all it's worth and making it seem a lot worse than it is. It's not that bad. They didn't lose viewers and hell, they didn't even advertise the match until right before it was scheduled to go on. They spent all night hyping Cena/Del Rio, which did a good rating, but I wonder how it did in quarter 12? Based on the overruns, and something to Punk's benefit, his match with Del Rio and the aftermath with Lesnar and Ziggler did better than this Cena/Del Rio one with the aftermath (Henry/Ziggler). So it'd be interesting to see how that all went.

But yeah, just to clarify since I know haters will try to spin this as me saying Punk did a good number this week... HE DID NOT. However it's not as abysmal as people are trying to make it seem. The overrun number of say Orton/Bryan was abysmal... the opening segment this week was abysmal (which did involve Punk, even if he wasn't out there long enough to make a difference). The 10PM segment was not abysmal, just not anything to talk about.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



sontin said:


> The Miz with the biggest gain besides 9PM, 10PM and overrun.
> 
> Damn he would be such a beast today if the WWE had him not buried after WM27.


He will be fine if WWE gets serious about pushing him as a top face. All this talk about Daniel Bryan and John Cena is fine. But at some point I would like to see a title match between Cena and Miz (face vs. face).


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> *You killed any argument you had when you brought up Sheamus. His win-loss record is probably better than anyone on the roster and he's not a draw. Proof that non-smarks don't get invested in somebody just because they win.* Also all those feuds you talked about for Orton and Sheamus were years ago. Hell, I don't know if the current audience are aware of Orton's feuds with Foley, Taker or HBK.
> 
> *And exposure and chance to showcase your ability is what makes you a draw. The Rock is probably the least protected top guy ever yet he was a draw because he was that good and given the chance to show what he's got.* Punk has gotten the same amount of opportunities in the past 2 years when he's worked with every big name around and won a lot. What have Orton and Sheamus done other than come out and have a random match? Even Cena will lose his drawing abilities if he becomes directionless and for a year+ just comes out every night to wrestle a meaningless match that leads to nothing.
> 
> Lastly, what does Punk have left to achieve? 434 days title reign, two time MITB winner, wins over the entire roster, worked with big names like HHH, Taker, Rock and now Lesnar, constantly in the spotlight. His fans might complain about main eventing Wrestlemania but that's it.


Thats why I said exposure shit is not valid and trust me wins and loses matter to the Non-Marks, thing about Sheamus is his wins over midcarders means nothing and are very much pointless, and people could careless about him and what hes offering. He had clean victories over HHH I think, and Cena, he should have used that to support his career, but hes busy talking about Irish stories and BS staff that nobody cares about, he killed every momentum he had before, thats because he doesnt have "IT". Punk does, do you know why? he at least sells shit load of Merchandise and have done decent/Good/Great numbers as a maineventer in PPVs and the guy can carry feuds by himself, and have done good/great numbers by himself before but the thing about him is hes not very constant, WWE seems to know how to kill his momentum, I had no problem of him losing to Rock and he actually improved in drawing, but ever since he lost to Taker, things went down hill and people stopped caring about him.

:lmao Being the #2 and #1 in the AE is now called the least protected, he defeated all there is to beat, and if you didnt think Vince protected the living shit of him than I dont know what else to tell you, he was always his pet project after Austin and if he was the least protected he wouldnt come back and beat everyone there is to beat when he knows hes a way bigger star than them, he had to prove something dont know what exactly that is but thats what he feels. If you wanna call someone the least protected that will be Mick Foley. 

Yet, all of that nobody here even consider his achievements to be greater than Jericho, and youre telling me thats a lot of achievements. Even Orton fans such as yourself saying Punk achievements aren't bigger than Orton. What does that mean? Simple, he has to achieve more...


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sheamus is overexposed. They put him in countless meaningless matches. He puts on great matches, however they don't mean anything. If WWE was smart at some point they would put him a in a big match against Brock Lesnar. No more funny with Sheamus -- he needs to get serious.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> Thats why I said exposure shit is not valid and trust me wins and loses matter to the Non-Marks, thing about Sheamus is his wins over midcarders means nothing and are very much pointless, and people could careless about him and what hes offering. He had clean victories over HHH I think, and Cena, he should have used that to support his career, but hes busy talking about Irish stories and BS staff that nobody cares about, he killed every momentum he had before, thats because he doesnt have "IT". Punk does, do you know why? he at least sells shit load of Merchandise and have done decent/Good/Great numbers as a maineventer in PPVs and the guy can carry feuds by himself, and have done good/great numbers by himself before but the thing about him is hes not very constant, WWE seems to know how to kill his momentum, I had no problem of him losing to Rock and he actually improved in drawing, but ever since he lost to Taker, things went down hill and people stopped caring about him.


You act like Sheamus decides what to do himself, lol. As for Punk, he's very inconsistent. Most of his greatest gains are with other top guys and only a couple of times he's impressed entirely on his own. He's also had some terrible numbers and as much as Punk marks hate to hear it, numbers were going down extremely fast when the show was centered around him after SummerSlam last year. And using the Taker match to determine how his drawing decrease is not very accurate since he took a break right after that and returned a couple of weeks ago so I don't think the two are related.



> :lmao Being the #2 and #1 in the AE is now called the least protected, he defeated all there is to beat, and if you didnt think Vince protected the living shit of him than I dont know what else to tell you, he was always his pet project after Austin and if he was the least protected he wouldnt come back and beat everyone there is to beat when he knows hes a way bigger star than them, he had to prove something dont know what exactly that is but thats what he feels. If you wanna call someone the least protected that will be Mick Foley.


That's why I said *top guy*. Foley was a main event jobber in a way but he's different to the rest and he was never a top draw. The Rock was 1b in the Attitude Era yet he was a lot less protected than Austin. That's what I'm getting at. Hell, Rock was once even pinned by Stephanie!



> Yet, all of that nobody here even consider his achievements to be greater than Jericho, and youre telling me thats a lot of achievements. Even Orton fans such as yourself saying Punk achievements aren't bigger than Orton. What does that mean? Simple, he has to achieve more...


I think he has not achieved more than Orton because Orton got to work with a lot of big names when Punk wasn't even with the company or trying to make a name in ECW and that's all. Other than that, Orton only has a WM main event and Royal Rumble victory above Punk. But all of that is long in the past and Orton's momentum has been ruined to the extent that one can't expect him to draw big numbers just because of what he's achieved years ago. In regards to Punk, Rumble win and WM main event aside, there really is nothing for him to achieve. He's worked with everybody there is, full-time and part-time. Many guys Orton worked with are no longer around for various reasons (Hogan, Benoit, Foley, Flair, HBK etc) so you can't expect Punk to wrestle them. And I highly doubt the things Punk has left to do will magically make him a bigger draw. Sheamus also has a RR victory yet he's been doing nothing of note and same can be said for many others.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They should have built Sheamus better heading into that Royal Rumble. It would also been better to have Sheamus go up against a stronger WHC. Looking back I wish they would have made it face vs. face with Big Show defending the title against Sheamus at WM 27.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> You act like Sheamus decides what to do himself, lol. As for Punk, he's very inconsistent. Most of his greatest gains are with other top guys and only a couple of times he's impressed entirely on his own. He's also had some terrible numbers and as much as Punk marks hate to hear it, numbers were going down extremely fast when the show was centered around him after SummerSlam last year. And using the Taker match to determine how his drawing decrease is not very accurate since he took a break right after that and returned a couple of weeks ago so I don't think the two are related.
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I said *top guy*. Foley was a main event jobber in a way but he's different to the rest and he was never a top draw. The Rock was 1b in the Attitude Era yet he was a lot less protected than Austin. That's what I'm getting at. Hell, Rock was once even pinned by Stephanie!
> 
> 
> 
> I think he has not achieved more than Orton because Orton got to work with a lot of big names when Punk wasn't even with the company or trying to make a name in ECW and that's all. Other than that, Orton only has a WM main event and Royal Rumble victory above Punk. But all of that is long in the past and Orton's momentum has been ruined to the extent that one can't expect him to draw big numbers just because of what he's achieved years ago. In regards to Punk, Rumble win and WM main event aside, there really is nothing for him to achieve. He's worked with everybody there is, full-time and part-time. Many guys Orton worked with are no longer around for various reasons (Hogan, Benoit, Foley, Flair, HBK etc) so you can't expect Punk to wrestle them. And I highly doubt the things Punk has left to do will magically make him a bigger draw. Sheamus also has a RR victory yet he's been doing nothing of note and same can be said for many others.


Well, if he was smart he will stand up for himself and decide whats good for him, but he seems happy about winning all those meaningless matches, there is a big chance in Sandow helping him, he should consider losing to Sandow in an obvious clean win to hype up the feud, because he makes every feud hes in pointless. Numbers will extremely go down this year after SS, thats no way to go deep on discussion, with Punk or without.


Foley whether you dont think hes a top draw or not, he is/was a big draw, I heard that he sold extra millions for his first book "Have a nice day" and that set records, helped defeat WCW, and the "This is your life" segment with Rock did the highest rated segment whether Rock marks like it or not, that was his idea and if it wasnt for him this segment will never even happen, and there are a lot of examples too. So, to me he was the least protected by far.

Brock feud didnt even end to talk about it, he does have something to prove here. Orton ruined himself with his attitude and him being unmotivated and insecure, I dont think WWE have a lot of faith on him, but if people dont remember his past feuds that just shows how forgettable it was, thats your saying by the way. Whatever others say, Cena wasnt made in a day to be a draw, he was even horrible as one as a lot of people stopped watching in 2007 when he was the champ, and Vince very much helped push him for 8 straight years, to be what he is today.


----------



## Apex Rattlesnake

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Daniel "ratings" Bryan strikes again


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> You killed any argument you had when you brought up Sheamus. His win-loss record is probably better than anyone on the roster and he's not a draw. Proof that non-smarks don't get invested in somebody just because they win. Also all those feuds you talked about for Orton and Sheamus were years ago. Hell, I don't know if the current audience are aware of Orton's feuds with Foley, Taker or HBK.
> 
> And exposure and chance to showcase your ability is what makes you a draw. The Rock is probably the least protected top guy ever yet he was a draw because he was that good and given the chance to show what he's got. Punk has gotten the same amount of opportunities in the past 2 years when he's worked with every big name around and won a lot. What have Orton and Sheamus done other than come out and have a random match? Even Cena will lose his drawing abilities if he becomes directionless and for a year+ just comes out every night to wrestle a meaningless match that leads to nothing.
> 
> Lastly, what does Punk have left to achieve? 434 days title reign, two time MITB winner, wins over the entire roster, worked with big names like HHH, Taker, Rock and now Lesnar, constantly in the spotlight. His fans might complain about main eventing Wrestlemania but that's it.


He needs to win the Royal Rumble, Main Event mania (and by main event, I mean CLOSE the show), and become a champ again and I'll won't ever complain about Punks booking.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> Well, if he was smart he will stand up for himself and decide whats good for him, but he seems happy about winning all those meaningless matches, there is a big chance in Sandow helping him, he should consider losing to Sandow in an obvious clean win to hype up the feud, because he makes every feud hes in pointless. Numbers will extremely go down this year after SS, thats no way to go deep on discussion, with Punk or without.


Ha, you should tell that to Sheamus and not me.



> Foley whether you dont think hes a top draw or not, he is/was a big draw, I heard that he sold extra millions for his first book "Have a nice day" and that set records, helped defeat WCW, and the "This is your life" segment with Rock did the highest rated segment whether Rock marks like it or not, that was his idea and if it wasnt for him this segment will never even happen, and there are a lot of examples too. So, to me he was the least protected by far.


Whatever you say, my point was that The Rock was not booked like Cena, Hogan or Austin despite being on their level for star power.



> Brock feud didnt even end to talk about it, he does have something to prove here. Orton ruined himself with his attitude and him being unmotivated and insecure, I dont think WWE have a lot of faith on him, but if people dont remember his past feuds that just shows how forgettable it was, thats your saying by the way. Whatever others say, Cena wasnt made in a day to be a draw, he was even horrible as one as a lot of people stopped watching in 2007 when he was the champ, and Vince very much helped push him for 8 straight years, to be what he is today.


Of course but I'm talking about _after_ the Brock feud ends. It's already started so we know it is going to happen. Maybe it's my lack of interest that makes me talk as if it's already done but you get my point. And what I mean about Orton's feud not being remembered refers to a different audience. Since the PG rating came about, the audience has been different and so has Randy Orton as a character. Many of his feuds with big names took place before these changes. And Cena has been #1 guy since Wrestlemania 22 and sold lots of merchandise as well as been a success with ratings and PPV buys on numerous occasions. He's got many detractors but he has had the casual audience on lock for years.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Wait, wait, wait. This is too fucking good. So Punk wrestles with fucking Michael McGillicutty against Darren Young and Titus O'Neal, and does the second best number of the show? And people are saying he did bad?
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> Holy shit. I can't. The trolling really never ends.
> 
> So many fucking morons in here.



It was the 10 pm segment. I bet WWE could show a 15 minute recap of the last week's RAW during that time slot and 9 times out of 10 it would do better than what Punk did. This was an epic fail that deserves to be mocked.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Didn't he get the best number of the night last week? Didn't he gain 640k viewers in the overrun the week after his return? *Didn't he open the program with a 3.04* the same night, an even better number than this week where, none other than Daniel Bryan opened the night this week?
> 
> I swear, sometimes the shit you people spew is hilarious. I'd question the mental state, but I think again about how much you all love to troll this thread.


Wow guys, a 3.04 rating, what a massive draw Punk is


----------



## El Capitano

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Apex Rattlesnake said:


> Daniel "ratings" Bryan strikes again


Lol what ratings both his openings this week and last week were weak as well as the ending last week :


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Ha, you should tell that to Sheamus and not me.
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever you say, my point was that The Rock was not booked like Cena, Hogan or Austin despite being on their level for star power.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course but I'm talking about _after_ the Brock feud ends. It's already started so we know it is going to happen. Maybe it's my lack of interest that makes me talk as if it's already done but you get my point. And what I mean about Orton's feud not being remembered refers to a different audience. Since the PG rating came about, the audience has been different and so has Randy Orton as a character. Many of his feuds with big names took place before these changes. And Cena has been #1 guy since Wrestlemania 22 and sold lots of merchandise as well as been a success with ratings and PPV buys on numerous occasions. He's got many detractors but he has had the casual audience on lock for years.


So, you know what I meant about the exposure thing, its all on the wrestler hands, if they are not serious about it they will not get anything from it. Thats why people dont care about Sheamus, he won big matches but yet he thrives on pointless matches and he seems happy about it, he doesnt want to improve and guys like that should not be pushed, and hes getting old anyway.

Maybe, but he was still always considered to be pushed from the very first since Vince saw him, I remember Foley even saying it. Even if HHH and Michaels didnt like him at that time but Vince was always high on him. Lawler helped a lot too, just like JR did to Austin, they always seem high on them, and put them as over as possible.

Yeah, he sold a lot of merch but not so much in PPVs and Ratings as I said statics say ratings in 2007 fall big time in the average from 2005 and 2006 (from 3.90 in 2006 and 3.60 in 2007), it seems a huge portion stopped watching. 

I heard Punk saying his shirt in 2011 (the white one) was the hottest sold shirt since Austin shirt, I dont know if its true but why will he lie tho. So, yeah I know why Vince is pushing him.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Apex Rattlesnake said:


> Daniel "ratings" Bryan strikes again


Yep... dat 2.73:cheer



Fanboi101 said:


> It was the 10 pm segment. I bet WWE could show a 15 minute recap of the last week's RAW during that time slot and 9 times out of 10 it would do better than what Punk did. *This was an epic fail that deserves to be mocked.*


The only thing that deserves to be mocked, is you and your appalling posts.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The funniest thing about this thread, other than the obvious trolling, is the complete bias. Viewership matters more than gains/losses because well, it should be self explanatory even to the most ignorant of people. If a match pitting one star with three jobbers does the second biggest number of the night, then yes it's a success. The bias I'm talking about it is people only focus on the overall number and ignore the gain when it has to do with their favourite star. When it comes to Punk, in come the trolls to use whatever little bits of info they have to try and bash Punk. In doing so, look stupid. 

Punk doesn't need to prove himself anymore, either. That's the best part, it's been two years since his push and the WWE only keep remaining high on him. He's their number two draw, they obviously know it, but it's such a sour pill to swallow around here that you people make shit up and try to believe it. You want to see an example of how well he does alone? Look no further than his solo promo on February 25th where he drew 420k in a random slot, doing a better number than Vince, Triple H and Lesnar in the opener. At this point, this far into his push as one of their only two top stars, this thread can only be looked at as laughable most times.

And don't get me started on the posts calling Bryan a draw. 2.7 and the bombing of the overrun last week. Damn, what an attention grabber that one is.


----------



## Mr.S

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> The funniest thing about this thread, other than the obvious trolling, is the complete bias. Viewership matters more than gains/losses because well, it should be self explanatory even to the most ignorant of people. If a match pitting one star with three jobbers does the second biggest number of the night, then yes it's a success. The bias I'm talking about it is people only focus on the overall number and ignore the gain when it has to do with their favourite star. When it comes to Punk, in come the trolls to use whatever little bits of info they have to try and bash Punk. In doing so, look stupid.
> 
> Punk doesn't need to prove himself anymore, either. That's the best part, it's been two years since his push and the WWE only keep remaining high on him. He's their number two draw, they obviously know it, but it's such a sour pill to swallow around here that you people make shit up and try to believe it. You want to see an example of how well he does alone? Look no further than his solo promo on February 25th where he drew 420k in a random slot, doing a better number than Vince, Triple H and Lesnar in the opener. At this point, this far into his push as one of their only two top stars, this thread can only be looked at as laughable most times.
> 
> And don't get me started on the posts calling Bryan a draw. 2.7 and the bombing of the overrun last week. Damn, what an attention grabber that one is.




Punk probably had the worst Title Reign since David Arquette when he was in the Mid-Card with the title and he drew so horrid that Cena was bigger than the title.

Besides it's weird when Punk talks being the best when he is an above average wrestler with plently of botches and a very average moveset


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sheamus is a terrible babyface so it's not suprising.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Torch:


> Why does WWE Raw remain attractive to advertisers despite sinking viewership following WrestleMania? Raw is relatively DVR-proof as a live program with habitual viewership and a fanbase that treats Raw like a "destination program."
> 
> The numbers from last Monday's Raw back up Raw being DVR-friendly compared to other programs on television, with only 8.0 percent of the adults 18-49 audience watching Raw on delay.
> 
> PWTorch has received the following break down from this week's July 1 Raw episode for the adults 18-49 demographic.
> 
> - First Hour: Raw drew 1.374 million a18-49 viewers. 81 percent of the audience (1.111 million) watched the show live, another 8 percent (111,000 viewers) watched the show within a 0-60-minute delay, and 3 percent (46,000) watched Raw on a 61-120-minute delay.
> 
> It adds up to over 90 percent of the audience watching the show real-time or within a two-hour delay.
> 
> - Second Hour: Raw drew 1.518 million a18-49 viewers. 83 percent of the audience (1.261 million) watched the show live, 8 percent (119,000) watched within 0-60 minutes delay, and another 5 percent watched within 61-120 minute delay.
> 
> - Third Hour: Raw drew 1.600 million a18-49 viewers. The figure increased to 87 percent of the audience (1.384 million) caught up to real-time/watching live. Another 6 percent (98,000) watched on a 0-60-minute delay.
> 
> The third hour had the highest percentage of "live + within one hour" viewing, registering 93 percent. The first hour had 89 percent and the second hour had 91 percent.
> 
> - OVERALL: Raw averaged 1.503 million viewers on the night. 84 percent (1.259 million) watched real-time, 7 percent (109,000) watched within one-hour delay, and 5 percent (68,000) watched within two-hour delay.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good.

Now maybe the DVR/internet excuses will stop.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Some more DVR numbers:
Q2 2013 P2+ is down vs Q1 2013:
Q1: 4,9 million viewers
Q2: 4,6 million viewers

As for the demos, no numbers for the second quarter were released.
Q1 did 2,3 million in A18-49, 2,3 million in A25-54 and 1,2 million viewers in A18-34.

Numbers via USA press release, mix of Live+7, Live+3 and Live+SD


----------



## Gang

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> via Observer NewsLetter
> 
> Ryback vs. The Miz gained 116,000 viewers.


:miz


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think both the marks and haters are going overboard in this thread. On one hand, Punk should be doing big numbers considering the push that he has had but on the other hand, the show is all-around terrible so....

I just don't understand how Sheamus is a failure because he's not drawing at least 3.0's but Punk and Cena aren't failures when they can only draw 3.0's feuding with guys like Lesnar, Jericho, Rock, and Taker? Hmmm... that seems very hypocritical to me.

When Sheamus's last 4 opponents are Rock, Cena, Taker, and Jericho, then I will 100% agree with that notion if he still isn't bringing in the viewers. But, I just don't think that it's fair to blame guys like Orton, Bryan, and Sheamus for their ratings when they aren't feuding with part-timers but you excuse the ratings of two people who do nothing but feud with part-timers. 

And since I blasted Punk when he was champion and had low ratings, now I'm calling Cena out on his. He needs to drop the belt because he isn't drawing well. If it wasn't for Mark Henry, then I wouldn't be able to handle his segments. It is obvious that Cena isn't motivated and doesn't care. His promos are garbage and Henry's performances only make this more evident.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Now we're getting DVR breakdowns? There's too many damn numbers and figures, to keep track of, lol.


----------



## Guy LeDouche

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This thread gets more and more hilarious by the day. :lol


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The Mark Henry video piece *gained 64,000 viewers.*





> C.M. Punk & Curtis Axel vs. Prime Time Players *gained 21,000 viewers* to a 3.00 rating, which is terrible growth for the 10 p.m.


Mark henry video gains more than the match? :lmao Punk is truly hopeless!!!! 

WWE buried a white hot Ryback for this guy? fpalm


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The causes of gains and losses are random. Stupid to analyse them on a weekly basis.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

but the nba off season is killing us in the ratings! :vince2


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> WWE buried a white hot Ryback for this guy? fpalm


ah when was ryback white hot exactly and moving ratings??

october 22 ie 6 days before hiac



> The Miz vs. Ryback and the backstage brawl with Layla, Eve Torres and Kaitlyn *lost 613,000 viewers* - not a good sign for Ryback right now.


same night 


> The Lumberjacks main event with CM Punk vs. Sheamus *gained 1,058,000 viewers* for a 2.89 quarter rating.


http://www.WrestlingInc.com/wi/news/2012/1025/557420/vince-mcmahon/#ixzz2YI3JcQUT


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I see a lot of guys coming here and trying to be cool by shitting on Punk. I guess hes the biggest draw around here, its weird, every hater has this argument about ratings in many threads when Punk is brought up, the obsession is unreal. You dont see Punk fans shitting on Sheamus, Ryback and Orton for ratings (but if so only in defense), even tho theyre not doing well from a long time ago.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



LovelyElle890 said:


> I think both the marks and haters are going overboard in this thread. On one hand,* Punk should be doing big numbers considering the push that he has had *but on the other hand, the show is all-around terrible so....
> 
> I just don't understand how Sheamus is a failure because he's not drawing at least 3.0's but Punk and Cena aren't failures when they can only draw 3.0's feuding with guys like Lesnar, Jericho, Rock, and Taker? Hmmm... that seems very hypocritical to me.
> 
> When Sheamus's last 4 opponents are Rock, Cena, Taker, and Jericho, then I will 100% agree with that notion if he still isn't bringing in the viewers. But, I just don't think that it's fair to blame guys like Orton, Bryan, and Sheamus for their ratings when they aren't feuding with part-timers but you excuse the ratings of two people who do nothing but feud with part-timers.
> 
> And since I blasted Punk when he was champion and had low ratings, now I'm calling Cena out on his. He needs to drop the belt because he isn't drawing well. If it wasn't for Mark Henry, then I wouldn't be able to handle his segments. It is obvious that Cena isn't motivated and doesn't care. His promos are garbage and Henry's performances only make this more evident.


Bolded = truth

How can Punk justify his ratings even when he is usually advertised before his segments/matches and had been given one of the best booking? At one point he was being booked above Cena and they put so much effort into him, expecting him to deliver in ratings but it didn't happen. We know how great Punk can be on the mic or in the ring (even tho I think he is slightly overrated), but we are judging him on how well he draws just like we would with anybody else. It's honestly a mystery to me because he created a huge impact in the business with his shoot and had everybody behind him, but he draws so poor when he isn't working with ppl who are above him. That's my issue with Punk.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> I see a lot of guys coming here and trying to be cool by shitting on Punk. I guess hes the biggest draw around here, its weird, every hater has this argument about ratings in many threads when Punk is brought up, the obsession is unreal. *You dont see Punk fans shitting on Sheamus, Ryback and Orton for ratings* (but if so only in defense), even tho theyre not doing well from a long time ago.


I've seen that happen so many times before. I remember when Orton was champion in 2011 and many of his haters were whining about the ratings (some of which are Punk marks who cry every time their hero gets shitted on for being a flop). Sheamus was on Smackdown as champion so they just skipped on Smackdown and shitted on him as an "entertainer". And I've seen many of them laugh every time a Ryback segment has done bad.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THE BWO FRAMED ME FOR TAX FRAUD said:


> Bolded = truth
> 
> How can Punk justify his ratings even when he is usually advertised before his segments/matches and had been given one of the best booking? *At one point he was being booked above Cena* and they put so much effort into him, expecting him to deliver in ratings but it didn't happen. We know how great Punk can be on the mic or in the ring (even tho I think he is slightly overrated), but we are judging him on how well he draws just like we would with anybody else. It's honestly a mystery to me because he created a huge impact in the business with his shoot and had everybody behind him, but he draws so poor when he isn't working with ppl who are above him. That's my issue with Punk.


No, he's never really been booked above Cena - not even when he was champ... and that's the problem.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THE BWO FRAMED ME FOR TAX FRAUD said:


> Bolded = truth
> 
> How can Punk justify his ratings even when he is usually advertised before his segments/matches and had been given one of the best booking? At one point he was being booked above Cena and they put so much effort into him, expecting him to deliver in ratings but it didn't happen. We know how great Punk can be on the mic or in the ring (even tho I think he is slightly overrated), but we are judging him on how well he draws just like we would with anybody else. It's honestly a mystery to me because he created a huge impact in the business with his shoot and had everybody behind him, but he draws so poor when he isn't working with ppl who are above him. That's my issue with Punk.


What is this poor ratings all about, giving us an overall rating of a show doesnt mean its CM Punk fault, didnt know that WWE was RAW featuring CM Punk. He was injured in a time when ratings where low, Cena was the Main guy all the time. Hes not gonna boost ratings who the hell is CM Punk to make it higher than ever is he god or something that will gain 5 million viewers per segment or match to satisfy assholes like you, no one can do that, the roster drawing power is very weak, not because of Punk, why dont you complain about Orton and Sheamus they got pushed harder than him with clean wins over big stars.



Choke2Death said:


> I've seen that happen so many times before. I remember when Orton was champion in 2011 and many of his haters were whining about the ratings (some of which are Punk marks who cry every time their hero gets shitted on for being a flop). Sheamus was on Smackdown as champion so they just skipped on Smackdown and shitted on him as an "entertainer". And I've seen many of them laugh every time a Ryback segment has done bad.


Maybe that happened but not as much as Punk mentioning, I really dont think so. Im talking about ratings shitting not who's entertaining and who's not. Ryback was at the time pushed straight away to the Main Event which I think was criticized by all marks but there are also times when they said Ryback is ratings and staff like that, but a lot of time its just defense because theyre marks and thats what they do.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

you are talking tiny differences either way here

people are laughing at raw opening with bryan opening the show with a 2.73 but yet on june 3rd raw opened with vince and steph at 2.72...

people say that bryan can't draw because last weeks mainevent did a 2.98 yet on june 3rd cena in the main event did a 3.14 and last year the worst over-run rating of the entire year had cena in the main event 

lets take the belt off of cena because raw *outside mania season *did 3.99m average whereas *during mania season* while rock was champion 3 times the show did 4.2m viewers

raw viewership is where it is right now and nothing or nobody is changing it for the forseeable future, raw during mania season will do on average 4.2-4.4m and maybe hit 5 million if there is a hook built in advance (big return, old school raw, night after mania/rumble), raw between may and august will average 3.9-4.2m and raw during football season will average 3.5-4m, that is the reality, no matter who is the champ or who is getting pushed you won't change that fact, wwe and the fans have programmed themselves to believe that nothing matters outside mania season anymore


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> No, he's never really been booked above Cena - not even when he was champ... and that's the problem.


Wrong. last November/December Cena was injured and after giving Ryback his main event spot disappeared from tv to heal up. Punk had total control of the show on his back at that point and that is when ratings hit 15 year lows. It got so bad Vince had to come running back onto tv to stop the fan exodus. Punk had his shot to carry the show after 2 years of a push and he failed. For 2 months straight he failed. Accept it.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> Maybe that happened but not as much as Punk mentioning, I really dont think so. Im talking about ratings shitting not who's entertaining and who's not. Ryback was at the time pushed straight away to the Main Event which I think was criticized by all marks but there are also times when they said Ryback is ratings and staff like that, but a lot of time its just defense because theyre marks and thats what they do.


The difference between all these examples is that Punk was pushed at the forefront and kept being in the spotlight for the entire year, specially after his heel turn. Orton, Sheamus and Ryback (specially Orton) have not been pushed nearly as much in the past two years. Sheamus was just on a pre-show last month, Ryback has only ever beat jobbers and Orton has had no direction for nearly two years. That's the reason why Punk gets bashed so much more in these ratings discussion.



Happenstan said:


> Wrong. last November/December Cena was injured and after giving Ryback his main event spot disappeared from tv to heal up. Punk had total control of the show on his back at that point and that is when ratings hit 15 year lows. It got so bad Vince had to come running back onto tv to stop the fan exodus. Punk had his shot to carry the show after 2 years of a push and he failed. For 2 months straight he failed. Accept it.


Yeah and people complained about how Cena was the focus of the show during his reign but to be fair, when he won the title, he closed the show as well as a PPV (with no Cena) and the PPV buyrates were down slightly (surprisingly not as bad as Punk's track record suggests) and the overruns were very low. One of them was a 6 man tag with Punk, Bryan and Ryder facing off against Del Rio, Miz and Ziggler I think. Cena was just about to start his Kane feud and was directionless at the time. That's probably why they didn't trust Punk to main event for another half a year but then they gave him the heel turn and the ball but ratings continued to bomb under his push. The only time he really started to impress was in the first couple of months this year during The Rock feud. And even as a detractor, I give him credit like that solo promo doing a big gain in a random spot.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Wrong. last November/December Cena was injured and after giving Ryback his main event spot disappeared from tv to heal up. Punk had total control of the show on his back at that point and that is when ratings hit 15 year lows. It got so bad Vince had to come running back onto tv to stop the fan exodus. Punk had his shot to carry the show after 2 years of a push and he failed. For 2 months straight he failed. Accept it.



Lol, So with Cena in the Main Event it was getting better? nothing changed try hard next time it even got lower with Punk being injured, so WWE desperately kept him for segments. Without Cena HIAC buys where higher than the previous year, and with Cena in TLC without Punk got even lower than the previous year.
With or without Punk ratings was going to be the lowest in last 15 years either ways, there was no hot angle and the roster lacked Maineventers and credibility, and guess what it will happen this year too.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> The only time he really started to impress was in the first couple of months this year during The Rock feud. And even as a detractor, I give him credit like that solo promo doing a big gain in a random spot.


Exactly. Punk rises when working with a bigger name. It takes the pressure off Punk and inspires him. In that regard I'll agree Punk has been disadvantaged by Vince. All the top talent has. Vince hasn't invested in and built up enough people so that if you aren't working with Cena you are more or less gonna half ass it as whatever your program is isn't viewed by the top brass as care worthy. That's totally on Vince. He should have built up more people than Cena/Punk the past 2 years but he didn't and here we are.




Sonnen Says said:


> Lol, So with Cena in the Main Event it was getting better? nothing changed try hard next time it even got lower with Punk being injured, so WWE desperately kept him for segments. Without Cena HIAC buys where higher than the previous year, and with Cena in TLC without Punk got even lower than the previous year.
> With or without Punk ratings was going to be the lowest in last 15 years either ways, there was no hot angle and the roster lacked Maineventers and credibility, and guess what it will happen this year too.


What? I can't understand half the bullshit you spew. I'm gonna assume English isn't your first language because you full on rape it with your dictation.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ryback vs Miz was 2 minute squash match, Ryback can't be blamed for entire quarter. Check HIAC buyrate it was higher than usual because of Ryback. Instead of pushing him further WWE buried him for Punk!!!!! fpalm


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> What? I can't understand half the bullshit you spew. I'm gonna assume English isn't your first language because you full on rape it with your dictation.


Is that all you got in respond. Choke2death had no problem responding and didn't hide behind grammar to run away from discussing. You're not good in grammar either. Ok, Bryan fan your hero will had saved WWE from ratings back in 2012 if he was the champ, yeah what a delusional mark.



Quietus said:


> Ryback vs Miz was 2 minute squash match, Ryback can't be blamed for entire quarter. *Check HIAC buyrate it was higher than usual because of Ryback. Instead of pushing him further WWE buried him for Punk!!!!! fpalm*


What an idiot, Punk was the poster boy of the PPV and WWE labeled Punk the success not Ryback.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> Is that all you got in respond. Choke2death had no problem responding and didn't hide behind grammar to run away from discussing. You're not good in grammar either. Ok, Bryan fan your hero will had saved WWE from ratings back in 2012 if he was the champ, yeah what a delusional mark.


Yes, I'm hiding. Me. :lmao I can't understand what you are talking about? Who brought up Bryan as champ in 2012? He *was* the world champion btw in 2012 on Smackdown getting *much higher ratings* then that program has gotten all year. But what does that have to do with anything? You're all over the place and making no sense. How am I supposed to respond to drivel like this? We're talking about 1 thing and you wildly jump to something else about Bryan and I'm just supposed to follow along like I have a clue what's going on in that tiny brain of yours. You're Brick from Anchorman. At any given moment you'll veer off course and say the first thing that pops in your itty bitty head.

Me: "Punk doesn't have anyone fresh left to work with after his year long run at the top."
You: "I like building sand castles at the beach with my penis."
Me: "Uh..ok."


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Yes, I'm hiding. Me. :lmao I can't understand what you are talking about? Who brought up Bryan as champ in 2012? He *was* the world champion in 2012 on Smackdown getting *much higher ratings* then that program has gotten all year. But what does that have to do with anything? You're all over the place and making no sense. How am I supposed to respond to drivel like this? We're talking about 1 thing and you wildly jump to something else about Bryan and I'm just supposed to follow along like I have a clue what's going on in that tiny brain of yours. You're Brick from Anchorman. At any given moment you'll veer off course and say the first thing that pops in your head.
> 
> Me: "Punk doesn't have anyone fresh left to work with after his year long run at the top."
> You: "I like building sand castles at the beach with my penis."
> Me: "Uh..ok."


Acting like you don't understand, is that what you do when getting exposed. Are you acting dumb or something, you're here blaming Punk for ratings and I responded as if who is gonna save it? Bryan. So, if not why are you blaming Punk for ratings, like if it was someone else it will have been much better back than and now. All you're is an idiot that has no purpose in life but to come here start bashing Punk drawing power, trying to put all the blame on him. Here we go SD ratings BS, Mark Heny was the real main reason, Bryan wouldn't be doing any good if he was facing Miz, Sheamus, Orton, etc. Bryan was facing two giants and big draws what to not like about it.

Edit: One more thing, you do really have no clue in what drawing is all about, you're just a guy thinking that he figured out everything. You have nothing.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> Acting like you don't understand, is that what you do when getting exposed.


You've been here less than a month. I've been here 4 years and yet you think you know all about me. You're a clown. Go like lamp and jerk off. Your boy Punk was given the #1 spot last November/December when Cena was injured and ratings hit a 15 year low. Choke2Death posted a link to Punk's epic fail on another thread. Go find and read it (if you are capable) and wallow in your stupidity. :flip


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> You've been here less than a month. I've been here 4 years and yet you think you know all about me. You're a clown. Go like lamp and jerk off. Your boy Punk was given the #1 spot last November/December when Cena was injured and ratings hit a 15 year low. Choke2Death posted a link to Punk's epic fail on another thread. Go find and read it (if you are capable) and wallow in your stupidity. :flip


Stupidity is your middle name sir. Being here a month or not, what does that have to do with anything. Yeah, because if it was someone else in Nov/Dec as the champ it will have been much better :lmao. Always remember Punk is the top merchandise seller with Cena, and his "BITW" shirt was the hottest selling shirt since Austin shirt and he obviously can gain/rise PPVs buys as a Main Eventer (NOC,HIAC,RR,EC, etc.), ratings BS argument doesn't work.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> What? I can't understand half the bullshit you spew. I'm gonna assume English isn't your first language because you full on rape it with your dictation.


Oh my fucking god I lost it with laughter after reading this.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> Ryback vs Miz was 2 minute squash match, Ryback can't be blamed for entire quarter. Check HIAC buyrate it was higher than usual because of Ryback. Instead of pushing him further WWE buried him for Punk!!!!! fpalm


the match was built up, miz came out, went to break, ryback entrance and then match was 3 minutes and post celebration took up another minute or two, altogether yes is was close to a full quarter

if we are talking about buyrates then surely wwe should have pushed big johnny to the top because over the limit with him in the main event did way better than year before and johnny unlike ryback was also moving tv ratings at the time, one episode of raw in may the two segments he was in (with big show and later cena) added 1 million viewers each

how much merch did ryback move prior to hiac?? would ryback have top selling dvd ahead of the rocks, mania, undertakers streak today if pushed to the top?? ryback AFTER losing at hiac did his highest quarter ever at the time against brad maddox

there was no way rock was wrestling ryback, he hand picked punk to work 6 months out not ryback, what exactly was over was it the streak or ryback himself, eventually you are going to have to beat ryback anyway


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm starting to think Sonnen Says is a rejoiner. It's not the first time I've seen somebody join the forum just to defend Punk's drawing abilities. And I've seen some of them use the same arguments by changing the subject into other wrestlers and play this "It's not just Punk, why don't you complain about ____, _____ and _____?" game.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> I'm starting to think Sonnen Says is a rejoiner. It's not the first time I've seen somebody join the forum just to defend Punk's drawing abilities. And I've seen some of them use the same arguments by changing the subject into other wrestlers and play this "It's not just Punk, why don't you complain about ____, _____ and _____?" game.


You think Im defending Punk just to defend him. The guy is simply saying Punk is the reason for ratings to drop. So, I cant say that you should blame others too, even if Im right :lol. You and him may think Orton, Bryan, Ryback, etc might change it to the better if they where champs :lmao, which is completely wrong and shows how clueless you guys are. I will never blame ratings to one person because hes the champ, thats dumb. Its clearly not the problem. But whatever you guys are embarrassing to discuss anything with. I guess being logical around here is wrong.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> You think Im defending Punk just to defend him. The guy is simply saying Punk is the reason for ratings to drop. So, I cant say that you should blame others too, even if Im right :lol. You and him may think Orton, Bryan, Ryback, etc might change it to the better if they where champs :lmao, which is completely wrong and shows how clueless you guys are. I will never blame ratings to one person because hes the champ, thats dumb. Its clearly not the problem. But whatever you guys are embarrassing to discuss anything with. I guess being logical around here is wrong.


So I guess I was right.

Anyways, stop assuming when you don't know anything. Nobody here said "Bryan/Ryback/Orton/whoever will help the ratings if they take Punk's spot", but since he's the most exposed guy alongside Cena, it makes sense that he takes much more of the blame (Cena too) than Ryback because his 2 minute squash match against The Great Khali lost viewers.

Nothing you've said is anywhere "logical", you just try to change the subject it seems and focus on other wrestlers. Don't know about others but I never said Punk is the only reason for ratings dropping just because he is/was champion. But since he was champion for a year+ and got a mega push plus more TV time than anyone else (except Cena at times), he deserves to get much more blame than the rest.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> So I guess I was right.
> 
> Anyways, stop assuming when you don't know anything. Nobody here said "Bryan/Ryback/Orton/whoever will help the ratings if they take Punk's spot", but since he's the most exposed guy alongside Cena, it makes sense that he takes much more of the blame (Cena too) than Ryback because his 2 minute squash match against The Great Khali lost viewers.
> 
> Nothing you've said is anywhere "logical", you just try to change the subject it seems and focus on other wrestlers. Don't know about others but I never said Punk is the only reason for ratings dropping just because he is/was champion. But since he was champion for a year+ and got a mega push plus more TV time than anyone else (except Cena at times), he deserves to get much more blame than the rest.


You think I'm stupid, I can go to previous pages in this thread and expose you but you seem not worth my time, as you're hypocritical as hell, you're the guy when Punk gains viewers you will put those smilies faces of the wrestlers you feel like putting because they gained viewers and dismiss Punk like his segment wasn't there, and put the guy in his segment instead, yep I guess I wont continue with you at this, you seem to hate him for some insane reason.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> You think I'm stupid, I can go to previous pages in this thread and expose you but you seem not worth my time, as you're hypocritical as hell, you're the guy when Punk gains viewers you will put those smilies faces of the wrestlers you feel like putting because they gained viewers and dismiss Punk like his segment wasn't there, and put the guy in his segment instead, yep I guess I wont continue with you at this, you seem to hate him for some insane reason.


I rarely talk about ratings anymore. I didn't even say anything about Punk's (lack of) gains from this week. I just saw his fans get defensive and whine about how he's a target so I came back in to address their constant bitching and lack of comeback material. I will laugh whenever he does terrible numbers but otherwise, I just don't acknowledge him and I certainly don't go "Nice numbers by Paul Heyman" (if he has a segment with Punk that gains big).

I guess these posts are another way for you to admit you're a rejoiner.


----------



## TheGreatBanana

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I've this before. There are many idiots in this thread who look at ratings and act as experts. They have never worked a day of their life in the TV industry, yet they use ratings to bash individual wrestlers. You guys don't know shit, you don't have access to the numbers like WWE does.


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^ It's called an illusion of knowledge. We all have it about something, and it's hard to admit when you don't. I think it would have been a bad thing for us to evolve with a lack of confidence. That being said, overconfidence in faux, valid-seeming conclusions without sources or actual insider knowlege won't convince anyone or do them any favors.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TheGreatBanana said:


> I've this before. There are many idiots in this thread who look at ratings and act as experts. They have never worked a day of their life in the TV industry, yet they use ratings to bash individual wrestlers. You guys don't know shit, you don't have access to the numbers like WWE does.


You're on wrestling forum every day, discussing wrestling and judging talent on who's good/great/bad worker in the ring. So tell me genius, how many matches have you wrestled in your life?


----------



## TheGreatBanana

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loader230 said:


> You're on wrestling forum every day, discussing wrestling and judging talent on who's good/great/bad worker in the ring. So tell me genius, how many matches have you wrestled in your life?


You claim that I'm on here everyday yet *you don't even know me*. I don't have to wrestle a match in my life to understand who is good or not, it is easy to tell by watching the product. However to bash certain wrestlers for gaining certain ratings, *which outside of their control*, is asinine. Heck you were bashing Punk a few pages ago, trying to use the low gain against him when in actuality he drew the second highest segment behind Cena.

I've seen the ratings long enough to realize that Punk does draw viewers and the aura of him being a ratings killer is false. It's the same for Orton, who consistently draws viewers much like Cena. 

Last week people tried to bash Bryan for the low main event rating, when historically the numbers say that Bryan has consistently drawn viewers. It all depends on how far back you want to look back, but in this year he has drawn viewership, which led to his first RAW singles main event bout. 

You see all these gains and drops are relative. A wrestler may gain a lot of viewers one week and do poorly the other, that doesn't mean you should bash certain wrestlers for the ratings they collect, since it is outside their control, and anyone who understands how ratings are measured will realize that these numbers come from sample homes that are randomly picked to reflect the whole population. 

Also WWE is more concerned with the commercial rating or C3 since that is what brings them the money from the Network.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This week the thread should be veeerrrry interesting. Punk and Orton were both in the main event, so if it ends up bombing... oh boy, I'm :mark: already!

Oh, and if it ends up doing well... :lmao

Either way...


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Gamblor said:


> This week the thread should be veeerrrry interesting. Punk and Orton were both in the main event, so if it ends up bombing... oh boy, I'm :mark already!
> 
> Oh, and if it ends up doing well... :lmao


I guess we're united this week in hoping it does well. :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> I guess we're united this week in hoping it does well. :lol


Yes, forces beyond our control have united us in a hope that it does well and looks good for both men.

I mean... if it does well:



Gamblor said:


> PUNK'S WIT DAT DRAWS ABILITY!


 unk2

Or if it doesn't do well...



Gamblor said:


> DAT DAMN THIRD GENERATION NO DRAWING HACK ORTON AND HIS FAILING OVERRUNS CONTINUE!


 rton

(Though on a serious note, I actually do like Orton more than most guys on the roster and I don't really "hate" him... although he's/WWE's made it incredibly difficult to care for anything he's done in the past few years).


----------



## bjnelson19705

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So how was the show?


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Wyatt Family was #1 trending worldwide. They're bringing on DEM RATINGZ.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



LovelyElle890 said:


> I think both the marks and haters are going overboard in this thread. On one hand, *Punk should be doing big numbers considering the push that he has had* but on the other hand, the show is all-around terrible so....
> 
> I just don't understand how Sheamus is a failure because he's not drawing at least 3.0's but Punk and Cena aren't failures when they can only draw 3.0's feuding with guys like Lesnar, Jericho, Rock, and Taker? Hmmm... that seems very hypocritical to me.
> 
> When Sheamus's last 4 opponents are Rock, Cena, Taker, and Jericho, then I will 100% agree with that notion if he still isn't bringing in the viewers. But, I just don't think that it's fair to blame guys like Orton, Bryan, and Sheamus for their ratings when they aren't feuding with part-timers but you excuse the ratings of two people who do nothing but feud with part-timers.
> 
> And since I blasted Punk when he was champion and had low ratings, now I'm calling Cena out on his. He needs to drop the belt because he isn't drawing well. If it wasn't for Mark Henry, then I wouldn't be able to handle his segments. It is obvious that Cena isn't motivated and doesn't care. His promos are garbage and Henry's performances only make this more evident.


If you think Punk should be doing huge numbers because this big push he has received the last 2 years i wonder what kind of ratings Orton and Cena should be getting with the pushes they had gotten their whole career?


The ratings thread will bring extra comedy in this week :lol with Orton and Punk closing the show i can't wait to see what Orton marks and Punk marks will say.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SoupBro said:


> If you think Punk should be doing huge numbers because this big push he has received the last 2 years i wonder what kind of ratings Orton and Cena should be getting with the pushes they had gotten their whole career?
> 
> 
> The ratings thread will bring extra comedy in this week :lol with Orton and Punk closing the show i can't wait to see what Orton marks and Punk marks will say.


Clearly, you didn't read the rest of my post where I blasted Cena too. That selective reading, though!!! :shaq

You know how this is going to go. Orton and Punk marks will join together and bash Sheamus & Bryan if the ratings for their match are terrible. If Bryan and Sheamus do well, then they will either blame the McMahons or Cena for losing the majority of the audience. 

I can't really predict how the ratings for this one are going to go. It was a really weird show, so I don't think that anyone should get blamed this week. But this is the ratings thread and someone always has to take the fall....:lol


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk and Orton in the main event with a Daniel Bryan run-in.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This thread's going to be hilarious for the next few days.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Am I the only one who enjoyed the Brodus/Tensai match with the Shield? It was fairly enjoyable, and I thought it was the best match tons of funk has had together. The end sequence was awesome. This whole DB ending the show and new ME's is new and refreshing, hopefully WWE gives it time for it to sink in and give us a break from Cena. Give others some great story lines for once.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Am I the only one who enjoyed the Brodus/Tensai match with the Shield? It was fairly enjoyable, and I thought it was the best match tons of funk has had together. The end sequence was awesome. This whole DB ending the show and new ME's is new and refreshing, hopefully WWE gives it time for it to sink in and give us a break from Cena. Give others some great story lines for once.


No, I also thought it was great. Rollins' selling was fantastic, he might even be better than Ambrose in the ring at this point.


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dexter Morgan said:


> No, I also thought it was great. Rollins' selling was fantastic, he might even be better than Ambrose in the ring at this point.


Ambrose is a shit worker. Rollins was always better, even back in NXT.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dexter Morgan said:


> No, I also thought it was great. Rollins' selling was fantastic, he might even be better than Ambrose in the ring at this point.


I believe he is a better ring worker than Anbrose tbh, but no knock to Ambrose just keep him away from big man workers so much. He had 1 too many matches with Kane. Kane is not on Taker's level when it comes to entertaining matches, so Ambrose shouldn't be facing him repeatedly unless gimmick match. 

I can see Rio's moment losing viewers being your typical squash before Ziggler came out.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Torch:


> One of the more intriguing quarter-hours of WWE Raw to examine this year is the John Cena vs. Alberto Del Rio main event from the July 1 Raw episode. The results are mixed.
> 
> WWE heavily promoted the match within the show, using video packages showing past WWE champions and past World Hvt. champions to link to the present. However, WWE has watered down the value of titles over a period of time, hurt the drawing power of "WWE champ vs. World champ" by scrapping the brand split, and Del Rio has not been elevated to the level of a marquee heel opposite WWE's top star.
> 
> The result was the main event averaged 1.306 million viewers in the key male demographic of males 18-49. This was only slightly above the most-watched quarter-hour of the show, which was 1.261 million viewers for Q9 at the top of the third hour, which featured C.M. Punk in tag action with Curtis Axel.
> 
> - Cena vs. Del Rio break down: 1.158 million viewers at 10:50 p.m. when the match started, 1.279 million viewers at 10:55 when Raw cut to break, 1.179 million viewers when Raw returned from break at 10:59 p.m., and 1.301 million viewers at the top of the hour for the start of the over-run.
> 
> During the over-run, the match peaked with 1.433 million viewers at 11:06 p.m. just before the conclusion of the match. Once the match concluded, Raw dipped to 1.397 million viewers at 11:08 p.m., then went off the air with 1.268 million viewers at 11:09 p.m. for the show-closing on-camera from the announcers leading into a Wyatts vignette.
> 
> It captures the audience typically growing as a long, effectively-promoted match unfolds, especially during an over-run portion. But, it also captures this type of match starting off slowly, especially when a match starts at the end of Q12 as viewers are finishing other programming before flipping over to Raw for the over-run.
> 
> - Comparison: Mark Henry's speech in Q8, Punk & Axel vs. the Prime Time Players in Q9, a Divas-heavy segment in Q10 drew a similar audience to the Cena vs. Del Rio main event.
> 
> In Q8, Mark Henry's speech on John Cena averaged 1.286 million viewers, peaking with 1.411 million viewers for the conclusion.
> 
> In Q9, Punk's match started with 1.372 million viewers, peaked with 1.389 million viewers at 10:02 p.m., and re-peaked with 1.388 million viewers at 10:09 p.m. for the conclusion of the match.
> 
> The audience then held steady for a WWE Title vs. World Title vignette on "Stone Cold" Steve Austin and Sting, respectively, drawing 1.358 million viewers at 10:10 p.m.
> 
> In Q10, the Kaitlyn vs. Alicia Fox match, the post-match Photoshopping exhibit from A.J. Lee, and Stephanie McMahon addressing Vickie Guerrero's concerns drew one of the most consistent audiences of the show.
> 
> Kaitlyn vs. A-Fox peaked with 1.363 million viewers at 10:17 p.m., the A.J. skit peaked with 1.388 million viewers at 10:20 p.m., and Steph's segment drew 1.386 million viewers leading into commercial.
> 
> OVERALL: Cena-Del Rio in a 16-minute match averaged 1.306 million viewers from Q12 to the over-run, Henry's six-minute segment averaged 1.286 million viewers at the end of the second hour, Punk & Axel in a seven-minute match averaged 1.359 million viewers at the top of the third hour, and the six-minute Divas portion of Q10 averaged 1.344 million viewers.
> 
> Hourly Highlights
> 
> Numbers are for the m18-49 demographic.
> 
> Q1: Raw opened with a show-low audience of 1.034 million viewers. However, the audience grew throughout the MITB All-Star talking segment. Raw averaged 1.006 million viewers at 8:03 p.m., then wrapped up with 1.234 million viewers at 8:15 p.m.
> 
> Q2: Raw slightly increased to an average of 1.043 million viewers. This segment featured the first-half of The Shield vs. Christian & The Usos in a six-man tag repeat from Smackdown.
> 
> Q3: Raw increased to 1.109 million viewers, which is consistent with the pattern of longer matches growing the audience over time. Included was the most-watched-minute of the first hour, which 1.289 million viewers at 8:36 p.m. for the finish of the six-man tag match.
> 
> Q4: Raw dipped to 1.079 million viewers for Dolph Ziggler dodging 3MB and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> Q5: Raw got a slight top-of-the-second-hour bump to 1.137 million viewers for Randy Orton vs. Kane. The peak audience was - once again - at the end of a 12-minute match when Orton-Kane averaged 1.357 million viewers at 9:12 p.m. This was the peak audience of the first 30 minutes of the second hour.
> 
> Q6 & Q7: Raw dipped to 1.076 million viewers and 1.110 million viewers, respectively, for segments highlighted by Sheamus vs. Fandango and Ryback vs. The Miz.
> 
> Q8: Raw shot up to 1.195 million viewers for Mark Henry's on-stage speech. Included was the most-watched minute of the second hour with 1.411 million viewers at 9:54 p.m. for the conclusion of the speech.
> 
> Q9: Raw averaged a show-high 1.261 million viewers for the full quarter highlighted by Punk & Axel vs. the Players.
> 
> Q10: Raw averaged a similar audience of 1.221 million viewers for the full quarter highlighted by three-consecutive Divas segments.
> 
> Q11: Raw slipped to 1.121 for Antonio Cesaro vs. Cody Rhodes, the Bella Twins backstage, and the set-up for the main event.
> 
> Q12: Raw increased slightly to 1.133 million viewers for the first portion of the Cena vs. Del Rio main event.
> 
> Over-Run: Raw averaged 1.361 million viewers for the over-run. It was the most-watched over-run since we began tracking minute-by-minute ratings on May 27.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The result was the main event averaged 1.306 million viewers in the key male demographic of males 18-49. This was only slightly above the most-watched quarter-hour of the show, which was 1.261 million viewers for Q9 at the top of the third hour, which featured C.M. Punk in tag action with Curtis Axel.





> In Q9, Punk's match started with 1.372 million viewers, peaked with 1.389 million viewers at 10:02 p.m., and re-peaked with 1.388 million viewers at 10:09 p.m. for the conclusion of the match.





> OVERALL: Cena-Del Rio in a 16-minute match averaged 1.306 million viewers from Q12 to the over-run, Henry's six-minute segment averaged 1.286 million viewers at the end of the second hour, Punk & Axel in a seven-minute match averaged 1.359 million viewers at the top of the third hour, and the six-minute Divas portion of Q10 averaged 1.344 million viewers.





> Q9: Raw averaged a *show-high* 1.261 million viewers for the full quarter highlighted by Punk & Axel vs. the Players.


So Punk's match averaged more viewers than the Cena/Del Rio match? 

And people are still saying Punk pulled bad numbers last week? Fucking clueless, man.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Actually conclusion of Mark Henry's promo in Q8(before punk's match) was the peak with 1.41m viewers. Punk's quarter just averaged better overall because the viewership held steady throughout 10:00 - 10:15pm, including Steve Austin/Sting video package as noted in the report,



> The audience then held steady for a WWE Title vs. World Title vignette on "Stone Cold" Steve Austin and Sting, respectively, drawing 1.358 million viewers at 10:10 p.m.


And this is the show-high average excluding the overrun. Closing of Henry's promo saw 1.41m viewers and the start of Q9, that is the Punk match, had 1.37m viewers. It increased and peaked at 1.38m viewers, still below henry's number the quarter before. Also impressive is the divas match following Punk's quarter, which also had steady viewership throughout as noted in the report.



> In Q10, the Kaitlyn vs. Alicia Fox match, the post-match Photoshopping exhibit from A.J. Lee, and Stephanie McMahon addressing Vickie Guerrero's concerns drew one of the most consistent audiences of the show.


The way I see it, Henry's promo and the Divas doing well in odd quarters is much more impressive than Punk's 10pm gains. What this shows is that Mark henry still remains the man who generates the most interest from casuals by far. :henry1 

As for divas it's either stephanie being a draw or general interest in women considering its the male demographic numbers.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Male 18-49 Breakdown - July 1st, 2013
20:03 - 1.006 million
20:15 - 1.234 million
....
20:36 - 1.289 million
....
21:12 - 1.357 million
....
21:54 - 1.411 million
....
22:00 - 1.372 million
22:02 - 1.389 million
22:09 - 1.388 million
22:10 - 1.358 million
....
22:17 - 1.363 million
22:20 - 1.388 million
22:21 - 1.386 million
....
22:50 - 1.158 million
22:55 - 1.279 million
22:59 - 1.179 million
23:00 - 1.301 million
23:06 - 1.433 million
23:08 - 1.397 million
23:09 - 1.268 million

Diva's continuing to do well in the Males 18-49 demographic.

BTW - Don't expect Raw numbers today because of the July 4th holiday backlogging ratings.


----------



## Tyrone Lannister

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Of course henry pulled in the numbers, that dawg can draw!


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Expected audience for last night's RAW: *3,863,000* (last week's RAW was 3,956,000).


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> So Punk's match averaged more viewers than the Cena/Del Rio match?
> 
> And *people are still saying Punk pulled bad numbers last week? Fucking clueless*, man.


Clutching at 'dem straws.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I read through the last few pages of this thread and genuinely lol'd. WOW. 

Double standards, hypocrisy and delusion running wild brother. 

:hogan

This week's breakdown should be hella fun after all that. I look forward to it. Damn though, I don't know who is more sensitive; the Punk marks or the Bryan marks. Maybe the Wyatt marks will give them both a run for their money when their segment numbers come in. Lol. DIS GON B GUD.


----------



## Berbz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm expecting the McMahon segment to get the highest of the night.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Berbz said:


> I'm expecting the McMahon segment to get the highest of the night.


Henry/Cena might give them a run for their money considering they were on at 9pm and it's HENRY. But I'd expect McMahon-A-Mania to top the night despite the poor performance of the 10pm slot in recent weeks.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I would expect the more heavily promoted seg to do the best?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> I would expect the more heavily promoted seg to do the best?


Doesn't always turn out that way but generally yes. 10pm hasn't done all that great in recent weeks and the third hour seems to be the point where most people tune out through exhaustion or at least that seems to be the general trend lately. Maybe sticking the McMahon's on there was an attempt to rectify that. They also held off on the Wyatt's until the third hour too and given the amount of build they received throughout the night, I think that was a blatant attempt at keeping people watching to see them. Let's see if it works.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Makes sense, Wyatt's debut being very close to the ME was a good idea, peeps were looking out for that. Never expected it to happen to happen to Kane, but from one freak to the next, I guess.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's strange that they chose probably the worst spot on the entire show to debut the Wyatt's because viewer fatigue seems to be at it's highest at that point and it has some of the lowest numbers iirc. Maybe their thinking is that people would stick around long enough to see them. It must have been because I see no other reason to do it there of all places but if not there then it would have had to go at 9 or 10 and those were taken by the extended Holy McMahon Family. 

:vince5 :HHH2 ............... :cena2


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Would suck if people were like "yup, definitely happening in the ME".


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

When will the ratings be available?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> -- Monday's WWE Raw increased 29 percent in social media activity compared to last week's dull episode.
> 
> Raw scored 285,172 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, which is right at the yearly average. Raw ranked #3 on cable TV behind "Teen Wolf" on MTV and "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" on VH1.


via PWTorch


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Mary Henry and Wyatt Family both trending #1 had me thinking the activity was up this week. Should be interesting to see how this reflects in the ratings as if the increase translates to an increase in viewership, we're looking at some very good numbers coming up.


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Mary Henry and Wyatt Family both trending #1 had me thinking the activity was up this week. Should be interesting to see how this reflects in the ratings as if the increase translates to an increase in viewership, we're looking at some very good numbers coming up.


If I remember correctly on Monday, Punk/Orton were also trending.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



hazuki said:


> If I remember correctly on Monday, Punk/Orton were also trending.


Thought it was only Orton, at least what I remember seeing displayed by WWE.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No ratings this week?

:HHH2


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Thought it was only Orton, at least what I remember seeing displayed by WWE.


It was after RAW was off the air.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why haven't the ratings been released yet


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

1 - 3.790 million
2 - 4.308 million
3 - 4.403 million


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That 3rd hour!

Not bad. unk2 rton :wyatt


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> 1 - 3.790 million
> 2 - 4.308 million
> 3 - 4.403 million


I'm willing to bet that the McMahon/Vickie segment probably drew the most, but I really hope that the Wyatt's had a good turnout for their debut. I'm not expecting anything great since it's a really odd quarter and they were following Christian/Kane (which, unfortunately, is almost a guaranteed flop in viewers), but hopefully they don't lose viewers at all. Other segments that should do well should be Henry/Cena's faceoff, Punk/Orton, the overrun with Bryan ascending the ladder, and Bryan/Sheamus in the opener.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I guess this was the first time the third hour doing higher than the previous 2 hours, in months. 

Nice to see the Wyatt debut and the Punks match doing very well.

Edited: Also it helps show that WWE should bring more creepy and dark characters to the show, possibly The Ascension (Coner O'Brian, Rick Victor, also adding Sami Callihan and Paige to the mix will be freaking awesome :mark


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk marks have won this battle with Bryan marks, I guess.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:insertwyattsmiley: :insertharpermsiley: :insertrowansmiley:

unk2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> 1 - 3.790 million
> 2 - 4.308 million
> 3 - 4.403 million


WOAH.

First hour is identical to last week's and still a poor showing, but what an increase for the second and third hour over last week. 

We won't know how everything did of course until we see the breakdown, but I'd expect the Vickie evaluation did really well and probably the best of the night since it was hyped since last week and had Vince, Stephanie, and HHH in it. Punk/Orton overrun either did very well, or flopped massively. Same thing for the Wyatt family. I'm sure the quarter after the Vickie evaluation stuff dropped a ton though.

But until we see the breakdown...

unk2 rton :vince


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

final rating - 3.08


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So CM Punk defeating Randy Orton, the McMahons/Vickie segment and the Wyatt debut equals ratings. I'm happy to see the third hour increase more than the 2nd hour for once.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No one's stated this, but:

- hour 1 highest since June 17th 
- hour 2 highest since April 29th
- hour 3 highest since April 8th
- average highest since May 20th


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

orton bringing in dem ratings


----------



## Osize10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hopefully they still find time to let D bry wrestle longer matches since he can't draw


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

A 3.1 rating for a Raw at the start of July, excellent job. If they hook people over the summer and keep these same numbers, major kudos to them.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Pretty good numbers, specially for how dull the show was. Actually hoping the main event does well.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Even when all of the McMahons are on the show, they barely get a 3.0. Sheesh.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

rton unk2 :henry1 :bryan2 :vince


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

the viewers go up with henry in the title picture


I GOT A LOT LEFT IN DA TANK


----------



## kiguel182

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Osize10 said:


> Hopefully they still find time to let D bry wrestle longer matches since he can't draw


hour 1 was the highest since 17th so no reason for him to stop the long matches. 

He is starting to get his big push, give him time.


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No joke the ratings have been excellent this year. 3.0 rating may sound poor in comparison with the AE, but this aint the AE and with 3hrs they are really doing well IMO.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They've been in the 2's prior to this week. Going to get even worse once the NFL season starts.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That is a very good audience. Should be even higher next week with the post-PPV bump. Remains to be seen if the momentum can continue through to Summerslam. Bring on Lesnar...


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Weltschmertz said:


> That is a very good audience. Should be even higher next week with the post-PPV bump. Remains to be seen if the momentum can continue through to Summerslam. Bring on Lesnar...


The Wyatt Family, Brock Lesnar, Rob Van Dam, Bryan/Orton with the briefcase and just the fact that is a Post-PPV show. I'm expeting a 3.2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Next week should do well, but if the show in two weeks doesn't do better than last year's show in the same week, that'll be a major disappointment. ... I'll stop trying to be funny and just walk away.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

From Pwtorch -


> WWE Raw on Monday, July 8 scored a 3.08 rating, up six percent from last week's rating. It was the highest-rated Raw since the end of April.
> 
> - Raw averaged 4.167 million viewers, up five percent compared to last week. It was the most viewers since May 20.
> 
> Hourly Break Down: 3.790 million first hour viewers, a 14 percent increase to 4.308 million viewers, and a rare third hour increase to 4.403 million viewers.
> 
> It was the most second hour viewers since late April and the most third hour viewers since the night after WrestleMania 29 on April 8.
> 
> - It appears that the McMahon Family Drama segment helped draw a big number in the third hour. The evidence is that both the male 18-49 & female 18-49 rating increased by one-tenth of a rating in the third hour compared to the second hour.
> 
> - On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #2 in overall viewers behind "Major Crimes" on TNT, but ranked #1 in all key male demos.
> 
> The key to Raw's ratings surge was a three-tenths of a ratings point increase in males 18-34. Raw also increased two-tenths of a rating in other demos.


----------



## Berbz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

McMahons :mark:


----------



## Gene_Wilder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Thank You Randy Orton! Woo!


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> As far as the Raw ratings went, the reason for the increase over the past six weeks when the segment breakdowns came in, it was totally clear it was the Vickie Guerrero job performance evaluation segment that drove the viewership.. Everything built to that segment, and fell off greatly when the segment was over. The John Cena-Mark Henry in-ring also did well.
> 
> WO/F4W


I think those were the two segments people were expecting to do well.

There appears to be a clear level of hierarchy in WWE as relates to who you can rely on to draw at the main event level.

Tier 1: The Rock, John Cena, Brock Lesnar, Triple H, Vince McMahon, and Undertaker – If any of these are anchoring a segment it’ll probably draw well. It doesn’t matter who they’re with.

Tier 2: Mark Henry – Wildcard. He’s not a draw on the level of tier 1 but he’s more consistent than the tier 3 guys, which is rather surprising given that he’s received less of a constant push than most of them. This is his first big push on the main show and his numbers during this feud with Cena have been impressive.

Tier 3 – CM Punk, Randy Orton, Daniel Bryan, Alberto Del Rio, Dolph Ziggler, and Sheamus – These guys can draw if they’re working with someone from tier 1. Put them together against each other though and 90% of the time it will draw poorly.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Jerichoholic4Life said:


> I think those were the two segments people were expecting to do well.
> 
> There appears to be a clear level of hierarchy in WWE as relates to who you can rely on to draw at the main event level.
> 
> Tier 1: The Rock, John Cena, Brock Lesnar, *Triple H, Vince McMahon*, and Undertaker – If any of these are anchoring a segment it’ll probably draw well. It doesn’t matter who they’re with.


hhh on his own doing an in-ring promo a few months back didn't do well and the match straight after added viewers, vince in the ring for a promo to open the show about a month ago only drew a 2.7



> Tier 3 – CM Punk, Randy Orton, Daniel Bryan, Alberto Del Rio, Dolph Ziggler, and Sheamus – These guys can draw if they’re working with someone from tier 1. Put them together against each other though and *90% of the time it will draw poorly.*


not true


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> They've been in the 2's prior to this week. Going to get even worse once the NFL season starts.


It's almost as if some wrestling fans want ratings to drop


----------



## Loader230

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Am I the only one that finds it funny that the highest rated segment on the Go-home show of the Money in the bank pay-per-view has actually nothing to do with the PPV? I mean we had Bryan/Sheamus, Cena/henry, Punk/Orton.. and the segment that drives the show ratings is Vickie's job evaluation :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DatKidMog said:


> It's almost as if some wrestling fans want ratings to drop


1. Those are facts. The ratings were in the high 2's the two weeks prior to this past Monday. And the NFL Monday Night games always take somewhat of a chunk out of Raw's audience every NFL season.

2. I definitely don't want WWE ratings to drop. If they drop anymore than where they are currently at, I'll be scared for the business (alittle bit, not alot) and :vince5's health.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nothing on who gained and lost how many numbers?


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Crazy how a 3.2 is considered high now.


----------



## Berbz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



thaimasker said:


> Crazy how a 3.2 is considered high now.


Wrestling isn't relevant and it's seen as "uncool". I don't think it's pretty crazy at all. Unless of course you're comparing it to ratings nearly 13 YEARS AGO! Then yeah, you're pretty crazy.


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



thaimasker said:


> Crazy how a 3.2 is considered high now.


It is high though, by any standard of modern television it's a really high rating.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Next week should do well, but if the show in two weeks doesn't do better than last year's show in the same week, that'll be a major disappointment.


What's so special two weeks from now?


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Slowhand said:


> What's so special two weeks from now?


last year on that same week, raw 1000. Yes he is being a troll for expecting that lol


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Berbz said:


> Wrestling isn't relevant and it's seen as "uncool". I don't think it's pretty crazy at all. Unless of course you're comparing it to ratings nearly 13 YEARS AGO! Then yeah, you're pretty crazy.



I'm not comparing it to 13 years ago...Even 3 years ago I remember people considering a 3.2 low for raw now they have to scratch and claw just to get it even during mania season.


----------



## Berbz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



thaimasker said:


> I'm not comparing it to 13 years ago...Even 3 years ago I remember people considering a 3.2 low for raw now they have to scratch and claw just to get it even during mania season.


It' a three hour show, it's high.

You really think the highers in WWE think 'Oh shit, a 3.2, fuck we're doing shit" , I highly doubt it. They are probably happy at that comfortable level and with the money they are making why should they even care?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Knowing Vince there is no way he is happy in the high 2, low 3 range. Especially since this is without the NFL Monday Night games. Just wait until that starts.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Knowing Vince there is no way he is happy in the high 2, low 3 range. Especially since this is without the NFL Monday Night games. Just wait until that starts.


You know Vince that well eh?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> You know Vince that well eh?


Yeah, we're tight


----------



## EndOfAnEra

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

How much rating was in the main-event?


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



EndOfAnEra said:


> How much rating was in the main-event?


Many.


----------



## EndOfAnEra

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> Many.


Thanks?


----------



## Gang

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



EndOfAnEra said:


> Thanks?


:maddow2


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> rton unk2 :henry1 :bryan2 :vince


Fix'd.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Here's a breakdown:



> In the segment-by-segment breakdown, the Vickie Guerrero segment with the ladder opened with a 2.7 quarter rating. Daniel Bryan vs. Sheamus match gained 113,000 viewers, which is partially due to the weak start, but still a great gain considering the time slot. The backstage promo with Dolph and AJ and a Mark Henry video package lost 211,000 viewers. The Shield vs. Tons of Funk lost 87,000 viewers. John Cena calling out Mark Henry gained 497,000 viewers to a 3.1 rating in the 9PM segment. Chris Jericho vs. Curtis Axel lost 108,000 viewers, which isn't too bad considering what the previous segment gained. The end of the match, the World Title MITB promo, and the Wyatt Family vignette gained 7,000 viewers. Alberto Del Rio vs. Sin Cara with Dolph interfering lost another 212,000 viewers.
> 
> The Vickie Guerrero job evaluation gained 758,000 viewers to a 3.47 rating, which is obviously a very impressive showing. Kane vs. Christian with the Wyatt Family attack lost 259,000 viewers, which like above in the quarter after the 9PM segment, isn't too bad considering the gain the 10PM segment had. Ryback with Vickie in the back and the divas match lost 389,000 viewers. Despite the promotion and general assumption that the Vickie segment did the peak of the night, the real big story is actually the main event. CM Punk vs. Randy Orton gained a whopping 17,121,000 viewers. It should be noted that after Punk was sent into the ring post by Bryan and left the screen, they lost all but about 100,000 of that.


----------



## TheGreatBanana

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> CM Punk vs. Randy Orton gained a whopping 17,121,000 viewers. It should be noted that after Punk was sent into the ring post by Bryan and left the screen, they lost all but about 100,000 of that.


Poor attempt at trolling, try better


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

Knew Ziggles and Rio was gonna get shot because of the typical squash.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TheGreatBanana said:


> Poor attempt at trolling, try better


K, thanks for the honesty and the green rep.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:lmao


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> CM Punk vs. Randy Orton gained a whopping 17,121,000 viewers


Damn, Punk can draw.

:brock


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So wheres the real breakdown, usually out by now?


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Orton with that 14 million gain. :mark: Punk can take his 3 millions and leave! unk3


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> :insertwyattsmiley: :insertharpermsiley: :insertrowansmiley:
> 
> unk2


























You rang?

Had these saved up when I made my sig gif. Figured it'd be a shame to let them go to waste.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



hazuki said:


> So wheres the real breakdown, usually out by now?


I don't think it'll be out until this week's breakdown comes out as well (if it follows the usual holiday deal), so someone has to keep this thread alive until then. :sandow


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



hazuki said:


> So wheres the real breakdown, usually out by now?


out next week since Independence Day pushed back ratings coming out late


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LOL, The Sandrone strikes again.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Metzler said that the McMahons/Vickie/Brad segment did a 3.6


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.6? If true, excellent number. Henry/Cena did nearly that a couple of weeks ago so the gain will determine whether it was better than that or not. Not that it really matters that much though, cause it's a great showing either way unless by some chance they lost viewers (which they obviously didn't).


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The McMahons can't draw, they say.

:vince


----------



## Loader230

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yup mcmahons/Vickie seems to have done 3.6. Meltzer says viewers were waiting for the segment, and when it was over the viewership had a big drop.


----------



## Lok

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hate or love the McMahons.....people still love to watch them.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

how the hell did they average a 3.08 with a 3.6 segment??


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Torch:


> Ratings cited below are for the males 18-49 demographic.
> 
> - Overall: Raw scored a very strong 2.16 rating and averaged 1.35 million viewers in m18-49. Both were the highest since we began tracking quarters at the end of May.
> 
> - Interestingly, the peak audience of the entire show was in the first hour when the end of The Shield vs. Tons of Funk averaged 1.858 million viewers at 8:49 p.m. Every other minute of the match was in the 1.3-million territory.
> 
> - The Cena-Henry confrontation delivered a big audience of a 2.5 rating and 1.602 million viewers from the end of the first hour to the top of the second hour. Included was a peak audience of 1.669 million viewers at 9:02 p.m.
> 
> - The top-rated segment was the McMahon Family Drama at the top of the third hour. Q9 scored a 2.56 rating and averaged 1.604 million viewers, making it the most-watched segment since we began tracking in May.
> 
> Included was nearly the peak audience of the show - 1.839 million viewers at 10:10 p.m. when Vickie Guerrero was "fired" as Raw authority figure.
> 
> After the segment and one commercial, Raw returned with 1.654 million viewers at 10:18 p.m. before the "comedown match" of Kane vs. Christian. Viewership fell off, then the Wyatt Family debut kicked in.
> 
> The Wyatts generated a slight bump (1.336 million viewers at 10:27 p.m. for the end of Kane-Christian, then 1.522 million viewers at 10:28 p.m.), but the segment only reached a peak of 1.572 million viewers at 10:32 p.m. when the Wyatts debuted and beat down Kane.
> 
> The end of the Wyatts's debut was the peak for the remainder of the show. Raw hit 1.488 million viewers at 10:42 p.m. for the Divas tag match, then 1.457 million viewers at 11:05 p.m. during the over-run for the finish of Randy Orton vs. C.M. Punk.
> 
> Overall, the audience peaked at the top of the second hour for Cena-Henry, re-peaked for the McMahons and Wyatts, then fell off for the remainder of the show.
> 
> 7/8 WWE Raw Ratings Flow
> 
> Q1: Raw started with a 1.88 rating for the show intro.
> 
> Q2: Raw stayed at a 1.88 rating for the hot Daniel Bryan vs. Sheamus match.
> 
> Q3: Raw increased slightly to a 1.90 rating for a segment with two commercial breaks.
> 
> Q4: Raw jumped to a 2.13 rating for the peak minute of the show for The Shield vs. Funk, then the start of Cena-Henry.
> 
> Q5: Raw jumped to a 2.39 rating for the Cena-Henry confrontation.
> 
> Q6: Raw slipped to a 2.29 rating for Curtis Axel vs. Chris Jericho.
> 
> Q7: Raw dropped to a second-hour-low 2.10 rating for two commercials before Alberto Del Rio vs. Sin Cara.
> 
> Q8: Raw increased to a 2.21 rating Del Rio vs. Cara and the first-half of the McMahons & Vickie.
> 
> Q9: Raw jumped to a show-high 2.56 rating for the end of the McMahons & Vickie.
> 
> Q10: Raw slipped to a 2.27 rating for Kane-Christian and the Wyatts's debut.
> 
> Q11: Raw slipped to a 2.21 rating for non-wrestling segments and a quick Divas tag match.
> 
> Q12: Raw dropped to a third-hour-low 2.01 rating for the first-half of Orton vs. Punk, plus two full commercial breaks.
> 
> Over-Run: Raw increased slightly to a 2.28 rating for the end of Orton-Punk and the finish of the MITB PPV.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Should be around 3,950,000 for last night's RAW.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Males 18-49 - July 1st, 2013
20:49 - 1.858 million
....
21:02 - 1.669 million
....
22:10 - 1.839 million
....
22:18 - 1.654 million
....
22:27 - 1.336 million
22:28 - 1.522 million
22:32 - 1.572 million
....
22:42 - 1.488 million
....
23:05 - 1.457 million


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The Wyatts generated a slight bump (1.336 million viewers at 10:27 p.m. for the end of Kane-Christian, then 1.522 million viewers at 10:28 p.m.), but the segment only reached a peak of 1.572 million viewers at 10:32 p.m. when the Wyatts debuted and beat down Kane.
> 
> The end of the Wyatts's debut was the peak for the remainder of the show. *Raw hit 1.488 million viewers at 10:42 p.m. for the Divas tag match, then 1.457 million viewers at 11:05 p.m. during the over-run for the finish of Randy Orton vs. C.M. Punk.*
> 
> Overall, the audience peaked at the top of the second hour for Cena-Henry, re-peaked for the McMahons and Wyatts, then fell off for the remainder of the show.



Divas match at 10:40 draws more than Punk/Orton in the overrun :bosh2


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Damn


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Divas out-drawing a Punk segment. WOW.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> - Monday's WWE Raw shot up 24.5 percent in social media activity from last week's pre-Money in the Bank episode.
> 
> Raw scored 355,138 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, which was the highest score since the night after WrestleMania. Raw topped the yearly average by 24.3 percent.
> 
> Raw ranked #3 on cable TV, trailing ESPN's Home Run Derby and MTV's "Teen Wolf."


via PWTorch


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Expecting Punk/Heyman/Lesnar to do an insane number.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> Divas match at 10:40 draws more than Punk/Orton in the overrun :bosh2





ShowStopper '97 said:


> Divas out-drawing a Punk segment. WOW.


Man, this is gonna rile the Punk haters up something fierce. I'd comment myself but Punk's taken all the fun out of it. This is like hooking a dead fish. All sport is gone.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Man, this is gonna rile the Punk haters up something fierce. I'd comment myself but Punk's taken all the fun out of it. This is like hooking a dead fish. All sport is gone.


I'm just very surprised.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Raw scored 355,138 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, which was the highest score since the night after WrestleMania.


Nice stuff.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> Nice stuff.


Dat GOAT doing GOAT like stuff. :clap


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Home Run Derby won the night with a 2.6 adults 18-49 rating. Love & Hip Hop came in second with a 1.9 adults 18-49 rating, matching last week's performance. 

8:00 PM: A18-49: 1.5 (#6), 3.926 million viewers
9:00 PM: A18-49: 1.6 (#5), 4.108 million viewers
10:00 PM: A18-49: 1.6 (#4), 4.268 million viewers

tvbythenumbers


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Divas out-drawing a Punk segment. WOW.


A Punk segment? That happened at the end of the overrun, and who came out at the end?

:lmao

Another week, another failure by Daniel Bryan. No surprise, I don't even care. I want to know how this week's GOAT segment did with Punk and Heyman.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> Divas match at 10:40 draws more than Punk/Orton in the overrun :bosh2


This is all that needs to be said..

sadly.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Another week, another failure by Daniel Bryan. No surprise, I don't even care. I want to know how this week's GOAT segment did with Punk and Heyman.


How do you figure that. We don't have the over run rating yet and that was the only time Bryan was seen all night.

Edit: Oh you meant last week. So Bryan is to blame for Orton/Punk not drawing when he was only out there for maybe 3 minutes max. That's one way to look at things I suppose. One really crazy way.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 1 - 3.926 million
Hour 2 - 4.108 million
Hour 3 - 4.268 million

(as a poster said in last page)


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> The Home Run Derby won the night with a 2.6 adults 18-49 rating. Love & Hip Hop came in second with a 1.9 adults 18-49 rating, matching last week's performance.
> 
> 8:00 PM: A18-49: 1.5 (#6), 3.926 million viewers
> 9:00 PM: A18-49: 1.6 (#5), 4.108 million viewers
> 10:00 PM: A18-49: 1.6 (#4), 4.268 million viewers
> 
> tvbythenumbers


huh...i thought it would do a lot better than that, did it even get a 3?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hm, second week in a row they go up in viewership by the hour. First hour goes up from last week while the last two go down. 

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that breakdown males 18-49 only? Not that it's not important, but we should wait for the normal breakdown with the total average viewership numbers before making ridiculous and possibly inaccurate statements.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> A Punk segment? That happened at the end of the overrun, and who came out at the end?
> 
> :lmao
> 
> Another week, another failure by Daniel Bryan. No surprise, I don't even care. I want to know how this week's GOAT segment did with Punk, Heyman, *and Lesnar*.


Fixed. Sorry, you conveniently left out the biggest draw of the segment.

See, it's this type of post that makes people bash Punk. In a group segment where Punk is working with his peers, and ratings are low, you absolve him of any blame. Yet, in group segments where Punk is working with people above his level, you try to give him the majority of the praise.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

HOLY FIRST FAMILY OF WRESTLING WITH DAT 3.6

:HHH2 :vince5

BIG number and I really do have to wonder just what the hell it is about Performance Reviews that makes people tune in in such huge numbers. If I'm remembering correctly here, the HHH review on Big Johnny got between the 3.6 - 3.8 range last year, the Vince review on Heyman got a 3.9 earlier this year and now the McMahon's on Vickie gets a 3.6. It's crazy how that works on a wrestling show of all things lol. 

The breakdown for the rest of the night should be interesting when it eventually comes out. Based off this I reckon Cena/Henry at 9pm probably did around a 3.4 then and probably had a massive gain considering the huge leap between hour 1 and 2. 

And now this week. A larger opening audience in the first hour but the latter two hours are below the latter two hours from last week. Still better to grow your audience throughout the show than lose it and 2 hours over 4 million is what they want. 



JY57 said:


> Hour 1 - 3.926 million
> Hour 2 - 4.108 million
> Hour 3 - 4.268 million
> 
> (as a poster said in last page)


I imagine Heyman/Punk/Brock at 10pm and the overrun should do well. They were very smart to have the first thing out of Punk's mouth be that Lesnar was in the building. Because of that we were all waiting for him and that should help keep people sticking around to see him. They also advertised Cena's decision throughout the night so again, based on viewership for hour 3, I'm thinking both those segments should do well, maybe around the 3.4 mark if they're lucky??

interdasting times in da ratingz thred.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The entire show deserves to do well. Raw was just too great last night, specially for 3 hour standards.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



LovelyElle890 said:


> Fixed. Sorry, you conveniently left out the biggest draw of the segment.
> 
> See, it's this type of post that makes people bash Punk. In a group segment where Punk is working with his peers, and ratings are low, you absolve him of any blame. Yet, in group segments where Punk is working with people above his level, you try to give him the majority of the praise.


I think everybody should share the blame when a segment or show doesn't draw well.

Punk was part of the segment. If he does well, he deserves some credit. If it doe badly, he deserves some of the blame.

I just don't understand these people who say that because Punk was champion last fall that he deserves ALL the blame. Sorry, but weren't there other people on the roster as well? Including Cena?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

final rating - 3.04


----------



## EndOfAnEra

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Average Audience: 4,101,000.
Last week it was: 4,167,000.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

good rating


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It deserved much better how the hell did the ratings decrease with that? They are going to get killed with the nfl coming up


----------



## NexS.E.S

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



VGooBUG said:


> It deserved much better how the hell did the ratings decrease with that? They are going to get killed with the nfl coming up


Hate to break it to you, but anything above a 3.0 is pretty good these days.


----------



## AJ_Styles_P1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

As far as the show goes for me.

I give it about a 5.5/10

There were really good parts, really bad parts, and parts that were just filler type garbage IMO.

They really need to cut back to a 2 hour program, 3 hours is way too long, your never going to draw in large number of casuals with a 3 hour product.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The positive about going to 3 hours is that we have been treated to consistently great TV matches nearly every week. Matches are actually getting 15+ minutes instead of the typical rushed crap to make room for storyline "progression" and jobber squashes like we had with the 2 hour format.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah I actually like the 3 hour concept at this point. this week all 3 matches Orton/Fandango, Ziggler/ADR and RVD/Jericho were great I thought. Legit PPV level matches on RAW and enough time to give the important segments a lot of time, like Bray Wyatt, Punk/Heyman and Cena/Bryan in the main event. 

I'd rather they give us the good stuff in bigger doses and still have time left over with filler than having to cut short segments and matches like Jericho/RVD and the likes of Punk/Heyman or the Wyatt Family to insert a 5 minute Divas Segment.


----------



## Strongside

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Raw was actually really good.
- Daniel Bryan vs John Cena for the WWE Championship announced at Summerslam
- Punk & Heyman promo plus the brawl between Punk & Lesnar
- Great match between Jericho and Rob Van Dam
- Ziggler seperating from AJ plus Big E & AJ Lee attacking Ziggler after his match
- Christian picking up a win over Sandow plus Cody attacking Sandow
- Mark Henry not whining about losing plus The Shield attacking Henry
- Solid Tag Team Match between the Real Americans & The Usos
The only downside was the Divas Match. Then again, a Bella was involved so what do you expect?


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Monday Night Rawwwwwwwwwww


----------



## Apex Predator

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I didn't change the channel this week!


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Apex Predator said:


> I didn't change the channel this week!


Good boy.

:vince


----------



## Berbz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The only problem with 3 hours is the commercials but you get used to it and you realise that its a money maker for them. When you get great 15+ TV matches and story and character development like we've been getting they use the 3 hours correctly and it's great to watch.


----------



## JC00

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Edit: Oh you meant last week. So Bryan is to blame for Orton/Punk not drawing when he was only out there for maybe 3 minutes max. That's one way to look at things I suppose. One really crazy way.


It's the Punk mark way, what do you expect. 

If Bryan wasn't involved they would just blame it on Orton or say that the WWE was stupid for putting a Diva's tag match before.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Berbz said:


> The only problem with 3 hours is the commercials but you get used to it and you realise that its a money maker for them. When you get great 15+ TV matches and story and character development like we've been getting they use the 3 hours correctly and it's great to watch.


Get a DVR from your cable company, record the show, and start watching at 9pm when the show used to start and just fast forward through commercials.


----------



## Berbz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Get a DVR from your cable company, record the show, and start watching at 9pm when the show used to start and just fast forward through commercials.


I am in the UK mate, starts at 2am and I don't have Sky Sports unfortunately. 

I was actually watching the day after but I am glad I watched Monday live, I wouldn't have wanted to miss out on live excitement like that, it was a joy to watch all the way through.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Berbz said:


> I am in the UK mate, starts at 2am and I don't have Sky Sports unfortunately.
> 
> I was actually watching the day after but I am glad I watched Monday live, I wouldn't have wanted to miss out on live excitement like that, it was a joy to watch all the way through.


2am? I don't even wanna know how you made it to work the next day. I'll say one thing for you guys, you are loyal motherf'ers to support WWE like that. Even watching the next day would be a hassle and yet you do it. Cheers to all of you.


----------



## Berbz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> 2am? I don't even wanna know how you made it to work the next day. I'll say one thing for you guys, you are loyal motherf'ers to support WWE like that. Even watching the next day would be a hassle and yet you do it. Cheers to all of you.


Few hours sleep when I get in from work, 2am to 4am watching Raw then back to sleep until due back in, I have sort of got used to it but sometimes I don't make it all the way through Raw if it's not been that good after a few hours and just watch or read the rest the following day really.


----------



## Marrakesh

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol @ people thinking ratings are just going to jump because it was a good Raw. Overall the product has been total garbage for a few years so don't expect any spike in the ratings unless there is a sustained period of quality programming which WWE haven't been able to produce in years now. 

If they are able to make legitimate stars of some of their new talents and actually persevere with booking Raw with engaging story lines as opposed to filler then over the course of months/years we could see a decent increase.

As for those segment breakdowns there usually pointless unless a segment is hyped throughout the show. Then it's a good indicator if people where interested or not.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Thought this was interesting: http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_72007.shtml



> July 9, 2007 - 3.4 rating / 4.6 million viewers
> July 14, 2008 - 3.2 rating / 4.8 million viewers
> July 13, 2009 - 3.6 rating / 5.3 million viewers
> July 12, 2010 - 3.3 rating / 4.8 million viewers
> July 11, 2011 - 2.9 rating / 4.4 million viewers
> July 9, 2012 - 3.2 rating / 4.4 million viewers
> July 15, 2013 - 3.0 rating / 4.1 million viewers


So in a time of changing TV and the such like, Raw has lost about half a million viewers in the past six years. Not bad!

2009 was the Trump and the guest hosts year, hence why it did better than the rest. But on the whole, WWE will be very, very happy. An extra hour and ratings are standing up.

If they keep up the booking, there's no reason why they won't reap the rewards in the long term.


----------



## Berbz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2009 was the worst year and it got the highest views, it just shows that ratings shouldn't mean anything really. Sure, it means a lot of viewers but it wouldn't surprise me if that is one of the reasons wrestling went downhill ratings wise, because the extra 1 million viewers that watched in 2009 realised it was shit. :lol


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Thought this was interesting: http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_72007.shtml
> 
> 
> 
> So in a time of changing TV and the such like, Raw has lost about half a million viewers in the past six years. Not bad!
> 
> 2009 was the Trump and the guest hosts year, hence why it did better than the rest. But on the whole, WWE will be very, very happy. An extra hour and ratings are standing up.
> 
> If they keep up the booking, there's no reason why they won't reap the rewards in the long term.



I don't know how you can look at that chart and feel that WWE will be very very happy. It's viewership is lower than its been since like the mid 90s maybe?? This is with an increasing population in the U.S. too.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> I don't know how you can look at that chart and feel that WWE will be very very happy. It's viewership is lower than its been since like the mid 90s maybe?? This is with an increasing population in the U.S. too.


viewership is about the same now as what nitro and raw were doing COMBINED in 1995, they were doing around 3 to 3.2 million homes combined back then and thats what raw is doing on its own right now

vince will be much happier with tv revenue 
2012.........$88.9m domestic ($139.5m total)
2007.........$59.6m domestic ($91.8m total)


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, Daniel Bryan vs. Sheamus gained 183,000 viewers, which is good for their segment. The search for the Wyatt family and a Mark Henry video lost 140,000 viewers. Brodus Clay & Sweet T vs. Seth Rollins & Roman Reigns gained 339,000 viewers. The John Cena-Mark Henry face-off promo gained 424,000 viewers to a strong 3.41 at 9 p.m. Chris Jericho vs. Curtis Axel lost 250,000 viewers. The backstage segment with Cody Rhodes, Damien Sandow, Wade Barrett, Fandango, Jack Swagger, Antonio Cesaro and Zeb Colter lost 285,000 viewers. Alberto Del Rio vs. Sin Cara with Dolph Ziggler out gained 171,000 viewers. The Vickie Guerrero evaluation gained 553,000 viewers, the best non-overrun segment in a long time, and finished with a 3.55 quarter, way above what the show has been doing. Kane vs. Christian lost 736,000 viewers. The Wyatt Family attacking Kane, Vickie Guerrero and Ryback backstage and A.J. Lee & Alicia Fox vs. Kaitlyn & Layla gained 122,000 viewers. The Randy Orton vs. C.M. Punk main event gained 48,000 viewers, which is terrible for an overrun segment, finishing at 3.13 overrun.


last week



> In the segment-by-segment, the show open with Brad Maddox, John Cena and Randy Orton did a 2.99 quarter. Randy Orton vs. Fandango lost 85,000 viewers. The Mark Henry interview where The Shield laid him out gained 78,000 viewers. Alberto Del Rio vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 273,000 people at 9 p.m. peaking at 3.19. The Bray Wyatt interview, Performance Center vignette and Zeb Colter interview lost 209,000 viewers. Usos vs. Jack Swagger & Antonio Cesaro and Christian vs. Damien Sandow lost 253,000 viewers. Brie Bella vs. Naomi gained 265,000 viewers. That’s a surprise. One of the two big segments was the C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman and Brock Lesnar angle which gained 498,000 viewers to a 3.41 quarter at 10 p.m. Backstage stuff with Cena & Khali and Maddox & HHH & Stephanie lost 497,000 viewers. Rob Van Dam vs. Chris Jericho lost 172,000 viewers. John Cena picking Daniel Bryan as his SummerSlam opponent was the other big segment, gaining 669,000 viewers, one of the best segments of the summer, with a 3.41 overrun.


this week


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Looks like the stars this week are of course DB, Punk, Brock, and Heyman...AND NAOMI. :clap


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Brodus Clay & Sweet T vs. Seth Rollins & Roman Reigns gained 339,000 viewers.


That's crazy.



> Randy Orton vs. C.M. Punk main event gained 48,000 viewers














> One of the two big segments was the C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman and Brock Lesnar angle which gained 498,000 viewers to a 3.41 quarter at 10 p.m.


unk2 :heyman :brock



> Cena picking Daniel Bryan as his SummerSlam opponent was the other big segment, gaining 669,000 viewers, one of the best segments of the summer, with a 3.41 overrun.


:cena3


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Randy Orton seems like a guy that you hardly can gain viewers with, he lost viewers against Fandango, and didn't do very well with Bryan few weeks back in the Mainevent and again with Punk last week. He needs to step up his game or else he will be depushed again.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not gonna lie, I really enjoyed the shield vs tons of funk.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Not gonna lie, I really enjoyed the shield vs tons of funk.


Yeah, but you know, Tons of Funk are jobbers and The Shield aren't as hot as they once were. You would think that they would lose viewers but that was a great gain.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> viewership is about the same now as what nitro and raw were doing COMBINED in 1995, they were doing around 3 to 3.2 million homes combined back then and thats what raw is doing on its own right now
> 
> vince will be much happier with tv revenue
> 2012.........$88.9m domestic ($139.5m total)
> 2007.........$59.6m domestic ($91.8m total)


2007 wwe made 50 mil even with the whole chris benoit massacre, 2012 with the rock brock lesnar and three hours on television made 30 million, im sure he isnt jumping for joy.


----------



## WWFECWWCW94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena segments drawing poorly could this finally mean people are sick of this motherfucker being a perfect squeaky clean pandering babyface :mark:. I know the main event segment drew well but still your top guy should never lose viewers or draw a 2.99 quarter failure.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

John Cena was out for not very long for the first segment. It's not like he started RAW off, people probably switched off when they seen it was Maddox. 

Later that night he gains 669,000 viewers.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sucks the Punk/Orton match didn't do well. It's one of the worst of the year actually, and it's 2/2 for Orton. Only overrun that was worse was Bryan/Orton, with a few things like the Punk/Kane match 3/11, the Lesnar/Heyman/HHH stuff 3/18, and the Cena/Axel matches that are around it, but not as bad. 

The whole Vicke Contract signing segment doing well shows something, along with Taker's match on Raw and the Lesnar/Heyman takeover (what I deem the three of the best 10PMs since Mania), and it's not necessarily that if you have a big name in it that it draws, but that if you advertise something a week in advance or promote it all day on something like twitter/heavily promote it on the show, that it'll do a lot better than it would without, even with those big draws in mind (although they still help to an extent). Hell, the Cena/Del Rio match from a few weeks ago did so well probably mostly because they promoted the fuck out of it to no end and made it seem important. And the Punk/Cena match from Raw earlier this year that got a 3.9 where Cena's Mania match was on the line. Punk/Cena on Raw in November or whenever it was last year didn't do anywhere near that well and that one wasn't as advertised or as important, but they throw in the promotion that match got (a week's worth) and heavily promoting it, it'll do well.

And on 10PMs again, Punk/Lesnar/Heyman did very well. The overrun doing well actually proves my point above as well as far as giving the fans something important, which was the decision of Cena's next opponent for Summerslam. Something like a WWE title tournament could probably draw well come to think of it, even in matches featuring no-draws because it's something important. Well, either that or the finals would just get the big number. Feels like forever since they've done a tournament like that.

And Cena/Orton only starting out with a 2.99, while stronger than the last few weeks, is still a poor number. But again, had they advertised a confrontation or even a potential one, it probably would've done much better.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good on Dolph gaining quite a lot again, by the way.


----------



## Chan Hung

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Damn Kane vs. Christian last week was a major drop of viewers :lol


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> Yeah, but you know, Tons of Funk are jobbers and *The Shield aren't as hot as they once were*. You would think that they would lose viewers but that was a great gain.


Maybe you're right.

But you should have watched The Shield vs The USO on MITB preview,it was an amazing match and *the crowd was absolutely hot for this match*.

They got 'this is awesome chants' from the Philly crowd,and not only then crowd popped up when Reings delivered that spear and pinned one of the USOs.


So,even though the Shield may not be as hot as they once were,yet they are more entertaining(and impressive) than most,IMO.So 'em gaining the ratings is still no big surprise.


----------



## Flawless Victory

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Waffelz said:


> Good on Dolph gaining quite a lot again, by the
> 
> Post edited.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You're looking at the wrong quote.


----------



## Flawless Victory

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Waffelz said:


> You're looking at the wrong quote.


If you're talking about this past monday. Then I apologize. BUT Give credit to BOTH ADR and Ziggler. Don't just act like it's all Ziggler. Come on now.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'll give 95% credit to Ziggler, 4% to people tuning in to see Ricardo - but forgetting he's 'injured' - and 1% to ADR.


----------



## WWFECWWCW94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I tried to attempt a Where's Ricardo chant


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Torch:


> Raw TV Ratings Break Down (m18-49 demo)
> 
> - Q1 (2.01 rating): Raw averaged 1.260 million viewers for the immediate MITB PPV fall-out, which included peak viewership of 1.484 million viewers just before Raw cut to break at 8:11 p.m.
> 
> - Q2 (1.85 rating): Raw dipped to show-low viewership of 1.155 million viewers for Randy Orton vs. Fandango and one commercial.
> 
> This was greatly affected by Raw viewers bailing to ESPN's "Home Run Derby" - 77,000 viewers left to the Derby at 8:11 p.m. and only a fraction of viewers returned to Raw during Orton vs. Fandango.
> 
> - Q3 (2.04 rating): Raw rebounded 10 percent despite two commercial breaks. Why? Mark Henry's post-PPV speech and The Shield, which combined two of WWE's biggest draws over the past month-plus.
> 
> Included was peak viewership of 1.523 million viewers at 8:38 p.m. as Henry was wrapping up his speech with Shield on the way to the ring.
> 
> - Q4 (2.13 rating): The most-watched segment of the first hour featured Alberto Del Rio vs. Dolph Ziggler in a re-match from the MITB PPV. The segment drew a steady audience and benefited from only containing one commercial break, which allowed the quarter-hour to draw a larger overall audience compared to Q3.
> 
> This is captured by the Q4 peak audience being 1.451 million viewers compared to the Q3 peak audience being 1.523 million viewers.
> 
> - Q5 (2.20 rating): The most-watched segment of the second hour featured the post-match of Ziggler-Del Rio with A.J. Lee and Big E. Langston officially turning on Dolph, one commercial, and the Wyatts beating down R-Truth.
> 
> This included peak viewership of 1.605 million viewers at 9:04 p.m. for the conclusion of the post-match. The Wyatts's segment then peaked with 1.611 million viewers at 9:15 p.m.
> 
> - Q6: (2.18 rating): Raw was steady for the end of the Wyatts-Truth segment, one commercial, and The Usos vs. Real Americans, although the credit goes to Wyatts-Truth.
> 
> - Q7 (2.04 rating): Raw dipped to a second-hour-low for Christian vs. Damien Sandow and two full commercial breaks, which dragged down the rating.
> 
> - Q8 (2.09 rating): Raw increased slightly for Brie Bella vs. Naomi and one commercial.
> 
> Included was peak viewership of 1.534 million viewers for a video package recap of Paul Heyman turning on C.M. Punk at the MITB PPV to set up the top-of-the-third-hour segment.
> 
> - Q9 (2.48 rating): Raw jumped 15.5 percent in viewership for the Heyman-Punk promo exchange and Brock Lesnar's return without commercial interruption.
> 
> Included was peak viewership of 1.634 million viewers at 10:14 p.m.
> 
> - Q10 (2.18 rating): After Lesnar finished off Punk, viewers bailed to the Home Run Derby. The Q10 segment included the McMahons backstage with Brad Maddox and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> Included was peak viewership of the entire show until the over-run when Hunter & Stephanie backstage drew 1.653 million viewers at 10:26 p.m. leading to commercial.
> 
> - Q11 (2.02 rating): Faced with the Home Run Derby climax, the first portion of RVD vs. Chris Jericho in the TV main event slid to a third-hour low rating. Peak viewership was 1.417 million viewers at 10:34 p.m.
> 
> - Q12 (2.05 rating): The conclusion of RVD vs. Jericho increased slightly, peaking with 1.448 million viewers at 10:54 p.m. for the end of the match.
> 
> - Over-run (2.53 rating): Cena's decision drew the most viewers of the show, peaking with 1.611 million viewers at 11:07 p.m. and 1.659 million viewers at 11:08 p.m. when Raw signed off with D-Bryan in the ring.
> 
> - Punk-Heyman & Lesnar segment (1.557 million average viewers): Given the entire Q9 segment without commercial interruption, the overall rating was a 2.48 rating, easily topping the next-highest-rated full quarter-hour, which was a 2.20 rating in Q5 at the top of the second hour.
> 
> Punk-Heyman/Lesnar peaked with 1.634 million viewers at 10:14 p.m. when Lesnar took out Punk. Raw then went to break with 1.507 million viewers at 10:17 p.m.
> 
> Raw lost 29 percent of the audience when Raw cut to break. This is captured by the biggest exit of the show being 82,000 viewers to the Home Run Derby at 10:17 p.m.
> 
> - Cena's Decision segment (1.561 million average viewers): The 8-minute over-run for Cena's in-ring segment scored a 2.53 rating, which was tops of the show. Peak viewership for the segment and the entire Raw was 1.659 million viewers at 11:08 p.m. when Raw signed off with Daniel Bryan in the ring with Cena.
> 
> 
> The following is a break down of the RVD vs. Jericho main event based on minute-by-minute ratings and viewership inflows/outflows in the males 18-49 demographic:
> 
> - Overall Rating: RVD vs. Jericho scored a 2.0 rating stretched out over Q11 and Q12, which were the two lowest-rated quarter-hours of the second and third hours up against the conclusion of the Home Run Derby.
> 
> - Q11 break down: Raw returned from break with 1,287 million viewers at 10:31 p.m. when the match started. At the time, Raw gained 22,000 viewers from the Derby.
> 
> The main event cut to its first break at 10:35 p.m. with 1.358 million viewers. During the commercial, viewers bailed to the Derby - Raw lost 50,000 viewers between 10:35 and 10:36 and another 40,000 viewers during the remainder of the commercial.
> 
> Raw then regained 34,000 viewers from the Derby at 10:40 p.m. This helped pushed viewership to a Q11 peak of 1.390 million viewers at 10:43 p.m. before Raw cut to a second mid-match commercial.
> 
> - Q12 break down: Raw lost 34,000 viewers to the Derby during the commercial. Raw then regained 25,000 viewers from the Derby at 10:50 p.m. as RVD vs. Jericho built to its conclusion.
> 
> The main event slowly regained viewers during the final few minutes of the match, but did not generate a significant gain until 1,448 million viewers at 10:54 p.m. for the finish of the match.
> 
> Immediately after the match concluded, 52,000 viewers bailed to the Derby. This is reflected by Raw drawing 1,281 million viewers at 10:55 p.m. (a drop of 11.6 percent) before Raw cut to its final break at 10:56 p.m.
> 
> - RVD vs. Jericho Break Down:
> 
> 10:31 p.m. - 1.287 million viewers
> 10:34 p.m. - 1.417 million viewers
> 10:43 p.m. - 1.390 million viewers
> 10:52 p.m. - 1.399 million viewers
> 10:53 p.m. - 1.406 million viewers
> 10:54 p.m. - 1.448 million viewers (finish of the match)
> 10:55 p.m. - 1.281 million viewers


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DANIEL RATINGS BRYAN :dazzler:


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2 highest rated segments are with Punk and Bryan. It does worry me that Punk only seems to draw an audience when he is up against a name much bigger than his own. Same *COULD* be said about Bryan but Bryan needs more time like Punk has had before that is set in stone IMO.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If there's one thing to take from all this, outside the fact that :brock :vince2 :HHH :cena2 all fucking kill it in da ratingz, it's the fact that the Divas are gaining some serious traction with people. Week after week, bar the odd mishap here and there, their segments are doing really well all things considered and in the most ridiculous time slots too be it AJ, Kaitlyn, the Bellas, whoever. 

Bellas + Cena + Bryan + McMahon's = MEGA RATINGZ which is obviously where they're going with this. 

McMahon's/Vickie flat out killed it. Nothing else to say here really. 

Punk/Orton in the overrun did shit. Punk and Orton are one in the same, they need a bigger name to produce big time numbers, neither of them are able to do it on their own yet their marks are constantly in here acting like one or the other is some big shot. It's comical to say the least. 

Cena/Henry was a strong segment. Crazy that a 3.4 didn't top the night when you think about it. 

Punk/Brock/Heyman was another strong segment and deserved to get that number. It was great TV and should have a lot of people looking forward to what goes down next week. Smart move since Brock isn't there. 

Cena/Bryan, again, another strong segment and probably the perfect way to kick off their feud from a viewership standpoint. With all the other shenanigans no doubt set to go down in this thing, they'll probably hit this mark again at least once as we roll into Summerslam. 

It's weird to have 2 shows averaging a 3.0 rating yet have 3 segments on the 3.4 mark and one on the 3.6. It's definitely a great sign for WWE though with all their top storylines obviously holding viewer interest for the time being. 

It did make me lol how the peak of the night this week (outside the overrun) was MADDOX backstage with Prince Paul and Princess Stephanie.

:HHH2

This thread has been restored to its former glory recently. 

SO MUCH RATINGZ. 

:vince3


----------



## El Capitano

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Dolph with that draw :ziggler3


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Punk/Orton in the overrun did shit. Punk and Orton are one in the same, they need a bigger name to produce big time numbers, neither of them are able to do it on their own yet their marks are constantly in here acting like one or the other is some big shot. It's comical to say the least.



Starbuck just planted the bomb and stolled away.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Males 18-49 Breakdown - July 15th, 2013
20:11 - 1.484 million viewers
20:12 - 1.407 million viewers
....
20:38 - 1.523 million viewers
....
~20:59 - 1.451 million viewers
21:04 - 1.605 million viewers
....
21:15 - 1.611 million viewers
....
~21:59 - 1.534 million viewers
22:14 - 1.634 million viewers
22:17 - 1.507 million viewers
22:18 - 1.429 million viewers
....
22:26 - 1.653 million viewers
....
22:30 - 1.265 million viewers
22:31 - 1.287 million viewers
22:34 - 1.417 million viewers
22:35 - 1.358 million viewers
22:36 - 1.308 million viewers
22:37 - 1.268 million viewers
22:40 - 1.302 million viewers
22:43 - 1.390 million viewers
22:45 - 1.356 million viewers
22:50 - 1.381 million viewers
22:52 - 1.399 million viewers
22:53 - 1.406 million viewers
22:54 - 1.448 million viewers
22:55 - 1.281 million viewers
....
23:07 - 1.611 million viewers
23:08 - 1.659 million viewers

One thing that does interest me - if males 18-49 are getting 2.0 ratings and the overall rating is 3.0, which demographics are getting a 4.0 rating for Raw I wonder?


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The strong number at the end has more to do with Cena than Bryan. Bryan was only out there for like 2 minutes at best.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Bellas + Cena + Bryan + McMahon's = MEGA RATINGZ which is obviously where they're going with this.


I think it'll be more Mchmahons then Bella's, Bella's will play a factor, no doubt, but if they are ALL in a story line as focal points, it'll get to jumbled up. Bella's should do backstage segments and that's it and have HHH corner Bryan, and Vince corner Cena.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Boy Wonder said:


> The strong number at the end has more to do with Cena than Bryan. Bryan was only out there for like 2 minutes at best.


Have to agree actually but no doubt there was anticipation to have Bryan named the number one contender.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Boy Wonder said:


> The strong number at the end has more to do with Cena than Bryan. Bryan was only out there for like 2 minutes at best.


Wrong as usual. The segment popped a rating because of the suspense of who would be picked and the fact that most of the roster was out there for the WHOLE segment.

Edit: I love how you conveniently missed this part. More viewers tuned in AFTER the pick was made and Bryan appeared. Spin that.



> Peak viewership for the segment and the entire Raw was 1.659 million viewers at 11:08 p.m. when Raw signed off with Daniel Bryan in the ring with Cena.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Males 18-49 Breakdown - July 15th, 2013
> 20:11 - 1.484 million viewers
> 20:12 - 1.407 million viewers
> ....
> 20:38 - 1.523 million viewers
> ....
> ~20:59 - 1.451 million viewers
> 21:04 - 1.605 million viewers
> ....
> 21:15 - 1.611 million viewers
> ....
> ~21:59 - 1.534 million viewers
> 22:14 - 1.634 million viewers
> 22:17 - 1.507 million viewers
> 22:18 - 1.429 million viewers
> ....
> 22:26 - 1.653 million viewers
> ....
> 22:30 - 1.265 million viewers
> 22:31 - 1.287 million viewers
> 22:34 - 1.417 million viewers
> 22:35 - 1.358 million viewers
> 22:36 - 1.308 million viewers
> 22:37 - 1.268 million viewers
> 22:40 - 1.302 million viewers
> 22:43 - 1.390 million viewers
> 22:45 - 1.356 million viewers
> 22:50 - 1.381 million viewers
> 22:52 - 1.399 million viewers
> 22:53 - 1.406 million viewers
> 22:54 - 1.448 million viewers
> 22:55 - 1.281 million viewers
> ....
> 23:07 - 1.611 million viewers
> 23:08 - 1.659 million viewers
> 
> One thing that does interest me - if males 18-49 are getting 2.0 ratings and the overall rating is 3.0, which demographics are getting a 4.0 rating for Raw I wonder?


"Overall rating" (stupid Dirt Sheet name) = Household rating. 
And a HH rating has nothing to do with the viewership!

These HH or "overall" rating is irrelevant. The only important numbers are the A18-49 (Live+SD & C3) numbers! 
Even P2+ (overall viewers) is only relevant as Live+7.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Wrong as usual. The segment popped a rating because of the suspense of who would be picked and the fact that most of the roster was out there for the WHOLE segment.
> 
> Edit: I love how you conveniently missed this part. *More viewers tuned in AFTER the pick was made and Bryan appeared.* Spin that.


Yep... all 48 of them.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Yep... all 48 of them.


The difference from 1,611,000 to 1,659,000 is 48,000...


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> "Overall rating" (stupid Dirt Sheet name) = Household rating.
> And a HH rating has nothing to do with the viewership!
> 
> These HH or "overall" rating is irrelevant. The only important numbers are the A18-49 (Live+SD & C3) numbers!
> Even P2+ (overall viewers) is only relevant as Live+7.


You know exactly what I mean.

If Raw had a 3.0 household rating, that means some demographics had above 3.0 (ie - doing better than expected) and some had below 3.0.

My question was wondering what demographics are doing say 4.0 or 5.0 ratings if male 18-49 is only bringing in a 2.0 rating in that demographic.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

10pm gains: 



> The Vickie Guerrero evaluation *gained 553,000 viewers*, the best non-overrun segment in a long time, and finished with a 3.55 quarter, way above what the show has been doing.





> The segment with Heyman and CM Punk gained *117,000 viewers* at 10pm





> C.M. Punk & Curtis Axel vs. Prime Time Players *gained 21,000 viewers* which is terrible growth for the 10 p.m. segment.




Overrun:




> John Cena vs. Albert Del Rio match *gained 567,000 viewers*





> John Cena picking Daniel Bryan as his SummerSlam opponent was the other big segment, *gaining 669,000 viewers*





> Punk Vs Orton main event *gained 48,000 viewers*




See a pattern here? unk3 Even the divas out-drew overrun.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Smart move since Brock isn't there.


Wait, so he definitely isn't gonna be there this upcoming week? 

Oh, and yep, this thread is back to runnin' wild with the Punk-hatin' trolls. :lmao


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> You know exactly what I mean.
> 
> If Raw had a 3.0 household rating, that means some demographics had above 3.0 (ie - doing better than expected) and some had below 3.0.
> 
> My question was wondering what demographics are doing say 4.0 or 5.0 ratings if male 18-49 is only bringing in a 2.0 rating in that demographic.


Like i said: A Household rating has nothing do to with the viewership (and Demos = viewership)

12/13 Nielsen Season:
A18-49: 1.0 rating = 1,265,400 viewers
A25-54: 1.0 rating = 1,187,000 viewers
A18-34: 1.0 rating = 676,600 viewers
M18-49: 1.0 rating = 625,600 viewers
W18-49: 1.0 rating = 639,800 viewers
---
HH ratings
US: 1.0 rating = 1,141,737 households 
Cable (USA): 1.0 rating = 993,100 households -> used by the Dirt Sheets


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> 10pm gains:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overrun:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See a pattern here? unk3 Even the divas out-drew overrun.


I mean that is kinda funny.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Strong more has more to do with Cena? Nah..he hasn't had any number that big since Mark Henry carried that segment with the fake retirement. He's been doing mediocre numbers for quite some time. The angle was what led to the increase...Cena isn't nowhere drawing that kind of number on his own.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> Like i said: A Household rating has nothing do to with the viewership (and Demos = viewership)
> 
> 12/13 Nielsen Season:
> A18-49: 1.0 rating = 1,265,400 viewers
> A25-54: 1.0 rating = 1,187,000 viewers
> A18-34: 1.0 rating = 676,600 viewers
> M18-49: 1.0 rating = 625,600 viewers
> W18-49: 1.0 rating = 639,800 viewers
> ---
> HH ratings
> US: 1.0 rating = 1,141,737 households
> Cable (USA): 1.0 rating = 993,100 households -> used by the Dirt Sheets


Thanks. 

So, for this past Monday's Raw:

A18-49: 1.57 rating = 1.99 million viewers
M18-49: 2.14 rating = 1.34 million viewers
W18-49: 1.07 rating = 0.65 million viewers

So the male vs female split in the 18-49 demographic is 67% vs 33%.


----------



## ecabney

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That great rating at the end pretty much stems from viewers anticipating Cena picking Bryan to contend for the title. It was forecasted at the beginning when the crowd was chanting for Bryan at the beginning of the night when B-Mad gave Cena the option to choose his challenger.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ecabney said:


> That great rating at the end pretty much stems from viewers anticipating Cena picking Bryan to contend for the title. It was forecasted at the beginning when the crowd was chanting for Bryan at the beginning of the night when B-Mad gave Cena the option to choose his challenger.


youre stretching it


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Now I'm a Bryan fan, but why are some of you giving Bryan the credit for the Over Run rating, but at the same time were so quick to defend him when he laid out Orton and Punk a week ago? Blatant Hypocrisy.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Wait, so he definitely isn't gonna be there this upcoming week?



Brock isn't showing up for the next 2 weeks. August 5th is the next time you will see Brock. This is why Punk's feud is centered around Heyman and not Lesnar.




Quietus said:


> See a pattern here? unk3 Even the divas out-drew overrun.


That's cause Punk was never really pushed as a main event player *last year*.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Now I'm a Bryan fan, but why are some of you giving Bryan the credit for the Over Run rating, but at the same time were so quick to defend him when he laid out Orton and Punk a week ago? Blatant Hypocrisy.


U don't even know what you're talking to say, man. LOL.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> See a pattern here? unk3 Even the divas out-drew overrun.


Well... I guess so... but at the same time-



> Q11: Raw slipped to a 2.21 rating for non-wrestling segments and a quick Divas tag match.





> Over-Run: Raw increased slightly to a 2.28 rating for the end of Orton-Punk and the finish of the MITB PPV.


2.28>2.21

I have to wonder what the numbers would have been if the time slots were reversed? There's a reason the WWE didn't see this and decide to book a Diva's match for the over-run this week.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well to be FAIR..Punk was getting GOOD numbers after the Rock program. Well..he was working with the Undertaker but his matches with Orton just don't draw jack shit. It's kind of sad.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SerapisLiber said:


> Well... I guess so... but at the same time-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2.28>2.21
> 
> I have to wonder what the numbers would have been if the time slots were reversed? There's a reason the WWE didn't see this and decide to book a Diva's match for the over-run this week.





> Q11: Raw slipped to a 2.21 rating for non-wrestling segments and a quick Divas tag match.
> 
> *Q12: Raw dropped to a third-hour-low 2.01 rating for the first-half of Orton vs. Punk.*
> 
> Over-Run: Raw increased slightly to a 2.28 rating for the end of Orton-Punk and the finish of the MITB PPV.



I like how you conveniently left out that part from quote. :lmao :lmao 


Punk drew like 300,000 viewers for one week, after his feud with the Rock. That makes him a draw? :regalunk2


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> I like how you conveniently left out that part from quote.


So the over-run did _*NOT*_ get a 2.28?

So the Divas would have gotten better than a 2.28 if placed in the over-run instead?

Yes, it was convenient- it saved space, bandwidth, and time. The quoted post is there in the public arena on this and many other websites, so there's not some conspiracy to hide anything here.

The fact of the matter is, that was irrelevant. Many segments inherit a loss off the previous segment and/or commercial break.

If the segment, regardless of who was in it- could have been Brock, Rock, Cena, all with a surprise return of Batista, and hell the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ while we're at it -if that segment started with a 2.01 and ended with 15.1, would you consider it valid argumentation for someone to jump in and say "I love how you guys are conveniently forgetting that this segment started with a 2.01!"? Of course you wouldn't. That wouldn't make any sense to do so and nor does it here. 

Or hell, we can even set aside that hypothetical analogy, we can go with reality and the data we do have. The McMahon/Vickie segment likewise got a higher rating than the divas or Punk/Orton, right?

So you had posted something like:



> Q9: Raw jumped to a show-high 2.56 rating for the end of the McMahons & Vickie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Over-Run: Raw increased slightly to a 2.28 rating for the end of Orton-Punk and the finish of the MITB PPV.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 2.56>2.28
Click to expand...

would it have been acceptable argumentation if I had retorted with a post like your own:



> Q8: Raw increased to a _*2.21*_ rating Del Rio vs. Cara _*and the first-half of the McMahons & Vickie.*_
> 
> 
> 
> I like how you conveniently left out that part from quote.:lmao:lmao
Click to expand...

since, you know, a 2.21 is lower than a 2.28?

No, that would not have been acceptable, because that 2.21 wasn't the peak of that segment and was thus rendered irrelevant. 

Unless of course we want to talk about inheriting inertia from previous segments, in which case the same would still likewise also have to be considered for the opening number for Punk/Orton who inherited the inertia of a freefall after the McMahons which neither Kane/Wyatt or the divas were able to break. But given that Punk/Orton managed to gain during their segment, _*THEY*_ clearly _*were*_ able to break that inertia.

But meh. It's still a low rating regardless, and there's no excuses to be made on that end. However, when comparing it to the divas just for lulz, that still begs the question as to how the divas would have done if placed in the overrun since they still got a lower rating inspite of higher viewership.


----------



## Fanboi101

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SerapisLiber said:


> So the over-run did _*NOT*_ get a 2.28?
> 
> So the Divas would have gotten better than a 2.28 if placed in the over-run instead?
> 
> Yes, it was convenient- it saved space, bandwidth, and time. The quoted post is there in the public arena on this and many other websites, so there's not some conspiracy to hide anything here.
> 
> The fact of the matter is, that was irrelevant. Many segments inherit a loss off the previous segment and/or commercial break.
> 
> If the segment, regardless of who was in it- could have been Brock, Rock, Cena, all with a surprise return of Batista, and hell the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ while we're at it -if that segment started with a 2.01 and ended with 15.1, would you consider it valid argumentation for someone to jump in and say "I love how you guys are conveniently forgetting that this segment started with a 2.01!"? Of course you wouldn't. That wouldn't make any sense to do so and nor does it here.
> 
> Or hell, we can even set aside that hypothetical analogy, we can go with reality and the data we do have. The McMahon/Vickie segment likewise got a higher rating than the divas or Punk/Orton, right?
> 
> So you had posted something like:
> 
> 
> 
> would it have been acceptable argumentation if I had retorted with a post like your own:
> 
> 
> 
> since, you know, a 2.21 is lower than a 2.28?
> 
> No, that would not have been acceptable, because that 2.21 wasn't the peak of that segment and was thus rendered irrelevant.
> 
> Unless of course we want to talk about inheriting inertia from previous segments, in which case the same would still likewise also have to be considered for the opening number for Punk/Orton who inherited the inertia of a freefall after the McMahons which neither Kane/Wyatt or the divas were able to break. But given that Punk/Orton managed to gain during their segment, _*THEY*_ clearly _*were*_ able to break that inertia.
> 
> But meh. It's still a low rating regardless, and there's no excuses to be made on that end. However, when comparing it to the divas just for lulz, that still begs the question as to how the divas would have done if placed in the overrun since they still got a lower rating inspite of higher viewership.



Maybe I'm reading this wrong but you do realize that the over-run segment is typically one of the 2 highest rated segments of the night right? 99% of the time the overrun would draw a higher rating than the timeslot the divas were in, which was like 10:40. The fact that the overrun Punk segment barely had a higher rating than the 10:40 segment and actually had less viewers is really bad.


----------



## SerapisLiber

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fanboi101 said:


> Maybe I'm reading this wrong but you do realize ... is really bad.


Yes, you are, for I acknowledged that in my previous post. Hence yes, I do and did realize that already. The question still remains (in response to the post that started this), if the Divas were placed in the overrun, would they have gotten better than a 2.28? Moreover, phrasing things in such a way as "The fact that the overrun Punk" [Punk and _*ORTON*_ segment, talk about conveniently leaving things out, lol] "segment barely had a higher rating than the 10:40 segment" is to phrase it in such way as to portray it as though they pulled in less than they actually did. The phrasing sets it up in the mind of the reader as though all they gained through the course of their segment was .07[2.28-2.21=.07], but since, as pointed out several times here, their segment started with a 2.01, it is actually a 2.28-2.01=.27. The divas, however, did not gain at all, but actually lost .06. So the overrun was terrible, everyone here has consistently always agreed on that. But as I said, when folks want to keep coming in to try and propagate a whole 'divas outdrew' thing, there needs to be some clarification made. The divas got a lower rating and they literally repelled people away from the program, Punk-Orton got a higher rating and were literally _*drawing*_ people into the program.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Meanwhile, over in the UK on Sky Sports (highest showing of each sport only) :

701,000 - *Live Ashes* (Sunday, 10:00)
265,000 - *Live WWE: Money in the Bank* (Sunday, 25:00)
188,000 - *Live T20 Cricket* (Monday, 19:00)
185,000 - *Live European Tour Golf* (Sunday, 14:30)
170,000 - *Live Fight Night* (Saturda, 20:00)


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Should be around 4,030,000 today.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well, this is gonna be interesting. Hour 3 will be very telling for Bryan. Hoping it ends up doing really well. And hey, if what was said about longer matches gaining viewers being true, then it should be a good number.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

God, Hour 3 is going to be pitiful. Bryan, a guy that isn't the best draw in the world, working with three cold characters for 40 minutes.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I really hope the 3rd hour does well because it was all about BRYAN.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> God, Hour 3 is going to be pitiful. Bryan, a guy that isn't the best draw in the world, working with three cold characters for 40 minutes.


If the ratings come out bad don't blame Bryan's opponents. If DB is as great as people claim he should be able to maintain the numbers or even do better considering nothing that great was on TV elsewhere.


----------



## Awesome22

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

There's no way the third hour did well with a 40 minutes match. No way.


----------



## ecabney

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Swagless
Cesaro
Bryan
and Ryback

Neither are ratings movers without Cena, so I'm thinking this will be the worst rating in a minute.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Punk/Heyman promo is the only saving grace for hour 3, I would say. I expect it to bomb hard.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ecabney said:


> Swagless
> Cesaro
> Bryan
> and Ryback
> 
> Neither are ratings movers without Cena, so I'm thinking this will be the worst rating in a minute.


Yeah unfortunately, but I doubt WWE cares since they know airing 45 minutes of wrestling on televsion to close out their main show usually = low ratings. Nonetheless the usual blowhards will come on here and proclaim that Bryan will never be a draw and to end his push when the quarter hour report comes out .


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't usually care about TV ratings but....I REALLY hope that MizTV segment tanked big time.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That MizTV seg didn't seem worth the time. And Miz is hosting SummerSlam. :argh: I hate cringing, so I couldn't bare to watch it. Not sure how DB will do, but man it was one hell of a ride.


----------



## Osize10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

well, at least the crowd enjoyed The main event :bryan


----------



## #Mark

The ME is gonna do fine. I'm sure there was intrigue into Bryan facing three random opponents. 

Everyone and their mother loves Bryan. If anyone can draw decent numbers wrestling for an hour it's him.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The overun will be awful, Ryback vs Bryan at the hour mark isn't going to have anyone sticking around, should have had Vince come out to intoduce someone, shame Henry's turned as he'd have been perfect as the 3rd opponent.


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Yeah unfortunately, but I doubt WWE cares since they know airing 45 minutes of wrestling on televsion to close out their main show usually = low ratings. Nonetheless the usual blowhards will come on here and proclaim that Bryan will never be a draw and to end his push when the quarter hour report comes out .


Agree. Dont see WWE expect anything. I say they are happy as long as the ME doesnt tank big time. 

But like you said, some will right away say "Well there goes Daniels push!" and im sure it wont be long until there is a dirtsheet report "Daniel Bryan was scheduled to win the WWE Title at SummerSlam but after the lackluster ratings McMahon has changed his mind".


----------



## Silent KEEL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ryback would get the credit for a high rating, while Bryan gets the credit for low ratings.

Didn't the last Ryback vs Bryan match gain viewers??


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The ratings will be very poor. 2.8 is my guess.


----------



## ecabney

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Waffelz said:


> The ratings will be very poor. *2.8 is my guess.*



Lol, that's like the norm these days


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's been over 3 the last few weeks, no?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> -- One hour of strong programming was not enough to offset two hours of dull programming Monday night on Raw, as the show's Social Media Activity dropped 22 percent from last week's post-Money in the Bank episode.
> 
> Raw scored 276,945, according to Trendrr.TV, down from 355k last week and 285k two weeks ago leading into the MITB PPV.
> 
> On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #3 behind usual competitors "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" on VH1 and "Teen Wolf" on MTV.


via PWTorch


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Love & Hip Hop won the night with a 2.0 adults 18-49 rating, up from last week's 1.9. WWE Raw was second with a 1.4, down from last week's 1.6. 

8:00-9:00 PM: A18-49: 1.3 (#6), 3.922 million viewers
9:00-10:00 PM: A18-49: 1.4 (#2), 4.162 million viewers
10:00-11:09 PM: A18-49: 1.4 (#3), 3.933 million viewers

tvbythenumbers


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...lf-switched-at-birth-the-fosters-more/193303/

Hour 1 - 3.922 million
Hour 2 - 4.162 million
Hour 3 - 3.933 million


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Boy Wonder said:


> If the ratings come out bad don't blame Bryan's opponents. If DB is as great as people claim he should be able to maintain the numbers or even do better considering nothing that great was on TV elsewhere.


Funny how that's the rule for Bryan and not CM Punk. You're right though. Bryan should be responsible for the numbers...however he also needs a few months to build himself up into a ratings magnet. Punk had 2 years, Bryan's had 1 month. Let's get real here.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Weltschmertz said:


> Should be around 4,030,000 today.


Turned out to be 4,006,000. Close, but no cigar.

Not a great third hour number, to be honest. Breakdown will be interesting.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Funny how that's the rule for Bryan and not CM Punk. You're right though. Bryan should be responsible for the numbers...however he also needs a few months to build himself up into a ratings magnet. Punk had 2 years, Bryan's had 1 month. Let's get real here.


Because Punk has gotten a whole hour of a program to wrestle.  

The individual quarters will partially be based on Bryan's opponent, but the hour as a whole is what relies almost entirely on Bryan. 

And speaking of which, not too great for the third hour, but it could've definitely been a lot worse. They held up decently for Bryan, being higher than the first hour at least, and I'm expecting the first quarter of the third hour to do well, followed by a decent drop, and then it slowly builds up from there. Hour 2... don't even remember what was in that. The first couple of minutes of Punk's promo, but that wouldn't be enough to pick it up. There was that MizTV segment I think... and yeah, that's all I recall.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Because Punk has gotten a whole hour of a program to wrestle.


Always an excuse with Punk's fans. The guy had numerous shows where he was the center storyline, mentioned in countless talk ups, and was on full display in numerous recaps. 2 years of this and he still drew nothing. Bryan gets "the" storyline of the night centered around him for the first time and he's suddenly ratings kryptonite. fpalm


EDIT: I fully admit if Bryan isn't popping a rating in 6 months he'll be a flop, but you Punktards have had 2 years of Punk on top, going over EVERYONE while still drawing flies and *STILL WON'T ADMIT PUNK IS A FAILURE*.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

sucks that d bry hasnt been drawing well at all in the ratings so far


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Always an excuse with Punk's fans. The guy had numerous shows where he was the center storyline, mentioned in countless talk ups, and was on full display in numerous recaps. 2 years of this and he still drew nothing. Bryan gets "the" storyline of the night centered around him for the first time and he's suddenly ratings kryptonite. fpalm
> 
> 
> EDIT: I fully admit if Bryan isn't popping a rating in 6 months he'll be a flop, but you Punktards have had 2 years of Punk on top, going over EVERYONE while still drawing flies and *STILL WON'T ADMIT PUNK IS A FAILURE*.


:lmao

Haters gonna hate... and apparently now make shit up as they go. The whole Punk drawing nothing, thinking everyone's calling Bryan a ratings "kryptonite", and then the hypocrisy in attacking Punk marks for making "excuses" when you're doing the same for Bryan. 

For the record, Bryan's doing fine right now. He was a big part of the overrun gain last week and this week while hour 3 fell below 4 million, it didn't fall as much as it would've if people didn't care about Bryan. He's doing his thing in drawing in viewers in this big feud, just like Punk has done in the past couple of years. Bryan will have some hiccups like Punk did (the Orton overruns for both guys for example), and even Cena does these days, but they draw when it counts and that's what matters.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

final rating - 2.94


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I love this thread.


----------



## Murph

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So 0.01 away from the usual 3.0 rating. Business as usual.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> :lmao
> 
> Haters gonna hate... and apparently now make shit up as they go. The whole Punk drawing nothing, thinking everyone's calling Bryan a ratings "kryptonite", and then the hypocrisy in attacking Punk marks for making "excuses" when you're doing the same for Bryan.
> 
> For the record, Bryan's doing fine right now. He was a big part of the overrun gain last week and this week while hour 3 fell below 4 million, it didn't fall as much as it would've if people didn't care about Bryan. He's doing his thing in drawing in viewers in this big feud, just like Punk has done in the past couple of years. Bryan will have some hiccups like Punk did (the Orton overruns for both guys for example), and even Cena does these days, but they draw when it counts and that's what matters.


I like d bry too, but so far hasnt drawn viewers. The whole 3rd hour was focused on him and he lost viewers.Sucks for him as well is that The ratings have been incredibly low this summer, and next week we get a taped show, which will just kill the ratings. And if he DOES win at summerslam, he is going face to face with the first Monday night football preseason. and during his run, the return of monday night football season. He is probably fucked


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> *Always an excuse with Punk's fans.* The guy had numerous shows where he was the center storyline, mentioned in countless talk ups, and was on full display in numerous recaps. 2 years of this and he still drew nothing. Bryan gets "the" storyline of the night centered around him for the first time and he's suddenly ratings kryptonite. fpalm
> 
> 
> EDIT: I fully admit if Bryan isn't popping a rating in 6 months he'll be a flop, but you Punktards have had 2 years of Punk on top, going over EVERYONE while still drawing flies and *STILL WON'T ADMIT PUNK IS A FAILURE*.


How is that an excuse? it's the truth.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> :lmao
> 
> Haters gonna hate... and apparently now make shit up as they go. The whole Punk drawing nothing, thinking everyone's calling Bryan a ratings "kryptonite", and then the hypocrisy in attacking Punk marks for making "excuses" when you're doing the same for Bryan.
> 
> For the record, Bryan's doing fine right now. He was a big part of the overrun gain last week and this week while hour 3 fell below 4 million, it didn't fall as much as it would've if people didn't care about Bryan. He's doing his thing in drawing in viewers in this big feud, just like Punk has done in the past couple of years. Bryan will have some hiccups like Punk did (the Orton overruns for both guys for example), and even Cena does these days, but they draw when it counts and that's what matters.


Not hating. Simple facts. Lowest ratings since Diesel happened on Punk's watch as champ. If the same thing happens on Bryan's watch when he becomes WWE champ I'll call him a flop too. See I'm not making up elaborate excuses for my boy. "Boo hoo, Cena main evented everything. Boo hoo, Punk was always number 2 behind Cena." Those are excuses that follow Punk around. Duck them all you want. As for me making excuses as well, maybe you're right. But you got to admit Punk has had more than enough time to become a big time ratings getter and he hasn't. Last week the freaking diva's kicked his ass. Bryan hasn't had that time and is already popping the same ratings as Punk. Pretty telling, don't you think?


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punks actually a pretty decent draw. Not Cena level, but he's not horrific.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



VGooBUG said:


> I like d bry too, but so far hasnt drawn viewers. The whole 3rd hour was focused on him and he lost viewers.Sucks for him as well is that The ratings have been incredibly low this summer, and next week we get a taped show, which will just kill the ratings. And if he DOES win at summerslam, he is going face to face with the first Monday night football preseason. and during his run, the return of monday night football season. He is probably fucked


We won't know until we see the breakdown if the third hour was a failure or not. If the breakdown reads something like:



> Punk/Heyman gained 400,000 in the 10PM segment to a 3.34 rating. Bryan/Swagger lost 400,000 viewers. Bryan/Cesaro gained 120,000 viewers. Bryan/Ryback gained 110,000 viewers. Bryan/Ryback/Cena in the overrun gained 320,000 viewers


^I'd consider that a success.



> Not hating. Simple facts. Lowest ratings since Diesel happened on Punk's watch as champ. If the same thing happens on Bryan's watch when he becomes WWE champ I'll call him a flop too. See I'm not making up elaborate excuses for my boy. "Boo hoo, Cena main evented everything. Boo hoo, Punk was always number 2 behind Cena." Those are excuses that follow Punk around. Duck them all you want. As for me making excuses as well, maybe you're right. But you got to admit Punk has had more than enough time to become a big time ratings getter and he hasn't. Last week the freaking diva's kicked his ass. Bryan hasn't had that time and is already popping the same ratings as Punk. Pretty telling, don't you think?


:lol 

So you admit to making excuses and condemn others that do? Look, it's fine to state reasonable facts about why certain things end up the way they do, but to criticize when someone you hate is defended on similar grounds, that's just being a flat-out hypocrite. 

Punk had some excellent gains and numbers at the top of his 2011 run, only a few months into his run. That was when Punk was hot and fresh like Bryan is now, and that's where the comparison should be. At that time Punk was a big part in the equation that sold MITB, as well as selling shirts, and having some strong gains. Punk did well for the most part throughout his run, whether you want to admit it or not. He didn't set the world on fire, and at certain points I may have agreed he wasn't a draw (and I even said at one point he was an anti-draw after all), but when I look back as a whole, his numbers for the most part fine. Some good, some great, some bad, etc. Same thing can be said about Cena to a lesser extent. Punk's a draw, just not on the level of Cena, but Cena isn't the line for who's a draw and who isn't.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> We won't know until we see the breakdown if the third hour was a failure or not. If the breakdown reads something like:
> 
> 
> 
> ^I'd consider that a success.


RVD/Barrett is missing, that killed viewership, I'm sure of it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> RVD/Barrett is missing, that killed viewership, I'm sure of it.


Didn't that happen before the Punk/Heyman segment? Or... actually, that would make sense. Actually now that I think about it, I think that took up a small portion of Q9 and Q10, so a loss in quarter 10 could be attributed to that, although I think the match was less than 5 minutes.


----------



## xD7oom

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No Lesnar, no ratings.


----------



## LKRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's great to come into this thread and a get a laugh outta all the crazy RATINGZ marks


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> So you admit to making excuses and condemn others that do? Look, it's fine to state reasonable facts about why certain things end up the way they do, but to criticize when someone you hate is defended on similar grounds, that's just being a flat-out hypocrite.
> 
> Punk had some excellent gains and numbers at the top of his 2011 run, only a few months into his run. That was when Punk was hot and fresh like Bryan is now, and that's where the comparison should be. At that time Punk was a big part in the equation that sold MITB, as well as selling shirts, and having some strong gains. Punk did well for the most part throughout his run, whether you want to admit it or not. He didn't set the world on fire, and at certain points I may have agreed he wasn't a draw (and I even said at one point he was an anti-draw after all), but when I look back as a whole, his numbers for the most part fine. Some good, some great, some bad, etc. Same thing can be said about Cena to a lesser extent. Punk's a draw, just not on the level of Cena, but Cena isn't the line for who's a draw and who isn't.



Yes, because my 1 excuse, that Bryan hasn't been given a month to do what it took Punk 2 years to accomplish, is the same as all the excuse*s* Punktards come up with. Vince derailed Punk. Punk was number 2. HHH squashed Punk. Nash squashed Punk. Punk never main evented as champ. Part timer Rock was handed the belt. Yeah that is totally equal....if you are a complete fucktard.

So we can't judge Punk on his current record now? Ok then. Well if we are comparing where Punk and Bryan are at this "point in their careers," let's do it right. Quite the track record for Punk. He's had more times to shine, more pushes, and bigger opponents than Bryan. Can you honestly say Punk deserves those accolades given the fact that Bryan is currently nipping at his heels? With that kind of resume shouldn't Punk be doing a lot better than he is at garnering fan interest?


----------



## EmbassyForever

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



LKRocks said:


> It's great to come into this thread and a get a laugh outta all the crazy RATINGZ marks


This.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Punks actually a pretty decent draw. Not Cena level, but he's not horrific.


What is Cena level? He has been champ since Mania and the ratings haven't really gone up.

This thread is the equivalent to the Funny Pictures Thread, i get tons of laughs whenever i read some posts.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Is a 5.5% drop off from hour 2 to hour 3 that bad? It doesn't seem like it.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SoupBro said:


> What is Cena level? He has been champ since Mania and the ratings haven't really gone up.
> 
> This thread is the equivalent to the Funny Pictures Thread, i get tons of laughs whenever i read some posts.


Well, even when punk was the champion, he really wasn't the champion. Cena's segments show consistent growth every time, everyone else, not so much. Is it their fault? No, but Cena's the only legit full time draw they have. Bryan could be one, but they won't go all the way with him because ratings aren't big right now.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

There's people who still think Punk is not a draw. :lmao

Nobody is that clueless, even in this thread. I do think it's trolling, especially from that hardcore Bryan mark, but it still is very tiring.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM Punk has worked with Vince McMahon, John Cena, Triple H, The Rock, The Undertaker and Brock Lesnar and has been getting pushed steadily for 2 years. Any time he's had an impressive rating it involved at least one of these men. 

Daniel Bryan has worked with John Cena and has been getting pushed steadily for 2 months. Any time he's had an impressive rating, a big one time, it involved John Cena. 

What are we fighting about again?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Yes, because my 1 excuse, that Bryan hasn't been given a month to do what it took Punk 2 years to accomplish, is the same as all the excuse*s* Punktards come up with. Vince derailed Punk. Punk was number 2. HHH squashed Punk. Nash squashed Punk. Punk never main evented as champ. Part timer Rock was handed the belt. Yeah that is totally equal....if you are a complete fucktard.
> 
> So we can't judge Punk on his current record now? Ok then. Well if we are comparing where Punk and Bryan are at this "point in their careers," let's do it right. Quite the track record for Punk. He's had more times to shine, more pushes, and bigger opponents than Bryan. Can you honestly say Punk deserves those accolades given the fact that Bryan is currently nipping at his heels? With that kind of resume shouldn't Punk be doing a lot better than he is at garnering fan interest?



Since you're gonna continue grasping at straws, making stuff up, using "Punktards" and just flat-out blind hating, this is my last response. We're going in circles as is. 

Out of those "excuses" you listed, I've only seen two of them used as a reason he's not some mega draw. At least generally used. HHH squashing Punk is used by a select few people but those are more the "HHH BURIES EVERYONEZ!" people rather than "Punktards". Never heard the Nash one. The never main eventing and being number 2 are one thing and it's the truth. Vince derailing Punk, again would go along with him putting Punk at number 2. At most that's 2 "excuses" in 2 years where Bryan already has one "excuse" being pushed in one month. 

But honestly I don't know why I'm even humoring you because I don't find any of them, for Punk or Bryan, unreasonable excuses. But as I said, this is my last post on this.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk's proven he can impress on his own, or when working with a star beneath him. TLC 2011 did better than 2012, where in the former Punk main evented a Cena-less PPV, where the latter was the other way around. To be fair, you could contribute that to the title. That was back when Punk's push first began, other times include: His program with Ryback doing well in the buys/ratings, his program with AJ Lee and Danielson, his match with Sheamus on one RAW gained 1mil+, as well as having some of the best gains and quarter-hour numbers/overrun numbers of the last year+. Including his 400k+ gain in a random segment, which outperformed Triple H, Brock Lesnar and Vince McMahon in the same segment on the same night. 

unk

Thing is, Punk's had far more impressive showings than not, so not calling him a draw would be wrong. Inconsistent, would be a more fair assessment. But in that case, many top stars are inconsistent at times as well. 

The expert here is WWE, and if they did not see Punk as their second biggest draw, he wouldn't be promoted as such. Bottom line.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why so sensitive?

unk2


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Everyone loves DA NUMBERS.

:vince5


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Why so sensitive?
> 
> unk2


Because it's ratings, duh. :HHH


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Always an excuse with Punk's fans. The guy had numerous shows where he was the center storyline, mentioned in countless talk ups, and was on full display in numerous recaps. 2 years of this and he still drew nothing. Bryan gets "the" storyline of the night centered around him for the first time and he's suddenly ratings kryptonite. fpalm
> 
> 
> EDIT: I fully admit if Bryan isn't popping a rating in 6 months he'll be a flop, *but you Punktards have had 2 years of Punk on top*, going over EVERYONE while still drawing flies and *STILL WON'T ADMIT PUNK IS A FAILURE*.


"2 years on top"? If only that was the case. Punk has NEVER been on top, and has never really been positioned to be a big draw. Even when he was champ for over a year, JOHN CENA WAS STILL THE FOCUS OF THE SHOW. Why is that so difficult for people of your ilk - the anti-Punktards, if you will, to comprehend?


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Bryan/Swagger lost 400,000 viewers












Might as well end it all now, don't think i'll ever get over the heart wrenching embarrassment of one of my favourite wrestlers losing viewers on a tv show.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SJFC said:


> Might as well end it all now, don't think i'll ever get over the heart wrenching embarrassment of one of my favourite wrestlers losing viewers on a tv show.


It's okay man, Swagger will have another chance next week!


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I know Sandrone takes his ratings seriously since you said it bothers you when other people on the internet don't think CM Punk is a draw. If I had to bet I'd guess that the same goes for WrestlinFan too. 

DEM RATINGZ DAT SERIOUS BIZNUS DAT SENSITIVE MARKING

unk3

Edit - Whoops. I spoke too soon, mblonde is here.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I know Sandrone takes his ratings seriously since you said it bothers you when other people on the internet don't think CM Punk is a draw. If I had to bet I'd guess that the same goes for WrestlinFan too.
> 
> DEM RATINGZ DAT SERIOUS BIZNUS DAT SENSITIVE MARKING
> 
> unk3
> 
> Edit - Whoops. I spoke too soon, mblonde is here.


:lmao

Wait, I did?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> :lmao
> 
> Wait, I did?


Yes, you did. Don't worry, I had the same reaction too. 

:|


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Now let's pretend Starbuck doesn't enter sensitive-mark-mode whenever the almighty :HHH is brought up.

:side:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Yes, you did. Don't worry, I had the same reaction too.
> 
> :|


Hm, was this in the last bunch of posts I've made? Color me curious.

Admittedly, I do find blind-hate of any wrestler I like a bit annoying (not just Punk), but oh well.


----------



## Evolution

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I can't wait for the next generation of kids to grow up basing their opinions on their favourite wrestlers not on crazy segments or good matches, but by their quarter hour ratings increases.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Pfft. Like I need to go bat for the Shovel God. His mere presence on the show is enough to bury everyone on the internet. DAT GAME DRAW.

@Sandrone - You said it not too long ago but you definitely did say it. Up until that point I thought all this banter was verbal sparring and thinly veiled trolling on both our ends. Then you said that and well, I realized it meant more to you than that. You take those quarter hours to your heart all you want. Nobody is going to judge you for it....except Happenstan I reckon. He'll judge you for it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Pfft. Like I need to go bat for the Shovel God. His mere presence on the show is enough to bury everyone on the internet.
> 
> @Sandrone - You said it not too long ago but you definitely did say it. Up until that point I thought all this banter was verbal sparring and thinly veiled trolling on both our ends. Then you said that and well, I realized it meant more to you than that. You take those quarter hours to your heart all you want. Nobody is going to judge you for it....except Happenstan I reckon. He'll judge you for it.


I think you might've read too much into what I said then, or just misinterpreted me trolling. I definitely don't take quarter hours to heart but I do enjoy discussing them and seeing how certain segments do and what not.

...

Actually, fuck all I said. It kills me every time Sandow losing viewers.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> I think you might've read too much into what I said then, or just misinterpreted me trolling. I definitely don't take quarter hours to heart but I do enjoy discussing them and seeing how certain segments do and what not.
> 
> ...
> 
> Actually, fuck all I said. It kills me every time Sandow losing viewers.


:lol You weren't trolling. You actually said it. It surprised me tbh. 

I know it does. Bless. You're just picking the wrong guys. Outside Taker you got nothing. Punk, Sandow, Barrett. Just no. You need to be on the World's Strongest Ratings train. That's where the money is. 

:henry1


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> :lol You weren't trolling. You actually said it. It surprised me tbh.
> 
> I know it does. Bless. You're just picking the wrong guys. Outside Taker you got nothing. Punk, Sandow, Barrett. Just no. You need to be on the World's Strongest Ratings train. That's where the money is.
> 
> :henry1


Well, can't say for certain if I was trolling or not as I really can't recall it. I definitely know I don't feel that way now, despite what it might look like from the back and fourth with Happenstan. :|

--

Yeah, I'm a ratings-picking failure. unk3


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Starbuck, the ultimate Ratings thread troll.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:jpl


----------



## ecabney

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.94: Just another day at the office


----------



## SpeedStick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ecabney said:


> 2.94: Just another day at the office


Before the all start just remember casual fans don't wanna see 40+ minutes of in ring matches


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.9? so pretty much the average nowdays...not bad at all. Especially when you consider the first 2 hours were dull as hell and in hour 3 it was basically just Bryan fighting 3 un-established mid-carders.


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Who loves ratings? Everybody! :vince Who loves Punk+ratings? Not many. unk3


----------



## dreamchord

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You guys talking about who draws what are completely missing the point. The fact is that wrestling matches have always lost ratings, in general. Of course some don't always, but most do. That's been a general trend which dates back to the Attitude Era.

Shows which are promo heavy always draw a bigger rating. That's why wrestling was in a boom in the 90's, because there was barely any actual wrestling on any of the TV shows.


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Q1: 3.0 rating - Brad Maddox hosts the John Cena and Daniel Bryan contract signing, Alberto Del Rio vs. Sheamus teaser

Q2: 2.7 rating - Alberto Del Rio vs. Sheamus in a non-title match, two commercial breaks

Q3: 2.9 rating - Del Rio vs. Sheamus continuation, Booker T and Teddy Long backstage, Christian entrance, two commercial breaks

Q4: 2.9 rating - Christian vs. Titus O'Neil, Ryback backstage promo, Mark Henry promo

Q5: 3.2 rating - Mark Henry calls out The Shield, The Uso's save Henry, John Cena and Daniel Bryan talk backstage, Dolph Ziggler vs. Darren Young

Q6: 3.1 rating - Ziggler vs. Young continuation with Big E Langston and A.J. Lee out post match, MizTV with the cast of Total Divas and Jerry Lawler

Q7: 2.9 rating - Maddox, Triple H, and Stephanie McMahon backstage, Wyatt Family video, Fandango and Summer Rae entrance, two commercial breaks

Q8: 2.9 rating - Cody Rhodes vs. Fandango with Damien Sandow on commentary, C.M. Punk promo

Q9: 3.1 rating - Punk continuation with Paul Heyman on the big screen, Rob Van Dam vs. Wade Barrett

Q10: 2.8 rating - RVD vs. Barrett continuation, Daniel Bryan vs. Jack Swagger

Q11: 2.8 rating - Daniel Bryan vs. Antonio Cesaro, two commercial breaks

Q12: 3.0 rating - Bryan vs. Cesaro continuation, Maddox and Alex Riley backstage, Daniel Bryan vs. Ryback

Overrun: 3.2 rating - Bryan vs. Ryback continuation, John Cena saves Bryan, Vince McMahon talks with Maddox backstage, Bryan in-ring celebration

http://www.prowrestling.net/artman/publish/WWE/article10032519.shtml


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Pretty early for quarter ratings. If they're true, the opening didn't do as hot as it should have with Cena being there.

Good showings by Henry, Punk, the overrun and unfortunately, that MizTV segment.

Bryan's matches with Swagger and Cesaro did poor, but that's to be expected.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



thaimasker said:


> Q1: 3.0 rating - Brad Maddox hosts the John Cena and Daniel Bryan contract signing, Alberto Del Rio vs. Sheamus teaser
> 
> Q2: 2.7 rating - Alberto Del Rio vs. Sheamus in a non-title match, two commercial breaks
> 
> Q3: 2.9 rating - Del Rio vs. Sheamus continuation, Booker T and Teddy Long backstage, Christian entrance, two commercial breaks
> 
> Q4: 2.9 rating - Christian vs. Titus O'Neil, Ryback backstage promo, Mark Henry promo
> 
> Q5: 3.2 rating - Mark Henry calls out The Shield, The Uso's save Henry, John Cena and Daniel Bryan talk backstage, Dolph Ziggler vs. Darren Young
> 
> Q6: 3.1 rating - Ziggler vs. Young continuation with Big E Langston and A.J. Lee out post match, MizTV with the cast of Total Divas and Jerry Lawler
> 
> Q7: 2.9 rating - Maddox, Triple H, and Stephanie McMahon backstage, Wyatt Family video, Fandango and Summer Rae entrance, two commercial breaks
> 
> Q8: 2.9 rating - Cody Rhodes vs. Fandango with Damien Sandow on commentary, C.M. Punk promo
> 
> Q9: 3.1 rating - Punk continuation with Paul Heyman on the big screen, Rob Van Dam vs. Wade Barrett
> 
> Q10: 2.8 rating - RVD vs. Barrett continuation, Daniel Bryan vs. Jack Swagger
> 
> Q11: 2.8 rating - Daniel Bryan vs. Antonio Cesaro, two commercial breaks
> 
> Q12: 3.0 rating - Bryan vs. Cesaro continuation, Maddox and Alex Riley backstage, Daniel Bryan vs. Ryback
> 
> Overrun: 3.2 rating - Bryan vs. Ryback continuation, John Cena saves Bryan, Vince McMahon talks with Maddox backstage, Bryan in-ring celebration
> 
> http://www.prowrestling.net/artman/publish/WWE/article10032519.shtml





Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Pretty early for quarter ratings. If they're true, the opening didn't do as hot as it should have with Cena being there.
> 
> Good showings by Henry, Punk, the overrun and unfortunately, that MizTV segment.
> 
> *Bryan's matches with Swagger and Cesaro did poor, but that's to be expected.*


Agreed. I will quote what Powell said on prowrestling.net though, because he's pretty spot on in his assessment.



> Powell's POV: The Bryan segments performed well. Quarter 11 doesn't look all that impressive, but the two commercial breaks clearly drove the number down. The growth for the final quarter and the overrun are to be expected. So while the Bryan segments didn't pop huge numbers, they seem to be in line with what Raw would normally draw in those quarter-hours. For those who missed it earlier, Raw delivered a 2.94 rating with 4.005 million viewers.
> 
> source: prowrestling.net


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan/Cesaro continuation, Bryan/Ryback got a 3.0 and a 3.2 into the overrun. Good for a situation in which the same guy has been on for around 45 minutes. Fans didn't get bored of it. Thought for sure it'd do horribly. Great job by Bryan. LOL that the highest quarter hour of the night (outside of the overrun) was a 3.1.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Woah, the gain and loss was posted that early?


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Bryan/Cesaro continuation, Bryan/Ryback got a 3.0 and a 3.2 into the overrun. Good for a situation in which the same guy has been on for around 45 minutes. Fans didn't get bored of it. Thought for sure it'd do horribly. Great job by Bryan. LOL that the highest quarter hour of the night (outside of the overrun) was a 3.1.


Yeah Bryan did quite well, and didn't tank the ratings like I had feared he would after working 45 minutes straight. Also don't forget about Q5.



> *Q5: 3.2 rating* - Mark Henry calls out The Shield, The Uso's save Henry, John Cena and Daniel Bryan talk backstage, Dolph Ziggler vs. Darren Young


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Breakdowns don't normally come this early. Then again this just seems to list the rating and not the gains/losses. That's the overall ratings and not just 18-49, right? 

If those are the real numbers, good number for Punk/Heyman, Henry/Shield, the overrun, but most importantly the Bryan gauntlet match gained throughout, which is really good.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Damn I expected Punk/Heyman at 10pm to be the highest rated quarter. Guess not, only Brock can make it happen it seems. 

Going by the overrun ratings and viewership gains the past two weeks, so far John Cena vs Daniel Bryan is outperforming Punk vs Brock. If this trend continues Cena/Bryan WWE championship match might possibly main event summerslam over Punk/Brock.

Also DAT MARK RATINGS HENRY still killing it in ratings! The Man is just unstoppable. :lmao


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Defei said:


> Going by the overrun ratings and viewership gains the past two weeks, so far John Cena vs Daniel Bryan is outperforming Punk vs Brock. If this trend continues Cena/Bryan WWE championship match might possibly main event summerslam over Punk/Brock.
> 
> Also DAT MARK RATINGS HENRY still killing it in ratings! The Man is just unstoppable. :lmao


You mean the past two weeks, where Bryan/Cena opened and closed both shows and Punk/Heyman/Lesnar got the 10 segment? Fair assessment. Punk/Lesnar started a month ago. Don't try to argue that Bryan/Cena is a bigger program, that's so far from the truth there's no point to even discuss it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Defei said:


> Damn I expected Punk/Heyman at 10pm to be the highest rated quarter. Guess not, only Brock can make it happen it seems.
> 
> Going by the overrun ratings and viewership gains the past two weeks, so far John Cena vs Daniel Bryan is outperforming Punk vs Brock. If this trend continues Cena/Bryan WWE championship match might possibly main event summerslam over Punk/Brock.
> 
> Also DAT MARK RATINGS HENRY still killing it in ratings! The Man is just unstoppable. :lmao


:clap

Bryan and Cena program has been doing quite well. Not that that's a surprise. But Bryan's 45 minutes of awesomeness and corresponding ratings is also fantastic.


----------



## #Mark

This HappenStan guy has to be a troll. Punk is a proven, steady draw at this point. The evidence is the numbers he's been drawing for the past month. 

You're really overrating Punk's push. He hasn't been a focal point the past two years, yeah he was champion, but that doesn't mean anything when the machine isn't really behind him. His real push started after his heel turn, before that he was getting his legs cut from him under him, playing second fiddle to Cena, and feuding with guys like Del Rio, Miz, and Ziggler.. All with no credibility at all. Do you think Cena would have drawn if he wasn't working with HHH and HBK during his mega push? The only person in position to give Punk credibility was HHH in 2011 and instead he pinned him in the middle of the ring. 

Plus, his merch sells well which should be a testament to his ability to draw. 

Why does Punk strike ire with some of you when a guy like Orton who was pushed significantly for nearly a decade has never proven to be a draw? (granted he's been depushed for quite sometime but even so he still has still been pushed for over eight years). 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Never heard the Nash one.


Then you haven't been paying attention.



The Sandrone said:


> The never main eventing and being number 2 are one thing and it's the truth.


No they aren't. Bryan has main evented 2 of the last 3 weeks and he isn't #2...yet. It's also opinion not truth.



The Sandrone said:


> Vince derailing Punk, again would go along with him putting Punk at number 2.


Wrong again. And I was referring to the Vince/Punk "feud" in October of 2012 that had nothing to do with being #2. Punk was the main focus of the show after RAW 1000, and really covered excessively before then, even if he didn't have the final slot of each show.



The Sandrone said:


> But honestly I don't know why I'm even humoring you because I don't find any of them, for Punk or Bryan, unreasonable excuses. But as I said, this is my last post on this.


Sure it is.



mblonde09 said:


> "2 years on top"? If only that was the case. Punk has NEVER been on top, and has never really been positioned to be a big draw. Even when he was champ for over a year, JOHN CENA WAS STILL THE FOCUS OF THE SHOW. Why is that so difficult for people of your ilk - the anti-Punktards, if you will, to comprehend?


Got to hand it to mblonde. He's got the most used excuse down pat. That's powerful Punktardom. 



Starbuck said:


> Nobody is going to judge you for it....except Happenstan I reckon. He'll judge you for it.


Me? Judge? I have no idea what you are talking about. :



#Mark said:


> This HappenStan guy has to be a troll. Punk is a proven, steady draw at this point. The evidence is the numbers he's been drawing for the past month.


Just "trolling" with facts Mark. BTW we are talking about Punk not drawing UNLESS he faces a named superstar bigger than his own. He's been doing that all year. Rock, Taker, now Brock. Put him in a match with Orton and the diva's match out performed his main event showing. Something that has never happened in the history of WWE. God only know what he would draw in a feud with Big Show or Sheamus.


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Honestly I think Mark henry is bigger draw than Punk. Say what you will about henry but he can do what Punk can't even after working with the biggest stars and biggest PPVs for the past two years... DRAW RATINGS. Every week henry impresses even in the odd quarter hours while punk works main event with superstars like Randy Orton. So what is Punk's excuse for not doing well?


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:henry1 unk :cena :bryan drawing as expected.

Don't forget that Punk and Sheamus gained over one million viewers in their sole match they had on RAW.


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sole match? Wasn't that a lumberjack match or something? Champion vs Champion too iirc.


----------



## IWCLOL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Dat 2.7 for Del Rio

:adr


Vince's project is over 

:vince6


Even casuals hate Sheamus/Del Rio matches :lmao


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

MARK "RATINGS" HENRY always killing it with the numbers! THAT'S WHAT HE DOES! :henry1


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Jof said:


> Sole match? Wasn't that a lumberjack match or something? Champion vs Champion too iirc.


It's still a one on one match. I don't think there was any Lamberjack match that gained that much.

Mark Henry wasn't doing well when he returned this year, he started doing well few weeks back only. I wanted him to win the title tho.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Then you haven't been paying attention.
> 
> 
> 
> No they aren't. Bryan has main evented 2 of the last 3 weeks and he isn't #2...yet. It's also opinion not truth.
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again. And I was referring to the Vince/Punk "feud" in October of 2012 that had nothing to do with being #2. Punk was the main focus of the show after RAW 1000, and really covered excessively before then, even if he didn't have the final slot of each show.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure it is.
> 
> 
> 
> Got to hand it to mblonde. He's got the most used excuse down pat. That's powerful Punktardom.
> 
> 
> 
> Me? Judge? I have no idea what you are talking about. :
> 
> 
> 
> *Just "trolling" with facts Mark. BTW we are talking about Punk not drawing UNLESS he faces a named superstar bigger than his own. He's been doing that all year. Rock, Taker, now Brock. Put him in a match with Orton and the diva's match out performed his main event showing. Something that has never happened in the history of WWE. God only know what he would draw in a feud with Big Show or Sheamus.*


Facts my ass. The only thing you have is an overall rating number of a show and you judge by that only. By the way he had a match with Orton in the 9pm and gained about 558,000 viewers as for Sheamus he gained a million viewers with and the segment between both in Chicago did pretty good too. As for Big show feud leading to SS 12 did also very good with a million viewers gain and near a million viewers gain.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Quarter hours out already? That was quick....if these are legit of course. Anywho...

I think that's one of the strongest openings they've had in a while so they started off well. Somebody can correct me on that if I'm wrong but most openings have been around the 2.7 - 2.9 range recently so this one is above that. 

DAT MARK HENRY matching the overrun. Seriously. This used to be a joke with Henry but it's actually the truth. Week after week he performs so well and with minimal hype. Give him some actual promotion and he pulls 3.6's. Madness. 

10pm did all right. No Bork so no surprise here. They went from a 2.9 to a 3.1. Not spectacular by any means but nothing did spectacularly well on this show. The quarter hours are very steady for the most part with no dramatic gains and losses. 

The Bryan hour is....interesting. Personally I'd consider that a great success. Viewership didn't fall dramatically and it actually held steady for the first 2 matches before growing during the third. That's an accomplishment from where I'm sitting considering it was the same guy fighting 3 no namers. So yeah, kudos DB. All of Bryan's stuff was only 0.2 away from the overall of the show, he was fighting nobodies and managed to hold a steady audience for 45 minutes. I really don't see how that can be called a poor performance tbh. Did it set the world on fire? Nope. But nothing on this show did so he's in line with everybody else. 

EDIT - I completely missed the MizTV stuff. I don't know whether to :lol or :| tbh. Then again, the Divas really have been performing way above average recently. Last week they matched Punk/Orton and this week they match Punk/Heyman. 

DAT DIVA 3.1

:vince3


----------



## Mister Hands

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> The Bryan hour is....interesting. Personally I'd consider that a great success. Viewership didn't fall dramatically and it actually held steady for the first 2 matches before growing during the third. That's an accomplishment from where I'm sitting considering it was the same guy fighting 3 no namers. So yeah, kudos DB. All of Bryan's stuff was only 0.2 away from the overall of the show, he was fighting nobodies and managed to hold a steady audience for 45 minutes. I really don't see how that can be called a poor performance tbh. Did it set the world on fire? Nope. But nothing on this show did so he's in line with everybody else.


Yeah, I think that, while Bryan's hour obviously didn't do huge numbers, the real question is how many guys on the roster could go out there for an hour and gain, rather than lose viewers.


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



#Mark said:


> This HappenStan guy has to be a troll. Punk is a proven, steady draw at this point. The evidence is the numbers he's been drawing for the past month.
> 
> You're really overrating Punk's push. He hasn't been a focal point the past two years, yeah he was champion, but that doesn't mean anything when the machine isn't really behind him. His real push started after his heel turn, before that he was getting his legs cut from him under him, playing second fiddle to Cena, and feuding with guys like Del Rio, Miz, and Ziggler.. All with no credibility at all. Do you think Cena would have drawn if he wasn't working with HHH and HBK during his mega push? The only person in position to give Punk credibility was HHH in 2011 and instead he pinned him in the middle of the ring.
> 
> *Plus, his merch sells well which should be a testament to his ability to draw.
> *
> Why does Punk strike ire with some of you when a guy like Orton who was pushed significantly for nearly a decade has never proven to be a draw? (granted he's been depushed for quite sometime but even so he still has still been pushed for over eight years).
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Why do you punk fans always bring up merchandise sales? Bryan has been outselling Punk for the past three months, so you agree Bryan is bigger draw than punk?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> Why do you punk fans always bring up merchandise sales? Bryan has been outselling Punk for the past three months, so you agree Bryan is bigger draw than punk?


I think you missed his point.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Consider Bryans quarterhours a success and predicted it would happen in that other thread. People in the other thread were worried that 45 minutes of pure wrestling would be too much and leading to terrible ratings which may jeopardize Bryans push but the numbers show a more positive picture. He only tanked in the ads heavy QH where he wrestled Swagger and got 3/4s of that viewership back in the following two segments. If people can sit through 45 minutes of Bryan action surely they will sit through most of his promos and other matches aswell. I'm content.


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RAtings are overrated IMO anyways, those drops and gains can be just one person switching the channel cause the fluxuations. The neilson ratings are an outdated system.

You would think in this day and age with the internet and most people being connected to the internet, they could get exact rating numbers for people watching TV.


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^ Yeah the only reason WWE even pays attention to them is because of sponsers..
also its highly ironic people in here defending punk ratings and yet punk doesn't think ratings could be more useless and thinks following them is ridiculous


Contrarian said:


> Why do you punk fans always bring up merchandise sales? Bryan has been outselling Punk for the past three months, so you agree Bryan is bigger draw than punk?


how do u know that? where can you view the merch sales?


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Interesting... http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_72207.shtml#.UfAi2I21Fv8



> The "Daniel Bryan Third Hour" declined in viewership, but drew in the younger demographic. The 10:00 p.m. hour rated the highest among m12-34 and m18-34, while the 9:00 p.m. hour was top-ranked in the broader demo of m18-49.
> 
> Also, the male teen rating jumped to its highest point in five weeks, indicating that Daniel Bryan's character appeals most to the younger audience.


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Interesting... http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_72207.shtml#.UfAi2I21Fv8


I read that which just proves the ratings are flawed since yes kids love DB but a good number of his fans are older fans who knew him from ROH.

Just think if everyone who posts in the raw thread had a neilson rating box how high the ratings for raw would be every week. They would get huge numbers.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Interesting... http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_72207.shtml#.UfAi2I21Fv8


So, in conclusion, the old farts north of 34, that grew up watching the likes of Hogan/Warrior/and other huge larger than life guys who can't wrestle, don't really like Daniel Bryan? Well who couldn't have seen that coming :lol. Also who cares since they'll soon fade into irrelevancy anyway.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


> Consider Bryans quarterhours a success and predicted it would happen in that other thread. People in the other thread were worried that 45 minutes of pure wrestling would be too much and leading to terrible ratings which may jeopardize Bryans push but the numbers show a more positive picture. He only tanked in the ads heavy QH where he wrestled Swagger and got 3/4s of that viewership back in the following two segments. If people can sit through 45 minutes of Bryan action surely they will sit through most of his promos and other matches aswell. I'm content.


You were right, thank God, and I was wrong. I didn't give the audience enough credit it seems, and for Bryan to hold viewers through all those commercials during his matches and actually begin to gain half way through the Cesaro match all the way until the overrun is a huge accomplishment, and I bet WWE is very happy with those numbers.


----------



## #Mark

Happenstan said:


> Just "trolling" with facts Mark. BTW we are talking about Punk not drawing UNLESS he faces a named superstar bigger than his own. He's been doing that all year. Rock, Taker, now Brock. Put him in a match with Orton and the diva's match out performed his main event showing. Something that has never happened in the history of WWE. God only know what he would draw in a feud with Big Show or Sheamus.


Where's Orton's blame? He's been pushed for over a decade and hasn't drawn a dime. And you do realize that whole show did poor, right?

Why don't you address the rest of my post? Do you really think Punk got a fair deal during the first year of his push? He wasn't main eventing and he was feuding with guys with no credibility. If you really think Del Rio, Miz, Ziggler, Bryan and a comedic Kane would be able to give Punk the rub necessary to make him a star then you're delusional. Cena was paired off with Hunter and HBK during his mega push while Punk gets ADR and Miz.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



#Mark said:


> Where's Orton's blame? He's been pushed for over a decade and hasn't drawn a dime. And you do realize that whole show did poor, right?
> 
> Why don't you address the rest of my post? Do you really think Punk got a fair deal during the first year of his push? He wasn't main eventing and he was feuding with guys with no credibility. If you really think Del Rio, Miz, Ziggler, Bryan and a comedic Kane would be able to give Punk the rub necessary to make him a star then you're delusional. *Cena was paired off with Hunter and HBK during his mega push while Punk gets ADR and Miz.*


Don't forget that Cena also went over Kurt Angle, Y2J Chris Jericho( who still had loads of credibility at that point), Christian at his peek, JBL at his peek, Edge, Umaga during his undefeated streak, Khali at his peek, and more.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



birthday_massacre said:


> RAtings are overrated IMO anyways, those drops and gains can be just one person switching the channel cause the fluxuations. The neilson ratings are an outdated system.
> 
> You would think in this day and age with the internet and most people being connected to the internet, they could get exact rating numbers for people watching TV.


I've been saying that for so long. I think the ratio is something like 250 nielsen viewwers equals 1M in the nielsen viewership. So if even 1 person tuns out, that's like 4000 less people.

So for Raw, getting 4M viewers means around 2500 nielsen viewers are watching.

Hopefully one day TV ratings are accurate down to the last viewer. All TV Cable/Satellite boxes should count towards TV ratings. Cause 20,000 or so people counting for all of USAs ratings(a country with over 100M tv viewers) seems like a REAL SMALL sample size.

Only reason I can think of that it hasn't happened yet is cause TV networks know that ratings for their shows will be going down if you count every last tv viewer in the country as part of the ratings.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



#Mark said:


> Where's Orton's blame? He's been pushed for over a decade and hasn't drawn a dime. And you do realize that whole show did poor, right?
> 
> Why don't you address the rest of my post? Do you really think Punk got a fair deal during the first year of his push? He wasn't main eventing and he was feuding with guys with no credibility. If you really think Del Rio, Miz, Ziggler, Bryan and a comedic Kane would be able to give Punk the rub necessary to make him a star then you're delusional. Cena was paired off with Hunter and HBK during his mega push while Punk gets ADR and Miz.


Orton was actually doing pretty good back in 2009 as a draw. Top merchandise seller at one point, WM25 was based around him and HHH/McMahon in the main event and it sold well, plus Raw for the first time in years got over 4.0 in numbers on two separate occasions during the HHH/Orton feud.

And he should get less blame than Punk/Bryan because they have been pushed harder than him in the past two or so years. Also nobody is really defending him as a draw NOW. The last time Orton was really center of a main event storyline on Raw would probably have to be his Cena feud four years ago. His last time as a main event star was in the Nexus/Cena feud where he was just the guy with the title and it was all about Cena.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Interesting... http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_72207.shtml#.UfAi2I21Fv8


That is rather interesting actually because one John Cena appeals most to children and WWE's entire product is geared towards kids for the most part. Very interesting indeed. Of all the times to say somebody is going to kick Cena off the kiddie train, there's actually a bit of evidence for once to support such a claim. 

OMG D BRY GONNA BCOME DA NEW FACE OF DA WWE 

:dazzler



#Mark said:


> Where's Orton's blame? He's been pushed for over a decade and hasn't drawn a dime. And you do realize that whole show did poor, right?
> 
> Why don't you address the rest of my post? Do you really think Punk got a fair deal during the first year of his push? He wasn't main eventing and he was feuding with guys with no credibility. If you really think Del Rio, Miz, Ziggler, Bryan and a comedic Kane would be able to give Punk the rub necessary to make him a star then you're delusional. Cena was paired off with Hunter and HBK during his mega push while Punk gets ADR and Miz.


I wonder what your excuse will be if Punk ends up in the same boat as Orton after working with Cena, Vince, HHH, Rock, Taker and Brock. Just curious because really, if you can't produce the numbers without the aid of a bigger star, then there's nothing to discuss. So far, this is the case when it comes to Punk, Orton too. They both do fine when paired up with a bigger name but when the onus is on them to provide the star power in a program, it flops.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Orton was actually doing pretty good back in 2009 as a draw. Top merchandise seller at one point, WM25 was based around him and HHH/McMahon in the main event and it sold well, plus Raw for the first time in years got over 4.0 in numbers on two separate occasions during the HHH/Orton feud.
> 
> *And he should get less blame than Punk/Bryan because they have been pushed harder than him in the past two or so years.* Also nobody is really defending him as a draw NOW. The last time Orton was really center of a main event storyline on Raw would probably have to be his Cena feud four years ago. His last time as a main event star was in the Nexus/Cena feud where he was just the guy with the title and it was all about Cena.


That doesn't make sense at all. He still got pushed harder than them, like he defeated HHH, Michaels, Benoit, Cena, Batista, Foley, etc. What else this guy need to be a draw? He's not good enough to carry his own weight and use his past pushes/accomplishments on his side or advantage. As of right now he needs a big opponent to draw and even that sometimes still fails. Plus I cant even remember the last time he carried a feud, he's kind of a guy that says come at me if you want a piece of me and doesn't do the opposite because he's lazy (You got to admit it). 

His character is dull, all I see on my TV is an RKO guy, nothing more and nothing less. Also he still defeated almost everybody in the roster clean, not so much for guys like Punk and Bryan (Who just go that lately, and god knows how long will that stay). His character might be his biggest problem but also he's lazy to make his current character work.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> They both do fine when paired up with a bigger name but when the onus is on them to provide the star power in a program, *it flops.*


They flop? Really? Never seen that happen. Didn't set the world on fire, sure, sometimes. But flop.. lol.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> They flop? Really? Never seen that happen. Didn't set the world on fire, sure, sometimes. But flop.. lol.












They all got left behind 

: (


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> You were right, thank God, and I was wrong. I didn't give the audience enough credit it seems, and for Bryan to hold viewers through all those commercials during his matches and actually begin to gain half way through the Cesaro match all the way until the overrun is a huge accomplishment, and I bet WWE is very happy with those numbers.


Indeed the numbers are very good, we watched uninterrupted wrestling (ignoring the ads obviously) for the same length as a Soccer Half-Time. I hope people can give up on the insane "wrestling matches don't draw wrestling fans in" argument. 3 jobbers and one pushed guy were enough to keep viewership steady. Of course, something that matters is the quality, you're never going to lose viewers when you let The Top 2 wrestlers in the company such as Bryan and Cesaro just go at it. The numbers, the reactions are all proof of that. 



Starbuck said:


> That is rather interesting actually because one John Cena appeals most to children and WWE's entire product is geared towards kids for the most part. Very interesting indeed. Of all the times to say somebody is going to kick Cena off the kiddie train, there's actually a bit of evidence for once to support such a claim.
> 
> OMG D BRY GONNA BCOME DA NEW FACE OF DA WWE
> 
> :dazzler


This, Cena dun goofed, should have tried to bury him instead of kissing his ass. Now Bryans gonna not only take the Title from him, but his spot as the Nr.1 Face of the show too. Goats > Supermen in 2013.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> They all got left behind
> 
> : (


So that one night, and that night with Tensai and Bryan. That's all I can remember _flopping_. Any others?

But hey, Triple H lost viewers in the overrun once, didn't he? Even DA GAME flops some nights.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> So that one night, and that night with Tensai and Bryan. That's all I can remember _flopping_. Any others?
> 
> But hey, Triple H lost viewers in the overrun once, didn't he? Even DA GAME flops some nights.


OMG DA GAME LOST VIEWERS I AM DEVASTATED BY THIS NEWS................

:HHH2

I guess he got left behind too.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punks been performing mediocre in the ratings ever since his push in 2011. Yet he's still positioned as 1B. It seems WWE don't care if he's a ratings draw like they didn't care HBK wasn't a ratings draw, like they didn't care Orton wasn't a ratings draw etc...

Thats why i don't give a shit about the Punk ratings argument anymore. Because WWE evidently dont.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> OMG DA GAME LOST VIEWERS I AM DEVASTATED BY THIS NEWS................
> 
> :HHH2
> 
> I guess he got left behind too.


Exactly. PUNK AND GAME CAN'T DRAW.

Am I doing it right?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^^^^ Not quite. I think you meant to say Punk and Orton there. 

rton2

But yet you took the time to come here and tell us all that. Thank you.


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Punks been performing mediocre in the ratings ever since his push in 2011. Yet he's still positioned as 1B. It seems WWE don't care if he's a ratings draw like they didn't care HBK wasn't a ratings draw, like they didn't care Orton wasn't a ratings draw etc...
> 
> Thats why i don't give a shit about the Punk ratings argument anymore. Because WWE evidently dont.


So you agree that Punk is being over-pushed by WWE? If he can't draw he shouldn't be in that position right? WWE should push someone who deserves to be 1b. They made a big mistake burying Ryback.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nah, Triple H lost overrun viewers one time. He can't draw.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> So you agree that Punk is being over-pushed by WWE? If he can't he shouldn't be in that position right?


Well everyone on the roster is overpushed as, if going by on who's a ratings draw, no one on the active roster should be on television expect for John Cena.

Do I think Punks over pushed. No. He's super talented, and its obvious that he's making the WWE money somewhere else, otherwise he wouldn't be facing the three biggest names in the wrestling business today all in a span of a year if he wasn't.

HBK when positioned as the number 1 guy in 96/97, didn't move business in any venture. Yet he's pushed as the greatest of all time. WWE's like that. This argument of Punks drawing power is pointless.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> That doesn't make sense at all. He still got pushed harder than them, like he defeated HHH, Michaels, Benoit, Cena, Batista, Foley, etc. What else this guy need to be a draw? He's not good enough to carry his own weight and use his past pushes/accomplishments on his side or advantage. As of right now he needs a big opponent to draw and even that sometimes still fails. Plus I cant even remember the last time he carried a feud, he's kind of a guy that says come at me if you want a piece of me and doesn't do the opposite because he's lazy (You got to admit it).
> 
> His character is dull, all I see on my TV is an RKO guy, nothing more and nothing less. Also he still defeated almost everybody in the roster clean, not so much for guys like Punk and Bryan (Who just go that lately, and god knows how long will that stay). His character might be his biggest problem but also he's lazy to make his current character work.


No matter how much you get in accomplishments, you need to get something to work with or else interest will die. That's what has happened with Orton for the past couple of years. He's been directionless and wrestled meaningless matches 98% of it so naturally, the audience loses interest and realizes that since nothing important will happen when he's on TV (something to remember for next week at the very least) so there's no point in watching - even if this guy has defeated all the big stars you mentioned.

He might have gotten "pushed harder than them" five years ago, but that is not the case anymore. If the same happened to John Cena and for a year straight all he did was come out and wrestle some match with no purpose, the results would be identical with his drawing power fading away.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Nah, Triple H lost overrun viewers one time. He can't draw.


I forget why we're talking about DA GAME again since he has nothing to do with any of this. Could it possibly be because you're trying to deflect from DAT MEGA DRAW PUNK? I think so. 

unk2



The Cynical Miracle said:


> This argument of Punks drawing power is pointless.


Agreed but I'll be damned if it isn't hella fun.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I forget why we're talking about DA GAME again since he has nothing to do with any of this. Could it possibly be because you're trying to deflect from DAT MEGA DRAW PUNK? I think so.
> 
> unk2


Because, Starbuck. Mark Wars. It's what makes this thread so great.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

"Q9: 3.1 rating - Punk continuation with Paul Heyman on the big screen"

At least he got the second highest segment of the night so it's no so so bad.

But it isn't much better than Bryan's numbers and Bryan was out wrestling for almost an hour. 

Solid numbers I guess. This just shows how easily Bryan can replace Punk and can't do any worse. Punk is anti a lot of things and ratings just happen to be one of them.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_72228.shtml

Males 18-49 Breakdown
AVERAGE = 1.241 million
- 20:00 to 22:25 - 1.236 million
- 22:25 to 23:06 - 1.252 million

22:07 - 1.496 million
...
22:25 - 1.322 million
22:27 - 1.365 million
22:34 - 1.137 million
22:38 - 1.260 million
22:43 - 1.254 million
22:47 - 1.387 million
22:50 - 1.366 million
22:57 - 1.382 million
23:00 - 1.361 million
23:01 - 1.421 million
23:02 - 1.413 million
23:03 - 1.407 million
23:04 - 1.459 million
23:05 - 1.415 million
23:06 - 1.407 million
23:07 - 1.367 million
23:08 - 1.283 million


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk/Heyman peaked the third hour. Expected.



> - 11:04 p.m. - 1.459 million viewers (peak of Bryan's three-match run).





> - 11:06 p.m. - 1.407 million viewers for Cena making the save.


Pretty big drop there.

PUNK > BRYAN > CENA

Those vanilla midgets.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> Facts my ass. The only thing you have is an overall rating number of a show and you judge by that only. By the way he had a match with Orton in the 9pm and gained about 558,000 viewers as for Sheamus he gained a million viewers with and the segment between both in Chicago did pretty good too. As for Big show feud leading to SS 12 did also very good with a million viewers gain and near a million viewers gain.


Review the quarter hours from last year when Punk was champ. He failed as champ like you fail at life Brick.




THANOS said:


> So, in conclusion, the old farts north of 34, that grew up watching the likes of Hogan/Warrior/and other huge larger than life guys who can't wrestle, don't really like Daniel Bryan? Well who couldn't have seen that coming :lol. Also who cares since they'll soon fade into irrelevancy anyway.


Damned good news for a Cena turn if Bryan is connecting with younger viewers. Besides the fact it hooks them in for the future, it might give Vince the pills to turn Cena heel for a few months. With a super over Bryan to carry the slack for a few months they could do a "short" Cena heel turn. If it doesn't work, turn him back quickly but we all know it would work great. A heel turn might be the only way to save Cena's character at this point.




#Mark said:


> Where's Orton's blame? He's been pushed for over a decade and hasn't drawn a dime. And you do realize that whole show did poor, right?


Read between the lines man. I was also blaming him. Given the pushes and time invested in those 2, the blame for a diva's segment beating the main event should definitely be shared.



#Mark said:


> Why don't you address the rest of my post? Do you really think Punk got a fair deal during the first year of his push? He wasn't main eventing and he was feuding with guys with no credibility. If you really think Del Rio, Miz, Ziggler, Bryan and a comedic Kane would be able to give Punk the rub necessary to make him a star then you're delusional. Cena was paired off with Hunter and HBK during his mega push while Punk gets ADR and Miz.


More than fair. Punk was the main or 2 main focus of EVERY RAW, multiple recaps each week on Raw and Smackdown, multiple talk ups and promos. He was given plenty. Look at Bryan. The guy is on par with Punk right now and hasn't gotten 1/100th of the push or backing Punk has. That's the ballgame when it comes to this argument. I posted a review of Bryan and Punk's first 3 and a half years in WWE (search for it). The differences between the 2 are staggering. Punk was handed the world on a platter compared to Bryan and yet Bryan is about to surpass him. At the end of the day Punk just can't connect with enough of the audience to justify his position. So far, Bryan can. Things may change but I wouldn't hold my breathe.

You're right that Cena went over bigger names but Punk went over the ENTIRE CURRENT ROSTER. They put Punk over almost everyone they could. The old guard are gone, nothing can be done about that but the same roadblock is gonna be put in the way for Bryan or any other up and comer. The old guard aren't gonna put the new guys over. The new guys are on there own......difference is Bryan will smash through that roadblock IMO and Punk couldn't.




Starbuck said:


> I wonder what your excuse will be if Punk ends up in the same boat as Orton after working with Cena, Vince, HHH, Rock, Taker and Brock. Just curious because really, if you can't produce the numbers without the aid of a bigger star, then there's nothing to discuss. So far, this is the case when it comes to Punk, Orton too. They both do fine when paired up with a bigger name but when the onus is on them to provide the star power in a program, it flops.


So true and yet you probably shouldn't have said this. Those Punktards are gonna cut you.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Because, Starbuck. Mark Wars. It's what makes this thread so great.


Well yeah but you need to actually pick a fight with somebody you can go to war with. Go pick on the Orton or DB marks, somebody more around Punk's level. We all know he can't sit at the big boys table. 

:rock4 :brock :vince2 :HHH2 :cena3 :taker







































unk3


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah, that's why WWE doesn't book him with all of those guys.

Oh, wait.

That Punk smiley is so much win, though.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Such a shame he can't draw without them. 

:vince3


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Punk/Heyman peaked the third hour. Expected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty big drop there.
> 
> PUNK > BRYAN > CENA
> 
> Those vanilla midgets.


And which of those 3 hasn't had a decent push yet? Oh right.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You must be right, he can't. You should go tell Vince that, he has to realize it so he can stop pushing Punk as his second biggest draw. Since you know, clearly he's not. Because the people on WrestlingForum think so.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

unk4 with DAT PEAK! Give us that Punk/Bryan title feud ASAP. Their buildup to MITB 2012 drew numbers that even Cena and Rock couldn't get in 2012. Let the vanilla midgets run wild unk :bryan2

EDIT: For the record, this was more of a joke from the prior thread that was made, but the marriage proposal segment with AJ/Punk/Bryan did a 4.4 for male teen ratings. No segment in the Road to Wrestlemania got a higher male teen rating than this. :aj

Why do we not have an AJ (not Styles) smiley?


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Well yeah but you need to actually pick a fight with somebody you can go to war with. Go pick on the Orton or DB marks, somebody more around Punk's level. We all know he can't sit at the big boys table.
> 
> :rock4 :brock :vince2 :HHH2 :cena3 :taker
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unk3


No offense, but putting Triple H up there with Rock and Lesnar is an insult to both of them, they are around 20-50 times bigger names than him and Cena too is a far bigger name than Triple H ever was, same for Vince and Undertaker. In reality, Triple H is not a 2nd tier, but a 3rd tier level guy, his 13 World Championships don't translate that well in real life, he would look out of place in a list with Goldberg, Warrior, Undertaker and Randy Savage who are all a league above him and legit 2nd Tier Wrestling Superstars. As far as name power goes, there is a much smaller gap between Punk and Triple H than you make it out to be. Randy Orton and Edge are the only two wrestlers that come to mind that have a worse Drawing Power/Name Value to World Title wins ratio than him.

Not defending the guy you quoted as he's one obsessive mark who makes other Punk fans look bad, but to pretend as if Triple H is above Punk is just as ridiculous.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> unk4 with DAT PEAK! Give us that Punk/Bryan title feud ASAP. Their buildup to MITB 2012 drew numbers that even Cena and Rock couldn't get in 2012. Let the vanilla midgets run wild unk :bryan2


Is this true? If so where can I get the numbers.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


> No offense, but putting Triple H up there with Rock and Lesnar is an insult to both of them, they are around 20-50 times bigger names than him and Cena too is a far bigger name than Triple H ever was, same for Vince and Undertaker. In reality, Triple H is not a 2nd tier, but a 3rd tier level guy, his 13 World Championships don't translate that well in real life, he would look out of place in a list with Goldberg, Warrior, Undertaker and Randy Savage who are all a league above him and legit 2nd Tier Wrestling Superstars. As far as name power goes, there is a much smaller gap between Punk and Triple H than you make it out to be. Randy Orton and Edge are the only two wrestlers that come to mind that have a worse Drawing Power/Name Value to World Title wins ratio than him.
> 
> Not defending the guy you quoted as he's one obsessive mark who makes other Punk fans look bad, but to pretend as if Triple H is above Punk is just as ridiculous.


Preach.

Aslo SD was doing way better house show biz then Raw in 2003, when HHH's infamous reign of terror was going on. And that was when Lesnar was no way near the name he is today.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


> No offense, but putting Triple H up there with Rock and Lesnar is an insult to both of them, they are around 20-50 times bigger names than him and Cena too is a far bigger name than Triple H ever was, same for Vince and Undertaker. In reality, Triple H is not a 2nd tier, but a 3rd tier level guy, his 13 World Championships don't translate that well in real life, he would look out of place in a list with Goldberg, Warrior, Undertaker and Randy Savage who are all a league above him and legit 2nd Tier Wrestling Superstars. As far as name power goes, there is a much smaller gap between Punk and Triple H than you make it out to be. Randy Orton and Edge are the only two wrestlers that come to mind that have a worse Drawing Power/Name Value to World Title wins ratio than him.
> 
> Not defending the guy you quoted as he's one obsessive mark who makes other Punk fans look bad, but to pretend as if Triple H is above Punk is just as ridiculous.


This. Triple H is, and has always been, the guy that works with the guy that draws. He has always been this guy, and so is Punk it seems, but to pretend that HHH is something he's not IS quite ridiculous.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Preach.
> 
> Aslo SD was doing way better house show biz then Raw in 2003, when HHH's infamous reign of terror was going on. And that was when Lesnar was no way near the name he is today.


Yeah I was there for a RAW episode when HHH was champion and the attendance was horribly low. However, I was also in attendance for WM 19 and shockingly fans started leaving before the Brock/Angle match. I was also dismayed by the lack of reaction that Brock got for his entrance.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


> No offense, but putting Triple H up there with Rock and Lesnar is an insult to both of them, they are around 20-50 times bigger names than him and Cena too is a far bigger name than Triple H ever was, same for Vince and Undertaker. In reality, Triple H is not a 2nd tier, but a 3rd tier level guy, his 13 World Championships don't translate that well in real life, he would look out of place in a list with Goldberg, Warrior, Undertaker and Randy Savage who are all a league above him and legit 2nd Tier Wrestling Superstars. As far as name power goes, there is a much smaller gap between Punk and Triple H than you make it out to be. Randy Orton and Edge are the only two wrestlers that come to mind that have a worse Drawing Power/Name Value to World Title wins ratio than him.
> 
> Not defending the guy you quoted as he's one obsessive mark who makes other Punk fans look bad, but to pretend as if Triple H is above Punk is just as ridiculous.


Can't even fuck around in a joke thread without being called an obsessive mark. 

unk3

On a serious note, you are spot on about Triple H.


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Re: Bryan at the ending, isn't there something to be said for the fact that the WWE was teasing mystery opponents? People would stick around for the intrigue alone. 

It was a smart angle in that way.


----------



## SmarkyKunt

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Women and children should die.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Boy Wonder said:


> Yeah I was there for a RAW episode when HHH was champion and the attendance was horribly low. However, I was also in attendance for WM 19 and shockingly fans started leaving before the Brock/Angle match. I was also dismayed by the lack of reaction that Brock got for his entrance.


Well they did just watch the final match between the two biggest wrestler ever, and possibly the final match of possibly the biggest star in wrestlings history. Its tough for a guy who hadn't been in the company a year to outshine them.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SmarkyKunt said:


> Women and children should die.


Without one we wouldn't have civilization and you used to be the other.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The people on WrestlingForum are right all the time. Everybody knows that. The internet is always right. We know best. We can book the shows better than everyone. Us > :russo. 

@Loudness - You're looking to have an actual debate. This isn't the thread for actual debates lol. Besides, you're trying to ruin my amazing smiley troll post. Stop it.

EDIT - :lmao :lmao :lmao at all the Punk marks jumping on DA GAME. Priceless. Just waiting on mblonde and Sandrone and the circle will be complete.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:HHH THIS BUSINESS cannot run without THE GAME. Remember that by shedding a single tear, he drew more than Kobe Bryant and Lebron James combined! :HHH2


----------



## Felpent

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> This. Triple H is, and has always been, the guy that works with the guy that draws. He has always been this guy, and so is Punk it seems, but to pretend that HHH is something he's not IS quite ridiculous.


Nah... that's some cornette pushed garbage. Triple h was legit difference maker in 2000, often even overshadawing the Rock, believe it or not. And he still holds the biggest Rumble buyrate record. I used to think it was Austin who held the record but after looking up the numbers I found out HHH holds the biggest record. 2003 RAW house show numbers were down because HHH was injured but Lesnar worked all of them. 2003 PPV business also shows HHH was the only draw in wwe that year, Lesnar never headlined a successful PPV until the day he quit in 2004, including a wrestlemania. 

The only true top tier is Austin and Hogan anyway. The Rock, Goldberg,Savage, HHH all of them headlined an already established hot period in wrestling. Taker has never been a difference maker neither has Shawn.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> The people on WrestlingForum are right all the time. Everybody knows that. The internet is always right. We know best. We can book the shows better than everyone. Us > :russo.
> 
> @Loudness - You're looking to have an actual debate. *This isn't the thread for actual debates lol*. Besides, you're trying to ruin my amazing smiley troll post. Stop it.
> 
> EDIT - :lmao :lmao :lmao at all the Punk marks jumping on DA GAME. Priceless. Just waiting on mblonde and Sandrone and the circle will be complete.


But who was mod?

Last thing I'd ever expect from a mod is getting called out for not trolling or making actual debates as you said lol. Inb4 Ratings Thread is the Bizarro World of WF.

Maybe it's because I'm not in this thread every week, but most posts are simply too black and white to me, maybe that's what you were getting it but what's the point in discussing ratings if you're only using them to try to prove that (*insert your favourite wrestler) is better than (*insert wrestler you don't like), you can't have a logical discussion if all you base ratings on are pure emotions. This goes to literally all marks and haters of the more prominent and important wrestlers.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No need to have logical discussions here. Just :henry1 worshipping!


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> :HHH THIS BUSINESS cannot run without THE GAME. Remember that by shedding a single tear, he drew more than Kobe Bryant and Lebron James combined! :HHH2


DAT TEAR










Only outdone by...

DIS TEAR










DEM DRAW TEARS



> But who was mod?
> 
> Last thing I'd ever expect from a mod is getting called out for not trolling or making actual debates as you said lol. Inb4 Ratings Thread is the Bizarro World of WF.
> 
> Maybe it's because I'm not in this thread every week, but most posts are simply too black and white to me, maybe that's what you were getting it but what's the point in discussing ratings if you're only using them to try to prove that (*insert your favourite wrestler) is better than (*insert wrestler you don't like), you can't have a logical discussion if all you base ratings on are pure emotions. This goes to literally all marks and haters of the more prominent and important wrestlers.


I wasn't calling you out lol. By all means go ahead and try to have a proper debate in here, key word being try. I wish you luck but I doubt it happens. 

I'm not using them to try and prove any point. I'm just joking around. Logic is the last thing that appears in this thread, trust me. I used to come in, look at DA NUMBERS and be prepared to state my case but it's futile and at the end of the day it doesn't mean shit. I just like to see what's doing well, what isn't, and post a few smileys really. I'm not one to take ratings or wrestling in general all that seriously. 

I disagree with your post but I'm not going to make an issue out of it and start a quote war where we go digging up information and in the end nobody changes their mind. It's a waste of time. You think what you think and some people are going to agree, evidently all DEM PUNK MARKS WHO B HATIN ON DAT GAME, and I think what I think. I don't need to go writing essays on why I think Triple H is a bigger draw than you think he is. What's the point in that?

Thread needs more Henry tbh and yes, this thread is the Bizarro World of WF. Welcome to Canada. 

:henry1


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> DAT TEAR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only outdone by...
> 
> DIS TEAR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DEM DRAW TEARS
> 
> 
> 
> I wasn't calling you out lol. By all means go ahead and try to have a proper debate in here, key word being try. I wish you luck but I doubt it happens.
> 
> I'm not using them to try and prove any point. I'm just joking around. Logic is the last thing that appears in this thread, trust me. I used to come in, look at DA NUMBERS and be prepared to state my case but it's futile and at the end of the day it doesn't mean shit. I just like to see what's doing well, what isn't, and post a few smileys really. I'm not one to take ratings or wrestling in general all that seriously.
> 
> *I disagree with your post but I'm not going to make an issue out of it and start a quote war where we go digging up information and in the end nobody changes their mind. It's a waste of time. You think what you think and some people are going to agree, evidently all DEM PUNK MARKS WHO B HATIN ON DAT GAME, and I think what I think*. I don't need to go writing essays on why I think Triple H is a bigger draw than you think he is. What's the point in that?
> 
> Thread needs more Henry tbh and yes, this thread is the Bizarro World of WF. Welcome to Canada.
> 
> :henry1


You're beeing way too defensive here. First off you may disagree but we may just take the factual approach and compare numbers and get down to reality pretty easy, in fact I don't even know why you would be so much against it because Triple H still isn't a terrible draw, so there's nothing to hide there, except unless you think he's a legit 2nd Tier Superstar which is another story and would disprove that idea. In general, he's still a big star, never questioned that in my post. I agree digging up numbers would be boring and pointless though.

This is why I'm saying this thread is too white and black. I never said Punk is a bigger draw than Hogan and that Triple H is a Primo level jobber, hell I've been negged by Punk marks several times recently for saying Punks NOT the GOAT or the best looking and most charismatic wrestler so it's not like I'm overly popular with other Punk fans myself, except the levelheaded ones. I'm just calling it like I see it. It seems like nowadays you can't be a fan of a wrestler unless you make exagerrations about their talent/drawing power etc.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loudness said:


> You're beeing way too defensive here. First off you may disagree but we may just take the factual approach and compare numbers and get down to reality pretty easy, in fact I don't even know why you would be so much against it because Triple H still isn't a terrible draw, so there's nothing to hide there, except unless you think he's a legit 2nd Tier Superstar which is another story and would disprove that idea. In general, he's still a big star, never questioned that in my post. I agree digging up numbers would be boring and pointless though.
> 
> This is why I'm saying this thread is too white and black. I never said Punk is a bigger draw than Hogan and that Triple H is a Primo level jobber, hell I've been negged by Punk marks several times recently for saying Punks NOT the GOAT or the best looking and most charismatic wrestler so it's not like I'm overly popular with other Punk fans myself, except the levelheaded ones. I'm just calling it like I see it. It seems like nowadays you can't be a fan of a wrestler unless you make exagerrations about their talent/drawing power etc.


You're reading me wrong. We could do all that, go get numbers, take the factual approach, start debating each other but the fact is, I don't want to. I'm not looking for a debate. The post you initially quoted me on was me messing around. 90% of my posts in here are me messing around. I'm not here to debate how big of a draw Triple H is lol. I don't care. I also don't think that I'll change your mind or you'll change mine if we do so I don't really see the point tbh. 

This thread is retarded pretty much. I post in here because it makes me lol.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow, I leave for a few hours, two pages later, no regular gains/losses breakdown, HHH gets brought up, Starbuck gets defensive, Loudness makes a rare appearance, tears draw, and yeah... that's what I gathered. 

Good shit. unk2


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT GOAT THREAD


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_72228.shtml
> 
> Males 18-49 Breakdown
> AVERAGE = 1.241 million
> - 20:00 to 22:25 - 1.236 million
> - 22:25 to 23:06 - 1.252 million
> 
> 22:07 - 1.496 million
> ...
> 22:25 - 1.322 million
> 22:27 - 1.365 million
> 22:34 - 1.137 million
> 22:38 - 1.260 million
> 22:43 - 1.254 million
> 22:47 - 1.387 million
> 22:50 - 1.366 million
> 22:57 - 1.382 million
> 23:00 - 1.361 million
> 23:01 - 1.421 million
> 23:02 - 1.413 million
> 23:03 - 1.407 million
> 23:04 - 1.459 million
> 23:05 - 1.415 million
> 23:06 - 1.407 million
> 23:07 - 1.367 million
> 23:08 - 1.283 million


This is the breakdown for 3rd hour only. 

Full show breakdown, peak of the show was mark Henry - 

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_72229.shtml#.UfBpLNKl66M




> *The combination of Mark Henry and The Shield proved to be successful once again for WWE.
> 
> After Henry's post-Money in the Bank speech and Shield's attack last week on Raw drew one of the largest audiences last Monday, their segment on this week's Raw drew the largest audience of the night.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - Positioned at the top of the second hour, which is when WWE has its largest audience mixing the casual audience with the adult audience tuning in at 9:00 p.m. EST, the seven-minute *Henry/Usos-Shield segment in Q5 averaged 1.541 million viewers* in the males 18-49 demographic.
> 
> - The next most-watched segment was *the Miz TV segment* with the "Total Divas" cast, which *averaged 1.477 million viewers* in a brief four-minute window.
> 
> - The next most-watched long-form segment was the *C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman promo exchange*, which *averaged 1.437 million viewers* over the course of 11 minutes from the end of Q8 to the start of Q9 at the top of the third hour.
> 
> - Related to the Daniel Bryan gauntlet, which we broke down HERE, the most-watched segment was the over-run portion, which averaged 1.411 million viewers.
> 
> Full Show Rundown
> 
> - Overall Show: 2.94 rating (1.98 males 18-49)
> 
> - Q1: Raw started around the show-average for an impromptu Daniel Bryan-John Cena Summerslam contract signing. (3.0 overall; 1.93 m18-49)
> 
> Viewers were slow tuning into Raw (876,000 viewers at the start of Raw), then peaked with 1.376 million viewers at the end of the segment.
> 
> - Q2: Raw took a big drop to a show-low rating for Alberto Del Rio vs. Sheamus, plus two full commercial breaks. (2.7 overall; 1.66 m18-49)
> 
> During the commercial breaks, viewers bailed to "How I Met Your Mother" and "American Pickers."
> 
> - Q3: Raw rebounded slightly for the conclusion of Del Rio-Sheamus, Teddy Long and Booker T backstage, and one-and-a-half commercials. (2.9 overall; 1.87 m18-49)
> 
> - Q4: Raw was about the same for Christian vs. Titus O'Neil and one-a-half commercials, although the m18-49 demographic showed an increase over the general audience, reflecting adult males starting to join the general audience. (2.9 overall; 1.96 m18-49)
> 
> - Q5: Raw jumped a show-high performance for Mark Henry confronting The Shield, one commercial, and the first-half of Dolph Ziggler vs. Darren Young. (3.2 overall; 2.23 m18-49)
> 
> Included was peak viewership of the entire show - 1.594 million viewers at 9:03 p.m. when business picked up. Raw was helped by a flood of viewers from "Family Guy," "American Ninja Warrior," "Fast N Loud," and "Hit the Floor" at the top of the hour.
> 
> - Q6: Raw stayed relatively strong for the conclusion of Ziggler-Young, one commercial, and the Miz TV segment featuring the "Total Divas" cast. (3.1 overall; 2.12 m18-49)
> 
> - Q7: Raw dipped for a segment that included Brad Maddox backstage with the McMahons, a Wyatts video package, and two full commercial breaks. (2.9 overall; 1.96 m18-49)
> 
> - Q8: Raw remained at the same level for Cody Rhodes vs. Fandango, one commercial, and the first few minutes of the Punk-Heyman segment leading into the third hour. (2.9 overall; 1.98 m18-49)
> 
> - Q9: Raw jumped for the Punk-Heyman promo exchange, one commercial, and the first few minutes of Rob Van Dam vs. Wade Barrett. (3.1 overall; 2.09 m18-49)
> 
> - Q10: Raw dropped off for the end of RVD-Barrett, one commercial, and the first match in Daniel Bryan's gauntlet. (2.8 overall; 1.92 m18-49)
> 
> Inside this portion: Punk-Heyman peaked with 1.497 million viewers, RVD-Barrett peaked with 1.315 million viewers, and Bryan-Swagger peaked with 1.365 million viewers.
> 
> - Q11: Raw remained stagnant for the first-half of Daniel Bryan vs. Antonio Cesaro, plus two full commercial breaks affecting the rating. (2.8 overall; 1.82 m18-49)
> 
> - Q12: Raw jumped for the second-half of Bryan vs. Cesaro, one commercial, and the start of Bryan vs. Ryback. (3.0 overall; 2.04 m18-49)
> 
> - OR: Raw finished with a decent over-run performance for Bryan-Cesaro and post-match activity. (3.2 overall; 2.23 m18-49)




Miz TV with the Divas outdrew CM Punk unk3 while Henry topped the night.:henry1


----------



## #Mark

Starbuck said:


> They all got left behind
> 
> : (


This is exactly my point. Do you really think Punk was pushed significantly enough to draw at that point? He was only one month into his championship reign and was only two months removed from doing the job to HHH right in the middle of the ring. How do you expect three fresh characters like them to draw well when they never even received any sort of rub? Yeah, Punk defeating Del Rio the month before really put him over right? That's not a fair deal at all. At that point, Jesus himself wouldn't have been able to draw.

And even if you're gonna allude to that segment, why don't you mention the buyrate of the PPV the night before? Punk main evented the PPV (that Cena didn't appear at) and was able to garner the same buyrate of the year before. 


Edit: Just reading through this thread.. Loudness seems like a smart guy but come on man. Goldberg and Warrior in a higher tier than Hunter? I understand he draws a lot of ire with some of you guys, but collectively over the years he's been a proven draw. Just look at Meltzer's reports over the years. He's one of the more consistent draws in RAW history. Same goes to Edge (who you mentioned) on the Smackdown side. When he retired, Smackdown died.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Review the quarter hours from last year when Punk was champ. He failed as champ like you fail at life Brick.
> 
> *If you have a good point other than just saying failed champ than we can discuss something that supports that claim. But you cant prove it, your'e just a claimer. *
> 
> 
> Damned good news for a Cena turn if Bryan is connecting with younger viewers. Besides the fact it hooks them in for the future, it might give Vince the pills to turn Cena heel for a few months. With a super over Bryan to carry the slack for a few months they could do a "short" Cena heel turn. If it doesn't work, turn him back quickly but we all know it would work great. A heel turn might be the only way to save Cena's character at this point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read between the lines man. I was also blaming him. Given the pushes and time invested in those 2, the blame for a diva's segment beating the main event should definitely be shared.
> 
> 
> 
> More than fair. Punk was the main or 2 main focus of EVERY RAW, multiple recaps each week on Raw and Smackdown, multiple talk ups and promos. He was given plenty. Look at Bryan. The guy is on par with Punk right now and hasn't gotten 1/100th of the push or backing Punk has. That's the ballgame when it comes to this argument. I posted a review of Bryan and Punk's first 3 and a half years in WWE (search for it). The differences between the 2 are staggering. Punk was handed the world on a platter compared to Bryan and yet Bryan is about to surpass him. At the end of the day Punk just can't connect with enough of the audience to justify his position. So far, Bryan can. Things may change but I wouldn't hold my breathe.
> 
> *Punk never lost viewers in his segments last year, you cant prove otherwise, he always gains decent/good/great numbers.
> 
> Really? Punk got his name chanted over Rock and Taker and your'e saying he cant connect with the crowd, nobody can do that in the current roster specially as a heel. I guess screaming Yes/No like an idiot helps show how limited that guy is to get a reaction. Who knew that beating midcarders means getting a big push because beating Miz, ADR, Bryan, Ziggler, Ryback (unclean) is such an achievement those guys are on par with HHH, Cena, Rock, Taker, who knew that :lmao. Not to forget he lost in his prime against HHH. One more thing Bryan will never and I mean ever surpass Punk.*
> 
> 
> You're right that Cena went over bigger names but Punk went over the ENTIRE CURRENT ROSTER. They put Punk over almost everyone they could. The old guard are gone, nothing can be done about that but the same roadblock is gonna be put in the way for Bryan or any other up and comer. The old guard aren't gonna put the new guys over. The new guys are on there own......difference is Bryan will smash through that roadblock IMO and Punk couldn't.
> 
> *Punk didn't feud with Sheamus, Orton, Henry (Just a match), Show (just a match), etc. Those are the top guys that Punk should have feuded with. You're so delusional, Punk opened the door for Bryan when he feuded with him. *
> 
> 
> So true and yet you probably shouldn't have said this. Those Punktards are gonna cut you.


*In Bold*


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> This is the breakdown for 3rd hour only.
> 
> Full show breakdown, peak of the show was mark Henry -
> 
> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_72229.shtml#.UfBpLNKl66M
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Miz TV with the Divas outdrew CM Punk* unk3 while Henry topped the night.:henry1[



For a four-minute window as noted in the report, possibly the nipple slip?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> In the segment-by-segment, the show opened at 2.99 with the segment with John Cena, Brad Maddox and Daniel Bryan for the contract signing. Sheamus vs. Alberto Del Rio lost 191,000 viewers. Christian vs. Titus O’Neil gained 85,000 viewers. The Mark Henry interview with The Shield attack, plus Darren Young vs. Dolph Ziggler at 9 p.m. gained a strong 373,000 viewers to a 3.19 quarter. The post-match with Big E Langston attacking Ziggler and The Miz Total Divas segment lost 125,000 viewers. Brad Maddox’s segment with HHH and then Stephanie McMahon lost 251,000 viewers. Fandango vs. Cody Rhodes gained 4,000 viewers. The C.M. Punk/Paul Heyman interview segment gained 201,000 viewers to a 3.07 quarter. Rob Van Dam vs. Wade Barrett and Daniel Bryan vs. Jack Swagger lost 295,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Antonio Cesaro gained 150,000 viewers which is good because that segment is often a loser. Daniel Bryan vs. Ryback with John Cena coming out at the end and Vince McMahon ending the show with Brad Maddox gained 331,000 viewers, which is on the weak side for an overrun, finishing at 3.20.


via Observer


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ziggler has been the man lately. :clap

What the hell was the other early gain loss thing about saying swagger lost almost half a mill? Lol


----------



## TheGreatBanana

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That wasn't Ziggler, that was down to Mark 'Ratings' Henry.

Swagger really has to improve himself, he has to crave out his own identity that makes him stand out. The fact that his been paired with Zeb just shows how inept he truly is. The people at home just don't give a shit about Swagger and change the channel on first shit and its Swaggers fault for being a huge vaccum of boring.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TheGreatBanana said:


> That wasn't Ziggler, that was down to Mark 'Ratings' Henry.
> 
> Swagger really has to improve himself, he has to crave out his own identity that makes him stand out. The fact that his been paired with Zeb just shows how inept he truly is. The people at home just don't give a shit about Swagger and change the channel on first shit and its Swaggers fault for being a huge vaccum of boring.


WWE has still booked him as a loser. there was 2 matches that amounted to that loss.


----------



## Lordhhhx

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think that they punishing Swagger for the incident during wrestlemania season not that i can blame them had he stayed out of trouble theres is no doubt in my mind that he would have won the world title.


----------



## Jammy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Gauntlet Analysis from PwTorch.



> WWE star Daniel Bryan's three-match, three-segment performance in the final hour of Monday's Raw scored above-average based on the quarter-hour ratings and minute-by-minute trends.
> 
> PWTorch has received minute-by-minutes for the demographic of males 18-49, which captures the widest portion of Raw's key audience. The following is a break down of the Gauntlet from the July 22 Raw.
> 
> - Bryan's three-match segment from 10:25 p.m. to 11:06 p.m. averaged 1.252 million viewers. This included three commercial breaks.
> 
> The overall Raw show averaged 1.241 million viewers, which includes Bryan's 40-minute segment. Prior to Bryan's three-segment stretch, Raw averaged 1.236 million viewers from Q1 to Q9.
> 
> - The most-watched portion of the third hour was the Paul Heyman-C.M. Punk promo exchange in Q9. The peak audience was 1.496 million viewers at 10:07. By comparison, Bryan's three-match run peaked with 1.459 million viewers at 11:04 p.m. during the over-run.
> 
> - Looking at the audience inflows and outflows, it's worth noting that channel-flipping slowed down during Bryan's gauntlet compared the first and second hours.
> 
> Whereas the top recipient of Raw's audience hit 30,000 viewers regularly during the first and second hours, the Bryan Gauntlet did not hit 30k one time. The most was 27,000 to "Big Bang Theory" at 10:39 p.m. during a commercial.
> 
> - Bryan's gauntlet started with a baseline audience of 1.322 million viewers at 10:25 p.m. when Jack Swagger was introduced as Bryan's first opponent. The Swagger match peaked with 1.363 million viewers, the Antonio Cesaro match peaked with 1.387 million viewers, and the Ryback match peaked with 1.459 million viewers.
> 
> This reflects the audience steadily becoming interested in the gauntlet as it unfolded. The following is the flow of the three-segment run.
> 
> - 10:25 p.m. - 1.322 million viewers (start of Swagger match)
> 
> - 10:27 p.m. - 1.365 million viewers (Swagger match peak)
> 
> The announcement of Antonio Cesaro as Bryan's next opponent on the other side of the break did not attract an audience...
> 
> - 10:34 p.m. - 1.137 million viewers when Raw returned from break.
> 
> - 10:38 p.m. - 1.260 million viewers (peak of Bryan-Cesaro Segment 1)
> 
> After Raw cut to a mid-match break, viewers came back for the conclusion of the two-part match...
> 
> - 10:43 p.m. - 1.254 million viewers
> 
> - 10:47 p.m. - 1.387 million viewers (peak audience of the Cesaro match)
> 
> - 10:50 p.m. - 1.366 million viewers (end of match before Raw cut to break with cliffhanger of Bryan's third opponent)
> 
> - 10:57 p.m. - 1.382 million viewers for the start of Bryan vs. Ryback.
> 
> - 11:00 p.m. - 1.361 million viewers at the top of the hour before a slight over-run increase occurred...
> 
> - 11:01 p.m. - 1.421 million viewers
> 
> - 11:02 p.m. - 1.413 million viewers
> 
> - 11:03 p.m. - 1.407 million viewers
> 
> - 11:04 p.m. - 1.459 million viewers (peak of Bryan's three-match run).
> 
> - 11:05 p.m. - 1.415 million viewers for the DQ ending to Bryan-Ryback, ending Bryan's gauntlet.
> 
> - 11:06 p.m. - 1.407 million viewers for Cena making the save.
> 
> - 11:07 p.m. - 1.367 million viewers for Maddox & McMahon backstage reacting.
> 
> - 11:08 p.m. - 1.283 million viewers for the final shot of Bryan celebrating in the ring; 39,000 viewers bailed to "Family Guy" at this point.
> 
> Caldwell's Analysis: Not a blow-away, but above-average, solid performance for Bryan's big spotlight. For starters, Swagger and Cesaro are nowhere near "main-event level," and Cesaro has been treated like an after-thought for a few months. As a result, it seems like the audience did not take those first two matches seriously until Bryan-Cesaro turned into something special half-way through. Then, the "cliffhanger" of Bryan's final opponent did not produce much of a bump; it wasn't until the over-run where the gauntlet reached the next level.


-PWTorch


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No huge gains, but consistency all around. Definitely something that :vince2 will like.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> *In Bold*


fpalm You again? Listen I don't want or need a hemorrhoid, so *get out of my ass*. Follow someone else around....preferably to a composition studies class, Brick. :flip:flip




Quietus said:


> Miz TV with the Divas outdrew CM Punk unk3 while Henry topped the night.:henry1


So, 2 years of build up and the #2 guy jobs to Divas for the second time. :lmao



D-Bry is Fly said:


> For a four-minute window...


4 minutes. Nah, too easy.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> You're reading me wrong. We could do all that, go get numbers, take the factual approach, start debating each other but the fact is, *I don't want to. I'm not looking for a debate.* The post you initially quoted me on was me messing around. 90% of my posts in here are me messing around. I'm not here to debate how big of a draw Triple H is lol. I don't care. I also don't think that I'll change your mind or you'll change mine if we do so I don't really see the point tbh.
> 
> This thread is retarded pretty much. *I post in here because it makes me lol.*


Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.


----------



## Swarhily

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.


Dude, it's wrestling stop taking it so seriously.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.


:lmao:lmao:lmao

Someone is maaaaad.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Slowhand said:


> :lmao:lmao:lmao
> 
> Someone is maaaaad.


You guys really don't appreciate mblonde09's shoot style posts as much as I do. :side:


----------



## ellthom

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

People tuning in for that nip slip


----------



## El Capitano

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ziggler's been rocking some good numbers recently, which is nice to see


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

As much as I dislike Ziggler, his face run seems to click with fans. Good numbers.



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.


:lmao You're doing a great job at trying to make yourself look like the most obsessive and ridiculous mark on this site.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^ lol. I thought it was established that one guy can't affect ratings...unless it WASN'T unk.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> fpalm You again? Listen I don't want or need a hemorrhoid, so *get out of my ass*. Follow someone else around....preferably to a composition studies class, Brick. :flip:flip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, 2 years of build up and the #2 guy jobs to Divas for the second time. :lmao


Listen you ******. Don't come out here and say "it's all facts but Punk fans don't want to admit it". Admit what? :lol He didn't get the biggest push like you state, he feuded with midcarders such as Bryan, Ziggler, ADR, Miz, Ryback (Aweful), etc. and he lost to HHH before that all happened. You ignored that like an idiot, :woolcock Your'e just a sheep. I need a composition studies class fpalm. You need to go to a Psychiatrist because you actually think that everything you say is facts even tho you cant freaking prove it. 

Punk segment still outdrew Bryan first segment with John Cena.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> Listen you ******. Don't come out here and say "it's all facts but Punk fans don't want to admit it". Admit what? :lol He didn't get the biggest push like you state, he feuded with midcarders such as Bryan, Ziggler, ADR, Miz, Ryback (Aweful), etc. and he lost to HHH before that all happened. You ignored that like an idiot, :woolcock Your'e just a sheep. I need a composition studies class fpalm. You need to go to a Psychiatrist because you actually think that everything you say is facts even tho you cant freaking prove it.
> 
> Punk segment still outdrew Bryan first segment with John Cena.


Jesus Brick, you really can't take a hint can you? It's over. I'm done with you. Find someone else to obsess over. Punk has had one non stop push after another since entering this company. I've posted these facts numerous times. Search them out if you want. Actually don't. Stalk someone else. You're just a creepy obsessed weirdo at this point who is really not worth my time. I do, however, want to better understand why we have reached this point in our online relationship so if you would please fill out the following form I would appreciate it.











And ******? Really? What's next to come tumbling out of that bigoted head of yours?


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

- The most-watched portion of the third hour was the Paul Heyman-C.M. Punk promo exchange in Q9. The peak audience was 1.496 million viewers at 10:07. By comparison, Bryan's three-match run peaked with 1.459 million viewers at 11:04 p.m. during the over-run.

Solid solid.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.













Ah. The ratings thread always delivers.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^
Indeed it does. :lmao


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

mblonde is to unk fans as Happenstan is to :bryan2 fans.


----------



## Falkono

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So Miz tv had a higher rating then Punks segment? Ouch...


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> mblonde is to unk fans as Happenstan is to :bryan2 fans.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.


Are you CM Punk? Are you family to him? There's absolutely no reason for you to be this defensive of another man. It was funny at first, now it's just disturbing.
:lmao


----------



## Vyer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This thread:lmao


----------



## ChickMagnet12

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> DAT GOAT THREAD


.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.











I have a great time reading this thread. It's just too good.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:lol @ mblonde getting completely annihilated. Even his fellow Punk marks are mocking DAT MELTDOWN.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.











Beautiful. Absolutely beautiful.


----------



## #Mark

Billion Dollar Man said:


> Are you CM Punk? Are you family to him? There's absolutely no reason for you to be this defensive of another man. It was funny at first, now it's just disturbing.
> :lmao


:lmao 

Aren't you the guy who obsesses over his body mass?


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Let's not pile on mblonde, he's just being passionate. We seriously need to stop overreacting with ratings. The truth is that WWE does similar ratings to what they did from the time before the Boom period and about the same from 2003 to the present. Check out the list below for ratings since 1995:

http://www.2xzone.com/ratings/rawhistory.shtml


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> Are you CM Punk? Are you family to him? There's absolutely no reason for you to be this defensive of another man. It was funny at first, now it's just disturbing.
> :lmao


Lmfao.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This thread delivers the goods.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> Are you CM Punk? Are you family to him? There's absolutely no reason for you to be this defensive of another man. It was funny at first, now it's just disturbing.
> :lmao


What part of that post is defending Punk? Maybe you should learn to read things better. My post had nothing to do with Punk... and everything to do with calling Starbuck out on her bullshit. Oh, and to those who have posted crying gifs, yeah, that's cute and everything - but I'm not crying over anything, just calling it as I see it. Starbuck has singled me out by name numerous times... and I'm not allowed to address it? Or I'm apparently "crying" about it if I do? Fuck that.


----------



## Frost99

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What rating did the App get? You know because they covert it over & over again, it's getting to the point every time they talk about this insignificant piece of crap I keep getting the sense that listing to the WWE App downloading instructions reminds me very much of this....








Just saying


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Frost99 said:


> What rating did the App get? You know because they covert it over & over again, it's getting to the point every time they talk about this insignificant piece of crap I keep getting the sense that listing to the WWE App downloading instructions reminds me very much of this....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just saying


The amount of attention the app gets sometimes is absolutely nuts. I wish they would just completely do away with the app.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> What part of that post is defending Punk? Maybe you should learn to read things better. My post had nothing to do with Punk... and everything to do with calling Starbuck out on her bullshit. Oh, and to those who have posted crying gifs, yeah, that's cute and everything - but I'm not crying over anything, just calling it as I see it. Starbuck has singled me out by name numerous times... and I'm not allowed to address it? Or I'm apparently "crying" about it if I do? Fuck that.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> What part of that post is defending Punk? Maybe you should learn to read things better. My post had nothing to do with Punk... and everything to do with calling Starbuck out on her bullshit. Oh, and to those who have posted crying gifs, yeah, that's cute and everything - but I'm not crying over anything, just calling it as I see it. Starbuck has singled me out by name numerous times... and I'm not allowed to address it? Or I'm apparently "crying" about it if I do? Fuck that.


All of your post I ever see you make consist of you either blindly defending/marking for the guy as if he's a perfect fucking being with no flaws. You bash every wrestler who you think is being traeted better or eclipsing Punk. Punk isn't perfect and his marks damn sure ain't, so Starbuck has good reason to make Punk marks look like the delusional cult like followers they/you are. That's what you deserve for overrating a mediocre talent like he's an all time great.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> What part of that post is defending Punk? Maybe you should learn to read things better. My post had nothing to do with Punk... and everything to do with calling Starbuck out on her bullshit. Oh, and to those who have posted crying gifs, yeah, that's cute and everything - but I'm not crying over anything, just calling it as I see it. Starbuck has singled me out by name numerous times... and I'm not allowed to address it? Or I'm apparently "crying" about it if I do? Fuck that.


unk3


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That mblonde guy is an angry dude.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's unbelievable just how passionate he is about another man. The other day he actually made a comment in another thread saying he has "no time" for anyone who doesn't like CM Punk. I guess that explains why he seems like he's depressed every time he sees a post that is not so supportive of his hero.

Even Punk himself would be laughing his ass off if he'd ever read his posts.


----------



## D17

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

mblonde09 going rather overboard there unk














:rock :cena2 rton


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> That mblonde guy is an angry dude.





Choke2Death said:


> It's unbelievable just how passionate he is about another man. The other day he actually made a comment in another thread saying he has "no time" for anyone who doesn't like CM Punk. I guess that explains why he seems like he's depressed every time he sees a post that is not so supportive of his hero.
> 
> Even Punk himself would be laughing his ass off if he'd ever read his posts.


:lmao:lmao:lmao


To bad I can't rep either of you right now.(Y)


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

mblonde09 stalks Cm Punk I bet


----------



## Guy LeDouche

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I love the Ratings thread. :lol 


mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.












Someone's gotten to.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



rabidwolverine27 said:


> mblonde09 stalks Cm Punk I bet


mblonde09 IS CM Punk!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## D17

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

mblonde has been absolutely scolded


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



rabidwolverine27 said:


> mblonde09 stalks Cm Punk I bet





Lord Flvcko said:


> I love the Ratings thread. :lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone's gotten to.





D17 said:


> mblonde has been absolutely scolded


I sense a heel turn coming from mblonde09


----------



## Farnham the Drunk

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't get why people get so upset when people they like aren't getting all-time GOAT ratings? Especially cause WWE seems to like CM Punk, so whatever bullshit people say about him on the internet or whatever the supposed "rating" is that he pulls obviously doesn't mean shit to Vince or his company, so who cares? A bunch of geeks on the internet obsessing over numbers shouldn't piss you off, enjoy your favorite wrestlers as they spend their hours critiquing an employee who their employer obviously likes.

Plus mainstream popularity doesn't equal or not equal talented/good. Hell we all have different opinions, and I can't attest to the rest of the world but at least in America, what is considered popular kinda sucks for the most part IMO.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Nope, you just seem to post in here to stir shit up with the Punk fans, as far as I can see - and you name-checking, and referencing people, such as myself, pretty much proves it. I'm not the only one who thinks that, either. Most of your posts consist of comments, mainly designed to antagonise the Punk marks... oh, and the over-use of DAT SAD FACE SMILEY, of course, 'cos Punk doesn't pull 4+ ratings. Hell, just the use of the word "DAT", is annoying enough in itself. You always single out the Punk fans for going overboard, but you're just as big a mark for your favourites, as anyone here - and notice you dropping your bullshit, "not being serious" act and getting all defensive, when someone made a quip saying that your beloved HHH, can't draw.


----------



## Teh_TaKeR

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This thread. 

Thanks for the laugh. Meltdown central.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

As a fan, there's nothing wrong with getting defensive if you feel your favorite wrestler is being unfairly criticized. Being a delusional mark overrating the fuck outta your guy is what annoys everyone(see: Bryan marks).


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Teh_TaKeR said:


> This thread.
> 
> Thanks for the laugh. *Meltdown central.*


No, that's the TNA section.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If WWE programming continues to improve like the last few months,then ratings would also improve.Not like AE where they're getting 6-7 ratings,but they can come close to 4.0 mark.And for a 3 hour show,4.0 rating should be considered quite stellar,IMO.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> If WWE programming continues to improve like the last few months,then ratings would also improve.Not like AE where they're getting 6-7 ratings,but they can come close to 4.0 mark.And for a 3 hour show,4.0 rating should be considered quite steller,IMO.


Regular 4.0's would be a lot more than stellar for a show which has had more than 1000 episodes and is only every week without fail. A 4.0 would effectively be close to around 6 million viewers, and if they manage that on a weekly basis I would be fucking surprised. At most, I would think that a consistently good wrestling show in this television viewing climate would pull in around 3.3-3.5 ratings.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

when CM Punk was in charge of the Nexus, Curtis Axel was a tag team champion under his leadership. :lol


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Loader230 said:


> As a fan, there's nothing wrong with getting defensive if you feel your favorite wrestler is being unfairly criticized. Being a delusional mark overrating the fuck outta your guy is what annoys everyone(see: Bryan marks).



 3 pages of a Punk fan getting lambasted for his meltdown and you have a go at Bryan's marks?


*NO!*


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Da Silva said:


> Regular 4.0's would be a lot more than stellar for a show which has had more than 1000 episodes and is only every week without fail. A 4.0 would effectively be close to around 6 million viewers, and if they manage that on a weekly basis I would be fucking surprised. At most, I would think that a consistently good wrestling show in this television viewing climate would pull in around 3.3-3.5 ratings.


I think one thing we can all agree upon is the fact that slowly but surely they are getting their basics right.


Now as far as getting 4.0 ratings on a regular basis is concerned,well they are just one megastar away,IMO.There is so much talent in today's roster,and I really have high hopes that one amongst these 4 man may turn on to become the next megastar of pro-wrestling:


1.Ambrose= Amazing talent.Got the looks,skills-in ring as well as mic.



2.Reings= Amazing look(and IT factor).


3.D Bryan= Currently he's as over as anyone can be.


4.Big E Langston= In NXT he was on fire.



So,if anyone of these guys can reach the level of Rock/Hogan/Austin,we'll get 4.0 ratings per week even for these long 3 hour shows.Yes I know you may say that it is not possible but...


But the talent is there,how far these gentlemen would go is yet to be seen!Lets hope for the best


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't think we will ever see a 4.0 again. RAW 1000 was as star-studded as it can get, and that didn't even reach 3.9. The sheer number of viewers necessary for a 4.0 is just out of the WWE's league. It's harder now to get high ratings than it ever was.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> I don't think we will ever see a 4.0 again. RAW 1000 was as star-studded as it can get, and that didn't even reach 3.9. The sheer number of viewers necessary for a 4.0 is just out of the WWE's league. It's harder now to get high ratings than it ever was.


Only Randy Orton can help Raw get 4+ again since the last time they got it, he was center of the show. TWICE. rton2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Only Randy Orton can help Raw get 4+ again since the last time they got it, he was center of the show. TWICE. rton2


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Only Randy Orton can help Raw get 4+ again since the last time they got it, he was center of the show. TWICE. rton2


inb4 mblonde09 gets butthurt .


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> If WWE programming continues to improve like the last few months,then ratings would also improve.Not like AE where they're getting 6-7 ratings,but they can come close to 4.0 mark.And for a 3 hour show,4.0 rating should be considered quite stellar,IMO.


id be hard pressed to see them average a 3.1, no matter what the product is wrestling is not big anymore and i doubt anytime soon it will, even with a decent product. In fact the recent good product recently the ratings have fallen a lot


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


>


If I'm not mistaken, Orton vs Triple H in a Last Man Standing was the peak of that show.

And the Trump episode was not even the one I had in mind. I'm talking about Raw from 16th and 23rd February, both of which got 4.1 and were main evented by Orton (and Legacy) in their feud with the McMahons and Triple H.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> If I'm not mistaken, Orton vs Triple H in a Last Man Standing was the peak of that show.
> 
> And the Trump episode was not even the one I had in mind. I'm talking about Raw from 16th and 23rd February, both of which got 4.1 and were main evented by Orton (and Legacy) in their feud with the McMahons and Triple H.


Trump episode was Trump/being commercial free, and I just remember that was the last one as it was mentioned somewhere around Raw 1000.

True on the other two though.


----------



## RenegadexParagon

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Only Randy Orton can help Raw get 4+ again since the last time they got it, he was center of the show. TWICE. rton2


But all these guys on the internet says no one wants to see him because he's boring 

Are you saying that it's not true? :O


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Been a long ass time since I seen Orton with some gold. :agree:


----------



## Mountain Rushmore

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Been a long ass time since I seen Orton with some gold. :agree:


Soon, my man, soon. He will climb that mountain once again.


----------



## Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boxes-With-Gods said:


> Soon, my man, soon. He will climb that mountain once again.


& then fuck it up somehow rton2


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Been a long ass time since I seen Orton with some gold. :agree:


Orton is almost like The Rock in terms of title reigns. Most of his title reigns didn't even last that long. I think it was something like 4 years since Ortons had a title reign that lasted longer than 3 months


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boxes-With-Gods said:


> Soon, my man, soon. He will climb that mountain once again.


And then get stoned and fall down the side of that mountain, only this time he won't get another chance to climb back up. Or maybe he will, seeing as he's one of Vince's golden boys.


----------



## Mountain Rushmore

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Eh, he actually might, we'll see. I'm gonna enjoy the ride.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Ever Wolf said:


> & then fuck it up somehow rton2


That would be new since he's never fucked up _while_ he was on top. At least in regards to the wellness policy. His first violation was in 2006 when he was "feuding" with Carlito for no reason and the second one was when he became directionless again just a week after Jericho's suspension (who he was supposed to feud with).


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol, totally forgot about the whole Orton/Jericho feud until you just brought it up. Kinda funny how both of them got suspended in back-to-back weeks when they were supposed to be feuding.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well it's obvious he didn't want to feud with Ziggler which is why he purposely got himself suspended. rton2


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Ever Wolf said:


> & then fuck it up somehow rton2


Made me LOL.

Orton's gonna be the whipping boy for the rest of the year for Punk and Cena to take turns beating.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Audience should be flat this week around 4,010,000.


----------



## IWCLOL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Weltschmertz said:


> Audience should be flat this week around 4,010,000.


I don't see them getting 4 million. They will lose the hardcore fans and some casuals who read online will find out it's taped and less will watch. I can see a 3,950,000 or something around that.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Expect Bryan/Kane to do very well. They built that match up all night as well as last week.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Made me LOL.
> 
> Orton's gonna be the whipping boy for the rest of the year for *Punk* and Cena to take turns beating.


LOL.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> LOL.


Somebody still can't accept Punk is on a whole other level than their boy Orton.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Made me LOL.
> 
> Orton's gonna be the whipping boy for the rest of the year for Punk and Cena to take turns beating.


We can but hope.


----------



## M1687

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Somebody still can't accept Punk is on a whole other level than their boy Orton.


Raw ratings average the last time Orton was WWE champ = 3.2

Raw ratings average during Punk's 2012 reign of terror = 2.5

I rest my case.....


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Somebody still can't accept Punk is on a whole other level than their boy Orton.


Both of them are boring as fuck. Randy Boreton Vs Tiresome cruiserweight with his gruel 15 minute monologues.... I pick... shit, to turn the entire show off.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^ you're an idiot that knows nothing about ratings. Comparing ratings from just a few years ago is moronic.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



M1687 said:


> Raw ratings average the last time Orton was WWE champ = 3.2
> 
> Raw ratings average during Punk's 2012 reign of terror = 2.5
> 
> I rest my case.....


Oh look, Hawksea's back.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> LOL.


What's funny about that? Punk is without a doubt the #2 guy in the company. He had bigger feuds than Orton like recently with Rock and now Lesnar. There will be more for Punk in the future and Orton future will not be that good neither will he be in the same level as he was in 2009. I don't think WWE has that much faith on him anymore.



roadkill_ said:


> Both of them are boring as fuck. Randy Boreton Vs Tiresome cruiserweight with his gruel 15 minute monologues.... I pick... shit, to turn the entire show off.


:lol, didn't you say that you like Bryan in your recent posts and yet you call Punk a cruiserweight and you imply that as an insult. What is Bryan than a heavyweight .


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> What's funny about that? Punk is without a doubt the #2 guy in the company. He had bigger feuds than Orton like recently with Rock and now Lesnar. There will be more for Punk in the future and Orton future will not be that good neither will he be in the same level as he was in 2009. I don't think WWE has that much faith on him anymore.


Orton is younger, so he has more of a future ahead of him. And Punk said that he will not stay around for too long. He's pretty much done everything there is to do, so chances are he keeps his word and retires in a couple of years. And really, after Lesnar, what "big feuds" are left for him? He's gone through every part-timer now. Unless you mean "big feud" like Punk vs Cena Part 3250975.

Orton's rise back to where he belongs is coming soon and the haters can do nothing about it other than whine.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Orton's "rise" can come as soon as it can, Orton won't be touching Punk again until Punk's out. Punk's made, and has a solid spot as one of the only two stars WWE has. And unlike Orton, he'll remain there because he's not an idiot.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't know how Orton's push will be handled, but I don't see him being in any "big" feuds. I mean he may be with Vince and he'll have another feud with Cena (as C2D would say, part 4352148), and maybe he'll feud with Punk, but the likes of Rock, Brock, Taker, and HHH... I can't see Orton feuding/facing any of them except potentially HHH... but that always ends up badly for Orton. And it'll just end up culminating with Bryan beating him and then Orton going back to floundering around after that feud is over. In fact, I could see his next WWE Title reign being his last... due to the whole two strikes thing.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



M1687 said:


> Raw ratings average the last time Orton was WWE champ = 3.2
> 
> Raw ratings average during Punk's 2012 reign of terror = 2.5
> 
> I rest my case.....


Makes sense.....When watching a danceoff between Brodus and someone else, people tuned out because CM Punk was WWE Champ(despite having nothing to do with that danceoff). But during a tag team match in 2009, people watched it because Orton was champ(despite having nothing to do with that match)


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> I don't know how Orton's push will be handled, but I don't see him being in any "big" feuds. I mean he may be with Vince and he'll have another feud with Cena (as C2D would say, part 4352148), and maybe he'll feud with Punk, but the likes of Rock, Brock, Taker, and HHH... I can't see Orton feuding/facing any of them except potentially HHH... but that always ends up badly for Orton. And it'll just end up culminating with Bryan beating him and then Orton going back to floundering around after that feud is over. In fact, I could see his next WWE Title reign being his last... due to the whole two strikes thing.


He's already feuded with Taker and HHH, including at WM with both, so there's no point in him wrestling them again. Brock and Rock... we shall see how that turns out. Since he might turn heel, facing Brock seems unlikely now but I can see it happening in a year or so since Brock's contract lasts until 2015 and outside of WM, he has no "big" opponents left as Cena and HHH are already done, Taker is WM only and so is The Rock. Punk is happening now and God forbid, maybe that drags out to WM at most. But who can he face after that? Orton is the best option since he's the biggest star aside from those mentioned. As for Rock, he might not even wrestle again for all we know and if he does, Orton is at the top of the list for full-timers since matches with Punk and Cena are a thing of the past.

And it's funny you say that about him as champion. First it was "He'll never get pushed again because he has two strikes", now it's "He will get one reign or a short one and then never win it again because of two strikes". What will it be next?


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh god, not another mark war. Save us Starbuck!


----------



## #1Peep4ever

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Orton is younger, so he has more of a future ahead of him. And Punk said that he will not stay around for too long. He's pretty much done everything there is to do, so chances are he keeps his word and retires in a couple of years. And really, after Lesnar, what "big feuds" are left for him? He's gone through every part-timer now. Unless you mean "big feud" like Punk vs Cena Part 3250975.
> 
> Orton's rise back to where he belongs is coming soon and the haters can do nothing about it other than whine.


The only thing Punk still wants to do is headline wrestlemania.. lets see if he can achieve that


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> Oh god, not another mark war. Save us Starbuck!


Not a mark war since I'm strictly talking about Orton's push.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't understand that Orton's potential new reign could be his last due to the two strikes. Surely if that was the case then what's the point in making him the new champion in the first place?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> And it's funny you say that about him as champion. First it was "He'll never get pushed again because he has two strikes", now it's "He will get one reign or a short one and then never win it again because of two strikes". What will it be next?


Who knows? Orton isn't exactly a necessary piece of the puzzle anymore. You can't predict what they'll do with him or what they see him in. He won MITB but that's as far as this "push" has went, and he's done nothing since. I mean, he was even losing to Wade Barrett several times earlier this year/late last year (clean once for that matter), losing to Ziggler a number of times as well in the same time period, and has lost more than any face in the last year. It looked like he was done and was only going to be used as an enhancement talent... and then he goes and wins MITB. The two strikes though makes it dangerous for them to put a lot of faith in him, and it's why I can't see him winning many more WWE Titles unless they completely abolish the wellness policy, which isn't going to happen.

All in all, what leads us to say that is just how unpredictable Orton can be... and apparently he just divorced from his wife? I don't know if that's going to have any mental effect on him, but that's something to think about as well, especially since I've heard him say in interviews it was his wife and daughter (?) that got him on the right track to begin with. Does that mean it will definitely have some effect on Orton? No, but again, it's something to keep in mind. 

Of course, that's just me. I don't know what Vince thinks of Orton, but I don't know for sure what Vince thinks of anyone. Doesn't stop me from predicting things (regardless of whether my previous predictions ended up inaccurate or not).



> I don't understand that Orton's potential new reign could be his last due to the two strikes. Surely if that was the case then what's the point in making him the new champion in the first place?


He'd be the only one that could do it right now, and put over Bryan by Mania time, since Punk will probably be busy with Lesnar, Cena with Taker, and HHH with Vince (if that feud doesn't go into Bryan/Orton). Ryback's been heel-jobbed out to death now, Sheamus they clearly have no intentions of turning heel (or else they'd done it by now), ADR wouldn't work because the man can't carry a feud or get heat from the crowd to save his life, so the only man that could do it is Orton.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Who knows? Orton isn't exactly a necessary piece of the puzzle anymore. *You can't predict what they'll do with him or what they see him in.* He won MITB but that's as far as this "push" has went, and he's done nothing since. I mean, he was even losing to Wade Barrett several times earlier this year/late last year (clean once for that matter), losing to Ziggler a number of times as well in the same time period, and has lost more than any face in the last year. It looked like he was done and was only going to be used as an enhancement talent... and then he goes and wins MITB. The two strikes though makes it dangerous for them to put a lot of faith in him, and it's why I can't see him winning many more WWE Titles unless they completely abolish the wellness policy, which isn't going to happen.


Exactly, yet you're jumping to conclusions and predicting that the only purpose of his current push with the briefcase is to put over Bryan by Mania time as if you've already been in Vince's room and read all the scripts that have been written up to Mania time.

I think people here make a much bigger deal of the wellness policy than it really is. Orton has already gotten punished for his fuck-ups with all the jobs you pointed out in that post so maybe he's regained the trust to be a headliner in the main event scene? They even went as far as making him enter the WWE Championship scene rather than the World Title which was the excuse Orton haters used ("_maybe_ he wins the WHC but never the WWE title!!!"). Also one can't forget Jeff Hardy who has had serious drug problems, worse than anything Orton has endured. He got his second strike in early 2008 but then they continued to push him all the way in his last year.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Who knows? Orton isn't exactly a necessary piece of the puzzle anymore. You can't predict what they'll do with him or what they see him in. He won MITB but that's as far as this "push" has went, and he's done nothing since. I mean, he was even losing to Wade Barrett several times earlier this year/late last year (clean once for that matter), losing to Ziggler a number of times as well in the same time period, and has lost more than any face in the last year. It looked like he was done and was only going to be used as an enhancement talent... and then he goes and wins MITB. The two strikes though makes it dangerous for them to put a lot of faith in him, and it's why I can't see him winning many more WWE Titles unless they completely abolish the wellness policy, which isn't going to happen.
> 
> All in all, what leads us to say that is just how unpredictable Orton can be... and apparently he just divorced from his wife? I don't know if that's going to have any mental effect on him, but that's something to think about as well, especially since I've heard him say in interviews it was his wife and daughter (?) that got him on the right track to begin with. Does that mean it will definitely have some effect on Orton? No, but again, it's something to keep in mind.
> 
> Of course, that's just me. I don't know what Vince thinks of Orton, but I don't know for sure what Vince thinks of anyone. Doesn't stop me from predicting things (regardless of whether my previous predictions ended up inaccurate or not).
> 
> He'd be the only one that could do it right now, and put over Bryan by Mania time, since Punk will probably be busy with Lesnar, Cena with Taker, and HHH with Vince (if that feud doesn't go into Bryan/Orton). Ryback's been heel-jobbed out to death now, Sheamus they clearly have no intentions of turning heel (or else they'd done it by now), ADR wouldn't work because the man can't carry a feud or get heat from the crowd to save his life, so the only man that could do it is Orton.


Yeah it's definitely possible that he'll be putting over Bryan at Mania for the title or at least working with him in some fashion.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Exactly, yet you're jumping to conclusions and predicting that *the only purpose of his current push with the briefcase is to put over Bryan by Mania time* as if you've already been in Vince's room and read all the scripts that have been written up to Mania time.
> 
> I think people here make a much bigger deal of the wellness policy than it really is. Orton has already gotten punished for his fuck-ups with all the jobs you pointed out in that post so maybe he's regained the trust to be a headliner in the main event scene? They even went as far as making him enter the WWE Championship scene rather than the World Title which was the excuse Orton haters used ("_maybe_ he wins the WHC but never the WWE title!!!"). Also one can't forget Jeff Hardy who has had serious drug problems, worse than anything Orton has endured. He got his second strike in early 2008 but then they continued to push him all the way in his last year.


Yeah, that's what I'm *predicting*, and I've explained why I think that's what's going to happen.

You have a point about the Jeff Hardy situation though, but even then his push only extended to a certain point. He got the WWE Title, but due to the nature of everything around it, he wasn't necessarily "put over" in the process. He won the belt, lost it a month later, and then went onto feuding with his brother Matt in the mid-card, before feuding with Edge, and then Punk. He main evented several PPVs while feuding for the title, but it was all really to put over Punk. Transition the belt from Edge to Punk so Punk could turn heel and use the straight-edge character to the fullest.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Yeah, that's what I'm *predicting*, and I've explained why I think that's what's going to happen.
> 
> You have a point about the Jeff Hardy situation though, but even then his push only extended to a certain point. He got the WWE Title, but due to the nature of everything around it, he wasn't necessarily "put over" in the process. He won the belt, lost it a month later, and then went onto feuding with his brother Matt in the mid-card, before feuding with Edge, and then Punk. He main evented several PPVs while feuding for the title, but it was all really to put over Punk. Transition the belt from Edge to Punk so Punk could turn heel and use the straight-edge character to the fullest.


 It's hard to tell what would have happened to Jeff but he won WWE title, World Heavyweight title and was main eventing shows so I think it's safe to say that he would have continued to be a major main eventer in the WWE if he stayed on.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Oliver-94 said:


> It's hard to tell what would have happened to Jeff but he won WWE title, World Heavyweight title and was main eventing shows so I think it's safe to say that he would have continued to be a major main eventer in the WWE if he stayed on.


Yeah, I don't know. I'm sure the whole reason he main evented and helped make the World Title seem bigger was to put over Punk as a top heel, and then I'd guess the reason he was doing that was because he was leaving, but I'm honestly not sure on that one. Maybe he would've put Punk over regardless and then moved to the WWE Title scene again. Or maybe he would've just been used as an enhancement talent after putting Punk over. Or maybe they would've just brought the title and Jeff down and have him be the face of the B-show, Smackdown, but not so solidly that if he ever fucked up, he'd be hard to replace. It's not something I've thought about tbh.


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



dxbender said:


> Makes sense.....When watching a danceoff between Brodus and someone else, people tuned out because CM Punk was WWE Champ(despite having nothing to do with that danceoff). But during a tag team match in 2009, people watched it because Orton was champ(despite having nothing to do with that match)


You know the main event and main storyline are the main reasons ratings go where they go, not because of one random midcard match that lasted 3 minutes.. I know you know that since you're not one of the dumber posters on here who think ludicrous things like that

After all, if CM Punk gets to kick off the show with a 15 minute promo, gets 2-3 replays of said promo and 2 segments where the camera cuts to the announce team talking about Punk for a minute all to extend his air time and push him harder, then he gets another backstage segment or two, AND a 15-20 minute match with replays afterward. . .totalling up to about 45 minutes of air time every week (which is just under half of a 2 hour show and a little under 1/3rd of a 3 hour show when you exclude commercials). . .

. . .Then how can you then sit there and say it isn't his fault if the ratings are low? You're just deflecting blame dude. Everyone but Punk? Yeah, I don't think so. It's mostly Punk since he got the most air time and was going over the entire time. Most air time + hardest pushes = most responsible for ratings. Clay's 3 minute matches are just blips on the radar in comparison.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> - Monday's taped edition of WWE RAW had a Trendrr.tv social media score of 218,071, down over 21% from the previous week. RAW once again ranked #3 for the night, behind "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" (VH1) and "Teen Wolf" (MTV).


Via PWTorch


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Somebody still can't accept Punk is on a whole other level than their boy Orton.


LOL.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think we are about to see a huge push of Orton and Bryan soon. Bryan is involved in a Cena/McMahon triangle and Orton has the briefcase and is likely to cash in sooner rather than later.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	3.896	1.3
WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	3.746	1.3
WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	3.662	1.2
TOTAL DIVAS	USA	11:08 PM	1.530	0.6

Awful numbers for Raw. Average of 3.77m, predicted figure was 4.01m. Lowest number of the year by far and lowest non holiday since December 10th, 2012.

Taped shows don't normally have an effect, but Raw is not normally taped six days in advance, either.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> I think we are about to see a huge push of Orton and Bryan soon. Bryan is involved in a Cena/McMahon triangle and Orton has the briefcase and is likely to cash in sooner rather than later.


I can definitely see Orton cashing in at Summerslam if Bryan does win the championship. I think he will be involve in the McMahon power struggle storyline and siding with Vince. It will very interesting indeed because I don't think he never had an alliance with Vince. He had he feuds with them several years ago. If he does side with Vince, I think he will be the corporate champion if that is what Vince is looking for. 

I know read that the McMahon storyline was going to go through WM 30. I can see possibly Orton vs Bryan at WM for the WWE championship.


----------



## IWCLOL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	3.896	1.3
> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	3.746	1.3
> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	3.662	1.2
> TOTAL DIVAS	USA	11:08 PM	1.530	0.6
> 
> Awful numbers for Raw. Average of 3.77m, predicted figure was 4.01m. Lowest number of the year by far and lowest non holiday since December 10th, 2012.


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:vince6


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They should continue to air taped Raws.

:vince


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The first hour audience is really low. Was there anything else on TV? New premieres for example?


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

But seriously, I don't understand why RAW's ratings went down to be honest. Only the hardcore fanbase knew it was taped, for the rest of the world it was another WWE RAW LIVE. It even said 'LIVE' on my television channel.

Can someone explain?


----------



## HankHill_85

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not good, but not catastrophic. I think it shows the impact of taped Raws, because there are a fair bunch of jaded fans who just read the spoilers and decided on whether to watch or not. They probably saw no Lesnar, no Orton, Punk not wrestling, the Cena/Ryback main event (normally reserved for dark matches these days), and decided to skip a week.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Let us pray together that we do not have to ever witness HHH/Orton again. Guys, don't forget that this is a serious possibility now.

Poor numbers, but what else do you expect from a show taped a week prior.


----------



## IWCLOL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DatKidMog said:


> But seriously, I don't understand why RAW's ratings went down to be honest. Only the hardcore fanbase knew it was taped, for the rest of the world it was another WWE RAW LIVE. It even said 'LIVE' on my television channel.
> 
> Can someone explain?


Much more casual fans read dirtsheets than internet fans think. Especially with Twitter and Facebook.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Like someone else said above, why would mainstream fans care/know whether the episode was taped? Can't be that.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

People seriously underestimate the influence of the internet. More and more casuals do read spoiler reports.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:lol Vince reaction gifs and smileys are the best. Not good. Vince no like. That's quite the dip. Strange since things seemed to be evening out and growing rather consistent these past few weeks. Meh. Don't think it will phase them though. They have Lesnar for the next 2 weeks even if they stupidly haven't bothered to advertise him and will no doubt push hard for the big sell on the go home show. 

Still odd though and the first hour is getting lower and lower. No matter what or who they put in that slot lately it just seems that they can't condition people to think the beginning of the show is worth tuning in for. The last time I can remember the opening segment getting above 3.0 was the HHH/Axel match with all the stop start shenanigans with Vince about 2 months back and back then some people were calling it bad. I guess the upside is that the audience grows throughout the show but even still, you'd think there would be a bit more interest as things kick off, especially coming off the back of a PPV etc.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> People seriously underestimate the influence of the internet. More and more casuals do read spoiler reports.


Evidence ?


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> Let us pray together that we do not have to ever witness HHH/Orton again. Guys, don't forget that this is a serious possibility now.
> 
> Poor numbers, but what else do you expect from a show taped a week prior.


Anything that puts Randal in the main event is perfectly fine by me. So yeah, BRING IT ON! Even if it's HHH _again_. rton

Didn't even watch the show myself after reading the spoilers. Just saw the opening segment and Cena's reaction when he got mad in the end. No Orton = no interest from me.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

OMG TAK DA TITLE OFF CENA HES KILLIN DA RATINGZ WIT DAT INDY TROLL BRYAN!


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> OMG TAK DA TITLE OFF CENA HES KILLIN DA RATINGZ WIT *DAT INDY TROLL BRYAN!*


i agree vince:vince


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Total Divas > Raw. 

Vinnie vs. Brodus = ratings.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Total Divas > Raw.
> 
> Vinnie vs. Brodus = ratings.


Vinnie to job Brodus out.


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	3.896	1.3
> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	3.746	1.3
> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	3.662	1.2
> TOTAL DIVAS	USA	11:08 PM	1.530	0.6
> 
> Awful numbers for Raw. Average of 3.77m, predicted figure was 4.01m. Lowest number of the year by far and lowest non holiday since December 10th, 2012.
> 
> Taped shows don't normally have an effect, but Raw is not normally taped six days in advance, either.


Your over-exaggerating. It scored a 2.87 only 6% down from last week and the lowest since June 3rd which did a 2.66

http://nodq.com/wwe/377231310.shtml


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2.87 rating


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



thaimasker said:


> Your over-exaggerating. It scored a 2.87 only 6% down from last week and the lowest since June 3rd which did a 2.66
> 
> http://nodq.com/wwe/377231310.shtml


thats a rating, hes talking about viewership, and was the lowest non holiday since dec 2012, in a non football season. Thats not something to cheer over


----------



## TromaDogg

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DatKidMog said:


> But seriously, I don't understand why RAW's ratings went down to be honest. Only the hardcore fanbase knew it was taped, for the rest of the world it was another WWE RAW LIVE. It even said 'LIVE' on my television channel.
> 
> Can someone explain?


It _was_ a live broadcast from the US. Just that is was a prerecorded show. That sort of shit is misleading and shouldn't be allowed though.

As for why Raw's ratings went down? I'm beginning to think that maybe (particularly with the low start figure, people are realising that missing the start of Raw doesn't matter much as, anything important will just be repeated ad infinitum in highlights in between matches for the rest of the show anyway.

And I also think that a lot more people read about stuff online than just the 'hardcore' fans. WWE keep encouraging people to use Twitter and other social media sites, so it's not too much of a stretch to believe that a lot of 'casuals' will have been aware it was a prerecorded show and seen some spoilers just because they don't all rush onto forums to complain about it.


----------



## TheWFEffect

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's cause Jericho's left Y2DRAW.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TromaDogg said:


> It _was_ a live broadcast from the US. Just that is was a prerecorded show. That sort of shit is misleading and shouldn't be allowed though.
> 
> As for why Raw's ratings went down? I'm beginning to think that maybe (particularly with the low start figure, people are realising that missing the start of Raw doesn't matter much as, anything important will just be repeated ad infinitum in highlights in between matches for the rest of the show anyway.
> 
> And I also think that a lot more people read about stuff online than just the 'hardcore' fans. WWE keep encouraging people to use Twitter and other social media sites, so it's not too much of a stretch to believe that a lot of 'casuals' will have been aware it was a prerecorded show and seen some spoilers just because they don't all rush onto forums to complain about it.


I agree with this, especially the second paragraph. You can only see so many recaps from the first hour throughout the show before you realize you don't actually have to watch it right when it happens.


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And Raw these days isnt exactly known for its cliffhangers. Its not often the ME match or segment ends, and you need to see the start of next weeks Raw.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> :lol Vince reaction gifs and smileys are the best. Not good. Vince no like. That's quite the dip. Strange since things seemed to be evening out and growing rather consistent these past few weeks. Meh. Don't think it will phase them though. They have Lesnar for the next 2 weeks even if they stupidly haven't bothered to advertise him and will no doubt push hard for the big sell on the go home show.
> 
> Still odd though and the first hour is getting lower and lower. No matter what or who they put in that slot lately it just seems that they can't condition people to think the beginning of the show is worth tuning in for. The last time I can remember the opening segment getting above 3.0 was the HHH/Axel match with all the stop start shenanigans with Vince about 2 months back and back then some people were calling it bad. I guess the upside is that the audience grows throughout the show but even still, you'd think there would be a bit more interest as things kick off, especially coming off the back of a PPV etc.


at least 30 minutes of the last 2 hours of Raw are recaps of what happened the first hour, I am thinking that has ALOT to do with why people don't feel they need to tune in for the first hour.


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You are going to get low ratings when you have guys main eventing that look like used car sales men Punk/Bryan.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

feud isn't buzzin like Punk vs Cena 2011. Vince being in it is a huge plus thou.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> 2.87 rating




wow such a bad rating for a pretty solid show.

We need to see the breakdowns though. I bet Punk lost some viewers though.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hopefully,Lesnar will bump up the ratings next week.Can't wait to watch the beast in action,really missed him past few weeks


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Males 18-49: http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_72407.shtml#.UfobWI21Fv8



> WWE Raw 7/29 Ratings Break Down
> 
> STRENGTHS: Dolph Ziggler vs. Big E. Langston, John Cena vs. Ryback main event (by default).
> 
> WEAKNESSES: Daniel Bryan vs. Kane, entire show.
> 
> - WWE will want to toss out this week's Raw TV ratings performance, as the entire show was pushed down to the lowest levels of July.
> 
> The only real winner of the night was the Dolph Ziggler vs. Big E. Langston match, which followed A.J. Lee vs. Kaitlyn in the Q5, top-of-the-second-hour slot.
> 
> In the important males 18-49 demographic, Ziggler-Langston averaged 1.254 million viewers from the end of Q5 to the beginning of Q6, which was the largest audience of the night until the over-run for Cena-Ryback in the main event.
> 
> - Cena vs. Ryback in the heavily-hyped main event with the benefit of an over-run averaged 1.231 million viewers from mid-Q12 to the over-run, which included a mid-match commercial break.
> 
> At the end of Q12, Cena-Ryback was at 1.272 million viewers, then the match picked up to 1.283 million viewers at 11:03 p.m. before finishing with 1.347 million viewers, 1.359 million viewers, and 1.355 million viewers. These were the most-watched minutes of the show, which would be expected during the over-run.
> 
> - Daniel Bryan vs. Kane, which was the other match promoted in-advance, did not fare well despite benefiting from the Q9, top-of-the-third hour slot.
> 
> The entire Q9 segment averaged 1.076 million viewers, which included one commercial. The match did finish with peak viewership of 1.224 million viewers at 10:13 p.m.
> 
> At the end of Q9, Raw benefited from a chunk of viewers flipping over (19,000 m18-49 viewers from "Lizard Lick Towing" on TruTV, 38,000 from "Street Outlaws" on Discovery, and 21,000 from "Teen Wolf").
> 
> Raw Audience Flow (males 18-49 demo)
> 
> - OVERALL: Raw scored a 1.72 rating and averaged 1.074 million viewers (lowest of July).
> 
> HOUR ONE
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened with a 1.73 rating for the entire Mr. McMahon-Daniel Bryan-John Cena opening talking segment. (By comparison, last week's Q1 scored a 1.93 rating.)
> 
> The segment opened with 1.011 viewers and ended with 1.226 million viewers. There was a big jump in viewers from Spanish-language show "Porque El Amor Manda" mid-way through the segment, producing 52,000 viewers at 8:08 p.m. to give the segment a boost.
> 
> - Q2: Raw dropped to a show-low 1.52 rating for two full commercial breaks after the talking segment and the first few minutes of Mark Henry & The Usos vs. The Shield.
> 
> - Q3: Raw rebounded to a 1.63 rating for the finish of Henry/Usos vs. The Shield, plus one-and-a-half commercials.
> 
> - Q4: Raw inched upward to a 1.65 rating for Rob Van Dam vs. Fandango and one-and-a-half commercials leading to the top of the hour.
> 
> At the point of the commercial break at 8:55 p.m., viewers bailed to "Cops" on Spike TV. This put Spike TV over the top as the #1 source of viewers leaving Raw during the first hour (topping VH1, TBS, Discovery, and ESPN).
> 
> HOUR TWO
> 
> - Q5: Raw jumped to a second-hour-high 1.76 rating for A.J. vs. Kaitlyn, one commercial, and the first-half of Dolph vs. Big E. Langston. (By comparison, last week's Q5 scored a 2.23 rating.)
> 
> Raw got a big increase from "Fast N Loud" on Discovery, which added 51,000 viewers at 9:10 p.m. for the start of Ziggler vs. Langston.
> 
> - Q6: Raw stayed close with a 1.73 rating for the end of Dolph vs. Langston, one commercial, and the first-half of Alberto Del Rio vs. Christian. (By comparison, last week's Q6 scored a 2.12 rating.)
> 
> During this portion of the show, big chunks of viewers moved between Raw and "Fast and Loud," "Cops" on Spike, and "Family Guy" on TBS.
> 
> - Q7: Raw stayed close with a 1.72 rating for the end of Del Rio vs. Christian and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> - Q8: Raw dropped to a 1.64 rating for Cody Rhodes vs. Wade Barrett and one commercial leading to the top of the third hour.
> 
> During this portion of the second hour, viewers bailed to "Cops" and "Fast & Loud." There was also some movement to MLB Network to check out final scores of baseball games.
> 
> HOUR THREE
> 
> - Q9: Raw scored a low-level 1.72 rating for the top-of-the-third-hour match between Daniel Bryan and Kane. (By comparison, last week's Q9 scored a 2.09 rating.)
> 
> Raw gained 44,000 viewers from "Fast & Loud" at 10:00 p.m., but Raw also lost chunks of viewers to Cops, MLB Network, "Lonesome Dove Week," and "Teen Wolf."
> 
> - Q10: Raw was the same with a 1.72 rating for the Wyatts's post-match attack on Kane, one commercial, and Brie Bella vs. Natalya.
> 
> - Q11: Raw dropped to a third-hour-low 1.57 rating for Curtis Axel vs. R-Truth and two full commercial breaks. (By comparison, last week's Q11 scored a 1.81 rating; two weeks ago post-MITB, it was a 2.02 rating.)
> 
> When Raw cut to break at 10:30 following the Divas match, 52,000 viewers bailed to "Big Bang Theory" on TBS and another big chunk bailed to "Cops." The Big Bang Theory viewers did return in Q11.
> 
> - Q12: Raw "jumped" to a show-high 1.85 rating for John Cena vs. Ryback and one commercial. (By comparison, last week's Q12 main event scored a 2.04 rating.)
> 
> The channel-flipping between Raw and "Cops" put viewers on Raw during this portion of the night. Raw also got a chunk of viewers (35,000) from MSNBC's "Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell" and ESPN's Baseball Tonight.
> 
> - Over-Run: Raw scored a 2.09 rating for the end of Cena-Ryback and Bryan's post-match appearance to confront Cena. (By comparison, last week's over-run was a 2.23 rating; two weeks ago, it was a 2.53 rating.)
> 
> During the over-run, there were no big chunks of viewers flipping over to Raw, which is why the over-run only produced a minimal gain. Instead, the gain was mainly from viewers simply turning on their TVs to catch the end of Raw. This is evidenced by a 5 percent tune-in gain at 11:01 p.m. and a 6 percent tune-in gain at 11:04 p.m.
> 
> Caldwell's Analysis: Spike TV will really want to crank up the TNA Impact spots during "Cops" on Monday nights based on the amount of channel-flipping in Spike's key demo of males 18-49. This is a way to attract new Impact viewers by tapping into WWE's biggest audience of the week.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

dat d bry dr..oh... never mind


----------



## ellthom

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Those Divas bringing in the ratings... 

who'd a thought it


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

A very odd breakdown for sure. 

I wish there was a bit more detail in there as well. They didn't even cover if Punk's appearance post Axel/Truth gained/lost viewers, and instead just lumped it in with the entire match and only showed how the entire segment lost viewers. Perhaps Punk's small appearance stopped the quarter from losing even more than it would normally have, but we don't have any proof of that unfortunately.

It's interesting to see that the AJ/Kaitlin and Big E/Ziggler storylines are doing well, but this could also just be a situation where people are only tuning in for the 10pm quarter in hopes they see something good then tuning out after, which may be evident by the huge dropoff in this week's 10pm compared to last week's.

They kind of undersold Bryan/Kane at the 11pm hour since it didn't do much worse than the 10pm hour by getting a 1.72 compared to the 1.73 that AJ/Ziggy/Big E/Kaitlin got, so there's no need to get too excited over that Bryan haters . Having said that Bryan/Kane was heavily promoted so something's to be said about that.

Conclusively though, this was definitely not an impressive show all around, and the only real winner was Cena/Ryback which is to be expected.


----------



## El Capitano

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ziggler with another good draw :ziggler3


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



El Capitano said:


> Ziggler with another good draw :ziggler3


You just can't stop the Zig Man.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The taped wrestling-heavy Raw on 7/29 did a 2.86 rating and 3.77 million viewers.
> 
> The show was fourth for the night on cable. The show did a 2.0 in Boys 12-17 (down 13%), a 2.0 in Males 18-49 (down 13%), 1.0 in Girls 12-17 (up 11%) and 1.0 in Women 18-49 (up 11%). The audience was 66.5% male.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, it opened at 2.87 for the first segment with Vince McMahon, Daniel Bryan and Brad Maddox. The Shield vs. Usos & Mark Henry lost 409,000 viewers, which tells you how The Shield really have gotten cold. Ryback messing people up in catering and a Wyatt Family promo gained 167,000 viewers. Rob Van Dam vs. Fandango gained 135,000 viewers. A.J. Lee vs. Kaitlyn and Dolph Ziggler vs. Big E Langston at 9 p.m. gained 361,000 viewers to a to a 3.06 quarter. Alberto Del Rio vs. Christian lost 206,000 viewers. Cody Rhodes vs. Wade Barrett lost 85,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Kane at 10 p.m. gained 60,000 viewers, which is terrible for the slot, doing a 2.90 quarter. Brie Bella vs. Natalya lost 92,000 viewers. Curtis Axel vs. R-Truth with the C.M. Punk attack lost 145,000 viewers. John Cena vs. Ryback in a tables match in the main event spot gained 769,000 viewers to a 3.29 overrun.
> 
> As far as the gain went, Cena vs. Ryback went from 2.2 to 2.4 in Boys 12-17, 1.9 to 2.5 in Males 18-49, 1.0 to 1.0 in Girls 12-17 and 0.9 to 0.9 in Women 18-49. So it’s notable that whether they boo or cheer Cena, the biggest gain in the main event was Males 18-49 and he didn’t move ratings at all among women.


via Obsever NewsLetter


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> via Obsever NewsLetter


Usually what I wait for...again...yoou just can't stop the ZIG MAN. lol


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nice to see that Ryback and Big E are gaining 'em ratings :cheer


However,they need to do something interesting with the Shield.They are just going through the motions at the moment,IMO.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The Shield vs. Usos & Mark Henry lost 409,000 viewers, which tells you how The Shield really have gotten cold.


Umm what it tells you is that the Usos are fucking useless and they're dragging Henry down with them. Get rid of these jobbers FFS.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Daniel Bryan vs. Kane at 10 p.m. gained 60,000 viewers


What the hell


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

John cena is on another level to the rest of the roster.

Hes a machine


----------



## IWCLOL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Looking at these ratings make me think how awful fall 2012 ratings actually were.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The early signs are that Daniel Bryan is probably going to be a main eventer in much the same fashion of a CM Punk or a Randy Orton. He’ll draw when he’s working with Cena but he wont be able to work with people below him and draw consistently.

It’s best that both his haters and his fans just accept that fact now rather than going back and forward arguing about it over the coming months.


----------



## IWCLOL

*How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

This is kind of a rating thread but more of a quality thread too. Meaning discuss ratings but mostly talk about what RAW can do to improve in quality and get people to switch back on.


WWE need to have a HUGE storyline going on and I mean HUGE to keep people interested. Ratings got as low as 2.4 (Non holiday) which is awful. This wasn't a yearly thing too 2010 and 2011 had decent 3's and some 2's but not 12 weeks of no 3's. 

They need more surprises and things to keep people coming in during the big games. 


What do you think WWE needs to do to combat the NFL machine that destroyed WWE last year on Mondays.


----------



## JY57

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

usual 2.4-2.8 range


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:cena4 :cena :cena2 :cena3 :cena5


----------



## Chrome

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

Push new talent and give them captivating storylines to work with? It's not as hard as WWE makes it look.


----------



## Berzerker's Beard

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

Boy I sure do wanna watch this Jets/Patriots game... but I just don't know if I have the willpower to ignore that Alberto Del Rio v. Dolph Ziggler match I've seen 3,000 times before.

It's gonna be tough.


----------



## Berzerker's Beard

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

"Hey quick! Change the channel! Sheamus is coming out and I think he's about to wrestle Jack Swagger for the 157th time in a match that has absolutely nothing at stake and won't forward the narrative in any real meaningful way! Here comes the brogue kick!!!!!!"


----------



## KingJohn

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

WWE can't compete with the NFL, pretty much nothing can tbh.


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So Daniel bryan vs Ryback drew more than Cena vs Ryback :bryan


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Only because this RAW was taped.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well, Ziggler drawing yet again. Of course it's been in the 9PM slot, which I've yet to see lose viewers, but the gains have still been good and more importantly, so have the ratings for that quarter.

10PM... ouch. That's the worst 10PM in a couple of months (since the Jericho/Heyman contract signing), and hell, that one may be the only one worse this year.

Overrun was really good. A bit down from a couple of weeks ago, but the fact Cena/Ryback is still drawing like that says something about their feud.



> So Daniel bryan vs Ryback drew more than Cena vs Ryback


Bryan/Ryback gained 331,000 to a 3.2, Cena/Ryback gained 769,000 to a 3.29.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Well, Ziggler drawing yet again. Of course it's been in the 9PM slot, which I've yet to see lose viewers, but the gains have still been good and more importantly, so have the ratings for that quarter.
> 
> 10PM... ouch. That's the worst 10PM in a couple of months (since the Jericho/Heyman contract signing), and hell, that one may be the only one worse this year.
> 
> Overrun was really good. A bit down from a couple of weeks ago, but the fact Cena/Ryback is still drawing like that says something about their feud.
> 
> 
> 
> *Bryan/Ryback gained 331,000 to a 3.2, Cena/Ryback gained 769,000 to a 3.29.*


lol..


----------



## IWCLOL

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*



JY57 said:


> usual 2.4-2.8 range


I'm looking for more what can WWE to stop the drop rather than how much they get. 


Also 2.4-2.8 wasn't the norm 2 years ago it was more like 2.8-3.2.


----------



## IWCLOL

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*



KingJohn said:


> WWE can't compete with the NFL, pretty much nothing can tbh.



WWE did well for many years against NFL. Only since last year did the ratings take a real hit.


----------



## ShiftyLWO

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

They wont stand a fucking chance I see 2.0 and under. Looks like they'll be doing the usual bullshit once summerslam is over. Thank god the NFL is back.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Waffelz said:


> lol..


Not sure why that is funny. They got almost the same rating. Cena/Ryback added more viewers because there were more people tuned out and not watching WWE in the previous quarter hour. The previous week Bryan was also wrestling in that previous quarter hour and less people were tuning out and more opted to watch Bryan wrestle. Unless I'm missing something that says good things about Bryan especially since he was facing the un-Americans at the time. What am I missing here?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Not sure why that is funny. They got almost the same rating. Cena/Ryback added more viewers because there were more people tuned out and not watching WWE in the previous quarter hour. The previous week Bryan was also wrestling in that previous quarter hour and less people were tuning out and more opted to watch Bryan wrestle. Unless I'm missing something that says good things about Bryan especially since he was facing the un-Americans at the time. What am I missing here?


Nothing, it's a good number. It's still weaker than Cena's on both overall rating and gain accounts, which is why he was laughing since someone boldly said Bryan/Ryback did better last week and that's what I responded to.

But both numbers are really good and that's certainly not the number to poke at Bryan for.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RTIME=NOW :cena3

fucking idiots :side:


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Well, Ziggler drawing yet again. Of course it's been in the 9PM slot, which I've yet to see lose viewers, but the gains have still been good and more importantly, so have the ratings for that quarter.
> 
> 10PM... ouch. That's the worst 10PM in a couple of months (since the Jericho/Heyman contract signing), and hell, that one may be the only one worse this year.
> 
> Overrun was really good. A bit down from a couple of weeks ago, but the fact Cena/Ryback is still drawing like that says something about their feud.
> 
> 
> 
> Bryan/Ryback gained 331,000 to a 3.2, Cena/Ryback gained 769,000 to a 3.29.


yeah Ryback/Cena doing good RAW numbers. Too bad their PPV matches in terms of buys was a fail (not sure they would have had a decent PPV number 231,000 without Hunter/Brock III and Payback did worst than No Way Out (pretty much saying Big Show/Johnny vs Cena and Punk vs Bryan vs Kane is better than Ryback vs Cena II and A Returning Punk vs Jericho)


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Once again another show with no real losers and filled with consistency. :vince must be somewhat proud. Although those Extreme Rules 2013 numbers must make him upset unk3


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Not sure why that is funny. *They got almost the same rating.* Cena/Ryback added more viewers because there were more people tuned out and not watching WWE in the previous quarter hour. The previous week Bryan was also wrestling in that previous quarter hour and less people were tuning out and more opted to watch Bryan wrestle. Unless I'm missing something that says good things about Bryan especially since he was facing the un-Americans at the time. What am I missing here?


Except Cena/Ryback attracted over double the amount of viewers, Bryan/Ryback did.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

Not even the return of the Attitude Era can compete with MNF.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

Just as bad if not worse than last year.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Is it really a surprise that Cena/Ryback got more viewers than Bryan/Ryback? Cena is basically the only guy who gets booked strong and made to look good. :lol at a certain type of fan trying to take this as an opportunity to bash Bryan. What a surprise.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*



IWCLOL said:


> WWE did well for many years against NFL. Only since last year did the ratings take a real hit.


well something about raw must have changed last year then...think hard what was that BIG change

again why is this even a thread, if the network was unhappy with raw last year the 3rd hour would have been cut straight away so if they do similar to last year usa will be happy


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Another week...another high AJ Lee rated segment. [email protected] to say Ziggler got anything to do with it. He's a joke. AJ is the one who has been having unique gains since her crazy heel turn started during the GM deal.

As for Cena? He's a conditioned overly pushed guy who people watch. So what. He's still garbage and the match was boring as fuck.


----------



## El Capitano

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AthenaMark said:


> Another week...another high AJ Lee rated segment. [email protected] to say Ziggler got anything to do with it. He's a joke. AJ is the one who has been having unique gains since her crazy heel turn started during the GM deal.
> 
> As for Cena? He's a conditioned overly pushed guy who people watch. So what. He's still garbage and the match was boring as fuck.


:lmao you mean even though he has been getting consistently high ratings for the last month or so even without AJ involved. Bitter much over the fact Bryan had a poor rating. Who cares! its one week


----------



## HeavyDandtheBoyz

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*



ChromeMan said:


> Push new talent and give them captivating storylines to work with? It's not as hard as WWE makes it look.


I think it's much harder than you think.


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

*It's the NFL, there's no chance of them coming close to them. You can't compete with the #1 sport in the country.*


----------



## BigDLangston

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

Now way WWE can even come close to competing with the NFL.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bitter? AJ was getting higher ratings than Punk as champion...that's not bitter. Just a fact.


----------



## joeycalz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Uh, the show was taped. There's your answer. A solid portion of the older audience read the spoilers online and decided to either go out, watch something else, or not tune into the television entirely. Ratings will be up again next week for sure. This thread sucks.

On another note: I tuned out during the main event, which goes to show you that none of this can be taken seriously. My friend who has interned at Newsday all summer and is as die-hard as me has had to watch it on DVR. You guys are absurd in here.


----------



## M1687

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

They'll do better than last years assuming they won't give the title to Punk.


----------



## Korvin

*Re: How do you think WWE will match up against NFL this year?*

To be fair to WWE, it is hard for anything to come close to the NFL. You only get to see certain games a few times out of the year while you can see the same people wrestle each other 100 times year round.

WWE will suffer in ratings because people would rather watch the MNF than RAW. It has always been like that. I do agree though that WWE needs to have some big storyline going on during that time if they want to even try to keep people from changing the channel.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The "taped" excuse is funny considering that during the AE, every other Raw and every Smackdown were taped and drew some of the biggest numbers in history. 

For example, the go-home Raw for Wrestlemania 15 was a taped show and had the highest rating ever up to that point.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> The "taped" excuse is funny considering that during the AE, every other Raw and every Smackdown were taped and drew some of the biggest numbers in history.
> 
> For example, the go-home Raw for Wrestlemania 15 was a taped show and had the highest rating ever up to that point.


But this is not the Attitude Era. Now you can read the spoilers on the internet much easier than ever and decide if you want to watch it or not.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> The "taped" excuse is funny considering that during the AE, every other Raw and every Smackdown were taped and drew some of the biggest numbers in history.
> 
> For example, the go-home Raw for Wrestlemania 15 was a taped show and had the highest rating ever up to that point.


What a silly post.


----------



## joeycalz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> The "taped" excuse is funny considering that during the AE, every other Raw and every Smackdown were taped and drew some of the biggest numbers in history.
> 
> For example, the go-home Raw for Wrestlemania 15 was a taped show and had the highest rating ever up to that point.


A percentage of the audience had access to the internet and knowledge to go online and "spoil" it for themselves. Nowadays, everybody (including my seven-year old cousin) has access to the internet and knows where to go and how to find spoilers. The AE had its internet smarks for sure, but the difference in people who find access to this stuff is way different than back then. Factor in DVR, Hulu and YouTube and a lot of people choose to watch RAW or catch up on it at a later time.


----------



## kingbucket

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Seriously, this is the first time I've seen that Mark Henry didn't bring in "the ratings" in a very long time. I really hope that him tapping out to Cena didn't cause him to lose whatever drawing ability he had. I'm not saying he was a top draw, but he has proven consistently that he brings in viewers prior to this week.


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

When ya don't put wrestlers in the show that can't draw this is what ya get. No Orton no Undertaker = no rating.

Just wait when Niners are on monday night football.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think Brock's presence was also missed.When two guys are involved in an intense feud,and one of them misses some shows right amidst the rivalry,then it hurts the ratings and it hurts the build,and eventually it may even hurt the PPV buys,IMO.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> But this is not the Attitude Era. Now you can read the spoilers on the internet much easier than ever and decide if you want to watch it or not.


Ahh, so it's the spoilers that are the problem. Not WWE being unadulterated garbage. I guess that's why WWF ratings skyrockted when Schiavone gave away spoilers about Foley winning the belt? The problem is, people read the spoilers to 'decide if they want to watch', and decide that they don't want to watch. Just like the people who watched the previous RAW and decide they don't want to watch the next one, based on the fact that the previous one was shit.

In TAE I purposely avoided spoilers online. Because when your product is good, the word 'spoiler' stays true to its meaning.

These days, we don't so much read 'spoilers' on the net about WWE so much as WARNINGS. In probably 10 years now, I have never read something about McMahon's product on the internet that made me go...man, I missed that, I should've watched it, damn.


----------



## kiguel182

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Honestly Kane vs Bryan with no real build-up whatsoever is the real reason that segment drew bad. Last week Bryan wrestled for 40 minutes and he kept viewers engaged and didn't lose them so he clearly isn't the problem.

Also Kane vs Bryan isn't the best in terms of quality either, I don't think they have a great chemistry.

And comparing gains without any other facts (like the loses of the previous quarter) is redundant and it's better to use the rating to do a fair comparison.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Waffelz said:


> What a silly post.


The only silly thing (except your four words reply) is trying to make excuses for bad ratings by any means.

Ratings are down because it's taped, ratings are down because of NFL, ratings are down because of NBA, ratings are down because it's summer, ratings are down because it's winter.

Good god if WWE spent half the time these people spend in finding excuses into creating compelling television, this ratings are down discussion wouldn't even be neccessary.


----------



## messi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> I think Brock's presence was also missed.When two guys are involved in an intense feud,and one of them misses some shows right amidst the rivalry,then it hurts the ratings and it hurts the build,and eventually it may even hurt the PPV buys,IMO.


This!

ppl are underestimating Lesnar's drawing ability. He is the second biggest draw in the business behind The Rock and he is feuding with a guy like Punk who isn't a big draw. And add on the fact that he is barely appearing on the shows like you mentioned then ratings will take a hit no doubt.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The only thing that performed worth a damn out of this weeks Raw was the main event. Everything else did poorly. 

:cena2


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Umm Lita vs Steph for the Woman's title was the ME for a RAW one time?






How well did this show do?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^ not sure about the specific main event (man I remember this its was fun with Rock, Angle, Hunter, Lita, Stephanie, & The Hardy's)

but the over all show did a 6.2 rating.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



messi said:


> This!
> 
> ppl are underestimating Lesnar's drawing ability. He is the second biggest draw in the business behind The Rock and he is feuding with a guy like Punk who isn't a big draw. And add on the fact that he is barely appearing on the shows like you mentioned then ratings will take a hit no doubt.


lesnar is not and never has been a great *tv draw* the season he was on ultimate figher was the lowest rated at that point, cena adds hundreds of thousands of viewers every week for his segments, put lesnar on tv every week of every month of every year i seriously doubt he draws anywhere near as consistently as cena


----------



## crazybeats

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Do any of you realise just how big some cable channels are? Do you realise that there are some shows out there drawing huge ratings? They're good shows. WWE has a lot to compete with today. People just have so much choice now that they can pick and choose what they want to watch. I imagine most do take one look at Sheamus or Cody Rhodes and they reach for the remote. It's just the way it is. WWE will never get a 6.2 rating ever again, not that they can't....they just don't have the commitment or drive to want to achieve it again but it's there for the taking.


All you gotta do is give people a reason to tune in. Give them something they want to see and then keep giving them what they want.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

To get to those high ratings again... it involves... well, "gambling", for lack of a better term. They have a choice to either take risks, some really big, to get someone to that "mega-star" level and bring WWE up to and beyond the 4.0's, or they can be compacent with where they are which works out financially just fine and stay at the 3.0 ratings. 

And at this present time, I can't blame WWE for going with the latter, because if I was in Vince's shoes and there's no competition (like now), I'd rather make sure my business stays afloat as opposed to taking a chance that could potentially ruin it if it doesn't work. As a fan, it sucks, but I get where they're coming from. 

But that's why we probably will continue seeing them push Cena as the number 1 guy until he retires, because as of now there hasn't been much of a reason to go with anyone else except maybe Punk, but Cena's still more reliable from a business sense (especially since Punk may not even be around in 3 years). I mean business may have dropped since Cena first took over the mantle as the number 1 guy in 2005, but it seems they're still doing well enough and that's what matters to them.


----------



## Vyer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> To get to those high ratings again... it involves... well, "gambling", for lack of a better term. They have a choice to either take risks, some really big, to get someone to that "mega-star" level and bring WWE up to and beyond the 4.0's, or they can be compacent with where they are which works out financially just fine and stay at the 3.0 ratings.
> 
> And at this present time, I can't blame WWE for going with the latter, because if I was in Vince's shoes and there's no competition (like now), I'd rather make sure my business stays afloat as opposed to taking a chance that could potentially ruin it if it doesn't work. As a fan, it sucks, but I get where they're coming from.
> 
> But that's why we probably will continue seeing them push Cena as the number 1 guy until he retires, because as of now there hasn't been much of a reason to go with anyone else except maybe Punk, but Cena's still more reliable from a business sense (especially since Punk may not even be around in 3 years). I mean business may have dropped since Cena first took over the mantle as the number 1 guy in 2005, but it seems they're still doing well enough and that's what matters to them.


I hope they don't become too complacent. I understand they don't want to run the risk, but it would be nice for them do something a little risky or out of the norm. Ratings might get lower too, but I don't know how likely that is.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wait until September rolls around and Monday Night Football is back. They're hovering around 2.9 WITHOUT Monday Night Football on the air. That's incredible to me.


----------



## crazybeats

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's what is needed though. People need to understand this, in order for WWE to get better, it has to get worse. 2.9 is good to them! Under The Dome on CBS brings in 13 million on a Monday night. That's good TV right there! Then you got other great shows starting in the fall. 2.9 is nothing, that's chump change. It really is guys and WWE needs to take a really hard hit. They know it's shit. Vince knows no one cares about WWE but he still makes the money he does due to higher ticket prices, the reliance of die hards buying PPVs at astronomical prices and the tons of international TV deals that they have. 

WWE is kept afloat by many many parts of the business. It all adds up to a nice round figure at the end of every quarter but look at the arenas. There is no sellouts every week, they don't do 15-18 or 20,000 seat arenas anymore. They're doing 7,000 for Raw and Smackdown has performed poorly for years on the ticketsales but that is the core audience. Those are the people that will never leave, it's like all of you on here. You will never stop watching and really what needs to happen is for the younger viewers to get bored or even the most ardent of fans to say enough is enough, that's enough for now and they finally change the channel.

And why wouldn't you change the channel? Under The Dome is a great TV show. Why pay for a PPV when you got some great shows coming up like The Walking Dead? American Horror Story is coming up soon too. There are so many great TV shows on. WWE really needs to take a big hit. If 2.9 is the standard now, I really hope American football knocks it down to at least 2.5 and you know what the sad thing is? WWE will do a few big things to try get the numbers up but it's too late. They've relied on the same people for years, the same matches week in and week out, the same boring old formula, a few big stunts or shocks isn't gonna be enough to keep viewers or bring any back. They will be FORCED to change the entire show, the entire format, the content, the way it's produced, the way people view WWE TV. Of course for that to happen, bad things would need to happen but i really believe it will happen sooner than we think.

And one last thing I want to mention. For all those WWE marks that say Vince McMahon is a genius and they badmouth WCW and ECW for their business failures. Do you what is a failure? Do you? How a Vince McMahon led World Wrestling Federation went from 6,7,8 million viewers in 2000 to 3-4 million in 2002. And ever since then the business has gotten worse. In 13 years the business has went down and down and down and look at it today. It's nowhere near going back up. And that's Vince McMahon at the helm, the genius! Some genius he is. Do you think that would happen at CBS? CMT? A&E? FOX? Do you think they would sit back and let a show drawing 6.0's and 7.0's every week fall to that level in such a short space of time and then over the following 10 years let it decline even further? No way would they. That right there is why WWE will never leave USA network again, because any network with any dignity would look at those numbers and wonder what the hell happened.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wrestling is never getting consistent 4.0 ratings again. That's just crazy thinking. Raw 1000 with all the hype and promotion behind it didn't even get a 4.0 iirc. It's just not possible given today's TV climate and the popularity of wrestling as a whole. It's not pop culture any more. WWE should aim to maintain 4 million viewers during their off peak times of the year and to push the 5 million mark for their peak times of the year in Mania and Summerslam. Besides, there's no direct correlation between TV ratings and PPV buys. Sometimes there is but sometimes there isn't. Now that the show is 3 hours, it would be impossible for them to sustain enough people to hit consistent 4.0's every week. It's just too long, wrestling isn't mainstream and they don't have enough star power to pack the shows to even give them a chance. Raw's earlier this year with The Undertaker, Triple H, The Rock, Brock Lesnar and John Cena were miles away from getting 4.0's. It's just not possible.


----------



## crazybeats

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That is the whole point. IT IS possible. If you're willing to put the work in and get the proper writers and bookers running the shows, if you cut down your hours of TV you can have 4 million viewers for each show. There is plenty of TV shows that draw high ratings every week. There is nothing stopping WWE doing the same but they are too lazy to put the effort in. That's why i said you can never again call Vince McMahon a genius because he's let his company go so far downhill over a 13 year period. Anybody else would say well if he's such a genius why didn't he build his company back up, oh but that's right no one else cares about wrestling apart from wrestling fans and like you said. It can't be done.


The truth is it can be done. There are a slew of talented writers, actors and producers that prove it every week with high ratings. WWE is no different to those shows. Actors, writers, producers.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

IF IF IF. Too many ifs. Be real for a second. WWE popping consistent 4.0 ratings for Raw in 2013 is not possible. They ARE a 3 hour show and they DONT have Emmy award winning writers on their staff. They aren't a pop culture fad or ahead of the curve on crash TV like they were in the AE. Unless they stumble across the next big thing to take over the TV world, it simply isn't happening.


----------



## crazybeats

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why should it be a case of IF IF IF? It can be done! WWE is a television show. They hire all those writers to do a job Vince Russo did on his own for years. How the hell can a team of writers from Hollywood not only match but EXCEED what one man did on his own. Ok everything went right, the right stars at the right time but all Russo did was put them in the right situations. Most of the time you could easily predict the Attitude Era but the key was giving people what they wanted. Why can't WWE find out what people want in 2013 and give them it and if they can't do it, hire the people that can do it. Of course the Attitude Era wouldn't work again but find something that does work in 2013. The next big thing is there, somewhere... but you wont know who it is until you put that person in the right position at the right time with the right gimmick facing the right opponent and everything comes together.

It can be done. As you say they don't have the best writers on their staff and that is their own doing, it's not like they can't afford it but then again I don't think they are really needed for a wrestling show or are the answer to WWE's woes. I just don't understand how you can be on such a high, have so much success and fall so hard and not want to try again and be on top and be in the headlines and have the world talk about you and how your show is so good. Why wouldn't you be motivated to get back there?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It can be done. And I also could win the lottery tomorrow. It is possible. But the odds are very much against it.

If WWE were to almost completely change their booking and writing philosophy (including hiring completely new writers and a different type of writer), that would be a good first step in that direction. But even after that, they would still have huge, dramatic steps to take to eventually draw 4.0's again consistently. It's not going to happen in 2013. It's most likely not going to happen in 2014, either. Hiring a new type of writer, booking cohesive, logical storylines with depth, and completely lucking into finding a new huge star (think Steve Austin level of star), are all things that would have to take place in order for WWE to be on the road to possibly start to draw 4.0's again consistently. They have to improve dramatically and have alot of luck on their side.


----------



## Defei

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> lesnar is not and never has been a great tv draw the season he was on ultimate figher was the lowest rated at that point, *cena adds hundreds of thousands of viewers every week for his segments, put lesnar on tv every week of every month of every year i seriously doubt he draws anywhere near as consistently as cena*


Non sense. "Cena adds hundreds of thousands of viewers everyweek" is just another way of saying Cena does decent gains on RAW everyweek. It is true and he does average around 250-300k viewers, but why do you believe Brock Lesnar can't do the same numbers as a full timer star? The only reason Cena appears to be some kinda super mega draw right now, is because the roster is so terribly lacking in starpower currently. You compare John Cena, who has been relentlessly pushed as the main event since 2006, with a bunch of jobbers and un-established names on the roster then obviously he seems way bigger draw than he actually is. I mean yeah guys like Orton, Punk, Sheamus, The Miz, Del Rio have had their start-stop pushes from time to time but nothing like what Cena has had for over 6 years. Brock Lesnar is way above Orton/Punk/Sheamus/Miz and is absolutely capable of drawing those weekly John Cena numbers. 

As for UFC numbers, TUF viewership has never been as good compared to pro-wrestling TV viewership. You can't compare these two. Brock is/was the UFC's biggest draw by far, after him GSP is the biggest star in UFC and the TUF season involving him drew like 0.70 average. Besides, Cena has been part of some of the lowest rated overruns in the past two years as well. This hardly proves anything.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3,970,000 is the central prediction this week.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Expect this week to do awful. A-Rod is a bigger draw than :rock, :austin, :hogan, :cena, unk4, :HHH, :flair, and :henry1 combined.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Only five of those can draw anyways. The first four and MIZARK. :henry1


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Fair enough. I guess I'll replace #5 and 6 with 2009 version of rton and :brock


----------



## Monterossa

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh god... just watched RAW and Christian gets very little crowd reaction when the ring announcer introduce him, when he hits the spear, and when he pins Slater.

this guy is clearly not over at all.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Aside from Bryan, Punk, Brock, Cena and Orton, no one was over yesterday.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



crazybeats said:


> That's what is needed though. People need to understand this, in order for WWE to get better, it has to get worse. 2.9 is good to them! Under The Dome on CBS brings in 13 million on a Monday night.


comparing cbs and usa network is daft, for one cbs is available in 20 million more homes (thats an extra 50 million+ people that have access to it), cbs averages 6 million viewers in prime time, usa averages 2 million viewers in prime time

would under the dome be doing 13 million if it were on the air every week of every year for 20 years... not a fucking chance, its new, its hip, it costs way more to produce than wwe raw

during the attitude era the most watched episode of raw had 8.4 million viewers watching for 2hrs, at the same time survivor had 52 million watching the finale of season 1, that puts into perspective how irrelevant wrestling is in the grand scheme of things especially compared to stuff on network tv, its a niche product that had a short boom when two companies went head to head for a few years but even during that period raw never even came close to beating a single regular season nfl game and compared to shows like friends, mash, seinfeld, cheers, cosby show, star trek tng, dallas etc etc etc it wasn't even on the same planet as those in terms of tv viewership

in england during their boom period world of sport averaged 8 million viewers and had 18 million watching for one episode, 18 fucking million in a country with 1/5th the population of america, wrestling in england back in the early 1980s was essential viewing, wrestling in america has never and will never be that



> There is no sellouts every week, *they don't do 15-18 or 20,000 seat arenas anymore.* They're doing 7,000 for Raw and Smackdown has performed poorly for years on the ticketsales but that is the core audience. Those are the people that will never leave, it's like all of you on here. You will never stop watching and really what needs to happen is for the younger viewers to get bored or even the most ardent of fans to say enough is enough, that's enough for now and they finally change the channel.


even when hogan was on top there was no sellouts every week, wwe are averaging 6,000 paid for houseshows (well above 1992-96, 2003-04) and doing plenty of big houses, they had a sellout in brooklyn just 2 weeks ago for raw, they had a sellout in houston for sd last week, mania season from first week in january till end of april had sellouts in big arenas pretty much every week, e.g.












> How a Vince McMahon led World Wrestling Federation went from 6,7,8 million viewers in 2000 to 3-4 million in 2002. And ever since then the business has gotten worse. In 13 years the business has went down and down and down and look at it today. It's nowhere near going back up. And that's Vince McMahon at the helm, the genius!


raw is drawing 4.8 million average today when dvr numbers are added, business hasn't gone down and down, in 2013 wwe will generate $500 million in revenue for only the second time in the companies history (the other year being 2008), in april wwe averaged 11,500 paid for the month, highest since the monday night wars were in full swing, they are on the longest run of ppv sellouts since 2000 with tlc, rumble, ec, mania, extreme rules, payback, mitb and summerslam all sold out well in advance of said show



> *Some genius he is. Do you think that would happen at CBS? CMT? A&E? FOX? *Do you think they would sit back and let a show drawing 6.0's and 7.0's every week fall to that level in such a short space of time and then over the following 10 years let it decline even further? No way would they. That right there is why WWE will never leave USA network again, because any network with any dignity would look at those numbers and wonder what the hell happened.


someone doesn't understand a boom created by numerous different things..

ok lets compare

the simpsons on fox
season 1.. 12.4 million *households* (there are 2.6 person on average in a us household)
season 2.. 13.4 million *households*
season 3...10.6 million *households*

the simpsons was averaging 15 million viewers in 2003 and last 10 episodes of this season averaged 4 million

survivor is doing a third of what it was doing in 2000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivor_(U.S._TV_series)#U.S._television_ratings

ultimate fighter was beating raw in 2009 and now its averaging 1 million viewers, again you are comparing cbs to usa, wrestling is cheap programming which gives consistent ratings week after week, month after month, year after year, raw was averaging 2.5 ratings for years and the network was happy from 1993 to 1997, in 2013 when the nfl are getting paid $2 billion a year by espn by 15 games it really hightlights usas $30 million a year they are paying for 52 episodes a year of raw, there are over *19,000 shows* on cable every week and raw is consistently top 10, a 2.9 rating get you this on the top 

after 20 years and over 1000 episodes raw is still in the top 10 most watched cable shows every week..go back and look at all the cable shows in that time thats come and gone, been huge and died away, you could write a book, jersey shore used to bring in 9 million viewers a week in 2011 and where is it now














Defei said:


> Brock Lesnar is way above Orton/Punk/Sheamus/Miz and is absolutely capable of drawing those weekly John Cena numbers.


every week of every year, i seriously doubt it, do you think if brock opened up every raw with a promo and had a match with titus o neal, ryback et al week after week, month after month, year after year he would be drawing cena numbers on tv, i don't. i think he would end up just being another guy after a few months, right now he is booked as a special attraction (and specifically placed in segments and at times when he will draw and not at 10.25pm) but if fans saw him a couple of times a night every week the shine would very soon wear off, hogan was doing monster numbers on tv the first few weeks of his return in 2002 and by late june he was just another guy on tv and no longer outdrawing most of the top guys on the roster



> As for UFC numbers, TUF viewership has never been as good compared to pro-wrestling TV viewership.


tuf was beating raw in viewership back in 2009...



> You can't compare these two. Brock is/was the UFC's biggest draw by far, after him GSP is the biggest star in UFC and the TUF season involving him drew like 0.70 average. Besides, Cena has been part of some of the lowest rated overruns in the past two years as well. This hardly proves anything.


ppv and tv are not the same thing, look lesnar returned on april 2nd 2012 and there was over 5 million watching his return that night, 20% of those same people didn't even bother tuning in the next week at 9pm to see where or what brock did next, 20%


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lmfao at all those random numbers this guys got off websites ^


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> comparing cbs and usa network is daft, for one cbs is available in 20 million more homes (thats an extra 50 million+ people that have access to it), cbs averages 6 million viewers in prime time, usa averages 2 million viewers in prime time
> 
> would under the dome be doing 13 million if it were on the air every week of every year for 20 years... not a fucking chance, its new, its hip, it costs way more to produce than wwe raw
> 
> during the attitude era the most watched episode of raw had 8.4 million viewers watching for 2hrs, at the same time survivor had 52 million watching the finale of season 1, that puts into perspective how irrelevant wrestling is in the grand scheme of things especially compared to stuff on network tv, its a niche product that had a short boom when two companies went head to head for a few years but even during that period raw never even came close to beating a single regular season nfl game and compared to shows like friends, mash, seinfeld, cheers, cosby show, star trek tng, dallas etc etc etc it wasn't even on the same planet as those in terms of tv viewership
> 
> in england during their boom period world of sport averaged 8 million viewers and had 18 million watching for one episode, 18 fucking million in a country with 1/5th the population of america, wrestling in england back in the early 1980s was essential viewing, wrestling in america has never and will never be that
> 
> 
> 
> even when hogan was on top there was no sellouts every week, wwe are averaging 6,000 paid for houseshows (well above 1992-96, 2003-04) and doing plenty of big houses, they had a sellout in brooklyn just 2 weeks ago for raw, they had a sellout in houston for sd last week, mania season from first week in january till end of april had sellouts in big arenas pretty much every week, e.g.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> raw is drawing 4.8 million average today when dvr numbers are added, business hasn't gone down and down, in 2013 wwe will generate $500 million in revenue for only the second time in the companies history (the other year being 2008), in april wwe averaged 11,500 paid for the month, highest since the monday night wars were in full swing, they are on the longest run of ppv sellouts since 2000 with tlc, rumble, ec, mania, extreme rules, payback, mitb and summerslam all sold out well in advance of said show
> 
> 
> 
> someone doesn't understand a boom created by numerous different things..
> 
> ok lets compare
> 
> the simpsons on fox
> season 1.. 12.4 million *households* (there are 2.6 person on average in a us household)
> season 2.. 13.4 million *households*
> season 3...10.6 million *households*
> 
> the simpsons was averaging 15 million viewers in 2003 and last 10 episodes of this season averaged 4 million
> 
> survivor is doing a third of what it was doing in 2000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivor_(U.S._TV_series)#U.S._television_ratings
> 
> ultimate fighter was beating raw in 2009 and now its averaging 1 million viewers, again you are comparing cbs to usa, wrestling is cheap programming which gives consistent ratings week after week, month after month, year after year, raw was averaging 2.5 ratings for years and the network was happy from 1993 to 1997, in 2013 when the nfl are getting paid $2 billion a year by espn by 15 games it really hightlights usas $30 million a year they are paying for 52 episodes a year of raw, there are over *19,000 shows* on cable every week and raw is consistently top 10, a 2.9 rating get you this on the top
> 
> after 20 years and over 1000 episodes raw is still in the top 10 most watched cable shows every week..go back and look at all the cable shows in that time thats come and gone, been huge and died away, you could write a book, jersey shore used to bring in 9 million viewers a week in 2011 and where is it now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> every week of every year, i seriously doubt it, do you think if brock opened up every raw with a promo and had a match with titus o neal, ryback et al week after week, month after month, year after year he would be drawing cena numbers on tv, i don't. i think he would end up just being another guy after a few months, right now he is booked as a special attraction (and specifically placed in segments and at times when he will draw and not at 10.25pm) but if fans saw him a couple of times a night every week the shine would very soon wear off, hogan was doing monster numbers on tv the first few weeks of his return in 2002 and by late june he was just another guy on tv and no longer outdrawing most of the top guys on the roster
> 
> 
> 
> tuf was beating raw in viewership back in 2009...
> 
> 
> 
> ppv and tv are not the same thing, look lesnar returned on april 2nd 2012 and there was over 5 million watching his return that night, 20% of those same people didn't even bother tuning in the next week at 9pm to see where or what brock did next, 20%


do you have the AVERAGE LIVE ATTENDANCE figures for 2011 and 2012?


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah, Mash, Cosby Show and Dallas were so popular on TV during the Attitude era.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lmao wtf is this guy going on about? Hogan vs Andre match during hogan's peak once drew 33.1million viewers. Whne hogan was on top, he never worked regular shows, he was always special attraction. Including WCW viewers, AE peak had over 14 million viewers. Wrestling was never essential viewing in america? lolwat? have you ever heard of Television era? Pro-wrestling was bigger mainstaream attraction than Boxing ever was in the US. It was absolutely essential viewing. Comparing 2013 business to 2000, you have to factor in inflation and not to mention the fact the only reason WWE does sell-out these days is due to their monopoly in the industry, which is the same reason they jack up ticket prices to insane levels. Higher ticket prices and PPV prices ensured WM-29 would be the highest grossing wrestlemania in history. Comparing NFL viewers to WWE? fpalm what are you smoking? 



> would under the dome *be doing 13 million if it were on the air every week of every year for 20 years*... not a fucking chance, its new, its hip, it costs way more to produce than wwe raw


So how do you explain the boom periods in pro-wrestling then? You do know wrestling has been on Television way before year 2000 right?

If WWE was so profitable, how do you explain the decreasing WWE stock value in the share market? WWF share prices was soaring high during the Attitude era and Vince Mcmahon's net worth was close to 2billion. You know what his net worth is right now? 500million. 

validreasoning? lol Change your fucking username.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DatKidMog said:


> Lmfao at all those random numbers this guys got off websites ^


lol.

Way too much time on the hands.


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Can people please let the ratings decline go? It's a different era. I remember the AE and at that time, in the UK where I live, there was only 5 terresteral channels: BBC1, BBC2, ITV, channel 4, channel 5. There was no free view. It was that or you had Sky and not everyone could afford that. There was no high speed internet either, with broadband only coming into peoples homes from 2000. Even if you did have broadband what would you do with it? YouTube only came out in 2005 and downloading anything was slow. Without sounding patronizing, if you are under 15 you don't know how lucky you are. You have never experienced the generation where it took 30 seconds to load up a web page. Back in the AE you couldn't download a thousand roms for free off of the internet at a clock of a button. Yes the ratings are terrible in comparison but that is true with all TV shows. TV viewers have collapsed since broadband. There is so much competition. Even those that do watch Raw live are playing around with their Ipads. Getting a 3.0 today is still a great achievement baring mind the culture we live in.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> - Monday's WWE Raw recovered 22 percent in Social Media Activity compared to last week's taped show, but fell below the the last live show two weeks ago.
> 
> Raw scored 266,465 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, up from 218k for the taped show, but below 276k two weeks ago.
> 
> Raw ranked #3 on cable TV for the fifth consecutive week and sixth week out of the last seven weeks. Once again, Raw trailed "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" on VH1 and "Teen Wolf" on MTV.


via PWTorch


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> Aside from Bryan, Punk, Brock, Cena and Orton, no one was over yesterday.


AJ was...they popped loud when she came out. And they definitely got loud for Bray Wyatt.



> ven when hogan was on top there was no sellouts every week, wwe are averaging 6,000 paid for houseshows (well above 1992-96, 2003-04) and doing plenty of big houses, they had a sellout in brooklyn just 2 weeks ago for raw, they had a sellout in houston for sd last week, mania season from first week in january till end of april had sellouts in big arenas pretty much every week, e.g.


That's because of the Rock...the guy this forum said they would be happy to never see wrestle again. So..let the era of mediocrity begin and let's see who stands on their own two feet without the Rock's star power to carry this place to legitimacy anymore.


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

i don't know about the ratings debate, but the past several shows i've been to (smackdown, raw) have been dead. the side that the hard camera faces is usually full-ish (never full to the top), but the other side is almost completely empty. they've also had the upper levels blacked out with curtains in all of the recent events i've been to. i remember when people used to camp out for those tickets and they'd sell out in a matter of days.

i understand that there is more to tv ratings than just the numbers, but attendance (at least in my area) is WAYYYYY down. not to mention, they're charging like $30 for lower level seating in 2013, and were charging at least that in 1998.


----------



## tonsgrams

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Think WWE deserve some props, cant remember them having raws being this consistently good for quite sometime.


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AthenaMark said:


> That's because of the Rock...the guy this forum said they would be happy to never see wrestle again. So..let the era of mediocrity begin and let's see who stands on their own two feet without the Rock's star power to carry this place to legitimacy anymore.


The Rock wasn't even there most weeks. Mania season attendance is usually up every year.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...hip-for-the-week-ending-august-4-2013/195630/

# 10, #11, & #13 in the Top 25 cable ratings past week (Rizzoli & Isles was # 1 again; Angie Harmon doing work)


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

anyways for this week:

Hour 1 - 3.973 million
Hour 2 - 4.381 million
Hour 3 - 4.182 million


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well, much better than last week, and I think it's better than two weeks ago, so good on them. Breakdown will be interesting to see, as usual.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Guess whats coming for both TNA and WWE in the coming weeks?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbU4fPYRvcY

Both these companies better step up their weak ratings or they are royally screwed


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



VGooBUG said:


> Guess whats coming for both TNA and WWE in the coming weeks?
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbU4fPYRvcY
> 
> Both these companies better step up their weak ratings or they are royally screwed


Royally screwed? :lmao. Ratings will drop like always during football season but WWE will be fine.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

final rating - 2.96


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The_It_Factor said:


> i don't know about the ratings debate, but the past several shows i've been to (smackdown, raw) have been dead. the side that the hard camera faces is usually full-ish (never full to the top), but the other side is almost completely empty. they've also had the upper levels blacked out with curtains in all of the recent events i've been to. i remember when people used to camp out for those tickets and they'd sell out in a matter of days.
> 
> i understand that there is more to tv ratings than just the numbers, but attendance (at least in my area) is WAYYYYY down. not to mention, they're charging like $30 for lower level seating in 2013, and were charging at least that in 1998.


People don't have disposable income anymore.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Decent rating, I guess. Next week is the go home show so I'm expecting more than 3.0


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:woolcock


Stad said:


> Royally screwed? :lmao. Ratings will drop like always during football season but WWE will be fine.


these ratings in the summer are about as low as 2011 during nfl season, they are gonna be just awful when nfl comes around, but yea sure tell me Vince is going to be happy when he gets 2.3 or lower, because he flipped his shit with a 2.5 last year. Lowering viewership plus lower buy rates, wwe is thrilled


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> final rating - 2.96



That is it? Golden Boy the main guy made sure everybody went home happy with 2 RKO's.

Let me guess the opening 22 minutes and divas turn people away!


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



RKO 4life said:


> *That is it? Golden Boy the main guy made sure everybody went home happy with 2 RKO's.
> 
> Let me guess the opening 22 minutes* and divas *turn people away!*


:lmao thanks for the laugh!


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'll bet Cena's promo followed by Orton confrontation at 9pm peaked the viewership.


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> :lmao thanks for the laugh!


Why are you laughing? If that first part of raw don't almost put people asleep then nothing should. Vince shouldn't waste my time with a guy who couldn't sell out a bingo hall. 

Punk sucking up the place divas eating up air time. It sucks man and I'll tell it like it is every damn time.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

...And I thought Rock marks were bad. I can't wait for the rton2 fans to make bigger fools of themselves when he wins the title. Smell the ratings drop! :henry1


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> ...And I thought Rock marks were bad. I can't wait for the rton2 fans to make bigger fools of themselves when he wins the title. Smell the ratings drop! :henry1



Oh I can't wait, maybe it will shut up those Bryan/Punk marks up.

But time will tell and I just can't wait. Some have no idea.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> ...And I thought Rock marks were bad. I can't wait for the rton2 fans to make bigger fools of themselves when he wins the title. Smell the ratings drop! :henry1


You're just scared that he'll outdraw BIG MIZARK! rton


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Orton as WWE champion would probably end up feuding with Punk anyway, especially since Punk is now a babyface and orton is set to turh heel. This one's inevitable.


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Jof said:


> Orton as WWE champion would probably end up feuding with Punk anyway, especially since Punk is now a babyface and orton is set to turh heel. This one's inevitable.


That would suck for Orton to be stuck in a program with Punk. I want him to wrestle the best they have to offer. Orton fans has waited to long.

Plus Punk will buzz kill people from watching. I want Orton haters to look foolish, have Orton feud with anyone but Cena/Bryan/Punk. and those ratings will go up.


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I would love to see Orton Vs Lesnar for the title. Rumble next year maybe?


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Jof said:


> I would love to see Orton Vs Lesnar for the title. Rumble next year maybe?


Lesnar would for sure fuck Orton up for life.


----------



## #Mark

RKO 4life said:


> That would suck for Orton to be stuck in a program with Punk. I want him to wrestle the best they have to offer. Orton fans has waited to long.
> 
> Plus Punk will buzz kill people from watching. I want Orton haters to look foolish, have Orton feud with anyone but Cena/Bryan/Punk. and those ratings will go up.


LOL.. Now the Orton marks appear, just as delusional as the rest of them.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



RKO 4life said:


> That would suck for Orton to be stuck in a program with Punk. I want him to wrestle the best they have to offer. Orton fans has waited to long.
> 
> Plus Punk will buzz kill people from watching. I want Orton haters to look foolish, have Orton feud with anyone but Cena/Bryan/Punk. and those ratings will go up.


:ti


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



RKO 4life said:


> That would suck for Orton to be stuck in a program with Punk. I want him to wrestle the best they have to offer. Orton fans has waited to long.
> 
> Plus Punk will buzz kill people from watching. I want Orton haters to look foolish, have Orton feud with anyone but Cena/Bryan/Punk. and those ratings will go up.


Would suck for Punk to be stuck in a program with someone who is clearly beneath him, more like. Goes from working with Vince, to Cena, to HHH, to Rock, to 'Taker, to Lesnar, to... Randy Orton:lmao



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Lesnar would for sure fuck Orton up for life.


I doubt Lesnar would even waste his time on Orton, to begin with.


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> :lmao This clown. You had better be repping yourself with an alt account - although it doesn't take a genius to work out why you have so many points, in so little time.



Points? what is this basketball? if so then let me be on my team The Kentucky Wildcats. So yeah I would out score you.

Genius we are now in college.? Little time? I'm just getting started here bud. Think I'll stick around and tell it like it is.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sad that people have completely given up on Randy.Who knows he may regain his lost star power after winning the title?

Anyway,I've waiting for Rock vs Randy match since this confrontation,hope some day this feud takes place:


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock/Orton never gonna happen. Orton/Brock probably won't either, though Brock would defo fuck him up just like Swagger Rocks said. Orton would lose a feud to Punk, who is clearly a bigger star now. Hell, he'll lose his feud with Bryan after Summerslam more than likely.


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Slowhand said:


> Rock/Orton never gonna happen. Orton/Brock probably won't either, though Brock would defo fuck him up just like Swagger Rocks said. Orton would lose a feud to Punk, who is clearly a bigger star now. Hell, he'll lose his feud with Bryan after Summerslam more than likely.



Keep telling yourself that.


----------



## fabi1982

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I have to rep you for that, as this is the truth. But this is what most of the people doesnt understand, that we are in a different time now. And all the NFL/wrestling comparison, it´s like soccer in Germany, this is the only thing still doing xx million viewers per game, all the other stuff declined massively. Looking at TV shows in Germany constantly drawing 8-15 million people back in 2000, you never have these figures now, because the landscape changed.

Regarding US TV, did the viewers back then had the chance to watch a trillion tv shows per day? No. Did they had broadband internet? No! I think US isnt as rich as it was back then as well...So many changes, but of course you can compare that...

I dont want to say wrestling is as cool as it was back then, but if the company was in trouble, you would have heard that and they would went to 3h RAW (and stay on 3h). If you take all the viewership from all the WWE programming you still got over 6 million viewers, of course this is lower than in AE days, but this is how the television landscape has changed.

You just can watch ONE show live at a time, the rest you can find on youtube/dailymotion/whateverillegalwayofwatchingtv...






hardysno1fan said:


> Can people please let the ratings decline go? It's a different era. I remember the AE and at that time, in the UK where I live, there was only 5 terresteral channels: BBC1, BBC2, ITV, channel 4, channel 5. There was no free view. It was that or you had Sky and not everyone could afford that. There was no high speed internet either, with broadband only coming into peoples homes from 2000. Even if you did have broadband what would you do with it? YouTube only came out in 2005 and downloading anything was slow. Without sounding patronizing, if you are under 15 you don't know how lucky you are. You have never experienced the generation where it took 30 seconds to load up a web page. Back in the AE you couldn't download a thousand roms for free off of the internet at a clock of a button. Yes the ratings are terrible in comparison but that is true with all TV shows. TV viewers have collapsed since broadband. There is so much competition. Even those that do watch Raw live are playing around with their Ipads. Getting a 3.0 today is still a great achievement baring mind the culture we live in.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Some stats:

- most watched first hour since 17th June
- most watched second hour since 22nd April
- most watched third hour since 15th July

Overall most watched since 20th May.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Thought I would do a quick summary of audience numbers in the past 2 months or so:










These predictions come through a model I've been using in the past month or so (so older predictions are slightly different from the ones posted on the forum). As you can see, it predicted whether the audience would fall/rise correctly 9/10 times which is pretty impressive. The predicted audience numbers were fairly good too - although there were a few predictions off the mark (including last week's).

The average audience was lower than expected over the period - but this is due to two bad numbers in particular. Overall it's been close to expected.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Would suck for Punk to be stuck in a program with someone who is clearly beneath him, more like. Goes from working with Vince, to Cena, to HHH, to Rock, to 'Taker, to Lesnar, to... Randy Orton:lmao


Honest question, this ain't about mark wars or anything. Put our differences aside for a second and just answer this. Where is Punk gonna go after he's finished with Lesnar? You still think Austin is coming back? If that doesn't happen, whether you like it or not, Punk will have no choice but to feud with someone beneath all the names you mentioned because there's not an infinite amount of part-timers to keep him busy and that's just how it is. So tell me, who will he work with after Lesnar? Let's say it goes all the way to Wrestlemania where Punk scores a victory (to keep you happy), where will he go from there?

And in case that's what you hinted at, I've never repped that guy before. Maybe once a long time ago but certainly not regularly.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It seems almost obvious that Punk will feud with The Shield after all of this, which would be pretty cool if done right considering their history and that he has some chemistry with Ambrose and maybe Rollins. Don't know why people think Orton is beneath Punk's interests; a heel Orton is one of the three true megastars in the company.


----------



## wwefanatic89

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Would suck for Punk to be stuck in a program with someone who is clearly beneath him, more like. Goes from working with Vince, to Cena, to HHH, to Rock, to 'Taker, to Lesnar, to... Randy Orton:lmao


This guy just named a bunch of part timers,a ceo and the WWE's biggest star and then goes to Orton smh that just goes to show that Punk cant draw or keep a feud interesting unless he is up against a part timer or someone bigger than him. Fact when Orton was at his peek as a heel he did more for the ratings and business than Punk ever did. FACT.


----------



## Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> *It seems almost obvious that Punk will feud with The Shield after all of this*


Care to elaborate?


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk has had enough time in the spotlight, now post-lesnar, he should feud with some under-carders like Cesaro, Sandow, Fundangoo and help elevate to them. He can go back to main event feuds after that, the same as Orton did essentially.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Honest question, this ain't about mark wars or anything. Put our differences aside for a second and just answer this. Where is Punk gonna go after he's finished with Lesnar? You still think Austin is coming back? If that doesn't happen, whether you like it or not, Punk will have no choice but to feud with someone beneath all the names you mentioned because there's not an infinite amount of part-timers to keep him busy and that's just how it is. So tell me, who will he work with after Lesnar? Let's say it goes all the way to Wrestlemania where Punk scores a victory (to keep you happy), where will he go from there?
> 
> And in case that's what you hinted at, I've never repped that guy before. Maybe once a long time ago but certainly not regularly.


I might have said Sheamus but he's out now. Orton will probably feud with Bryan, it's way too soon for Cena.

I am gonna go on a limb and say nobody. Brock puts him out of commission, win or lose and he returns at the Rumble and wins it. Or they have a rematch at Survivor Series, Punk wins the rematch and Brock injures him afterwards and then he comes back at the RR.

EDIT: Wasn't even thinking about the Shield, thats probably his next feud.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No Way Punk Goes on Hiatus again, he just got back.

Punks gonna steamroll through some guys until Wrestlmania, where then he'll work with either Bryan or Lesnar again. I'd suspect that he's gonna main event the show next year.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Slowhand said:


> Rock/Orton never gonna happen. Orton/Brock probably won't either, though Brock would defo fuck him up just like Swagger Rocks said. Orton would lose a feud to Punk, who is clearly a bigger star now. Hell, he'll lose his feud with Bryan after Summerslam more than likely.


Bryan/Lesnar at the Rumble would be amazing, would allow Brock to take the title too and a huge spot for Bryan even in defeat. :mark:


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Raw on 8/5 did a 2.96 rating and 4.18 million viewers. While the rating was about average, viewers per home were up and the actual viewer number was the best for the show since 5/20. The show was third for the night on cable. Raw does traditionally show life in August before falling in mid-September when the NFL season starts.
> 
> We only have sketchy details on the segments. RVD vs. Alberto Del Rio didn’t move significantly. Ryback vs. Mark Henry showed a small increase in viewers. The John Cena interview at 9 p.m. showed about a 420,000 viewer increase. The Wyatt Family vs. Sweet T & Brodus Clay lost about 280,000 viewers. Kaitlyn vs. Layla and Christian vs. Heath Slater was a small gain. C.M. Punk vs. Curtis Axel and the Brock Lesnar brawl did a small gain only at 10 p.m. doing a 3.1 quarter. Fandango vs. Kingston was a big drop. Usos vs. Jack Swagger & Antonio Cesaro stayed even. The Cena & Daniel Bryan & Randy Orton vs. The Shield match and post-match gained about 700,000 viewers to a 3.4 overrun.


via Observer (not much detail this week)


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The John Cena interview at 9 p.m. showed about a 420,000 viewer increase


:cena2



> C.M. Punk vs. Curtis Axel and the Brock Lesnar brawl did a small gain only at 10 p.m. doing a 3.1 quarter.


unk3


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



YoungGun_UK said:


> Bryan/Lesnar at the Rumble would be amazing, would allow Brock to take the title too and a huge spot for Bryan even in defeat. :mark:


I would be okay with Brock being champ if it meant we got Brock/Bryan.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The Cena & Daniel Bryan & Randy Orton vs. The Shield match and post-match gained about 700,000 viewers to a 3.4 overrun.


rton2 :cena2 :yes


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DatBryan unk2


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Overrun probably would have been a million if orton wasn't involved.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Snoth said:


> Overrun probably would have been a million if orton wasn't involved.


what?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well that's a pretty poorly detailed breakdown.

Punk/Axel started and was about 5-10 minutes before the 10PM slot, and it had it gain along with the Lesnar/Punk stuff, and a 3.1 rating is decent enough, especially since Lesnar wasn't advertised at all during the show.

Very good 9PM gain, although without a rating number it's tough to say how great it actually was, but the gain was good at the very least. And the overrun was great, best in a few weeks.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

John Cena really is a don. Over 1,000,000 gains.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> *Well that's a pretty poorly detailed breakdown.
> *
> Punk/Axel started and was about 5-10 minutes before the 10PM slot, and it had it gain along with the Lesnar/Punk stuff, and a 3.1 rating is decent enough, especially since Lesnar wasn't advertised at all during the show.
> 
> Very good 9PM gain, although without a rating number it's tough to say how great it actually was, but the gain was good at the very least. And the overrun was great, best in a few weeks.












What's going on this week?


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I wish there are more guys that are booked as strong as Cena it will only help.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



#Mark said:


> LOL.. Now the Orton marks appear, just as delusional as the rest of them.


So one says something, and it equals all saying something? Give more examples before spewing such blasphemy.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

John Cena just absorbed Mark Henry's drawing power with that victory.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nice to see the main event and overrun do well.

:cena4 :yes rton


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Would suck for Punk to be stuck in a program with someone who is clearly beneath him, more like. Goes from working with Vince, to Cena, to HHH, to Rock, to 'Taker, to Lesnar, to... Randy Orton:lmao
> 
> 
> I doubt Lesnar would even waste his time on Orton, to begin with.


And, that's why you're in the red. You think Punk is bigger then he actually is. 


Lesnar wouldn't waste his time with Orton? Funny you'd say that, considering he's facing the equivalent of Essa Rios right now.

This Punk/Lesnar feud looks like angry disgruntled fan vs Brock Lesnar, anything is better than this.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Lesnar would for sure fuck Orton up for life.


I'm not understanding this. 

I could act like a Punk fan and say " Orton has a legit background in the Marines", but I'm just gonna say, it's *waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy*
more believable than Punk/Lesnar.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> I'm not understanding this.
> 
> I could act like a Punk fan and say " Orton has a legit background in the Marines", but I'm just gonna say, it's *waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy*
> more believable than Punk/Lesnar.


Having a backround in Marine is nothing :lol. With Punk at least he does JiuJitsu and Muay Thai. And I know your respond will be awful and you will bring up something irrelevant.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh. My. God. fpalm


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> Having a backround in Marine is nothing :lol. With Punk at least he does JiuJitsu and Muay Thai. And I know your respond will be awful and you will bring up something irrelevant.


I can't even begin to imagine what your mother has to go through. Bless her heart.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> C.M. Punk vs. Curtis Axel and the Brock Lesnar brawl did a small gain only at 10 p.m. doing a 3.1 quarter.



What the hell? This is suppose to be main event of Summerslam right? Are the casuals even interested in this feud at all?


----------



## Loader230

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> What the hell? This is suppose to be main event of Summerslam right? Are the casuals even interested in this feud at all?


It probably has to do with Punk vs Axel match. Punk marks get all butthurt and neg rep me when I called him 'hopeless' last time, and yet its the same thing with him over and over. Two weeks before one of the biggest matches of his career at Summerslam and he's incapable of holding up casual fans' interest in the 10pm slot with Brock fucking lesnar of all people. Dude just can't draw.

The Main event is not Lesnar vs Punk. Lesnar/Punk is special attraction like Undertaker's streak match at mania. True mania event is Cena vs Bryan for the WWE title. On RAW, Cena/bryan feud has been given the most Tv time each week with one top of the hour slot and the Main event+Overrun. Except for the night when Lesnar returned and attacked Punk(which was before MITB PPV), Cena/Bryan has closed the show pretty much every week. Plus involvement of Mcmahon and Randy Orton with the unpredictability of him cashing in his contract, pretty much ensures that this match would close the show at Summerslam. Viewers are more interested in Cena vs Bryan anyway.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> I can't even begin to imagine what your mother has to go through. Bless her heart.


Do you know what a marine is? I bet your mother didn't tell you what it's all about. She didn't know how her son will turn out to be after all these years of school. I feel your mother she pretty much seem to help you in doing your homework most of the time while your'e wasting your time in the computer.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> And, *that's why you're in the red.* You think Punk is bigger then he actually is.
> 
> 
> Lesnar wouldn't waste his time with Orton? Funny you'd say that, considering he's facing the equivalent of Essa Rios right now.
> 
> This Punk/Lesnar feud looks like angry disgruntled fan vs Brock Lesnar, anything is better than this.


So should you be, considering you post nothing but drivel.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Crap breakdown, with absolutely nothing worth reading into. Pointless of the Observer to include it if they're not going to bother to list the full drops/gains.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> So one says something, and it equals all saying something? Give more examples before spewing such blasphemy.


You have posted before putting down all Punk marks as one entity, when there are intelligent ones on this forum.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> Having a backround in Marine is nothing :lol. With Punk at least he does JiuJitsu and Muay Thai. And I know your respond will be awful and you will bring up something irrelevant.


Punk is a WHITE BELT in jujitsu. A marine is more well trained than a fucking white belt. Come on, son.




Loader230 said:


> True mania event is Cena vs Bryan for the WWE title.


Of course it is. That was apparent 3 weeks ago even though every Punk mark here couldn't fathom that outcome.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> What the hell? This is suppose to be main event of Summerslam right? Are the casuals even interested in this feud at all?


sometimes people don't know when Brock shows up (since they don't read advertisements that often) and WWE really don't advertise him on TV at all. So most might just thought it was Punk vs Axel without interference.

the other two times they he was there for the feud it was obvious he was there because they said so on TV and ratings did better (3.41 and 3.42 with 480,000 gain and 686,000 gain respectively for their quarter). WWE need to advertise better or fans at home don't know when to expect Brock. They did it a few times with The Rock too where couple of his segments he cam out un-advertised not doing so well (The Shiel/Punk/Rock segment for example lost viewers and was below 3.0)


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> sometimes people don't know when Brock shows up (since they don't read advertisements that often) and WWE really don't advertise him on TV at all. So most might just thought it was Punk vs Axel without interference.
> 
> the other two times Brock was involved with Punk the ratings did good. next week with something advertise Punk vs Heyman in a fight (finally) I imagine doing good as well.


Translation = 2 years of the biggest push one man has received in a decade and Punk alone *STILL CAN'T FUCKING DRAW!!!*


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

cena>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The only draw in the company.

Cm punk is a complete joke. Only the iwc cares about him.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Only the iwc cares about a guy who sells fuck loads of merch and has crowds everywhere chanting his name? You sure?


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The Cena & Daniel Bryan & Randy Orton vs. The Shield match and post-match gained about 700,000 viewers to a 3.4 overrun.


Cena once again proves he's the king of the WWE. RTIME IZ NOW :cena4


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Translation = 2 years of the biggest push one man has received in a decade and Punk alone *STILL CAN'T FUCKING DRAW!!!*


Being a mid card champion doesn't really count as anything, but I get what you are saying.


----------



## Twisted14

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Guys seriously. Can't tell if you're simply trolling, if not, we already know that Punk can draw, he rarely loses viewers and almost always gains and the night after MITB his segment with Heyman and Lesnar gained 500,000 viewers. Ok we get it, you don't like the guy but please cut the bullshit.

A second point, there isn't much to go off here with this totally useless breakdown. What is a small gain? 50,000 viewers? 200,000 viewers? Could be anything. The 3.1 (even though it's actually a solid number) still doesn't mean anything without any numbers before it. Jumping to conclusions from this useless information is totally ridiculous, and if anything only shows how desperate you are to put CM Punk down. I'm not saying you can't, but why not wait for some facts first?

Thirdly, the match was advertised a little bit, but let's be honest, Curtis Axel isn't exactly a huge name right now. Regardless, the last few weeks have been a bit odd. Last week he came out during the not advertised and almost entirely random Axel/Truth match. The week before he had a fairly random promo segment that still managed to gain 200,000 viewers. The week before where they gained 500,000 viewers was coming straight off the big news of Heyman turning on Punk the night before which they spoke about all night and mentioned that both men were there.

Fourth, come on guys, if you haven't realised by now that the ratings mean pretty much shit all then I'm worried for you. You can especially tell this when strange things happen right out of left field. Take for example last week. The hottest act right now, Daniel Bryan, faced Kane. You would expect this match to do well considering their history. Well in the 10pm timeslot of all timeslots, they only gained 60,000 viewers. Why? I don't fucking know. There are many, MANY other segments just like this, with popular acts and 'draws' that gain nothing or lose viewers. The ratings hardly make any sense half the time. I honestly thought we all knew this by now and had gotten over who can and can't draw. Apparently not. It seems to be just as rampant and pointless as it has ever been.

That's all I have to say. I'm a Punk fan, I guess you could say I'm a Punk mark (though the meaning of mark seems to be completely lost right now, just like the terms smark, and IWC) which might make me a little biased. However I recognise his few flaws and won't blindly defend him. Some people here seem to be on the other side of the spectrum but on the extreme end where you will blindly pick him apart, and seemingly just to be different.

TL;DR: Please, if you are going to hate on Punk, at least use some intelligent arguments. I know they exist on this forum, they're just so rarely expressed in this particular thread.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Starbuck, where are you? We need you to lighten up the mood and sing the praises of :HHH2


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

John Cena really is a machine. Only Stone Cold and Rock making an appearance would top him.


----------



## wwefanatic89

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk marks are the best I tell you lol they're quick to defend Punk but when it's somebody else they shit on them. Its proven that Punk cant draw unless he is feuding with someone bigger than him (popularity wise) and Im not even throwing a shot cause thats the truth.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena/Henry was outdrawing Lesnar/Punk last month and now Cena/Bryan is outdrawing it.

WWE will probably be disappointed that Lesnar/Punk isn't as big of a deal as they thought it would be but they should be glad in a way that people are actually more interested in matches featuring TWO full-time talents.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena was outdrawing Punk/Lesnar last month. Cena is outdrawing Punk/Lesnar this month.

Bryan can't draw for shit.....yet.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Jerichoholic4Life said:


> Cena/Henry was outdrawing Lesnar/Punk last month and now Cena/Bryan is outdrawing it.
> 
> WWE will probably be disappointed that Lesnar/Punk isn't as big of a deal as they thought it would be but they should be glad in a way that people are actually more interested in matches featuring TWO full-time talents.


this week yeah didn't do that good, mainly because Brock wasn't advertised on TV when to appear. Only other 2 times Brock was involved they gained 480,000 viewers for 3.41 (same quarter rating as Cena/Bryan that same day) and their first encounter had 636,000 gain in over-run to 3.42 (Henry/Cena obviously was better with 3.57 rating). Both times Brock was advertised on the show or strongly hinted at appearing (the over-run appearance) so they are doing fine except 1 week where it was mostly Punk vs Axel with unanounced appearance by Brock.

On other hand Bryan/Cena opening segments not doing to well and for some reason Bryan is not drawing well with Vince (2.87 last week and below 3.0 this week too). At least their over-runs are doing great, guess that what matters to them.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Regarding Punk and Lesnar. It's the draw back of a part timer feud. It's not made for tv ratings. You're barely advancing a storyline. When Lesnar attacked Punk we pretty much knew everything we needed to know for Summerslam.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Punk is a WHITE BELT in jujitsu. A marine is more well trained than a fucking white belt. Come on, son.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it is. That was apparent 3 weeks ago even though every Punk mark here couldn't fathom that outcome.



You know kids like you are embarrassing, in the marine you don't train to fight, they are trained to land on and secure key points inland using machines. The marine uses helicopters and landing craft, hovercraft and amphibious armored vehicles and boats in order to carry out their tasks. That doesn't make you strong or to be taken seriously for a fight.

Punk is not a white belt, the guy said he doesn't go there for belts, he goes to train and he doesn't go there all the time, he's been doing this for years now and it's impossible for him to still be in white. Your'e calling me a son with a video game pic on your dp :lol.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^ :lmao :lmao What the FUCK are you talking about again?

This has to be one of the funniest things I've heard, "They only shoot guns, fly helicopters and drive boats". I actually wish it was as simple as you make it out to be so I could sign up.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



GillbergReturns said:


> Regarding Punk and Lesnar. It's the draw back of a part timer feud. It's not made for tv ratings. You're barely advancing a storyline. When Lesnar attacked Punk we pretty much knew everything we needed to know for Summerslam.


Good point.And as JY57 said Brock was also unadvertised.


Anyway,Brock's job is to boost PPV sales as he carries the reputation of 'the biggest UFC PPV draw of all time'.And if look at last year's Summerslam(358K) and Extreme Rules(261k) buys,he has done his job so far(only disappointment may be was Mania,as one would expect Brock to boost the overall figures,which sadly didn't happen).


So hopefully,this year should do similar number as last year's SS,if not better,IMO.Courtesy:brock


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:lmao

This thread is never gonna evolve.


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> The Cena & Daniel Bryan & Randy Orton vs. The Shield match and post-match gained about 700,000 viewers to a 3.4 overrun.
> 
> 
> 
> rton2 :cena2 :yes
Click to expand...


Also don't forget the 9pm gain by Orton and Cena - 420,000 viewers. This is huge.


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



GillbergReturns said:


> Regarding Punk and Lesnar. It's the draw back of a part timer feud. It's not made for tv ratings. You're barely advancing a storyline. When Lesnar attacked Punk we pretty much knew everything we needed to know for Summerslam.


Yeah but then Punk vs Heyman "storyline advancing" isn't doing great, in terms of drawing the show peak rating though.


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

How did this get into a fight with Punk and Orton ? Damm their both great wrestlers.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Jof said:


> Also don't forget the 9pm gain by Orton and Cena - 420,000 viewers. This is huge.


That's pretty average. Ziggler and ADR at that slot usually gain 320,000-350,000. And they are mid carders.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



rabidwolverine27 said:


> How did this get into a fight with Punk and Orton ? Damm their both great wrestlers.


Because it seems most marks of one hate the other. It's a shame.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> ^ :lmao :lmao What the FUCK are you talking about again?
> 
> This has to be one of the funniest things I've heard, "They only shoot guns, fly helicopters and drive boats". I actually wish it was as simple as you make it out to be so I could sign up.


I'm here to enlighten you about all the machines that this world can offer it's not a bad thing it's a good thing. You should be proud about your hero, they have put him in to a military prison for 38 days because he was guilty to this society and all it's filth :lol. But seriously tho I didn't say it's easy but it doesn't show his physical strength and make you a fighter. It's about discipline and how you can handle it. It's not like Orton will show up with a rifle and shoot Lesnar but that's believable tho and it will boost ratings for Raw. You know Brock will talk about his UFC background and Orton will show up with a rifle and will talk about how he used to be in the marine (that will be fun to watch).


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> I'm here to enlighten you about all the machines that this world can offer it's not a bad thing it's a good thing. You should be proud about your hero, they have put him in to a military prison for 38 days because he was guilty to this society and all it's filth :lol. But seriously tho I didn't say it's easy but it doesn't show his physical strength and make you a fighter. It's about discipline and how you can handle it. It's not like Orton will show up with a rifle and shoot Lesnar but that's believable tho and it will boost ratings for Raw. You know Brock will talk about his UFC background and Orton will show up with a rifle and will talk about how he used to be in the marine (that will be fun to watch).


GOAT Post.

End the thread now.


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> This thread is never gonna evolve.


Just wait until SummerSlam is over. Orton will (probably) win the title. This thread will reach its full potential :lol.


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Am I the only one here who likes Cena Punk and Orton ? :lol


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Orton shooting Lesnar with a rifle sounds like must-see TV. :lol Or he can use a tranquilizer, sneak up to the rafters and shoot Lesnar from there then come down and attack him by using the moves he learned in the military.

And Pro Royka/Sonnen Says, believe me, i don't need any "enlightening" when it comes to the military stuff. I've played the GTA games so I know the military vehicles just fine.



rabidwolverine27 said:


> Am I the only one here who likes Cena Punk and Orton ? :lol


I like Cena and Orton. I'm now kind of in the middle regarding Punk. I don't hate him like I used to, that side only comes out when some of his fans are being annoying marks.

As you can see, I didn't even take advantage of his weak gain this week and mock it.


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Im fine if someone isn't a Punk fan . Im not gonna cry about it like his annoying marks.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Torch:


> Two of the top-rated segments of Monday's WWE Raw episode were John Cena's promo at the top of the second hour and Daniel Bryan's "corporate make-over" at the start of the show.
> 
> It points to TV interest in the WWE Title feud between Cena and Bryan leading to Summerslam, but will it translate to PPV buys?
> 
> - At the start of the show, Bryan's "make-over" registered a 2.02 rating in males 18-49. This was the highest-rated Q1 since we began tracking m18-49 quarter-hours in May.
> 
> Included was peak viewership of 1.495 million viewers at 8:14 p.m. EST. When the segment spilled over into Q2, viewership peaked again with 1.485 million viewers.
> 
> - At the top of the second hour, John Cena's promo responding to Bryan scored a 2.29 rating in m18-49. This was the second-highest-rated Q5 since we began tracking m18-49 quarter-hours in May.
> 
> Included was peak viewership of 1.635 million viewers at 9:09 p.m. when business picked up for The Shield confronting Cena, Randy Orton, and Daniel Bryan before GM Brad Maddox walked out to book the main event.
> 
> - WWE did not give the main event six-man tag match much time, so it produced a just-average rating. Raw returned from its final commercial with 1.311 million viewers at 10:59 p.m., the match jumped to 1.419 million viewers at 11:00 p.m. for the start of the over-run, and peaked with 1.427 million viewers at 11:05 p.m.
> 
> Overall, the seven-minute over-run scored a 2.24 rating, which was in-between Bryan's opening segment and Cena's promo.
> 
> Raw Viewership Flow m18-49
> 
> - OVERALL: Raw scored a 1.99 rating and averaged 1.243 million viewers.
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened with a 2.02 rating for the uninterrupted Corporate Make-Over. Raw grabbed big chunks of viewers from a variety of shows - sports, dramas, food shows, movies, and other programs - at the top of the hour.
> 
> - Q2: Raw dipped to a 1.92 rating for the end of the Corporate Make-Over, two full commercials, and the first few minutes of Rob Van Dam vs. Alberto Del Rio. During the commercials, Raw lost big chunks of viewers to a variety of programs again.
> 
> - Q3: Raw dipped again to a 1.84 rating for the end of RVD-Del Rio, one commercial, and the latest Rhodes Scholars skit.
> 
> Both items were slow to grab an audience. Del Rio-RVD peaked with 1.358 million viewers at 8:34 p.m. and the Rhodes Scholars peaked with 1.340 million viewers at 8:44 p.m. Leading to that point, though, were below-average ratings within the segment.
> 
> - Q4: Raw increased to a 1.90 rating for Ryback vs. Mark Henry and two full commercial breaks. The Ryback-Henry match drew a consistent audience, peaking with 1.426 million viewers at 8:53 p.m. just when the match got started before Ryback walked away.
> 
> - Q5: Raw jumped to a 2.29 rating for Cena's speech at the top of the second hour, then Orton's interruption, Shield's involvement, and the main event set. Included was peak viewership of 1.635 million viewers at 9:09 p.m.
> 
> Raw gained a big chunk of audience from "American Pickers" at 9:00 p.m., MLB baseball at 9:02 p.m., and Cops at 9:08 p.m.
> 
> - Q6: Raw stayed above the 2.0-mark with a 2.09 rating for the Wyatts in action, post-match with Kane, and one commercial. This was a good performance considering the previous segment felt like the "end of Act 1" of Raw.
> 
> Included was peak viewership of 1.489 million viewers at 9:20 p.m. In total, six consecutive minutes were right at or above 1.4 million viewers.
> 
> - Q7: Raw began a steady decline with a 1.99 rating - right at the show's average - for Kaitlyn vs. Layla, Christian vs. Heath Slater, and one commercial.
> 
> The Divas match performed better, with five consecutive minutes above 1.3 million viewers, while Christian-Slater only had two minutes above 1.3 million viewers. But, the men's match finish had Q7's peak viewership of 1.380 million viewers at 9:43 p.m.
> 
> - Q8: Raw fell to a 1.87 rating for a segment that included two full commercial breaks and the first-half of C.M. Punk vs. Curtis Axel. The first three minutes of the match were right there in the mid-1.3 million viewers range, but the audience did not recover after the second commercial break.
> 
> During the commercials, Raw lost chunks of viewers to MLB baseball, American Pickers, Spanish-language show "Marido En Alquiler," and other programming.
> 
> - Q9: Raw returned to a 1.99 rating - right at the show's average - for the finish of Punk vs. Axel, Brock Lesnar's scrap with Punk, one commercial, Brock Lesnar's "say something stupid" promo backstage, and ring introductions for Fandango and Kofi Kingston.
> 
> Included was peak viewership of 1.443 million viewers at 10:02 p.m. for the finish of Punk-Axel, 1.421 million viewers for Lesnar's beat down at 10:04 p.m., and 1.402 million viewers at 10:12 p.m. for Fandango & Summer Rae's ring intro.
> 
> The audience peaks were scattered throughout Q9, which is why there was not a significant top-of-the-third-hour bump, reflecting inconsistent interest in what was happening.
> 
> Within the segment, Raw gained a big chunk of viewers from "Under The Dome" and the BET Movie of the Week. This is also where "The Shed" on Food Network came into play throughout the third hour.
> 
> - Q10: Raw dipped to a 1.91 rating for Fandango vs. Kofi Kingston, one commercial, and the first-half of Real Americans vs. The Usos.
> 
> Within the segment, viewers flipped back-and-forth between Raw and "The Shed."
> 
> - Q11: Raw was essentially even with a 1.92 rating for the finish of the tag match, one commercial, and Dolph Ziggler vs. Big E. Langston in a spotlight match.
> 
> Ziggler-Langston easily won the segment, registering consistent numbers right at the 1.3-million viewer mark from 10:40 to 10:44 p.m.
> 
> - Q12: Raw dipped to a show-low 1.84 rating for two full commercial breaks as people caught the end of other shows, ring introductions for the main event, and the first minute of the main event.
> 
> At this point, Raw fell below 1.0-million viewers during the first commercial break and nearly did the same during the second commercial.
> 
> - Over-Run: Raw scored a 2.24 rating for the six-man tag main event and Randy Orton standing tall in the post-match. Included was peak viewership of 1.427 million viewers at 11:05 p.m.
> 
> Within the over-run, Raw gained a chunk of viewers from Shark Week's "Voodoo Sharks" show at 11:00 p.m., plus another chunk from "The Shed" once that show concluded. Raw also gained viewers from "Teen Wolf" at 11:01 p.m.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Much more like it, the Torch delivering with breakdowns once again.

Bryan and Cena seems to be doing well with viewers as of late. The only blip for Bryan was him versus Kane last week, but I wonder if taped show = breakdown last week effectively useless? I wonder how the Corporate Makeover would have done in Q5?


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> *Included was peak viewership of 1.443 million viewers at 10:02 p.m. for the finish of Punk-Axel*, 1.421 million viewers for Lesnar's beat down at 10:04 p.m., and 1.402 million viewers at 10:12 p.m. for Fandango & Summer Rae's ring intro.
> 
> The audience peaks were scattered throughout Q9, which is why there was not a significant top-of-the-third-hour bump, reflecting inconsistent interest in what was happening.
> 
> Within the segment, *Raw gained a big chunk of viewers from "Under The Dome" and the BET Movie of the Week.* This is also where "The Shed" on Food Network came into play throughout the third hour.


Correct me if I'm wrong, what this part basically says is that viewers switched over from the other shows to RAW at 10:01, saw Punk and Axel wrestling and quickly left, instead of staying through for Lesnar? That explains the loss of viewership from 1.443 to 1.402m.

IMO I don't think CM Punk/Lesnar feud is really working considering m18-49 _is_ their target PPV audience, unlike Cena and Daniel Bryan where kids and teenagers would matter more. Although going by this breakdown it seems like Bryan/Cena is hitting it home with pretty much every demo.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Damn, they didn't even stick around for DA BEAST!?

Well, I suppose that's what happens when you don't advertise him, but even then that's not too good they apparently tuned out right as the match ended and didn't even bother waiting for Lesnar... and actually Lesnar was out less than about 10 seconds later as the match ended when Punk grabbed Heyman. 

I also remember how Lesnar/HHH had weeks that weren't too good as well. Maybe Lesnar isn't much of a TV draw but drawing for PPVs is where his strength in pulling in numbers is (of course, he doesn't do much on TV when he's not kicking someone's ass, so that could be a reason for it).

Just some food for thought (and hopefully to change up this thread a bit). Of course this was just one week with the Punk/Lesnar stuff where Lesnar was there and it didn't do well, and he wasn't advertised to be on the show at all during the show. I still think Lesnar's a TV draw for sure, as he still has some of the best numbers of the year. There hasn't been an overrun since his return to attack Punk after Payback that did better than that one. He has a 4.0 when he returned to attack Vince earlier this year during Mania season. Hell, he also got a 3.6 for just attacking the New Age Outlaws. And then the attack on the Miz was one of if not the best 10PM segment of the year (600,000 gain for a 3.82). 

Again though, just something different to discuss.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What the Flying Fuck has this thread become? Someones talking about Orton shooting Lesnar on TV?


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> What the Flying Fuck has this thread become? Someones talking about Orton shooting Lesnar on TV?


It's about believability dude, didn't you know?


----------



## Fred Spoila

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Miss the days when these ratings meant something to so many people, know they are just numbers.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Damn, they didn't even stick around for DA BEAST!?
> 
> Well, I suppose that's what happens when you don't advertise him, but even then that's not too good they apparently tuned out right as the match ended and didn't even bother waiting for Lesnar... and actually Lesnar was out less than about 10 seconds later as the match ended when Punk grabbed Heyman.
> 
> I also remember how Lesnar/HHH had weeks that weren't too good as well. Maybe Lesnar isn't much of a TV draw but drawing for PPVs is where his strength in pulling in numbers is (of course, he doesn't do much on TV when he's not kicking someone's ass, so that could be a reason for it).
> 
> Just some food for thought (and hopefully to change up this thread a bit). Of course this was just one week with the Punk/Lesnar stuff where Lesnar was there and it didn't do well, and he wasn't advertised to be on the show at all during the show. I still think Lesnar's a TV draw for sure, as he still has some of the best numbers of the year. There hasn't been an overrun since his return to attack Punk after Payback that did better than that one. He has a 4.0 when he returned to attack Vince earlier this year during Mania season. Hell, he also got a 3.6 for just attacking the New Age Outlaws. And then the attack on the Miz was one of if not the best 10PM segment of the year (600,000 gain for a 3.82).
> 
> Again though, just something different to discuss.


not everyone is perfect heck even happened to The Rock. For example (from go home Rumble show):



> The Rock’s interview at 10pm with The Shield attacking him lost 109,000 viewers for a 3.01 quarter rating – a very bad number for the 10pm timeslot.


thats even worst than this Punk/Brock segment which happened at the same timeslot. And there others where The Rock didn't gain much viewers either or even lost viewers too. 

and like said before they really didn't advertise Brock on the show.

The Rock and Brock are made for PPV Buys anyways. Thats what Vince uses them for.


----------



## El Capitano

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ziggler doing pretty well with the ratings again, Cena always a big draw and Bryan doing pretty good in the opening


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

How on earth did viewers *DROP* during the :brock beatdown? Good god, has this world been sissified?


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

When Orton at 9:08 had the mic tellin Cena it doesn't really matter who wins at Summerslam he will at anytime cash in to become champion was in fact the highest spot of the show. (wrestling sites once again lying) What may have turned off the people/well what did turn off fans where when Shed and Bryan came down to the ring.

Love how people try and spin Punks lack of draw.

But why do so many turn to another show in the first place? I watch everything and every match. Silly just watching half a show, I wouldn't waste my time doing that. I'm a wrestling fan after all.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm guessing that you're 13 years old.


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> I'm guessing that you're 13 years old.


you that dumb bo?


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I skip through most of Raw every week, but the Brock/Punk beatdown I watched. Of course, it was on DVR and it actually happened an hour earlier but oh well.


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I also dvr it and wait 45 mins after it starts to fast-forward commercials but I try to get it where my tv picks up the rating. I always thought if I didn't watch the while thing I would miss something big, plus I enjoy watching it all. I like the 3 hours.

A lot of people are like you tho just skip most and watch a fav.


----------



## WWFECWWCW94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

8 years of the no character development also being the most hated top guy of all time and yet he still draws????? I guess Cena is like Lil Wayne no matter how much he never varies his material his fans still digest the mediocrity that he displays week in and week out.


----------



## Mqwar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

He draws because he is the only "mega-star" left in comparison to a mediocre roster with no larger than life characters. Ryback is the only one in recent years who managed to get close to Cena's spot, and in such a short time too. But, as always, they buried him just like they do with anyone who gets close to Cena. Its like Vince Mcmahon absoultely does not want WWE to move past Cena's dominance.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



RKO 4life said:


> I also dvr it and wait 45 mins after it starts to fast-forward commercials but I try to get it where my tv picks up the rating. I always thought if I didn't watch the while thing I would miss something big, plus I enjoy watching it all. I like the 3 hours.
> 
> A lot of people are like you tho just skip most and watch a fav.


A midcard that struggles to exist, and even has the Divas title looking better than the mid card titles atm, and on par with the WHC in terms of booking. I'm not even sure if I could blame the people for skipping a hell of a lot of shit lately. I do know that the recent RAW was a cluster fuck of a mess imo. I'm just like you thou, I watch the entire thing unless I crash out, and enjoy it to a certain extent or at least for what it's worth.

But not even gonna lie, not having the channel as of late is forcing me to stream.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Mqwar said:


> He draws because he is the only "mega-star" left in comparison to a mediocre roster with no larger than life characters.


ortons been there as long as cena and pushed to the moon but this whole sentence makes no sense, if its a mediocre roster then cena achievements of drawing every week of every month of every year no matter who he is in there with is even MORE impressive



> Ryback is the only one in recent years who managed to get close to Cena's spot, and in such a short time too.


ryback didn't get close to cena, he was up and down like everyone else while he was still undefeated

10/22 
Ryback vs. The Miz and the Kaitlyn, Eve Torres and Layla brawl lost 613,000 viewers.

10/15 
Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler & David Otunga gained 512,000 viewers and did a 3.04 quarter at the 9 p.m. mark which is a usual good gaining spot

10/1
Ryback vs. Tensai and Eve Torres vs. Beth Phoenix lost 350,000 viewers.

9/24
Miz vs. Ryback and the Harry Met Sally segment in the diner lost 533,000 viewers

9/17
At 9 p.m., when you expect the pick up, with Miz TV interviewing Booker T and Ryback, they gained 381,000 viewers. 

9/10
The Kane/Daniel Bryan backstage with Dr. Shelby plus Heath Slater vs. Ryback lost 247,000 viewers

9/3
Ryback vs. Jinder Mahal gained 243,000 viewers

8/27
Ryback vs. Jack Swagger and Natalya vs. Layla lost 160,000 viewers.

8/20
The Ryback squash and backstage stuff with Chris Jericho and Dolph Ziggler and A.J. gained 198,000 viewers





> But, as always, they buried him just like they do with anyone who gets close to Cena. Its like Vince Mcmahon absoultely does not want WWE to move past Cena's dominance.


yes vince would much rather have one guy who draws (and could get injured at any time) instead of 50 who makes him 20 times the money because vince is stupid, ryback simply wasn't the guy, he got zero reaction at survivor series last year coming 3 weeks after hiac


----------



## Mqwar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> ortons been there as long as cena and pushed to the moon but this whole sentence makes no sense, if its a mediocre roster then cena achievements of drawing every week of every month of every year no matter who he is in there with is even MORE impressive


No one on the current roster has had the level of push Cena did, and you know it. Stop bullshitting with Orton/Punk excuses, its totally annoying. From the past 8 years, count the number of RAW and PPV main events Cena has been part of and compare it with anyone from the current roster. Get back to me with the results and then we can discuss this shit.

I meant mediocre roster in the perspective of the casual fanbase. Viewers tune in to watch Cena because no one else has been positioned on the same level as him nor were they given the same level of opportunities, therefore its much easier for Cena to top the night. Anyone who ever got close is immediately turned heel and sacrificed because super-cena needs a fresh new opponent to beat every 4 fucking months. 




> ryback didn't get close to cena, he was up and down like everyone else while he was still undefeated
> 
> 10/22
> Ryback vs. The Miz and the Kaitlyn, Eve Torres and Layla brawl lost 613,000 viewers.
> 
> 10/15
> Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler & David Otunga gained 512,000 viewers and did a 3.04 quarter at the 9 p.m. mark which is a usual good gaining spot
> 
> 10/1
> Ryback vs. Tensai and Eve Torres vs. Beth Phoenix lost 350,000 viewers.
> 
> 9/24
> Miz vs. Ryback and the Harry Met Sally segment in the diner lost 533,000 viewers
> 
> 9/17
> At 9 p.m., when you expect the pick up, with Miz TV interviewing Booker T and Ryback, they gained 381,000 viewers.
> 
> 9/10
> The Kane/Daniel Bryan backstage with Dr. Shelby plus Heath Slater vs. Ryback lost 247,000 viewers
> 
> 9/3
> Ryback vs. Jinder Mahal gained 243,000 viewers
> 
> 8/27
> Ryback vs. Jack Swagger and Natalya vs. Layla lost 160,000 viewers.
> 
> 8/20
> The Ryback squash and backstage stuff with Chris Jericho and Dolph Ziggler and A.J. gained 198,000 viewers


Ofcourse you're going to list only the less impressive numbers here so as to make your argument look credible. Anyways what does this even prove? Ratings are only part of the deal, being a PPV difference maker is much more important and Ryback was able to do that when he was undefeated. You also have to consider how short Ryback's push was. He was remarkably over for a guy who was doing nothing but squashing local jobbers for about 4 months with no direction, which only makes these numbers and HIAC buys more impressive. At one point everyone from kids to adults in the arena were chanting "Feed me more", when was the last time Cena did that? I don't even like Ryback, but you can't deny he had something special for those couple of months before they had Punk beat him. Even Jericho said the same thing in busted open interview before HIAC PPV. 

Also its funny you're listing all these QH numbers to put down the guy, when RAW right now with Cena as champion is drawing 2.9s almost regularly. Ryback vs Punk feud leading to HIAC PPV delivered much better overall weekly rating and viewership.

And Yes, Vince is stupid but he can afford to be because WWE brand is so strong globally.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> You know kids like you are embarrassing, in the marine you don't train to fight, they are trained to land on and secure key points inland using machines. The marine uses helicopters and landing craft, hovercraft and amphibious armored vehicles and boats in order to carry out their tasks. That doesn't make you strong or to be taken seriously for a fight.


:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

OMG. I go away for a day and miss Brick shitting all over himself. Are you actually trying to embarrass yourself or does it just come naturally?




Jerichoholic4Life said:


> Cena/Henry was outdrawing Lesnar/Punk last month and now Cena/Bryan is outdrawing it.
> 
> WWE will probably be disappointed that Lesnar/Punk isn't as big of a deal as they thought it would be but they should be glad in a way that people are actually more interested in matches featuring TWO full-time talents.


Funny isn't it. Casuals just don't buy into Punk beating a beast like Lesnar. They didn't buy the build up for Punk/Taker and they aren't buying this.




Waffelz said:


> Cena was outdrawing Punk/Lesnar last month. Cena is outdrawing Punk/Lesnar this month.
> 
> Bryan can't draw for shit.....yet.


Fair enough....for now. 




The Sandrone said:


> GOAT Post.
> 
> End the thread now.


WOW!!! You understood that drivel? :clap




The Sandrone said:


> He has a 4.0 when he returned to attack Vince earlier this year during Mania season. Hell, he also got a 3.6 for just attacking the New Age Outlaws. And then the attack on the Miz was one of if not the best 10PM segment of the year (600,000 gain for a 3.82).



Too many losses have taken their toll on the guy. That's why Lesnar will go over Punk at SS. Mania feud with Taker or Rock is more important than Phil's ego.


----------



## #Mark

Didn't Orton have a dishonorable discharge?


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punks going to be in one of the top 3 matches of WM, and you guys bringing up the fact of his ratings being the determining factor of him being brought down the card won't happen. Punk has been a mediocre draw for 2 years and has still gotten the #3 match at WM28 and WM29, deal with it, in the eyes of the WWE, Punk is the 2nd biggest full time star they have. That's not opinion, that is fact whether you guys want to face it or not.

Bryan, Punk and Orton are all fairly mediocre draws, but there is something that the WWE see's in Punk over the other two, whether that be his merchandise sale or whatever, I don't know.

Also, at least give Punk the credit of that his DVD actually sold REALLY well, so he did draw money for WWE there, albeit not crazy amounts.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Funny isn't it. Casuals just don't buy into Punk beating a beast like Lesnar. *They didn't buy the build up for Punk/Taker* and they aren't buying this.


Just flat out making stuff up now, are we?


----------



## Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Punk hatred in here is hilarious.


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Stating Punk can't draw =/= Punk hatred.


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This thread is the same every week. By the time Orton or Bryan get the belt it's gonna be Punk marks vs Orton marks or Bryan marks. To see who draws better as the champ. :lmao:lmao:lmao


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Funny isn't it. Casuals just don't buy into Punk beating a beast like Lesnar. They didn't buy the build up for Punk/Taker and they aren't buying this.


Punk's an underdog. Fans are buying it just fine.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Just flat out making stuff up now, are we?


You wish. No one here or among the casuals thought Punk had a chance in hell of beating Taker. Punk wasn't perceived as a threat to the streak. He just wasn't. That doesn't take away from the match itself, Punk was able to cast some doubt there. I'm talking about the build up.




Slowhand said:


> Punk's an underdog. Fans are buying it just fine.


The latest ratings say otherwise. People are simply tuning out during those segments.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> You wish. No one here or among the casuals thought Punk had a chance in hell of beating Taker. Punk wasn't perceived as a threat to the streak. He just wasn't. That doesn't take away from the match itself, Punk was able to cast some doubt there. I'm talking about the build up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The latest ratings say otherwise.


Crowd reactions say otherwise.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Crowd reactions say otherwise.


:lmao Whoo Whoo Whoo. You know it. :gun:


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> You wish. *No one here or among the casuals thought Punk had a chance in hell of beating Taker.* Punk wasn't perceived as a threat to the streak. He just wasn't. That doesn't take away from the match itself, Punk was able to cast some doubt there. I'm talking about the build up


So you speak for every single person on here, and every single casual fan out there, do you? The build up segments for Punk/'Taker, drew well enough - and despite your claims to the contrary, you know full well they did.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Dance Puppets, Dance! :vince :henry1


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> So you speak for every single person on here, and every single casual fan out there, do you? The build up segments for Punk/'Taker, *drew well enough* - and despite your claims to the contrary, you know full well they did.


Key words there. Well enough. Take Taker out of the equation and Punk alone shits the bed, as per usual.

Also, go read the forums from back then Captain ButtHurt, no one including most Punk marks believed Punk had a prayer against Taker's streak. Well, maybe your silly ass did. No one on the planet strives to protect Punk's rep more than you....including his own family members. You're like Punk's very own PR firm....only you don't get paid and you ultimately do more to embarrass Punk than enhance him. I'd have thought you'd keep yourself scarce in this thread after that little 'incident' with Starbuck, but apparently, much like your simian brethren, you choose to linger longer while throwing your feces all around.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://www.wwe.com/inside/wwe-scores-20-million-viewers

Monday Night Raw – Monday, Aug. 5 on USA Network

Raw generated *8 million unique viewers*
The show was watched by more men 18-34 than every other program on broadcast TV


----------



## WWFECWWCW94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



dxbender said:


> http://www.wwe.com/inside/wwe-scores-20-million-viewers
> 
> Monday Night Raw – Monday, Aug. 5 on USA Network
> 
> * Raw generated 8 million unique viewers
> The show was watched by more men 18-34 than every other program on broadcast TV*



Next did you know bullshit fact


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



WWFECWWCW94 said:


> Next did you know bullshit fact


8 million viewers will be how many people Raw reached on Monday night from 20:00 to 23:05. It's also quite interesting though, I wonder how many of the 4 million watching at the start are there still at the end? Could be 1 million, with the other 3 million gradually joining as the show progresses.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Key words there. Well enough. Take Taker out of the equation and Punk alone shits the bed, as per usual.
> 
> Also, go read the forums from back then Captain ButtHurt, no one including most Punk marks believed Punk had a prayer against Taker's streak. Well, maybe your silly ass did. *No one on the planet strives to protect Punk's rep more than you....including his own family members. You're like Punk's very own PR firm*....only you don't get paid and you ultimately do more to embarrass Punk than enhance him. I'd have thought you'd keep yourself scarce in this thread after that little 'incident' with Starbuck, but apparently, much like your simian brethren, you choose to linger longer while throwing your feces all around.


I could say the same for you, and your apparent role on here as Bryan's personal cheerleader. Also, there was no incident with Starbuck... I simply called her out on her bullshit - and no doubt I'll do it again, at some point in the future.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> I could say the same for you, and your apparent role on here as Bryan's personal cheerleader.


Actually I talk about Bryan's limitations all the time. If you ever doubted Punk at anything you'd kill yourself immediately after.




mblonde09 said:


> Also, there was no incident with Starbuck... I simply called her out on her bullshit - and no doubt I'll do it again, at some point in the future.


Sure you will. And good job "calling her out." You only had the ENTIRE forum laughing at you. That's some skill you got there. :lmao


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Expected audience tonight is 3,980,000 - a fall from last week's audience.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> -- Monday's Raw was flat in social media activity compared to last week's show.
> 
> Raw scored 260,716 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, compared to 266,465 last week.
> 
> For the sixth consecutive week, Raw ranked #3 on cable TV, trailing "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" on VH1 and "Teen Wolf" on MTV.


via PWTorch


----------



## IWCLOL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I can see a 2.8 today. Lesnar will save the overrun but first hour is gonna be horrendous. Matches at the start of the show don't draw.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ip-for-the-week-ending-august-11-2013/197048/

past week: RAW # 5 (9:00 PM hour), # 8 (10:00 PM hour), & # 12 (8:00 PM hour) in Cable.

# 1 and # 2 was Breaking Bad and Rizzoli & Isles (again Angie Harmony doing work)


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



IWCLOL said:


> Matches at the start of the show don't draw.


Matches have never drawn except in the overrun featuring Rock, Austin, Hogan, Goldberg, Triple H, Undertaker or Foley


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's because they don't hype the start of the show. Axel/HHH did very well and it started the show. Why? Because they promoted the match.


----------



## kiguel182

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Is it possible to get a ratings thread with comments disabled? I mean just the post of ratings and all of that.

Having to shuffle threw mark wars to find breakdowns and ratings postage is really annoying.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 1 - 3.743 million
Hour 2 - 4.273 million
Hour 3 - 4.317 million


----------



## Ray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT PUNK unk


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> That's because they don't hype the start of the show. Axel/HHH did very well and it started the show. Why? Because they promoted the match.


It didn't really do "well", but good point as all overruns since then have done worse. 

Promotion is key, but also people should have a reason to be invested in the match. Punk/Cena earlier this year did amazingly when it was for the #1 contender-ship, doing a 3.9. The #1 contenders match for Summerslam last year between Cena and Show (with the champ, Punk, right out there on commentary the whole match)? It did a 3.9. And let's not forget the Punk/Show match a couple of weeks before that where Cena made a hint of cashing in. People had to tune in for that and it got a 4.0. Of course the Raw 1,000 overrun rating between that... while of course due to the heavy promotion of the show as a whole, can't be denied it's success as it had a 4.43 rating, probably the highest quarter rating WWE will get for a long long time.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Can't wait to see how the Bryan/Cena segment did. These are the kind of numbers you do when you up the ante in content for the WWE Title angle.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Hour 1 - 3.743 million
> Hour 2 - 4.273 million
> Hour 3 - 4.317 million


almost identical to the go home summerslam show last year, freaky

hour 1 - 3.795 million
hour 2 - 4.252 million 
hour 3 - 4.354 million

more impressive though because since this time last year usa is in over 500,000 less homes


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena-Bryan started in the second hour and finished in the third hour. I expect big gains from Bryan-Cena segment and a 550,000 gain from Bork-Punk.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good numbers for the go-home show. Hour 1 being the worst hour has become the norm, but hour's 2 and 3 did well. I think people really are catching onto the whole "the good stuff happens in the last two hours" thing. Hell, I wonder what the rating would be if we only counted the 9-11 timeframe (like the old 2-hour days).

Third hour's success is great. I wonder what drew 'em in. Was it the Cena/Bryan MizTV segment that was only advertised on the show, or does my last post prove true about promotion and it ends up being Punk/Heyman? Then again, I think that was exclusively in the overrun, so it might not be considered. Also there was the battle royal. How do those usually do? If that does well, that proves my point about when something's on the line (like #1 contendership), it'll draw in viewers (plus it had several ads throughout the show).


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Of course the battle royal will do well. Mizark was there.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> Of course the battle royal will do well. Mizark was there.


Oh right. :henry1


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> almost identical to the go home summerslam show last year, freaky
> 
> hour 1 - 3.795 million
> hour 2 - 4.252 million
> hour 3 - 4.354 million
> 
> more impressive though because since this time last year usa is in over 500,000 less homes


Yeah crazy. Last year competition was big too with Dallas Cowboys/Oakland Raiders MNF game.

For comparison, last year with HHH vs Lesnar contract signing in Q11 gained a solid 431,000 viewers and overrun with Shawn's "arm break" grew incredibly with 817,000 viewers to a show high 3.45 quarter rating. Let's see if Punk vs Lesnar ME+Overrun can outdo that this year.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> Yeah crazy. Last year competition was big too with Dallas Cowboys/Oakland Raiders MNF game.
> 
> For comparison, last year with HHH vs Lesnar contract signing in Q11 gained a solid 431,000 viewers and overrun with *Shawn's "arm break" grew incredibly with 817,000 viewers *to a show high 3.45 quarter rating. Let's see if Punk vs Lesnar ME+Overrun can outdo that this year.



:hbk


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM GOAT with that hour 3.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> CM GOAT with that hour 3.


Yep. It's all one guy, as per usual. Nothing new to see here. The overrun doesn't even count towards hour 3 :lmao


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> *Yep. It's all one guy, as per usual.* Nothing new to see here. The overrun doesn't even count towards hour 3 :lmao


Exactly, it's all one guy, Punk. It's been that way since 2011. Nice to see you finally catchin' up. unk5


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

expect a massive cena gain again.


----------



## IWCLOL

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Everyone salute that rating because in around 3 weeks you will not see a 4 million hour for 3 and a half months UNTIL RACK DA GOAT COMES BACK muahahahhahaha.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Meh. Everyone knows why the 3rd did so well.

:axel


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Exactly, it's all one guy, Punk. It's been that way since 2011. Nice to see you finally catchin' up. unk5


Haha. I'm just disappointed that KO Bossy isn't here to get on his case for stating his opinion as if it's fact.

unk2


Punk is such a ratings God, that him being in the overrun counts towards hour 3. That's a first. :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Haha. I'm just disappointed that KO Bossy isn't here to get on his case for stating his opinion as if it's fact.
> 
> unk2


KO Bossy is busy somewhere healing people who are addicted to tweeting and tell everyone when they piss, shit, what they eat, how it tasted, going to sleep, and telling what their dreams are while sleeping. :ddp


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

final rating - 2.95


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> final rating - 3.0


Das it?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Das it?


better than last week at least. Post-PPV RAWs do better than go home ones anyways. Can't remember the last time the go home was better than the Post-PPV one.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

the overrun went up to 3.5+ rating according to pro wrestling.net


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> the overrun went up to 3.5+ rating according to pro wrestling.net


If true...

DAT unk2 :brock :heyman


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think the Battle Royal will have done well, as they did surprisingly hype it a lot throughout.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> better than last week at least. Post-PPV RAWs do better than go home ones anyways. Can't remember the last time the go home was better than the Post-PPV one.


If that's considered good these days, then it's clearly all because of Daniel "Ratings" Bryan. That's what I will refer to him as in this thread.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> the overrun went up to 3.5+ rating according to pro wrestling.net


Like I said,

CM GOAT.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> the overrun went up to 3.5+ rating according to pro wrestling.net



Even though I can't believe that is considered a huge rating today, this is the reason why Vince keeps Brock around, as sparingly as it may be.

:brock


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Didn't people tune out when Brock showed up last week? 

:brock

People tuned in to see the GOAT slay the beast. Dat 3.5.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Didn't people tune out when Brock showed up last week?
> 
> :brock
> 
> People tuned in to see the GOAT slay the beast. Dat 3.5.


Didn't Punk get beaten by an AJ Lee segment one night not too long ago?

Yeah, I'm going to stick with my original post.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh god, is this really going where I think it is?


----------



## James1o1o

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Oh god, is this really going where I think it is?


Yep.

This is why I hate most wrestling fans.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yep, it is. fpalm


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Oh god, is this really going where I think it is?


Can't say I'm surprised, at all.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lesnar/Punk/Heyman is out performing Bryan/Cena, in every aspect. Shouldn't be shocked it's upsetting the Bryan fans.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

delete


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Lesnar/Punk/Heyman is out performing Bryan/Cena, in every aspect. Shouldn't be shocked it's upsetting the Bryan fans.


Not really. There's been nothing special about it. It hasn't lived up to the hype at all.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Welp, better make the most of it and get some popcorn.

TROLLAMANIA 79:

BEST VS BEAST
Wrestlinfan35 vs. Showstoppa97

GO!

Edit:

WOAH! Wrestlinfan35 throws a curveball and hits :bryan Showstoppa changed his weapon of choice to GOAT!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> technically that segment last week still gained viewers ( be it a small gain) not lose viewers.


I meant the minute-by-minute breakdown, that saw viewers dip when Lesnar came out to attack Punk. Guess that means Axel > Lesnar, according to the logic of this place.



> Not really. There's been nothing special about it. It hasn't lived up to the hype at all.


Masterful mic work, intense brawls and wonderful chemistry by all three involved, yeah that's definitely out-classed by handpicking opponents, makeovers and a little guy doing a lot of shouting of a single word.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And now Wrestlinfan35 puts over the one who's more perfect than perfect! WHAT A MATCH!


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I meant the minute-by-minute breakdown, that saw viewers dip when Lesnar came out to attack Punk. Guess that means Axel > Lesnar, according to the logic of this place.


nobody can be that dumb. they had one bad week in ratings so what. Rock/Punk feud had couple bad weeks as well (one of them even worst than the one last week). Don't know why people around here making a big deal about it


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

AND FIRST-TIMER JY57 JOINS THE FRAY! VINTAGE JY57!

Edit: Man, I'm really bored, aren't I?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> nobody can be that dumb. they had one bad week in ratings so what. Rock/Punk feud had couple bad weeks as well (one of them even worst than the one last week). Don't know why people around here making a big deal about it


Wait, what? Lesnar/Punk has performed very well every week. If that's what you're trying to argue then don't bother because I agree. I was just saying it's not all Lesnar.

It's Lesnar, Punk, Heyman,

and the real GOAT Curtis Axel.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I meant the minute-by-minute breakdown, that saw viewers dip when Lesnar came out to attack Punk. Guess that means Axel > Lesnar, according to the logic of this place.
> 
> 
> 
> Masterful mic work, intense brawls and wonderful chemistry by all three involved, yeah that's definitely out-classed by handpicking opponents, makeovers and a little guy doing a lot of shouting of a single word.


The words "masterful" and "intense" sure do get thrown around pretty loosely these days, don't they? They had one good brawl. Woopty-do. Never, ever seen that before in my time of watching wrestling, :lol

I love how butt-hurt it can make someone that Vince McMahon picked little, good 'ol Daniel Bryan to be in a feud for the WWE Title going into SummerSlam, and not someone else. I absolutely love it. And, apparently, so did the fans last night.

Vince made the right decision. He knows it. 

:yes


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WHAT A SLOBBERKNOCKER THIS HAS BEEN! Will Showstopper97 answer before the count of 10?

Edit: OMG, A COMEBACK BY SHOWSTOPPER! HE PLAYED THE WWE TITLE CARD! WHAT A MANEUVER!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> WHAT A SLOBBERKNOCKER THIS HAS BEEN! Will Showstopper97 answer before the count of 10?
> 
> Edit: OMG, A COMEBACK BY SHOWSTOPPER! HE PLAYED THE WWE TITLE CARD! WHAT A MANEUVER!


Not so much the WWE Title card. More of the "I can't believe someone is so mad that their favorite wrestler isn't currently going for the WWE Title" card. Like, who cares?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh sorry...

ahem

HE PLAYED THE BUTTHURT CARD! THE CROWD IS GOING CRAZY!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Oh sorry...
> 
> ahem
> 
> HE PLAYED THE BUTTHURT CARD! THE CROWD IS GOING CRAZY!


Your commentary is much better than WWE's. Have you ever thought about applying for a job as a WWE commentator before? Way better than Cole, JBL, and Lawler.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

AND SHOWSTOPPER SHOWS NO RESPECT TO HIS OPPONENT, TALKING TO THE COMMENTATOR LIKE HE'S GOT NO CHALLENGE. THIS MAN'S THE TRUE BEAST INCARNATE!


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Your commentary is much better than WWE's. Have you ever thought about applying for a job as a WWE commentator before? Way better than Cole, JBL, and Lawler.


Beautiful use of sarcasm


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Beautiful use of sarcasm


I'm better than Lawler is right now at least. Right?!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> The words "masterful" and "intense" sure do get thrown around pretty loosely these days, don't they? They had one good brawl. Woopty-do. Never, ever seen that before in my time of watching wrestling, :lol
> 
> I love how butt-hurt it can make someone that Vince McMahon picked little, good 'ol Daniel Bryan to be in a feud for the WWE Title going into SummerSlam, and not someone else. I absolutely love it. And, apparently, so did the fans last night.
> 
> Vince made the right decision. He knows it.
> 
> :yes


Just like "good mic skills" gets thrown around when talking about Daniel Bryan. My my how standards have dropped drastically these days. One decent segment in this program so far, compared to what, six so far in Lesnar/Heyman/Punk. Yup, real competition you've got there. 

Never said Bryan doesn't belong in this spot. He got over by shouting a word because he couldn't any other way, I can respect that. Comparing this to the GOAT angle is quite insulting to Punk and Heyman. Don't need to say anything though, that overrun will do the talking.

unk :brock :heyman


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Just like "good mic skills" gets thrown around when talking about Daniel Bryan. My my how standards have dropped drastically these days. One decent segment in this program so far, compared to what, six so far in Lesnar/Heyman/Punk. Yup, real competition you've got there.
> 
> Never said Bryan doesn't belong in this spot. He got over by shouting a word because he couldn't any other way, I can respect that. Comparing this to the GOAT angle is quite insulting to Punk and Heyman. Don't need to say anything though, that overrun will do the talking.
> 
> unk :brock :heyman


If only one word of that was actually you being honest. It's clear as day you are all kinds of butt-hurt that Daniel Bryan is in a program with John Cena, in which the WWE title is up for grabs.

You can rundown Daniel Bryan all you want. "His mic skills suck, he only got over because of one word, he looks like a troll, he's only in this spot because of one word," etc. etc. etc. Go for it. You're the one who's making yourself look more and more foolish and butt-hurt. Unlike you in regards to Punk, I'm comfortable enough with Bryan's skill-set to not have to rundown Punk, or anyone else.


----------



## ecabney

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk stans insecure that Bryan is being groomed for that number one spot.

I hope they don't commit that when Punk calls it quits in a couple of years :jordan


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

We're not the same person. I'm not running down Bryan for the hell of it, it's just my true opinions of him. You can express yours about Punk or whoever, not like I care. It's not like I'm running down Bryan because I'm not "comfortable" with Punk's skill or some bullshit like that, what a random thing to say, it's just how I see Bryan. Brilliant ring performer, shitty everything else. And you've always been so sensitive about it. 

I've constantly said how excited I am for Cena vs. Bryan, as a match, because it'll kick ass. Not asking you to believe me. But right now I'm talking about the program itself. Try not taking shit so seriously, especially in this thread, where every week it's the same joking posts.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> We're not the same person. I'm not running down Bryan for the hell of it, it's just my true opinions of him. You can express yours about Punk or whoever, not like I care. It's not like I'm running down Bryan because I'm not "comfortable" with Punk's skill or some bullshit like that, what a random thing to say, it's just how I see Bryan. Brilliant ring performer, shitty everything else. And you've always been so sensitive about it.
> 
> I've constantly said how excited I am for Cena vs. Bryan, as a match, because it'll kick ass. Not asking you to believe me. But right now I'm talking about the program itself. Try not taking shit so seriously, especially in this thread, where every week it's the same joking posts.


Fair enough, if that's how you feel about the Cena/Bryan program. But most of your criticisms aren't the least bit fair. And everything I've said about the Punk/Brock program, I meant. I don't think there is anything monumental about it. And for someone who is looking to get rid of sensitivity, you sure are sensitive to remarks that don't sing the praises of every little aspect of CM Punk, and his feuds.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Guys, guys. Stop arguing. We all know who is really responsible for this.


----------



## WWE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:brock


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Mizark and Brock are easily the biggest draws for the company.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Haha. I'm just disappointed that KO Bossy isn't here to get on his case for stating his opinion as if it's fact.
> 
> unk2
> 
> 
> Punk is such a ratings God, that him being in the overrun counts towards hour 3. That's a first. :lol


Well I already hashed it out with him last night. But apparently that small amount of progress we all made yesterday has once again degenerated into people bickering with each other. That's disappointing.

Honestly, I don't even care how both segments did in terms of viewers. Both were entertaining, that's all I care about. I gave up having these ratings quarrels with people a long time ago. Right around when people were trying desperately to convince me that it was all Punk's fault the ratings were in the 2.0s because he was the WWE champion. If one guy isn't solely responsible for the show being good, then he's not solely responsible for it being bad, either. Vice versa also applies. If the show did a good rating, then I'm guessing Punk probably contributed to some of that, just like Bryan did. If the show did poorly, then its just as much Punk's fault as it is Bryan's. The only people I wouldn't fault at all are those who aren't on the show period. 

As I said, I'm a fair guy. Its ridiculous to try and pin a bad rating all on one guy, just as its ridiculous to try and credit a good rating all to one guy.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> Well I already hashed it out with him last night. But apparently that small amount of progress we all made yesterday has once again degenerated into people bickering with each other. That's disappointing.
> 
> Honestly, I don't even care how both segments did in terms of viewers. Both were entertaining, that's all I care about. I gave up having these ratings quarrels with people a long time ago. Right around when people were trying desperately to convince me that it was all Punk's fault the ratings were in the 2.0s because he was the WWE champion. If one guy isn't solely responsible for the show being good, then he's not solely responsible for it being bad, either. Vice versa also applies. If the show did a good rating, then I'm guessing Punk probably contributed to some of that, just like Bryan did. If the show did poorly, then its just as much Punk's fault as it is Bryan's. The only people I wouldn't fault at all are those who aren't on the show period.
> 
> As I said, I'm a fair guy. Its ridiculous to try and pin a bad rating all on one guy, just as its ridiculous to try and credit a good rating all to one guy.


I agree with all of that. I was just messing around when asking for you to call him out. Just pointing out where it was started today. We're all good.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's the ratings thread, bickering about nonsense and exaggerated posts will always ensue.

We're all friends here.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> I agree with all of that. I was just messing around when asking for you to call him out. Just pointing out where it was started today. We're all good.


:

Although there are some people in this thread who...well, I dunno. It seems they truly believe some of the crap they say. Usually its just haters trying to push an agenda.

"ZOMG PUNK'S SEGMENT DID BADLY IN VIEWERS! I TOLD YOU HE WASN'T A DRAW! NOW ALL MY BELIEFS ABOUT HIM BEING SHIT ARE MAGICALLY TRUE! YOU SHOULD ALL HATE HIM LIKE ME."



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> It's the ratings thread, bickering about nonsense and exaggerated posts will always ensue.
> 
> We're all friends here.


Glad to hear, although its easy to pick out the people looking to start an argument.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Not so much the WWE Title card. More of the "I can't believe someone is so mad that their favorite wrestler isn't currently going for the WWE Title" card. Like, who cares?


A feud with Lesnar > a feud for the WWE Championship. I'm sure most Punk fans don't really give a shit that Bryan is in a feud for the title since Punk just held it for 400+ days lol. Punk will be back in the title picture soon enough.

Bryan/Cena had 1 good segment so far during this feud. Punk/Lesnar has been good every week. I'm a fan of both Bryan and Punk but i've enjoyed the Punk/Lesnar feud way more so far.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Stad said:


> A feud with Lesnar > a feud for the WWE Championship. I'm sure most Punk fans don't really give a shit that Bryan is in a feud for the title since Punk just held it for 400+ days lol. Punk will be back in the title picture soon enough.
> 
> Bryan/Cena had 1 good segment so far during this feud. Punk/Lesnar has been good every week. I'm a fan of both Bryan and Punk but i've enjoyed the Punk/Lesnar feud way more so far.


I don't know, it's a much bigger deal to be in a feud with the face of the company and WWE Champion than it is Brock, or anyone really. I'm sure Bryan is happy he's in the feud he's in.

People also think being in a feud with Taker at WM is better than being in a match for the WWE Title. But even Punk himself said during the RTWM that he and Cena should be in a match in the main event of WM 29 for the title.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Being in a program with Lesnar is much, much bigger than the title at this point. It's easy to be champion these days, but you have to be a legit guy to be put in a program with a guy like Rock or Lesnar. There's only a select few guys who are more important than the belt, in the sense that they don't need to be with or around it to stay relevant and important. Punk is one of those guys.

As for the Wrestlemania thing, Showstopper, I think it has more to do with being in the main event for Punk and not so much the title. Punk just wants that main event spot, I don't think he cares if it's for the title or not. And he did actually say once during a Comic Con Q&A before Mania that the streak match is looked at as a bigger deal than the title at WM.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Matches with Rock, Lesnar, Taker, and to a lesser extent, HHH, all take precedence over the WWE Title match. That includes for this Sunday, as Punk/Lesnar is the biggest match on the card. Best? That's subjective. I'd say it's leaps and bounds better than Bryan/Cena, but then I also think Bryan/Cena has been really good. However if you think the opposite, hey, nothing can really be said.

Now that being said, on paper, Punk/Lesnar is far bigger than Bryan/Cena (Punk's clearly bigger than Bryan and Lesnar bigger than Cena), but due to how they've played out the Bryan/Cena feud, by putting the McMahon stuff into it, and now HHH as guest ref, plus Orton having his part, it's made it a lot closer than I ever thought possible. Only way you're surpassing a Lesnar match though is if Taker, Rock, or HHH is wrestling on the same card and/or Brock is in some throwaway match with a jobber/low-carder, but Bryan/Cena is actually bigger than I thought it would be and it could realistically main event with the WWE Title in the equation.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Being in a program with Lesnar is much, much bigger than the title at this point. There's only a select few guys who are more important than the belt, in the sense that they don't need to be with or around it to stay relevant and important. Punk is one of those guys.
> 
> As for the Wrestlemania thing, Showstopper, I think it has more to do with being in the main event for Punk and not so much the title. Punk just wants that main event spot, I don't think he cares if it's for the title or not. And he did actually say once during a Comic Con Q&A before Mania that the streak match is looked at as a bigger deal than the title at WM.


I don't know about the Brock part. He's a monster and a big name (relatively speaking), but a good deal of his momentum has been slowed down due to creative. He's 2-2, which I think we can all agree is kind of ridiculous and his stock has kind been lowered since that Triple H program which dragged on forever. Don't get me wrong, it's still a big deal to be in a feud with Lesnar. I just don't know if it's as big of a deal as the face of the company (unfortunately).

Also, Bryan and Punk are in two different places in their careers and Punk has a few years on Bryan. Punk already has won the WWE title and Bryan hasn't. Bryan has alot more to gain by being in a feud with Cena for the Title than he would in a feud with Brock.

As for the WM thing, you're right, he definitely wants to be in the main event of WM no matter the opponent. But he also likes the chemistry/rivalry that he has with Cena and feels that he and Cena should headline a WM main event for the title.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Matches with Rock, Lesnar, Taker, and to a lesser extent, HHH, all take precedence over the WWE Title match. That includes for this Sunday, as Punk/Lesnar is the biggest match on the card. Best? That's subjective. I'd say it's leaps and bounds better than Bryan/Cena, but then I also think Bryan/Cena has been really good. However if you think the opposite, hey, nothing can really be said.
> 
> Now that being said, on paper, Punk/Lesnar is far bigger than Bryan/Cena (Punk's clearly bigger than Bryan and Lesnar bigger than Cena), but due to how they've played out the Bryan/Cena feud, by putting the McMahon stuff into it, and now HHH as guest ref, plus Orton having his part, it's made it a lot closer than I ever thought possible. Only way you're surpassing a Lesnar match though is if Taker, Rock, or HHH is wrestling on the same card and/or Brock is in some throwaway match with a jobber/low-carder, but Bryan/Cena is actually bigger than I thought it would be and it could realistically main event with the WWE Title in the equation.


Don't know if that's true anymore in regards to Brock, tbh. And kayfabe wise, no one is bigger than Cena right now, including Brock.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> I don't know about the Brock part. He's a monster and a big name (relatively speaking), but a good deal of his momentum has been slowed down due to creative. He's 2-2, which I think we can all agree is kind of ridiculous and his stock has kind been lowered since that Triple H program which dragged on forever. Don't get me wrong, it's still a big deal to be in a feud with Lesnar. I just don't know if it's as big of a deal as the face of the company (unfortunately).
> 
> Also, Bryan and Punk are in two different places in their careers and Punk has a few years on Bryan. Punk already has won the WWE title and Bryan hasn't. Bryan has alot more to gain by being in a feud with Cena for the Title than he would in a feud with Brock. Which is also why Punk should come out the victor of this feud, a loss would just hurt him a lot more.
> 
> As for the WM thing, you're right, he definitely wants to be in the main event of WM no matter the opponent. But he also likes the chemistry/rivalry that he has with Cena and feels that he and Cena should headline a WM main event for the title.


Despite the losses, I do think Brock still has that credit of being a difference maker on or near the level of The Rock. It's easy to take Brock seriously because of his fighting history and his look, therefore I think he can handle losses and still be taken legitimately. 

Agreed with your next two paragraphs. You're right, Punk does want that match with Cena at WMXXX more than any other option, as he stated a few days ago in Chicago. I agree with him, too. I'd love to see Punk/Cena for the title at Mania. I think their feud's earned it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh, and on the whole Punk wanting to be in the main event Mania thing, that has less to do with the WWE Title and more to do with just main eventing Mania. His best bet is against a guy like Brock, Taker, Rock, Austin, etc. Obviously the streak match didn't main event, but it was still the second biggest match on the card, which is a step up from the year prior (and hell, if you're one of those people that feel the Lesnar/HHH match was bigger, Taker/Punk is still a huuuuuuge step up from Punk/Jericho the year prior).



> Don't know if that's true anymore in regards to Brock, tbh. And kayfabe wise, no one is bigger than Cena right now, including Brock.


Nah, Brock's still bigger than Cena. He reaches an outside audience, increases business when he's around, and due to his part-time schedule, he has an extremely special aura around him that guys like him only have (Rock, Taker, etc.)

The loses might've hurt Brock but all that's happened in the past year is the gap has closed some between Brock and Cena. Until Cena can do the business Brock can (the past couple of ERs and SS last year), I don't see it any other way. Cena had TLC on his back and you could also credit him with Payback as well. Neither of them did any good and in TLC's case, it was pretty poor.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Brock only seemed bigger than Cena on the show during his feud with Cena and MAYBE his first match with HHH. But not this year at all.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Brock still main eventide over Cena/Ryback for the WWE Title in Extreme Rules. If Cena was still higher than him he would have close that show and he didn't. As for SummerSlam Brock/Punk was scheduled to Main Event the show according to numerous reports, something changed to make it Bryan?Cena now (aka Hunter)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Oh, and on the whole Punk wanting to be in the main event Mania thing, that has less to do with the WWE Title and more to do with just main eventing Mania. His best bet is against a guy like Brock, Taker, Rock, Austin, etc. Obviously the streak match didn't main event, but it was still the second biggest match on the card, which is a step up from the year prior (and hell, if you're one of those people that feel the Lesnar/HHH match was bigger, Taker/Punk is still a huuuuuuge step up from Punk/Jericho the year prior).
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, Brock's still bigger than Cena. He reaches an outside audience, increases business when he's around, and due to his part-time schedule, he has an extremely special aura around him that guys like him only have (Rock, Taker, etc.)
> 
> The loses might've hurt Brock but all that's happened in the past year is the gap has closed some between Brock and Cena. Until Cena can do the business Brock can (the past couple of ERs and SS last year), I don't see it any other way. Cena had TLC on his back and you could also credit him with Payback as well. Neither of them did any good and in TLC's case, it was pretty poor.


I think when Brock first came back, yeah, he probably was bigger than the title, I guess. But today? I don't know, he's still a big deal, but the way he's been booked and the long program with Triple H has killed alot of interest I have. He barely got a reaction when he came out on Raw this past week, during his entrance. I think his momentum has been substantially hurt.

And for Bryan specifically, no one is a bigger match up for him than Cena/the WWE champion.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cena's bigger than Bork.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> I think when Brock first came back, yeah, he probably was bigger than the title, I guess. But today? I don't know, he's still a big deal, but the way he's been booked and the long program with Triple H has killed alot of interest I have. He barely got a reaction when he came out on Raw this past week, during his entrance. I think his momentum has been substantially hurt.
> 
> And for Bryan specifically, no one is a bigger match up for him than Cena/the WWE champion.


Like I said, I agree the gap has closed due to how Brock's been handled. Also, as far as Lesnar coming out to dead crowds, that's been happening since he returned. Well, not every week, but one week he'll get a big reaction, the next he won't, then he'll get a reaction, then he won't. The crowd was dead for him on Raw 1000 from what I remember (or maybe I'm thinking of another night or two leading up to Summerslam last year?) They were also pretty dead for him at Mania (I was there), and I'm pretty sure for ER this year as well. I might be missing some. He can get some big reactions like when he returns after a hiatus, but crowd reactions aren't his strongest asset.

I agree that for Bryan, the WWE Title match is bigger than a match with Brock, but that has more to do with the fact Bryan has never held the WWE Title and that title is what legitimizes his entire career and struggle. The journey he's had to win that belt has been one we haven't seen in awhile. Most guys who win their first title recently seem to just win it within a year (Sheamus and Del Rio) of coming into WWE, but with Bryan, if he wins at SS, would've taken almost 4. Not to mention all the years he spent in the Indys. That WWE Title match is bigger for Bryan specifically than even a match with The Rock. However, that doesn't make it a bigger match.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Brock is definitely the biggest thing going in WWE right now. They'll put Cena/Bryan on last to make it _seem_ like Cena's above everyone else and the greatest thing since sliced fucking bread, but everyone knows that the success of SummerSlam will fall directly onto the shoulders of a Mr. Brock Lesnar. 

Brock Lesnar > WWE title. That's a fact, jack.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just doesn't seem like it on the show. Brock had two great years, left then came back and has lost half his matches, including the first one to Cena. Cena has been here for a decade, won more titles, has more great matches, made more money. I am far from a Cena fan, but he seems bigger on the show in every way. We all know Brock is a bigger star and is more socially relevant BLAH BLAH BLAH, who cares. Kayfabe wise, Cena is the guy the show mostly revolves around, not Brock.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Like I said, I agree the gap has closed due to how Brock's been handled. Also, as far as Lesnar coming out to dead crowds, that's been happening since he returned. Well, not every week, but one week he'll get a big reaction, the next he won't, then he'll get a reaction, then he won't. The crowd was dead for him on Raw 1000 from what I remember (or maybe I'm thinking of another night or two leading up to Summerslam last year?) They were also pretty dead for him at Mania (I was there), and I'm pretty sure for ER this year as well. I might be missing some. He can get some big reactions like when he returns after a hiatus, but crowd reactions aren't his strongest asset.
> 
> I agree that for Bryan, the WWE Title match is bigger than a match with Brock, but that has more to do with the fact Bryan has never held the WWE Title and that title is what legitimizes his entire career and struggle. The journey he's had to win that belt has been one we haven't seen in awhile. Most guys who win their first title recently seem to just win it within a year (Sheamus and Del Rio) of coming into WWE, but with Bryan, if he wins at SS, would've taken almost 4. Not to mention all the years he spent in the Indys. That WWE Title match is bigger for Bryan specifically than even a match with The Rock. However, that doesn't make it a bigger match.



I agree with 99.9% of that, although I didn't know Brock had been coming out to dead crowds that often. Guess I don't pay attention that much to his crowd reactions.

I think the fact that the Bryan/Cena match is in a way a 'career-maker', or as you said, 'legitimizes his entire career and struggle' makes it a bigger match. The Brock/Punk match doesn't do that for either guy. Throw in the fact that it's for the WWE title and the face of the company for the past 8 years, I think it's certainly more important, especially to the company itself. Depending on how the match goes, they can have a new main eventer to add to the list and possibly a new rivalry going forward.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> I agree with 99.9% of that, although I didn't know Brock had been coming out to dead crowds that often. Guess I don't pay attention that much to his crowd reactions.
> 
> I think the fact that the Bryan/Cena match is in a way a 'career-maker', or as you said, 'legitimizes his entire career and struggle' makes it a bigger match. *The Brock/Punk match doesn't do that for either guy.* Throw in the fact that it's for the WWE title and the face of the company for the past 8 years, I think it's certainly more important, especially to the company itself. Depending on how the match goes, they can have a new main eventer to add to the list and possibly a new rivalry going forward.


I agree that it could do wonders for Bryan, but I think you're ignoring truly how important this could be for Punk. 

http://www.lordsofpain.net/columns/...lvr.it&utm_medium=twitter#BPE2WwrAYKPZgH8A.99

Punk's lost every single big match he's been a part of for the past year. Hell, since MITB 2011. He still does not have that major win over somebody bigger than he is, and he needs that to be looked at as not just a guy who can hang with the Lesnars, Cenas and Rocks, but a guy who belongs with them. In the casuals' eyes. And that article goes in depth on that perfectly. Real good read, tbh.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

well of course Bryan/Cena is more important to the company in terms of future.

but Brock/Punk is that big special attraction match solely made for making big dough. Its needed for 2nd biggest PPV for the buy rates. Without it I doubt Cena/Bryan would make a major boost in buys. Hell Cena/Punk alone in 2011 didn't do anything for the PPV.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I agree that it could do wonders for Bryan, but I think you're ignoring truly how important this could be for Punk.
> 
> http://www.lordsofpain.net/columns/...lvr.it&utm_medium=twitter#BPE2WwrAYKPZgH8A.99
> 
> Punk's lost every single big match he's been a part of for the past year. Hell, since MITB 2011. He still does not have that major win over somebody bigger than he is, and he needs that to be looked at as not just a guy who can hang with the Lesnars, Cenas and Rocks, but a guy who belongs with them. In the casuals' eyes. And that article goes in depth on that perfectly. Good read, tbh.


That is true. Punk does need the win, and it could really help him out. That could be a nice first step in moving up the ladder from main eventer to a step closer to the Cena's of the world.

Putting this topic to the side, because all it is is based on opinion, which match is the biggest. Doesn't even really matter in the long run. But do you think Punk is going to win Sunday? I honestly don't know. Because Brock kind of needs the win, too. And obviously Punk stood tall on Raw, and usually that guy loses on the PPV. Who do you think wins?

Thanks for the link. It's nice discuss things instead of making snarky comments, but I think we can both agree that sometimes the snarky comments are fun


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> That is true. Punk does need the win, and it could really help him out. That could be a nice first step in moving up the ladder from main eventer to a step closer to the Cena's of the world.
> 
> Putting this topic to the side, because all it is is based on opinion, which match is the biggest. Doesn't even really matter in the long run. But do you think Punk is going to win Sunday? I honestly don't know. Because Brock kind of needs the win, too. And obviously Punk stood tall on Raw, and usually that guy loses on the PPV. Who do you think wins?
> 
> Thanks for the link. It's nice discuss things instead of making snarky comments, but I think we can both agree that sometimes the snarky comments are fun


At the end of the day, any way you look at it, we have two huge MOTYCs set up for Summerslam. Both matches will rule, so yeah, it won't matter in the long run. What matters is how the company handles both these situations. I'm predicting a Bryan win with no cash in, but as for Punk/Lesnar, I was certain Punk had this until last night. I think Lesnar's got it, but if the WWE just ends the program there then they've made a mistake. If Punk doesn't come out of this feud with Lesnar victorious, it'd just show that Punk was all talk and looked like a complete chump. 

Lesnar can handle the loss, yes he shouldn't be losing, but he can recover from it. He lost to Cena, but it didn't effect his legitimacy for Summerslam 2012. I still think Punk needs to come out of this the winner much more than Lesnar. 

And yeah, it is. :lol The snarky, asshole comments are such a norm in this thread and it gets pretty contagious. But now that it's all out of the way, it's nice to actually have a conversation.


----------



## ecabney

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Brock only main evented because of Cena and HHH, let's be honest


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> At the end of the day, any way you look at it, we have two huge MOTYCs set up for Summerslam. Both matches will rule, so yeah, it won't matter in the long run. What matters is how the company handles both these situations. I'm predicting a Bryan win with no cash in, but as for Punk/Lesnar, I was certain Punk had this until last night. I think Lesnar's got it, but if the WWE just ends the program there then they've made a mistake. If Punk doesn't come out of this feud with Lesnar victorious, it'd just show that Punk was all talk and looked like a complete chump.
> 
> Lesnar can handle the loss, yes he shouldn't be losing, but he can recover from it. He lost to Cena, but it didn't effect his legitimacy for Summerslam 2012. I still think Punk needs to come out of this the winner much more than Lesnar.
> 
> And yeah, it is. :lol The snarky, asshole comments are such a norm in this thread and it gets pretty contagious. But now that it's all out of the way, it's nice to actually have a conversation.


Punk can lose by not tapping out..if he brings back the Brock Lock.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> At the end of the day, any way you look at it, we have two huge MOTYCs set up for Summerslam. Both matches will rule, so yeah, it won't matter in the long run. What matters is how the company handles both these situations. I'm predicting a Bryan win with no cash in, but as for Punk/Lesnar, I was certain Punk had this until last night. I think Lesnar's got it, but if the WWE just ends the program there then they've made a mistake. If Punk doesn't come out of this feud with Lesnar victorious, it'd just show that Punk was all talk and looked like a complete chump.
> 
> Lesnar can handle the loss, yes he shouldn't be losing, but he can recover from it. He lost to Cena, but it didn't effect his legitimacy for Summerslam 2012. I still think Punk needs to come out of this the winner much more than Lesnar.
> 
> And yeah, it is. :lol The snarky, asshole comments are such a norm in this thread and it gets pretty contagious. But now that it's all out of the way, it's nice to actually have a conversation.


Yeah, I actually think Punk should win, too. But after Punk stood tall on Raw this week, I think this is going to be a 2 match feud, with Brock winning this Sunday and Punk winning the 2nd match, whenever that is. I would guess the 2nd match would either be at Survivor Series, Royal Rumble, or possibly WM 30. Whenever that 2nd match is, Punk wins. Brock wins this Sunday. My guess.

As far as Cena/Bryan, especially now with the Cena elbow issue, I think Bryan wins. Not sure if Orton cashes in or not. After Raw, I think they made it alittle too obvious that Orton would cash in, by having him come out on the stage and hold up the briefcase. It's like they're begging the fans to think Orton is definitely going to cash in. Seems like a swerve to me. But I also wouldn't be shocked if Orton cashed in. I wouldn't be pissed if Orton cashed in and won, especially if Orton/Bryan have a feud and Bryan eventually wins the title.

Either way, regardless of who wins, like you said, we have two great matches to look forward to this Sunday, and that's all that matters.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> If only one word of that was actually you being honest. *It's clear as day you are all kinds of butt-hurt that Daniel Bryan is in a program with John Cena, in which the WWE title is up for grabs.*
> 
> You can rundown Daniel Bryan all you want. "His mic skills suck, he only got over because of one word, he looks like a troll, he's only in this spot because of one word," etc. etc. etc. Go for it. You're the one who's making yourself look more and more foolish and butt-hurt. Unlike you in regards to Punk, I'm comfortable enough with Bryan's skill-set to not have to rundown Punk, or anyone else.


Why would he, or any other Punk fan be "butt-hurt" that Bryan is in a WWE title program with Cena? It may have escaped your notice, but Punk's already been there, done that and had the best-selling t-shirt. In addition to that, not only did Punk do it better, this Cena/Bryan feud hasn't even come close to the "summer of Punk" stuff. Not to mention the fact that Punk is in a feud with someone who is only willing to work with people at elite level... so what reason is there for him to be jealous or "butt-hurt"?


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Why would he, or any other Punk fan be "butt-hurt" that Bryan is in a WWE title program with Cena? It may have escaped your notice, but Punk's already been there, done that and had the best-selling t-shirt. In addition to that, not only did Punk do it better, this Cena/Bryan feud hasn't even come close to the "summer of Punk" stuff. Not to mention the fact that Punk is in a feud with someone who is only willing to work with people at elite level... so what reason is there for him to be jealous or "butt-hurt"?


Stop.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk isn't going to get any bigger than he is now. He has plateaued and has essentially run out of big programs since he's worked them all this year. Bryan on the other hand is where Punk was 2 years ago. The only place for him to go is up. Punk/Lesnar is just Punk/Lesnar. Cena/Bryan isn't just Cena/Bryan. It's bigger than that. It's Cena/Bryan/Orton/HHH/Vince and possibly even the Shield. Brock/HHH was THE main event of Summerslam last year because it was basically the only thing on the card stopping it from looking like a Raw card. Punk/Lesnar is a big special attraction match but the difference between this year and last is the fact that the title match isn't a throwaway piece of crap that nobody cares about. It's actually quite important and has been presented as such. The beauty of Summerslam this year is that you could remove either of the top 2 matches and you'd still be left with a killer main event. That most certainly was not the case last year. WWE have done a great job building both these matches. It's rare that they put this much effort into ONE match let alone TWO and I'm thankful for that because I don't feel like I'm paying for a one match show like I usually do. If Cena/Bryan wasn't on the card I'd still buy it for Punk/Lesnar. If Punk/Lesnar wasn't on the card I'd still buy it for Cena/Bryan. If Brock/HHH wasn't on the card last year I wasn't buying shit and I don't think very many people would have either.

All that being said, I think this is the first time Brock Lesnar doesn't main event a PPV (bar Mania) because the implications of the WWE title match are bigger than whatever happens with Lesnar and Punk. Come Raw next week, Lesnar will be gone and it looks like Cena is going to be joining him this time too. Whatever the hell happens in this WWE title match is most likely going to be the focal point of Raw to the end of the year and into the RTWM with Bryan, Orton and possibly HHH and Vince all playing key roles. Punk is most likely going to end up in the mix with all of them too. I personally think it would be foolish for Cena/Bryan not to main event after the amount of hype and importance they have placed on the outcome of the match. This isn't Punk/Jericho at ER 12, Punk/Cena/Show at SS 12 or Cena/Ryback at ER 13 where the alternative Lesnar match was far and away the clear money maker for each respective show. Cena/Bryan is very similar to Cena/Punk from MITB. Were Lesnar on _that _card, I doubt any Punk mark in here would be calling for him to main event over the title match. The same thing applies here. This match has the ability to elevate Daniel Bryan to a level he's never been on before, just like Punk 2 years ago. It would be silly for them not to go all the way.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Punk isn't going to get any bigger than he is now. He has plateaued and has essentially run out of big programs since he's worked them all this year. Bryan on the other hand is where Punk was 2 years ago. The only place for him to go is up. Punk/Lesnar is just Punk/Lesnar. Cena/Bryan isn't just Cena/Bryan. It's bigger than that. It's Cena/Bryan/Orton/HHH/Vince and possibly even the Shield. Brock/HHH was THE main event of Summerslam last year because it was basically the only thing on the card stopping it from looking like a Raw card. Punk/Lesnar is a big special attraction match but the difference between this year and last is the fact that the title match isn't a throwaway piece of crap that nobody cares about. It's actually quite important and has been presented as such. The beauty of Summerslam this year is that you could remove either of the top 2 matches and you'd still be left with a killer main event. That most certainly was not the case last year. WWE have done a great job building both these matches. It's rare that they put this much effort into ONE match let alone TWO and I'm thankful for that because I don't feel like I'm paying for a one match show like I usually do. If Cena/Bryan wasn't on the card I'd still buy it for Punk/Lesnar. If Punk/Lesnar wasn't on the card I'd still buy it for Cena/Bryan. If Brock/HHH wasn't on the card last year I wasn't buying shit and I don't think very many people would have either.
> 
> All that being said, I think this is the first time Brock Lesnar doesn't main event a PPV (bar Mania) because the implications of the WWE title match are bigger than whatever happens with Lesnar and Punk. Come Raw next week, Lesnar will be gone and it looks like Cena is going to be joining him this time too. Whatever the hell happens in this WWE title match is most likely going to be the focal point of Raw to the end of the year and into the RTWM with Bryan, Orton and possibly HHH and Vince all playing key roles. Punk is most likely going to end up in the mix with all of them too. I personally think it would be foolish for Cena/Bryan not to main event after the amount of hype and importance they have placed on the outcome of the match. This isn't Punk/Jericho at ER 12, Punk/Cena/Show at SS 12 or Cena/Ryback at ER 13 where the alternative Lesnar match was far and away the clear money maker for each respective show. Cena/Bryan is very similar to Cena/Punk from MITB. Were Lesnar on _that _card, I doubt any Punk mark in here would be calling for him to main event over the title match. The same thing applies here. This match has the ability to elevate Daniel Bryan to a level he's never been on before, just like Punk 2 years ago. It would be silly for them not to go all the way.


:clap

Well said. I have nothing really to add to this, other than just re-enforcing your point. Everything we've seen from segments on RAW, the press conference, and interviews with HHH, leads me to believe that we are finally seeing a real changing of the guard type storyline. We didn't really get this when Punk was on his big run against Cena at MITB '11, but are getting it now with Bryan.

It seems WWE may actually be going through with, or at least teasing the idea, of replacing Cena as the broadcast "face" of the company. I say "broadcast" because I believe Cena would still be the top promoted WWE character outside of WWE television because, let's face it, he has the perfect look to please all current/potential investors. Bryan does have a family friendly look but I think it will take awhile to ingrain that look in the minds of casuals and people outside of the company. 

I do think that this storyline with Cena and Bryan will be the start of that process and Bryan will most likely win clean in the match, and probably begin a superman push similar to Cena's from 2005-2010. It took awhile for Cena to become the draw that he is today, and I'm sure it will take awhile for Bryan to become a big draw, but it really does seem that WWE is prepared to go for it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hopefully Bryan does take the top face spot from Cena this Sunday... but I just can't bring myself to set myself up for that and then be severely disappointed when it's business as usual a year from now. If Mania rolls around, Bryan's in the main event, and he wins the match, then I'll start celebrating. Until them I'll just be crossing my fingers.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan will never be top face, it's pretty delusional to think so. He won't even reach second to the top as long as Punk is face. However he can very easily be added to the Cena/Punk/Orton group that nobody has been able to reach since Punk in 2011.

Starbuck, I agree with practically everything, except for Punk reaching his peak. That's a load of shit, as he still has quite a ways to go. Also for the simple fact that he has lost every single big match he's had after Cena. Punk still needs that big moment _as_ a top guy to cement his legacy. Don't tell me MITB is that moment, because that was the moment that _sent _him to top. While he's been on top, the only notable wins he has had have been Jericho, Bryan, and fucking Del Rio. Hardly notable at all.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If Punk does indeed retire within a couple of years, though, I don't see many big moments coming for him between now and then.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

He's going to main event Wrestlemania before he retires, so that could very well be his "moment." Who knows how long he'd stick around after that though.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'd enjoy Bryan/Punk @ Mania 30 for the title. Not sure that would headline over whatever Brock or Taker match is bound to happen, though.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

For Punk, I'd like to see any of these at 'Mania, in order of most to least interested:

1. vs. Cena, title match
2. vs. Austin, highly unlikely 
3. vs. Bryan, title match
4. vs. Lesnar, title rematch

I can see any of these, except maybe the Bryan match, headlining. Unless the WWE keep Bryan's momentum strong. Nonetheless, I can't see myself being disappointed with Punk's match at WMXXX, however it'd be a bummer if he doesn't main event once again.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You'd like to see him against Cena the most? While they indeed have great chemistry, I'd rather something new. It'd be a great match, though, as they all have been.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> For Punk, I'd like to see any of these at 'Mania, in order of most to least interested:
> 
> 1. vs. Cena, title match
> 2. vs. Austin, highly unlikely
> 3. vs. Bryan, title match
> 4. vs. *Taker*, *Streak *rematch
> 
> I can see any of these, except maybe the Bryan match, headlining. Unless the WWE keep Bryan's momentum strong. Nonetheless, I can't see myself being disappointed with Punk's match at WMXXX, however it'd be a bummer if he doesn't main event once again.


Fixed. Punk said that he got a call and that he believes he's the only one that has that much choices and named those 4. So to me I think it will be highly between Bryan and Taker. If Austin doesn't appear in the RR I don't think it will ever happen, it's the perfect time for that move. Lesnar rematch in WM will never happen.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> Why would he, or any other Punk fan be "butt-hurt" that Bryan is in a WWE title program with Cena? It may have escaped your notice, but Punk's already been there, done that and had the best-selling t-shirt. In addition to that, not only did Punk do it better, this Cena/Bryan feud hasn't even come close to the "summer of Punk" stuff. Not to mention the fact that Punk is in a feud with someone who is only willing to work with people at elite level... so what reason is there for him to be jealous or "butt-hurt"?


You know how to tell when someone is butthurt? When they can't stop saying butthurt.












Starbuck said:


> Punk isn't going to get any bigger than he is now. He has plateaued and has essentially run out of big programs since he's worked them all this year. Bryan on the other hand is where Punk was 2 years ago.


Wow. Starbuck's just shooting that truth out with zero fucks given. I'm giving you the clap...er you know what I mean. :clap

I wish WWE would treat Bryan and Punk kinda like Hogan/Ultimate Warrior went at first. Keep them as far apart as possible until RR where they have a brief tease. Bryan wins the Rumble, Punk wins WWE title at EC and we get a best of 3 falls WWE title match at Mania. So easy to write and yet these Hollywood burnouts haven't got a clue.




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Bryan will never be top face, it's pretty delusional to think so. He won't even reach second to the top as long as Punk is face.


The fear. So tasty. So sustaining.




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> He's going to main event Wrestlemania before he retires, so that could very well be his "moment."


Know that for a fact, do ya?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah, I'd like to see the main event with Cena more than anything. To me, nobody in the last decade matches their chemistry together, it's a bold statement, but I believe it. I think their feud has earned and deserved the Wrestlemania headline spot. I can only imagine the quality that match would be.



Happenstan said:


> The fear. So tasty. So sustaining.


Fear? lol, believe what you want, you'll just end up being disappointed. 



> Know that for a fact, do ya?


Yep.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

My dream main event for Wrestlemania is still Daniel Bryan vs CM Punk, just two guys who don't necessarily fit the WWE mold proving they could headline the biggest show of the year. That alone would be a better moment for CM Punk IMO, rather than just another John Cena main event where chances are Cena would win.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nah, I'd much rather Cena over Bryan. Punk/Cena is this generation's Austin/Rock, it needs that WM main event. Punk/Bryan, while I would love it, would be like Austin/Jericho. Just not enough for Punk.

You know what, fuck it, just give me both. :mark:


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Punk isn't going to get any bigger than he is now. He has plateaued and has essentially run out of big programs since he's worked them all this year. Bryan on the other hand is where Punk was 2 years ago. The only place for him to go is up. Punk/Lesnar is just Punk/Lesnar. Cena/Bryan isn't just Cena/Bryan. It's bigger than that. It's Cena/Bryan/Orton/HHH/Vince and possibly even the Shield. Brock/HHH was THE main event of Summerslam last year because it was basically the only thing on the card stopping it from looking like a Raw card. Punk/Lesnar is a big special attraction match but the difference between this year and last is the fact that the title match isn't a throwaway piece of crap that nobody cares about. It's actually quite important and has been presented as such. The beauty of Summerslam this year is that you could remove either of the top 2 matches and you'd still be left with a killer main event. That most certainly was not the case last year. WWE have done a great job building both these matches. It's rare that they put this much effort into ONE match let alone TWO and I'm thankful for that because I don't feel like I'm paying for a one match show like I usually do. If Cena/Bryan wasn't on the card I'd still buy it for Punk/Lesnar. If Punk/Lesnar wasn't on the card I'd still buy it for Cena/Bryan. If Brock/HHH wasn't on the card last year I wasn't buying shit and I don't think very many people would have either.
> 
> All that being said, I think this is the first time Brock Lesnar doesn't main event a PPV (bar Mania) because the implications of the WWE title match are bigger than whatever happens with Lesnar and Punk. Come Raw next week, Lesnar will be gone and it looks like Cena is going to be joining him this time too. Whatever the hell happens in this WWE title match is most likely going to be the focal point of Raw to the end of the year and into the RTWM with Bryan, Orton and possibly HHH and Vince all playing key roles. Punk is most likely going to end up in the mix with all of them too. I personally think it would be foolish for Cena/Bryan not to main event after the amount of hype and importance they have placed on the outcome of the match. This isn't Punk/Jericho at ER 12, Punk/Cena/Show at SS 12 or Cena/Ryback at ER 13 where the alternative Lesnar match was far and away the clear money maker for each respective show. Cena/Bryan is very similar to Cena/Punk from MITB. Were Lesnar on _that _card, I doubt any Punk mark in here would be calling for him to main event over the title match. The same thing applies here. This match has the ability to elevate Daniel Bryan to a level he's never been on before, just like Punk 2 years ago. It would be silly for them not to go all the way.


I agree with some of what you said but...really? I don't think Cena/Bryan is similar to Cena/Punk in any way besides the fact that they have a chance to establish a new guy. This isn't just me crapping on Bryan, either (in case some are wondering). If Bryan wins, what happens? A new star is made, true, but let's talk kayfabe here. What exactly happens if Bryan wins? Nothing. Bryan will be the new champion, there will be a celebration, etc. I'm also talking facts, here. Not rumors like Orton and Vince will reform the Corporation, and whatnot. MiTB was bigger because it wasn't just about who won. This was about Punk kayfabe claiming he was going to take the title away and not come back, which would be his personal revenge on Vince McMahon and a giant middle finger to the WWE. On top of that, it would disgrace the company. The pride of the WWE was at stake. Are there any stakes like that in Bryan/Cena? Nope. When you get right down to it, its just a match. Again, yes, it can make Bryan's career, just like MiTB made Punk's career. But in terms of story, I don't see it as being that important. That's why I'm kind of confused. Why real emphasis has been placed on this match? Its the most important match of Bryan's career. Yeah, big deal. We heard that same line from Cena against Rock, people always say it. NOW its supposed to mean something? If Bryan loses, what happens? Well nothing really. At some point he'll get another title shot. If Bryan wins, what happens? People cheer, they celebrate. Next night on Raw...right into whatever the next storyline is. If Orton cashes in and turns heel, yeah it'll be cool and he'll finally get something to do, but that'll just lead to the Bryan/Orton feud we're expecting. 

I just don't buy into a lot of the severity of the outcome that others, including the WWE, are trying to hype. I believed it with Punk/Cena in 2011 because they pretty clearly established that a Punk win was a seriously big problem for Vince and the WWE. With this...they keep trying, but let's face it. Whatever consequences stem from the conclusion will really end up being pretty routine. The WWE is trying to make me feel that I really should care about who wins because of how big of a deal it is, but I honestly just don't see it. I mean I'd like Bryan to get that feel good moment and have his time in the sun, but I don't buy the outcome of this being some be all/end all sort of thing. I got that vibe in 2011 at MiTB, but not from this.

My problem with the McMahon involvement is that I honestly feel that in a lot of respects its overshadowing the Bryan/Cena feud. With Punk/Cena, there was equal emphasis placed on the rivalry between Cena and Punk and Vince and Punk. In the build for Summerslam 2013, I feel its been disproportionate. They aren't even really building a rivalry, its just Vince coming out to crap on Bryan to build the feud with Triple H. This past week was...what, the second real Bryan promo in this 5 week build? They've only really spent 2 weeks hyping the match at Summerslam, while the rest was about corporate makeovers, Vince thinking Bryan's look is bad and Vince not wanting either to be champion. Oh and everyone in corporate besides Triple H believing Bryan isn't worthy. I feel that's taken away from the actual Bryan vs Cena feud.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Yeah, I'd like to see the main event with Cena more than anything.* To me, nobody in the last decade matches their chemistry together*, it's a bold statement, but I believe it. I think their feud has earned and deserved the Wrestlemania headline spot. I can only imagine the quality that match would be.
> 
> 
> 
> Fear? lol, believe what you want, you'll just end up being disappointed.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.


Orton/Christian, Orton/Benoit, Taker/Michaels, Orton/Mysterio, Jericho/Mysterio, Punk/Mysterio, Edge/Undertaker, Jericho/Michaels, Orton/Michaels, Hell Bryan/Orton.

I don't remember exactly how many matches Punk and Cena have had, but they have only delivered twice out of like ten times IMO. NOC was good and their match on Raw was above average. Rest were average.

The combos I named at the top had above average/good/great matches any and every-time they stepped in the ring with each other. No way Punk/Cena have the best chemistry.



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Nah, I'd much rather Cena over Bryan. *Punk/Cena is this generation's Austin/Rock*, it needs that WM main event. Punk/Bryan, while I would love it, would be like Austin/Jericho. Just not enough for Punk.
> 
> You know what, fuck it, just give me both. :mark:


Punk mark, just Punk markin'.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> :clap
> 
> Well said. I have nothing really to add to this, other than just re-enforcing your point. Everything we've seen from segments on RAW, the press conference, and interviews with HHH, leads me to believe that we are finally seeing a real changing of the guard type storyline. We didn't really get this when Punk was on his big run against Cena at MITB '11, but are getting it now with Bryan.
> 
> It seems WWE may actually be going through with, or at least teasing the idea, of replacing Cena as the broadcast "face" of the company. I say "broadcast" because I believe Cena would still be the top promoted WWE character outside of WWE television because, let's face it, he has the perfect look to please all current/potential investors. Bryan does have a family friendly look but I think it will take awhile to ingrain that look in the minds of casuals and people outside of the company.
> 
> I do think that this storyline with Cena and Bryan will be the start of that process and Bryan will most likely win clean in the match, and probably begin a superman push similar to Cena's from 2005-2010. It took awhile for Cena to become the draw that he is today, and I'm sure it will take awhile for Bryan to become a big draw, but it really does seem that WWE is prepared to go for it.


Yeah, I don't think there is much doubt that WWE is at the very least beginning to figure out that Cena isn't going to be around forever. It's amazing that it took them this long to figure that fact out, but I suppose it's better than them never figuring that out. I have to agree that it seems like they are depending on Bryan quite a bit here and are trusting him, which is GREAT. WWE really hasn't made that many stars since they've had Cena. Cena is the biggest star of this current era (which is sad), and he doesn't even have a proper rivalry. Come to think of it, there are no great rivalries right now. There is no Austin/Rock of this generation, or anything even in the same stratosphere as those two.

While Cena is gone with the elbow injury, I'm quite excited to see where they go with Bryan. I think they know they have a real opportunity here to finally make a new star. It'd also be nice to see some actual rivalries on TV, too. Because there are no rivalries right now that really take the viewer and pulls them in to watch consistently. Hopefully, this is a step in that direction.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> I agree with some of what you said but...really? I don't think Cena/Bryan is similar to Cena/Punk in any way besides the fact that they have a chance to establish a new guy. This isn't just me crapping on Bryan, either (in case some are wondering). If Bryan wins, what happens? A new star is made, true, but let's talk kayfabe here. What exactly happens if Bryan wins? Nothing. Bryan will be the new champion, there will be a celebration, etc. I'm also talking facts, here. Not rumors like Orton and Vince will reform the Corporation, and whatnot. MiTB was bigger because it wasn't just about who won. This was about Punk kayfabe claiming he was going to take the title away and not come back, which would be his personal revenge on Vince McMahon and a giant middle finger to the WWE. On top of that, it would disgrace the company. The pride of the WWE was at stake. Are there any stakes like that in Bryan/Cena? Nope. When you get right down to it, its just a match. Again, yes, it can make Bryan's career, just like MiTB made Punk's career. But in terms of story, I don't see it as being that important. That's why I'm kind of confused. Why real emphasis has been placed on this match? Its the most important match of Bryan's career. Yeah, big deal. We heard that same line from Cena against Rock, people always say it. NOW its supposed to mean something? If Bryan loses, what happens? Well nothing really. At some point he'll get another title shot. If Bryan wins, what happens? People cheer, they celebrate. Next night on Raw...right into whatever the next storyline is. If Orton cashes in and turns heel, yeah it'll be cool and he'll finally get something to do, but that'll just lead to the Bryan/Orton feud we're expecting.
> 
> I just don't buy into a lot of the severity of the outcome that others, including the WWE, are trying to hype. I believed it with Punk/Cena in 2011 because they pretty clearly established that a Punk win was a seriously big problem for Vince and the WWE. With this...they keep trying, but let's face it. Whatever consequences stem from the conclusion will really end up being pretty routine. The WWE is trying to make me feel that I really should care about who wins because of how big of a deal it is, but I honestly just don't see it. I mean I'd like Bryan to get that feel good moment and have his time in the sun, but I don't buy the outcome of this being some be all/end all sort of thing. I got that vibe in 2011 at MiTB, but not from this.
> 
> My problem with the McMahon involvement is that I honestly feel that in a lot of respects its overshadowing the Bryan/Cena feud. With Punk/Cena, there was equal emphasis placed on the rivalry between Cena and Punk and Vince and Punk. In the build for Summerslam 2013, I feel its been disproportionate. They aren't even really building a rivalry, its just Vince coming out to crap on Bryan to build the feud with Triple H. This past week was...what, the second real Bryan promo in this 5 week build? They've only really spent 2 weeks hyping the match at Summerslam, while the rest was about corporate makeovers, Vince thinking Bryan's look is bad and Vince not wanting either to be champion. Oh and everyone in corporate besides Triple H believing Bryan isn't worthy. I feel that's taken away from the actual Bryan vs Cena feud.


:clap

Bryan/Cena is huge for Bryan's career. But to compare it to MITB 2011 is absurd, and makes me feel if some forgot what the WWE was like in that period.



Billion Dollar Man said:


> Orton/Christian, Orton/Benoit, Taker/Michaels, Orton/Mysterio, Jericho/Mysterio, Punk/Mysterio, Edge/Undertaker, Jericho/Michaels, Orton/Michaels, Hell Bryan/Orton.
> 
> I don't remember exactly how many matches Punk and Cena have had, but they have only delivered twice out of like ten times IMO. NOC was good and their match on Raw was above average. Rest were average.
> 
> The combos I named at the top had above average/good/great matches any and every-time they stepped in the ring with each other. No way Punk/Cena have the best chemistry.
> 
> 
> Punk mark, just Punk markin'.


The fuck? Fuck all of those pairings, the only one I'd consider are Taker/Michaels and maybe Jericho/Michaels. And what, am I wrong calling it this generation's Rock/Austin? It's the two biggest stars of this era, whether you approve of it or not. I didn't say Cena/Punk is as big, it isn't, so what's the issue? I won't bother with you, I just stated my opinion and I'll leave it at that.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No breakdown?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

KO Bossy, excellent post and right on all cylinders. This Bryan/Cena stuff isn't really as big as Punk/Cena due to everything going around that match. On top of that, at least how I feel, was Punk/Cena felt like it could've led to a new era in wrestling as it was going on. With Bryan/Cena, it feels like we could maybe see Bryan as the top guy, but it would still be very largely the same show it is now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> I agree with some of what you said but...really? I don't think Cena/Bryan is similar to Cena/Punk in any way besides the fact that they have a chance to establish a new guy. This isn't just me crapping on Bryan, either (in case some are wondering). If Bryan wins, what happens? A new star is made, true, but let's talk kayfabe here. What exactly happens if Bryan wins? Nothing. Bryan will be the new champion, there will be a celebration, etc. I'm also talking facts, here. Not rumors like Orton and Vince will reform the Corporation, and whatnot. MiTB was bigger because it wasn't just about who won. This was about Punk kayfabe claiming he was going to take the title away and not come back, which would be his personal revenge on Vince McMahon and a giant middle finger to the WWE. On top of that, it would disgrace the company. The pride of the WWE was at stake. Are there any stakes like that in Bryan/Cena? Nope. When you get right down to it, its just a match. Again, yes, it can make Bryan's career, just like MiTB made Punk's career. But in terms of story, I don't see it as being that important. That's why I'm kind of confused. Why real emphasis has been placed on this match? Its the most important match of Bryan's career. Yeah, big deal. We heard that same line from Cena against Rock, people always say it. NOW its supposed to mean something? If Bryan loses, what happens? Well nothing really. At some point he'll get another title shot. If Bryan wins, what happens? People cheer, they celebrate. Next night on Raw...right into whatever the next storyline is. If Orton cashes in and turns heel, yeah it'll be cool and he'll finally get something to do, but that'll just lead to the Bryan/Orton feud we're expecting.
> 
> I just don't buy into a lot of the severity of the outcome that others, including the WWE, are trying to hype. I believed it with Punk/Cena in 2011 because they pretty clearly established that a Punk win was a seriously big problem for Vince and the WWE. With this...they keep trying, but let's face it. Whatever consequences stem from the conclusion will really end up being pretty routine. The WWE is trying to make me feel that I really should care about who wins because of how big of a deal it is, but I honestly just don't see it. I mean I'd like Bryan to get that feel good moment and have his time in the sun, but I don't buy the outcome of this being some be all/end all sort of thing. I got that vibe in 2011 at MiTB, but not from this.
> 
> My problem with the McMahon involvement is that I honestly feel that in a lot of respects its overshadowing the Bryan/Cena feud. With Punk/Cena, there was equal emphasis placed on the rivalry between Cena and Punk and Vince and Punk. In the build for Summerslam 2013, I feel its been disproportionate. They aren't even really building a rivalry, its just Vince coming out to crap on Bryan to build the feud with Triple H. This past week was...what, the second real Bryan promo in this 5 week build? They've only really spent 2 weeks hyping the match at Summerslam, while the rest was about corporate makeovers, Vince thinking Bryan's look is bad and Vince not wanting either to be champion. Oh and everyone in corporate besides Triple H believing Bryan isn't worthy. I feel that's taken away from the actual Bryan vs Cena feud.


Well, Bryan/Cena and Punk/Cena seem different, because they are different. Bryan/Cena doesn't have the "contract of one of the performers running out" aspect to it like Punk/Cena did. That is a huge difference right there. Plus, Punk/Cena was in Punk's hometown. Bryan/Cena won't be in either guys' hometown. Two huge fundamental differences right there.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> :clap
> 
> Bryan/Cena is huge for Bryan's career. But to compare it to MITB 2011 is absurd, and makes me feel if some forgot what the WWE was like in that period.
> 
> 
> 
> The fuck? Fuck all of those pairings, the only one I'd consider are Taker/Michaels and maybe Jericho/Michaels. And what, am I wrong calling it this generation's Rock/Austin? It's the two biggest stars of this era, whether you approve of it or not. I didn't say Cena/Punk is as big, it isn't, so what's the issue? I won't bother with you, I just stated my opinion and I'll leave it at that.


That can be argued tho. So stop acting like it's fact. Only one penciled in is Cena. The second guy could be Edge, Batista, Orton, or Punk. You just say Punk because you're a blind mark for him. He doesn't have an overwhelming claim to that spot. Orton is actually the guy in that spot if you look at it objectively, which clearly you aren't/won't.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM Punk was never bigger than Eddie Guerrero yet alone ever seen ANYWHERE near as big as Rock or Austin during their main feuds in 1999 and 2001. Not even close. That's why numbers do matter because if he had changed shit up, like he said, then there would be argument to it. He didn't. MITB was considered big on this forum but it wasn't really huge...it did 200 and something buys, man. LOL. If it was some HUGE deal, people would of paid to see it. Simple. The Undertaker comes back on Monday and that automatically drops CM Punk down a spot because the fans love to pay to see Undertaker. He's a bigger star and always will be..it's just how it is.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Waffelz said:


> No breakdown?


lol skimming through the essays, not sure.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Starbuck, I agree with practically everything, except for Punk reaching his peak. That's a load of shit, as he still has quite a ways to go. Also for the simple fact that he has lost every single big match he's had after Cena. Punk still needs that big moment _as_ a top guy to cement his legacy. Don't tell me MITB is that moment, because that was the moment that _sent _him to top. While he's been on top, the only notable wins he has had have been Jericho, Bryan, and fucking Del Rio. Hardly notable at all.


Why is it a load of shit? What else is left for him to do? He's already worked against every bigger name available. He got his turn, he got his rub and he got elevated in status from where he was at the beginning of his push. 2013 Punk is a much bigger deal than 2011 Punk. He doesn't need anything to cement his legacy. CM Punk's legacy was cemented the second he opened his mouth in Las Vegas. That is his moment and it's far more memorable than every one of the 434 days he held the WWE title because numbers and statistics mean jack shit compared to genuine moments. Him main eventing Wrestlemania is a personal goal of Phil Brooks. HE wants that and YOU as his fan want it. CM Punk doesn't need it. Him main eventing Mania isn't going to elevate him further. Him beating Brock Lesnar isn't going to suddenly send him into superstardom. Why? Because he's gone as far as he can go. 434 day title reign. Feuds with Rock, Taker and Lesnar all in the same year. WWE has nothing left to give at this stage and they have a lot more going on right now than just CM Punk and what he, you and any other fan of his wants for him. He has had 2 solid years invested into him and been given ample opportunity to grow his star and he has. He can't get all the pushes given to just him, especially not when he has already reaped whatever benefits he would get from previous programs. He's not getting any bigger than this. You may not want to hear it but it's true. He can't move any higher because there's nobody left to bring him there. 



KO Bossy said:


> I agree with some of what you said but...really? I don't think Cena/Bryan is similar to Cena/Punk in any way besides the fact that they have a chance to establish a new guy.


Well yes that's my point and the only point I was making. WWE never intended for Cena/Punk to be anything other than the establishment of a new guy. It's everybody else who went crazy thinking Punk was going to dethrone Cena when it was never in the works to begin with. MITB = Punk becomes worth something. SS = Daniel Bryan becomes worth something. What's the difference because I don't see it. 



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Bryan/Cena is huge for Bryan's career. But to compare it to MITB 2011 is absurd, and makes me feel if some forgot what the WWE was like in that period.


Tell me what WWE was like in that period. What was so different? Bryan/Cena is huge for Bryan's career just like Punk/Cena was huge for Punk's career. All that match did was elevate CM Punk. It changed nothing. And I'm not trying to claim that the Bryan/Cena match will mark some significant shift either. It's a chance to establish a new guy in Bryan just like MITB did for Punk. That's it. You're acting like MITB was some huge significant turning point in history when it wasn't. Absolutely nothing changed apart from Punk moving up the card. We don't know what's going to happen at Summerslam and all that might come out of it is the change of Bryan moving up the card. They're the same thing, the elevation of a red hot character and turning them into a star through establishing him against the top guy. There is no difference. 



The Sandrone said:


> KO Bossy, excellent post and right on all cylinders. This Bryan/Cena stuff isn't really as big as Punk/Cena due to everything going around that match. On top of that, at least how I feel, was Punk/Cena felt like it could've led to a new era in wrestling as it was going on. With Bryan/Cena, it feels like we could maybe see Bryan as the top guy, but it would still be very largely the same show it is now.


You feel it could have led to a new era in wrestling. Just because you feel it doesn't mean it was actually going to happen. And it didn't happen so really, it's just a feeling you and a whole bunch of other people had. For all the hype this angle received online, it had no real world impact outside of the bump for the MITB PPV. Summerslam 2011 bombed and bombed hard. The only thing that changed was CM Punk's status. Summerslam 2013 has the opportunity to change Daniel Bryan's status. There is no difference. It's a star making angle regardless of content. Like Punk with Cena and Cena with JBL. Like Batista with HHH and HHH with Foley. This is an angle devised to make Daniel Bryan into a star so that when somebody from the part time roster wants to work another match, they don't just have the same 3 or 4 people available to them. They have somebody new that becomes an option and in turn can continue to grow their star through working on a level above where they are. Who does that remind you of from these last 2 years? Oh yeah, CM Punk, that's who. 

The crucial difference between MITB and SS is that MITB was not pre planned. It literally fell into their lap and they didn't know what to do with it. There was no preconceived story arc where Punk was going to knock Cena off the top spot, not when Cena had Rock coming up in one of the biggest matches of all time. But Summerslam? There has obviously been a lot of thought behind this and the big difference maker is the fact that there have been explicit mentions of change not just from wrestlers but from the McMahon's. This is most likely going to end up being the first act of a series of acts in the struggle for power between the McMahon Family. That is legitimate change and that's the difference. The only question is whether Bryan remains part of that or whether the focus ends up shifting from him completely by the time Wrestlemania rolls around. At the very least, this is an angle created to elevate Daniel Bryan and make him a star, just like MITB did for CM Punk. At the most? Well, who the hell knows what it could be at the most but if that's the case then Daniel Bryan most certainly has a rocket strapped to his ass. 

Sorry swagger. That's my essay done and it's the only one I'm writing. I've said my piece and I'm leaving it at that lol. Agree, disagree, it's up to you. Besides, once the breakdown comes everything will go back to normal and the thread will turn back into amateur comedy hour. 8*D


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Well, Bryan/Cena and Punk/Cena seem different, because they are different. Bryan/Cena doesn't have the "contract of one of the performers running out" aspect to it like Punk/Cena did. That is a huge difference right there. Plus, Punk/Cena was in Punk's hometown. Bryan/Cena won't be in either guys' hometown. Two huge fundamental differences right there.


Yeah, I guess I got confused. I thought Starbuck was saying he felt that they were similar in more ways than "establish a new star". Guess I misinterpreted it.

I find that the real hook for the educated audience isn't so much Bryan getting the title, but more seeing what direction they choose to go. I mean, sure it'll be a feel good moment and probably a good match, but once Bryan has the title, the really intriguing part (at least for me) is what's happening next? Will Orton cash in and become Vince's corporate champion, which I think is the move that opens the most doors in the long run? Will Bryan get a title reign longer than a night? What role will Cena play? Will Triple H do anything of note? How will this further the Hunter/Vince power struggle? And so on.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Why is it a load of shit? What else is left for him to do? He's already worked against every bigger name available. He got his turn, he got his rub and he got elevated in status from where he was at the beginning of his push. 2013 Punk is a much bigger deal than 2011 Punk. He doesn't need anything to cement his legacy. CM Punk's legacy was cemented the second he opened his mouth in Las Vegas. That is his moment and it's far more memorable than every one of the 434 days he held the WWE title because numbers and statistics mean jack shit compared to genuine moments. Him main eventing Wrestlemania is a personal goal of Phil Brooks. HE wants that and YOU as his fan want it. CM Punk doesn't need it. Him main eventing Mania isn't going to elevate him further. Him beating Brock Lesnar isn't going to suddenly send him into superstardom. Why? Because he's gone as far as he can go. 434 day title reign. Feuds with Rock, Taker and Lesnar all in the same year. WWE has nothing left to give at this stage and they have a lot more going on right now than just CM Punk and what he, you and any other fan of his wants for him. He has had 2 solid years invested into him and been given ample opportunity to grow his star and he has. He can't get all the pushes given to just him, especially not when he has already reaped whatever benefits he would get from previous programs. He's not getting any bigger than this. You may not want to hear it but it's true. He can't move any higher because there's nobody left to bring him there.


_Completely_ disagree. There's room for everybody in the company to continue and grow, even those like Cena and Punk who are established. Punk's legacy right now is the pipebomb and being the longest reigning champ in 25 years, but years from now people will look at him as the guy that hung with all time greats, but couldn't beat them. Feuds with them mean jack shit, it's about who came out on top. I feel even just one true win over a star that is above Punk himself would show the audience that this is a guy that not only can hang, but belongs. There's not much to discuss here as we'll have opposing opinions. After all, all we're doing is predicting the future, so we'll just leave it at that.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> Orton/Christian, Orton/Benoit, Taker/Michaels, Orton/Mysterio, Jericho/Mysterio, Punk/Mysterio, Edge/Undertaker, Jericho/Michaels, Orton/Michaels, Hell Bryan/Orton.
> 
> *I don't remember exactly how many matches Punk and Cena have had, but they have only delivered twice out of like ten times IMO. NOC was good and their match on Raw was above average. Rest were average.*


Come on dude, I'm not even a fan of Punk but that's just criminal to say that the only good matches they had were NOC and the Raw match. And calling them just "good". MITB, Summerslam, NOC and Raw earlier this year were easily Fantastic matches. Just put your hate against Punk out of the way, just think objectively.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Come on dude, I'm not even a fan of Punk but that's just criminal to say that the only good matches they had were NOC and the Raw match. And calling them just "good". MITB, Summerslam, NOC and Raw earlier this year were easily Fantastic matches. Just put your hate against Punk out of the way, just think objectively.


Speaking objectively, in my opinion, MITB is excellent while the Raw 2013 and NoC matches are great. The rest of their stuff are either decent or average.

I'd easily take some of the match-ups mentioned over it. Specially Orton/Benoit, Orton/Christian, Taker/HBK and Jericho/HBK.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

MITB - *****
Summerslam - ****1/2
RAW Aug 22 2011 - ****
Night of Champions - ****1/4
RAW Feb 2013 - ****1/2

Yeah, I'll take that over any other pairing in the past decade easily. DAT CHEMISTRY


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

didn't they also have a match on the go home show for 2012 Survivor Series?


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk is at the highest he could ever be. Him winning Rumble, him going over Brock, him being in the main event of MANIA and going over would just add to his accomplishments in WWE, but summer of punk is what got him to that height, how much higher could he go?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Speaking objectively, in my opinion, MITB is excellent while the Raw 2013 and NoC matches are great. The rest of their stuff are either decent or average.
> 
> I'd easily take some of the match-ups mentioned over it. Specially Orton/Benoit, Orton/Christian, Taker/HBK and Jericho/HBK.


This.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No, not this. Taker/HBK and I guess Jericho/HBK as well hbk) are the only pairings that have the innate chemistry that unk3 and :cena4 have.

In all seriousness though, where are my breakdowns? I need to see if Cena truly absorbed all of Henry's drawing power after beating him.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Speaking objectively, in my opinion, MITB is excellent while the Raw 2013 and NoC matches are great. The rest of their stuff are either decent or average.
> 
> I'd easily take some of the match-ups mentioned over it. Specially *Orton/Benoit, Orton/Christian*, Taker/HBK and Jericho/HBK.


Not even close to say easily better. Punk/Cena are better than those. As for Jericho/HBK I take Punk/Cena in Raw and MITB over it. All subjective but that's how fair it should be.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Why is it a load of shit? What else is left for him to do? He's already worked against every bigger name available. He got his turn, he got his rub and he got elevated in status from where he was at the beginning of his push. 2013 Punk is a much bigger deal than 2011 Punk. He doesn't need anything to cement his legacy. CM Punk's legacy was cemented the second he opened his mouth in Las Vegas. That is his moment and it's far more memorable than every one of the 434 days he held the WWE title because numbers and statistics mean jack shit compared to genuine moments. Him main eventing Wrestlemania is a personal goal of Phil Brooks. HE wants that and YOU as his fan want it. CM Punk doesn't need it. Him main eventing Mania isn't going to elevate him further. Him beating Brock Lesnar isn't going to suddenly send him into superstardom. Why? Because he's gone as far as he can go. 434 day title reign. Feuds with Rock, Taker and Lesnar all in the same year. WWE has nothing left to give at this stage and they have a lot more going on right now than just CM Punk and what he, you and any other fan of his wants for him. He has had 2 solid years invested into him and been given ample opportunity to grow his star and he has. He can't get all the pushes given to just him, especially not when he has already reaped whatever benefits he would get from previous programs. He's not getting any bigger than this. You may not want to hear it but it's true. He can't move any higher because there's nobody left to bring him there.
> 
> 
> 
> Well yes that's my point and the only point I was making. WWE never intended for Cena/Punk to be anything other than the establishment of a new guy. It's everybody else who went crazy thinking Punk was going to dethrone Cena when it was never in the works to begin with. MITB = Punk becomes worth something. SS = Daniel Bryan becomes worth something. What's the difference because I don't see it.
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me what WWE was like in that period. What was so different? Bryan/Cena is huge for Bryan's career just like Punk/Cena was huge for Punk's career. All that match did was elevate CM Punk. It changed nothing. And I'm not trying to claim that the Bryan/Cena match will mark some significant shift either. It's a chance to establish a new guy in Bryan just like MITB did for Punk. That's it. You're acting like MITB was some huge significant turning point in history when it wasn't. Absolutely nothing changed apart from Punk moving up the card. We don't know what's going to happen at Summerslam and all that might come out of it is the change of Bryan moving up the card. They're the same thing, the elevation of a red hot character and turning them into a star through establishing him against the top guy. There is no difference.
> 
> 
> 
> You feel it could have led to a new era in wrestling. Just because you feel it doesn't mean it was actually going to happen. And it didn't happen so really, it's just a feeling you and a whole bunch of other people had. For all the hype this angle received online, it had no real world impact outside of the bump for the MITB PPV. Summerslam 2011 bombed and bombed hard. The only thing that changed was CM Punk's status. Summerslam 2013 has the opportunity to change Daniel Bryan's status. There is no difference. It's a star making angle regardless of content. Like Punk with Cena and Cena with JBL. Like Batista with HHH and HHH with Foley. This is an angle devised to make Daniel Bryan into a star so that when somebody from the part time roster wants to work another match, they don't just have the same 3 or 4 people available to them. They have somebody new that becomes an option and in turn can continue to grow their star through working on a level above where they are. Who does that remind you of from these last 2 years? Oh yeah, CM Punk, that's who.
> 
> The crucial difference between MITB and SS is that MITB was not pre planned. It literally fell into their lap and they didn't know what to do with it. There was no preconceived story arc where Punk was going to knock Cena off the top spot, not when Cena had Rock coming up in one of the biggest matches of all time. But Summerslam? There has obviously been a lot of thought behind this and the big difference maker is the fact that there have been explicit mentions of change not just from wrestlers but from the McMahon's. This is most likely going to end up being the first act of a series of acts in the struggle for power between the McMahon Family. That is legitimate change and that's the difference. The only question is whether Bryan remains part of that or whether the focus ends up shifting from him completely by the time Wrestlemania rolls around. At the very least, this is an angle created to elevate Daniel Bryan and make him a star, just like MITB did for CM Punk. At the most? Well, who the hell knows what it could be at the most but if that's the case then Daniel Bryan most certainly has a rocket strapped to his ass.
> 
> Sorry swagger. That's my essay done and it's the only one I'm writing. I've said my piece and I'm leaving it at that lol. Agree, disagree, it's up to you. Besides, once the breakdown comes everything will go back to normal and the thread will turn back into amateur comedy hour. 8*D



*sniff* *sniff* It's so beautiful. :clap


----------



## RKO 4life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Lesnar is a bad ass. I just can't get into him facing Tony Hawk. To me it doesn't seem believable Punk pulling the upset on Lesnar, yet I know Punk will win.

I am looking more forward to a Axel/Punk match. Small hope hoping Axel gets his big break and beats Punk. I will respect Punk and Vince more if that happen. I feel Axel can be a big star in the WWE.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> You know how to tell when someone is butthurt? When they can't stop saying butthurt.


It's actually the complete opposite of being "butthurt" You notice how the word "butthurt" is in quotation marks? Well, sometimes you use quotation marks:

*to introduce a word or phrase used as an ironic comment*, as slang, *or as an invented or coined expression*

Irony
Main article: Scare quotes

Another common use of quotation marks is to indicate or call attention to ironic or apologetic words:

He shared his "wisdom" with me.
The lunch lady plopped a glob of "food" onto my tray.

Quotes indicating verbal irony, or other special use, are sometimes called scare quotes. They are sometimes gestured in oral speech using air quotes, or indicated in speech with a tone change or by replacement with supposed[ly] or so-called.



Lesson over. You're welcome.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Raw on 8/12 did a 2.95 rating and 4.13 million viewers, numbers almost identical with the prior week.
> 
> Males 18-49 did a 2.4 rating and Women 18-49 did a 1.0 rating, as compared to 2.3 and 1.1 the prior week respectively.
> 
> What was notable about the show was the ratings pattern as the show started off weak, and had strong growth from start-to-finish. The Daniel Bryan vs. Wade Barrett and Randy Orton vs. Damien Sandow matches featuring two of the company’s current big four stars both only did 2.6 ratings, so the viewers weren’t there.
> 
> The Great Khali & Natalya vs. Big E Langston & A.J. Lee segment grew about 140,000 viewers. The segment with Vince McMahon in the ring with Brad Maddox and then HHH coming out to set him up as the referee for the SummerSlam title match grew about 560,000 viewers to a 3.2 quarter. Alberto Del Rio vs. Kofi Kingston lost about 300,000 viewers. Then the Usos vs. Jack Swagger & Antonio Cesaro lost about 140,000 viewers. So the huge second hour gains were really all for the McMahon/Maddox segment carrying the hour as opposed to the entire hour. The Miz TV segment with John Cena and Daniel Bryan gained about 560,000 viewers as well, doing a 3.3. But it lost roughly the same 560,000 viewers when Fandango and R-Truth did their dance off. The Battle Royal did well, gaining about 400,000 viewers and then the C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman, Brock Lesnar and Curtis Axel segment gained more than 400,000 viewers as well, basically normal overrun, ending at a 3.5.


via Wrestling Observer NewsLEtter


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So :cena2:HHH2:vince2heyman3:henry1 with a side of unk2:dazzler equals this weeks ratings?


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> It's actually the complete opposite of being "butthurt" You notice how the word "butthurt" is in quotation marks? Well, sometimes you use quotation marks:
> 
> *to introduce a word or phrase used as an ironic comment*, as slang, *or as an invented or coined expression*
> 
> Irony
> Main article: Scare quotes
> 
> Another common use of quotation marks is to indicate or call attention to ironic or apologetic words:
> 
> He shared his "wisdom" with me.
> The lunch lady plopped a glob of "food" onto my tray.
> 
> Quotes indicating verbal irony, or other special use, are sometimes called scare quotes. They are sometimes gestured in oral speech using air quotes, or indicated in speech with a tone change or by replacement with supposed[ly] or so-called.[/B]
> 
> 
> 
> Lesson over. You're welcome.



Oh wow. Rather than ignoring my post and ending this you go on a tangent and prove my point. It's ok man. Just put the ointment on the hole. You'll feel better in no time.




JY57 said:


> via Wrestling Observer NewsLEtter


So much for Orton bringing da ratings. Perfect time to give him the belt. 

And even though it is still really early, it looks like Bryan has CM Punk syndrome. So far he only draws ratings when working with bigger names. We will see if that changes in 2 years time. Didn't for Punk, might not for Bryan. We shall see.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> via Wrestling Observer NewsLEtter


A 2.6 for DB for the opening segment and a 2.6 for Orton. Thats pretty damn bad.


----------



## TN Punk

It's funny how people argue over ratings etc...lol

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## #Mark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Punk is at the highest he could ever be. Him winning Rumble, him going over Brock, him being in the main event of MANIA and going over would just add to his accomplishments in WWE, but summer of punk is what got him to that height, how much higher could he go?


No, it didn't; his recent heel run did. I hate how people overrate the Summer of Punk.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I fucking knew the battle royal would do well. 400,000. Holy shit Mizark, you're awesome.

:mark:


----------



## Lordhhhx

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

i dont think Randy and bryan did Bad its only normal the Damn show is 3 hours with the first most of the time being Bad if you watch the ratings all the viewers started coming by the second hour wich is when things start to get good.

ill blame it more to WWE not making the 1st hour consistently good most of the time.


----------



## kiguel182

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Fandango and R-Truth were obviously going to lose a ton of viewers, they were sent to die there.

The first hour did awful numbers because it wasn't advertised. You need to start the show with hype, not with random matches. Bad booking is to blame.

The two main-even feuds are doing great but I still don't know who will close SummerSlam, probably Cena vs Bryan because it has been getting more air-time and HHH is now involved. At least I hope so.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nice to see the top program did great, outshining Bryan/Cena yet again. 

Bryan and Orton, ouch, they bombed. It was expected, though.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Why is it a load of shit? What else is left for him to do? He's already worked against every bigger name available. He got his turn, he got his rub and he got elevated in status from where he was at the beginning of his push. 2013 Punk is a much bigger deal than 2011 Punk. He doesn't need anything to cement his legacy. CM Punk's legacy was cemented the second he opened his mouth in Las Vegas. That is his moment and it's far more memorable than every one of the 434 days he held the WWE title because numbers and statistics mean jack shit compared to genuine moments. Him main eventing Wrestlemania is a personal goal of Phil Brooks. HE wants that and YOU as his fan want it. CM Punk doesn't need it. Him main eventing Mania isn't going to elevate him further. Him beating Brock Lesnar isn't going to suddenly send him into superstardom. Why? Because he's gone as far as he can go. 434 day title reign. Feuds with Rock, Taker and Lesnar all in the same year. WWE has nothing left to give at this stage and they have a lot more going on right now than just CM Punk and what he, you and any other fan of his wants for him. He has had 2 solid years invested into him and been given ample opportunity to grow his star and he has. He can't get all the pushes given to just him, especially not when he has already reaped whatever benefits he would get from previous programs. He's not getting any bigger than this. You may not want to hear it but it's true. He can't move any higher because there's nobody left to bring him there.
> 
> 
> 
> Well yes that's my point and the only point I was making. WWE never intended for Cena/Punk to be anything other than the establishment of a new guy. It's everybody else who went crazy thinking Punk was going to dethrone Cena when it was never in the works to begin with. MITB = Punk becomes worth something. SS = Daniel Bryan becomes worth something. What's the difference because I don't see it.
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me what WWE was like in that period. What was so different? Bryan/Cena is huge for Bryan's career just like Punk/Cena was huge for Punk's career. All that match did was elevate CM Punk. It changed nothing. And I'm not trying to claim that the Bryan/Cena match will mark some significant shift either. It's a chance to establish a new guy in Bryan just like MITB did for Punk. That's it. You're acting like MITB was some huge significant turning point in history when it wasn't. Absolutely nothing changed apart from Punk moving up the card. We don't know what's going to happen at Summerslam and all that might come out of it is the change of Bryan moving up the card. They're the same thing, the elevation of a red hot character and turning them into a star through establishing him against the top guy. There is no difference.
> 
> 
> 
> You feel it could have led to a new era in wrestling. Just because you feel it doesn't mean it was actually going to happen. And it didn't happen so really, it's just a feeling you and a whole bunch of other people had. For all the hype this angle received online, it had no real world impact outside of the bump for the MITB PPV. Summerslam 2011 bombed and bombed hard. The only thing that changed was CM Punk's status. Summerslam 2013 has the opportunity to change Daniel Bryan's status. There is no difference. It's a star making angle regardless of content. Like Punk with Cena and Cena with JBL. Like Batista with HHH and HHH with Foley. This is an angle devised to make Daniel Bryan into a star so that when somebody from the part time roster wants to work another match, they don't just have the same 3 or 4 people available to them. They have somebody new that becomes an option and in turn can continue to grow their star through working on a level above where they are. Who does that remind you of from these last 2 years? Oh yeah, CM Punk, that's who.
> 
> The crucial difference between MITB and SS is that MITB was not pre planned. It literally fell into their lap and they didn't know what to do with it. There was no preconceived story arc where Punk was going to knock Cena off the top spot, not when Cena had Rock coming up in one of the biggest matches of all time. But Summerslam? There has obviously been a lot of thought behind this and the big difference maker is the fact that there have been explicit mentions of change not just from wrestlers but from the McMahon's. This is most likely going to end up being the first act of a series of acts in the struggle for power between the McMahon Family. That is legitimate change and that's the difference. The only question is whether Bryan remains part of that or whether the focus ends up shifting from him completely by the time Wrestlemania rolls around. At the very least, this is an angle created to elevate Daniel Bryan and make him a star, just like MITB did for CM Punk. At the most? Well, who the hell knows what it could be at the most but if that's the case then Daniel Bryan most certainly has a rocket strapped to his ass.
> 
> Sorry swagger. That's my essay done and it's the only one I'm writing. I've said my piece and I'm leaving it at that lol. Agree, disagree, it's up to you. Besides, once the breakdown comes everything will go back to normal and the thread will turn back into amateur comedy hour. 8*D


I agree I don't think Punk's star will rise much more, nothing to make him suddenly shift from No.2 to becoming Legit No.1, however I do think theirs one fued which ties into headlining a WrestleMania that would still elevate his work and his star power and that's with Austin. 

Regarding Summerslam 2011 bombing, the angle had died by then, it got killed the moment Punk returned only 8 days after MITB when that should have been the power struggle storyline were seeing right now! culminating with Vince having to bring back/resign CM Punk to face Triple H but as we know HHH was already all booked up for WrestleMania by that point. 

Punk could have become a much bigger star IMO but that opportunity died very quickly after he returned and he became just another guy a couple months later.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*Summerslam 2011 bombed and bombed hard*

Actually it was more financially successful then SS 2012 according to Meltzer.

The cost of Lesnar and the disappointing buys growth from 2011 cost them money


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Closing Wrestlemania is overrated. Just ask Orton or Jericho. Both were lameduck main events in different ways, hardly a defining moment for those guys. It might have been the best moment for Benoit and a few others, but not everyone. I want Punk to close but never expect him to and that's fine. Plenty of my favorite wrestlers have never closed and who cares?


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Come on dude, I'm not even a fan of Punk but that's just criminal to say that the only good matches they had were NOC and the Raw match. And calling them just "good". MITB, Summerslam, NOC and Raw earlier this year were easily Fantastic matches. Just put your hate against Punk out of the way, just think objectively.


I actually was being objective, or at least I thought I was.




Choke2Death said:


> Speaking objectively, in my opinion, MITB is excellent while the Raw 2013 and NoC matches are great. The rest of their stuff are either decent or average.
> 
> I'd easily take some of the match-ups mentioned over it. Specially Orton/Benoit, Orton/Christian, Taker/HBK and Jericho/HBK.


TBH.


Wrestlinfan35 said:


> MITB - *****
> Summerslam - ****1/2
> RAW Aug 22 2011 - ****
> Night of Champions - ****1/4
> RAW Feb 2013 - ****1/2
> 
> Yeah, I'll take that over any other pairing in the past decade easily. DAT CHEMISTRY


Yet you don't say the same to him?
No way this guy is being even remotely objective. 

Your standards must be pretty low to hand out 4 stars to all those matches.:lmao


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> *Summerslam 2011 bombed and bombed hard*
> 
> Actually it was more financially successful then SS 2012 according to Meltzer.
> 
> The cost of Lesnar and the disappointing buys growth from 2011 cost them money


unk :cena3


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Slowhand said:


> Closing Wrestlemania is overrated. Just ask Orton or Jericho. Both were lameduck main events in different ways, hardly a defining moment for those guys. It might have been the best moment for Benoit and a few others, but not everyone. I want Punk to close but never expect him to and that's fine. Plenty of my favorite wrestlers have never closed and who cares?


What are you even saying at this point? End it.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Billion Dollar Man said:


> What are you even saying at this point? End it.


fpalm

:woolcock


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Slowhand said:


> Closing Wrestlemania is overrated. Just ask Orton or Jericho. Both were lameduck main events in different ways, hardly a defining moment for those guys. It might have been the best moment for Benoit and a few others, but not everyone. I want Punk to close but never expect him to and that's fine. Plenty of my favorite wrestlers have never closed and who cares?


Completely agreed. Main Eventing WM isn't going to do much big of a difference for Punk's legacy, it's not something he can't live without. 10 years from now no one is going to care that Punk never closed Wrestlemania, he's going to be remembered for his 434 days title reign, his promo, and for being a guy who can lose cleanly only to Cena and part-timers, and only after going with them on war.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So on the breakdown:

Show started off really weak. 9PM was the first big gain and it was a good rating, about on par with how well the 7/22 9PM did. However then they lose all of that gain over the second hour before getting 560,000 back for the 10PM slot to a 3.3. Almost identical to the 9PM, and it was the best 10PM in about a month. 

I figured the battle royal may do well, but I definitely wasn't expecting that type of gain. 400,000! Holy crap, that's gotta be the best odd quarter gain in a while. Then again, it proves me right that if you give people a reason to care with something important on the line, they'll watch. Or maybe since the US Title isn't that important, it was :henry1

Punk/Lesnar/Heyman does the best overrun in about 4 months. Strong gain (especially strong since it's gaining on top of that battle royal), and a strong quarter number. TBH though, after reading the report that stated they got a 3.5+, I was expecting in the higher 3.5 range and maybe a 3.6. But meh, that's small, unimportant details. The important thing is the advertising of Punk/Heyman worked, and then swerving them with Lesnar coming out and then that leading to the blindside by Punk... it was a brilliant move. One of the best overruns of the year for that matter.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I knew the Battle Royal would do well. They hyped it well throughout, and that gets you viewers. They should do it more often. Obviously Mark "Ratings" Henry played a part.

Does anyone know how much viewers gained when Rock returned on 2011?

Edit: Didn't Cena gain more than 500,000 in the overrun?


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No surprise, that the opener was poor. Ever since they started putting Bryan in that spot, the numbers for the opening segment have been weak.



Happenstan said:


> Oh wow. Rather than ignoring my post and ending this you go on a tangent and prove my point. It's ok man. Just put the ointment on the hole. You'll feel better in no time.


Nothing wrong with me, I just thought I'd educate you a bit.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

MIZARK bringing the ratings! Nothing new here. :henry1


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow a lot of good numbers from various guys. Battle Royal did really good. Punk/Lesnar did Great. And Cena/Bryan did great. Good Shit.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Nice to see the top program did great, *outshining Bryan/Cena yet again.*


How so? If you pay attention to the breakdown, 



> The Great Khali & Natalya vs. Big E Langston & A.J. Lee segment grew about 140,000 viewers. The segment with Vince McMahon in the ring with Brad Maddox and then HHH coming out to set him up as the referee for the SummerSlam title match grew about 560,000 viewers to a 3.2 quarter. Alberto Del Rio vs. Kofi Kingston lost about 300,000 viewers. Then the Usos vs. Jack Swagger & Antonio Cesaro lost about 140,000 viewers. So the huge second hour gains were really all for the McMahon/Maddox segment carrying the hour as opposed to the entire hour. *The Miz TV segment with John Cena and Daniel Bryan gained about 560,000 viewers as well, doing a 3.3.* But it lost roughly the same 560,000 viewers when Fandango and R-Truth did their dance off. *The Battle Royal did well, gaining about 400,000 viewers* and then the *C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman, Brock Lesnar and Curtis Axel segment gained more than 400,000 viewers* as well, basically normal overrun, *ending at a 3.5.*


John Cena and Bryan had the most interest and the massive Battle Royal gain in odd quarter before the Overrun is the reason for the 3.5. If it was say Axel vs Sin cara in that slot, it would have lost viewers inturn dragging the overrun down because the 400,000 is just about barely a normal gain for overrun.



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Summerslam 2011 bombed and bombed hard
> 
> Actually it was more financially successful then SS 2012 according to Meltzer.
> 
> The cost of Lesnar and *the disappointing buys growth from 2011 *cost them money


??? Where are you getting that from? Source? Meltzer never said anything about disappointing buys because it wasn't. All he said was Lesnar's cost offset the overall PPV profit. 280,000 domestic + 95,000 international buys isn't even close to "disappointing". 2011 Summerslam drew only 299,000 buys (171,000 domestic) including international, apparently one of the lowest since 1997.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> *Summerslam 2011 bombed and bombed hard*
> 
> Actually it was more financially successful then SS 2012 according to Meltzer.
> 
> The cost of Lesnar and the disappointing buys growth from 2011 cost them money


I don't know if you're getting the latest info but the latest Observer has Summerslam 2012 at 392,000 buys with the inclusion of last minute numbers. Disapponting buys growth? I don't think so considering that's almost a 100,000 increase on 2011. Regardless of the cost of Brock Lesnar and considering the new number I doubt they didn't make back the cost of him working the show, 392,000 buys is a ridiculous number for any PPV these days. The only one close to it (and above) is this years Rumble.

:brock :rock4

Both these guys are on another level tbh. Ridiculous numbers.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Comparing Lesnar vs Punk and Bryan vs Cena angles starting the RAW after MITB PPV.

*July 15 -* 
10:00 PM - Lesnar Vs Punk gain - 498,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 669,000 Viewers - 3.41 quarter

*July 22 -* 
10:00 PM - Lesnar vs Punk gain - 201,000 viewers - 3.07 quarter
ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 341,000 viewers - 3.20 quarter

*July 29 - n/a*
10:00 PM - ... (Kane Vs Bryan)
Me + Overrun - ... (Cena/Ryback tables)

*August 05 -*
10:00 PM - (small)??? gain - 3.1 quarter
ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 700,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter

*August 12 -* 
10:00PM - Bryan Vs Cena - 560,000 viewers - 3.3 quarter
ME + Overrun - Lesnar vs Punk - 400,000 viewers - 3.5 quarter

Anyone looking at this objectively would agree, Bryan vs Cena is outshining Punk and Lesnar. By far the biggest feud of the PPV, heading in with the most interest.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I don't know if you're getting the latest info but the latest Observer has Summerslam 2012 at 392,000 buys with the inclusion of last minute numbers. Disapponting buys growth? I don't think so considering that's almost a 100,000 increase on 2011. Regardless of the cost of Brock Lesnar and considering the new number I doubt they didn't make back the cost of him working the show, 392,000 buys is a ridiculous number for any PPV these days. The only one close to it (and above) is this years Rumble.
> 
> :brock :rock4
> 
> Both these guys are on another level tbh. Ridiculous numbers.


I believe Summerslam 2011 did 312,000 or 310,000 buys? Summerslam 2013 did 392,000 and Meltzer said that a PPV with Lesnar on it needs to do at least an extra 80,000 buys for them to break even. So they are pretty much even in terms of monetary gain. If you classify 2011 as a failure, then 2012 is a failure as well when it comes to monetary gain.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> I believe Summerslam 2011 did 312,000 or 310,000 buys? Summerslam 2013 did 392,000 and Meltzer said that a PPV with Lesnar on it needs to do at least an extra 80,000 buys for them to break even. So they are pretty much even in terms of monetary gain. If you classify 2011 as a failure, then 2012 is a failure as well when it comes to monetary gain.


Brock Lesnar ain't cheap lol. Damn that's a hefty pay check for one guy but he clearly earns it back. Funny how the numbers all add up perfectly in this case for them to break dead even with the 80k number. I never called 2011 a monetary failure. I said it bombed in relation to the supposed momentum Punk had going for him at the time. In real world terms, it meant nothing. If you want to label Summerslam 2012 a monetary failure then go right ahead. You'll look kind of foolish though all things considered. Lesnar and Rock bring in money on PPV but they don't do it for free. I guess that's the catch 22 when it comes to booking them on shows.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow, never realized Brock meant that much. I wonder how of an increase would be needed to justify Rock's pay? I know Brock is in it for the money while Rock isn't (at least not to that degree), so maybe it would be less, but still it's something to think about.

But damn, that's interesting. Brock improving the SS buyrate that much though last year is crazy... but if it doesn't increase the money WWE gets, it really isn't worth it from a business sense using him like they've been. They should be using him to at least attempt to build someone else up with Brock so people who are watching for Brock may see the other guy, stick around for them, and they wouldn't have to pay Brock all that money to keep them. Obviously though, that's a whole hell of a lot easier said than done, but Brock's impact on PPVs is only going to decrease as time goes on and they won't be able to justify that pay for him, and then he'll leave, and they'll lose that fanbase. They have to at least try, and it looks like they might be with Punk. However as shown in the past, that doesn't guarantee anything, and it looks like even after that's all said and done, they'll just go back to putting Brock with a part-timer again (Rock or Taker), and then after that, who knows?


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Nice to see the top program did great, outshining Bryan/Cena yet again.
> 
> Bryan and Orton, ouch, they bombed. It was expected, though.


This coming from someone who champions a guy who got beat by a diva's segment...twice. :lol




Quietus said:


> *Anyone looking at this objectively* would agree, Bryan vs Cena is outshining Punk and Lesnar. By far the biggest feud of the PPV, heading in with the most interest.


And that is where you loose the Punktards.




The Sandrone said:


> Punk/Lesnar/Heyman does the best overrun in about 4 months.


By a tenth of a point. Bryan/Cena has got a 3.4 two times in the last month. Punk got lucky there was a big interest in the battle royal that drove his numbers up.



mblonde09 said:


> Nothing wrong with me, I just thought I'd educate you a bit.


Educate me on what exactly? How to turn into a laughing stock in one easy post? No need. I can just go back a few pages and re-live your humiliation.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> Comparing Lesnar vs Punk and Bryan vs Cena angles starting the RAW after MITB PPV.
> 
> *July 15 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar Vs Punk gain - 498,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 669,000 Viewers - 3.41 quarter
> 
> *July 22 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar vs Punk gain - 201,000 viewers - 3.07 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 341,000 viewers - 3.20 quarter
> 
> *July 29 - n/a*
> 10:00 PM - ... (Kane Vs Bryan)
> Me + Overrun - ... (Cena/Ryback tables)
> 
> *August 05 -*
> 10:00 PM - (small)??? gain - 3.1 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 700,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> 
> *August 12 -*
> 10:00PM - Bryan Vs Cena - 560,000 viewers - 3.3 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Lesnar vs Punk - 400,000 viewers - 3.5 quarter
> 
> Anyone looking at this objectively would agree, Bryan vs Cena is outshining Punk and Lesnar. By far the biggest feud of the PPV, heading in with the most interest.


Good breakdown, man.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> *Summerslam 2011 bombed and bombed hard*
> 
> Actually it was more financially successful then SS 2012 according to Meltzer.
> 
> The cost of Lesnar and the disappointing buys growth from 2011 cost them money


Yeah and Survivor Series 10 did better than 11. Rumble 12 did better than 13. The only thing that proves is WrestleMania is the only event big enough to support Rock and Brock and turn a profit.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I don't know if you're getting the latest info but the latest Observer has Summerslam 2012 at 392,000 buys with the inclusion of last minute numbers. Disapponting buys growth? I don't think so considering that's almost a 100,000 increase on 2011. Regardless of the cost of Brock Lesnar and considering the new number I doubt they didn't make back the cost of him working the show, 392,000 buys is a ridiculous number for any PPV these days. The only one close to it (and above) is this years Rumble.
> 
> :brock :rock4
> 
> Both these guys are on another level tbh. Ridiculous numbers.


Summerslam 2011 was also the highest grossing Summerslam ever held at the staple centre with it grossing over 1 million in attendance which 2012 didn't. 

Summerslam 2011 was more financial successful then Summerslam 2012 for WWE. Lesnars pricing crippled the positive reflection of the butyrate number. 

Extreme Rules 2013 also had a lower profit income compared to 12 and 11. Bottom line I think Lesnar losing his first match back did kill some of his aura but he's not doing mega business. and 392,000 buys isn't a ridiculous number at all for a PPV "now a days". Look at UFC


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Brock is like a 200 million dollar action movie that makes 250 million back. Sure, 250 mill is a lot, but take off the big ass costing price and you're only 50 ahead, not really that big of a deal.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sorry for posting again, might have got lost in all the walls of text - does anyone know how many folk tuned in for when The Rock returned in 2011?


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Summerslam 2011 was also the highest grossing Summerslam ever held at the staple centre with it grossing over 1 million in attendance which 2012 didn't.
> 
> Summerslam 2011 was more financial successful then Summerslam 2012 for WWE. Lesnars pricing crippled the positive reflection of the butyrate number.
> 
> Extreme Rules 2013 also had a lower profit income compared to 12 and 11. Bottom line I think Lesnar losing his first match back did kill some of his aura but he's not doing mega business. and 392,000 buys isn't a ridiculous number at all for a PPV "now a days". Look at UFC


It's just like Rock with the Royal Rumble and Survivor Series. A 20% just doesn't cover the cost of their appearance. The event is not big enough to pay someone 1.5 mil for one night's work.

WM 27, 28, 29 have been some of the most profitable Manias of all time and that's the payday WWE is looking for out of Rock and Lesnar.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The 20 min overrun segment with the rock return in 2011 did 3.7 quarter rating with 1.2m viewer gain.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Summerslam 2011 was also the highest grossing Summerslam ever held at the staple centre with it grossing over 1 million in attendance which 2012 didn't.
> 
> Summerslam 2011 was more financial successful then Summerslam 2012 for WWE. Lesnars pricing crippled the positive reflection of the butyrate number.
> 
> Extreme Rules 2013 also had a lower profit income compared to 12 and 11. Bottom line I think Lesnar losing his first match back did kill some of his aura but he's not doing mega business. and 392,000 buys isn't a ridiculous number at all for a PPV "now a days". Look at UFC


Point 1, fair enough.

Point 2, despite cost being higher due to Lesnar, it still doesn't change the fact that almost 100,000 more people bought the PPV. It doesn't take away from the fact that Lesnar is a major attraction/star.

Extreme Rules 2013 featured a rematch of a rematch we got a month earlier. I wouldn't put much blame on Lesnar's starpower there. Although I agree that his losses have hurt him.

And I think Starbuck ment PPV as in WWE PPVs. Because that is a great number for WWE, despite not being that impressive vs UFC/Boxing and such.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The final segment of Punk Lesnar actually did better than last year's closer with HHH v Lesnar (3.5 to 3.44). If Summerslam 13 comes anywhere close to last years numbers we can officially call it a night that Punk can't draw.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> Point 1, fair enough.
> 
> *Point 2, despite cost being higher due to Lesnar, it still doesn't change the fact that almost 100,000 more people bought the PPV. It doesn't take away from the fact that Lesnar is a major attraction/star.
> *
> Extreme Rules 2013 featured a rematch of a rematch we got a month earlier. I wouldn't put much blame on Lesnar's starpower there. Although I agree that his losses have hurt him.
> 
> And I think Starbuck ment PPV as in WWE PPVs. Because that is a great number for WWE, despite not being that impressive vs UFC/Boxing and such.


Yes it does because WWE are paying him more then anyone in the company with the exception of Cena. Evidently WWE expected him to have the same guaranteed butyrate success that he had in the UFC and while a increase of 100,000 is really good. It Isnt nearly as much as he was doing for UFC or matchign up WWE's (be it somewhat lofty) expectations. Therefore WWE aren't making that big of a profit with Lesnar and his star power has decreased thanks to shitty WWE booking with his return.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> Comparing Lesnar vs Punk and Bryan vs Cena angles starting the RAW after MITB PPV.
> 
> *July 15 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar Vs Punk gain - 498,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 669,000 Viewers - 3.41 quarter
> 
> *July 22 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar vs Punk gain - 201,000 viewers - 3.07 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 341,000 viewers - 3.20 quarter
> 
> *July 29 - n/a*
> 10:00 PM - ... (Kane Vs Bryan)
> Me + Overrun - ... (Cena/Ryback tables)
> 
> *August 05 -*
> 10:00 PM - (small)??? gain - 3.1 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 700,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> 
> *August 12 -*
> 10:00PM - Bryan Vs Cena - 560,000 viewers - 3.3 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Lesnar vs Punk - 400,000 viewers - 3.5 quarter
> 
> Anyone looking at this objectively would agree, Bryan vs Cena is outshining Punk and Lesnar. By far the biggest feud of the PPV, heading in with the most interest.


Objectively, yeah, I'd agree. But the biggest feud by far? That I don't agree on. Punk/Lesnar has been exclusively about that, while Bryan vs Cena has been muddled by a lot of overlapping and external feuds that kind of downplay the actual feud. If anything, I'd say they're about equal in terms of emphasis, with maybe a slight edge to Punk/Lesnar.

I also don't know how numbers of people tuning in shows that one outshines the other, either. Then again, I've never really understood how ratings suddenly need to change your opinion on something. Bryan/Cena seems to be doing better gains than the Punk/Lesnar feud. Does that mean its better? No, that's subjective.


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^On top of that, Cena is the biggest draw out of all of them. It's no surprise that his segments do the best. Don't know that I would really attribute it to one feud or another.

ETA: Well, obviously Brock is a draw, but I really think they've done him a disservice lately. He's lost some of his aura due to booking, and it's not that special or rare to see him around anymore.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> Comparing Lesnar vs Punk and Bryan vs Cena angles starting the RAW after MITB PPV.
> 
> *July 15 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar Vs Punk gain - 498,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 669,000 Viewers - 3.41 quarter
> 
> *July 22 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar vs Punk gain - 201,000 viewers - 3.07 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 341,000 viewers - 3.20 quarter
> 
> *July 29 - n/a*
> 10:00 PM - ... (Kane Vs Bryan)
> Me + Overrun - ... (Cena/Ryback tables)
> 
> *August 05 -*
> 10:00 PM - (small)??? gain - 3.1 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 700,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> 
> *August 12 -*
> 10:00PM - Bryan Vs Cena - 560,000 viewers - 3.3 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Lesnar vs Punk - 400,000 viewers - 3.5 quarter
> 
> Anyone looking at this objectively would agree, Bryan vs Cena is outshining Punk and Lesnar. By far the biggest feud of the PPV, heading in with the most interest.


Brock wasn't there on July 22 (just Heyman & Punk). But anyways Brock/Punk is solely for the buy-rates for SummerSlam and special attraction match for the PPV not for TV Ratings. Sure Bryan/Cena had slightly better TV Rating numbers (nothing wrong with that), but the fact is without Brock/Punk (lets say Punk/Axel instead) Bryan/Cena alone can't sell the PPV that is considered # 2 in the company by themselves.


----------



## Biast

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Anyone thinking that the buys for Summerslam will be coming from Bryan/Cena is mildly retarded. Take :brock out of the equation and the PPV will have less buys than Payback. :lmao


----------



## Arrogant Mog

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Beast v Best

Can't wait lads


----------



## Biast

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> Comparing Lesnar vs Punk and Bryan vs Cena angles starting the RAW after MITB PPV.
> 
> *July 15 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar Vs Punk gain - 498,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 669,000 Viewers - 3.41 quarter
> 
> *July 22 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar vs Punk gain - 201,000 viewers - 3.07 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 341,000 viewers - 3.20 quarter
> 
> *July 29 - n/a*
> 10:00 PM - ... (Kane Vs Bryan)
> Me + Overrun - ... (Cena/Ryback tables)
> 
> *August 05 -*
> 10:00 PM - (small)??? gain - 3.1 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 700,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> 
> *August 12 -*
> 10:00PM - Bryan Vs Cena - 560,000 viewers - 3.3 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Lesnar vs Punk - 400,000 viewers - 3.5 quarter
> 
> Anyone looking at this objectively would agree, Bryan vs Cena is outshining Punk and Lesnar. By far the biggest feud of the PPV, heading in with the most interest.


Bad breakdown. Lesnar wasn't there on July 22. Take that out of the equation and Punk/Lesnar comes on top...


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DatKidMog said:


> Beast v Best
> 
> Can't wait lads


I still think that this is the best phrase of the year. Why am I not surprised that Paul Heyman is behind it? The guy won last year's best phrase for Master of the Brocktagon, too.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> Comparing Lesnar vs Punk and Bryan vs Cena angles starting the RAW after MITB PPV.
> 
> *July 15 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar Vs Punk gain - 498,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 669,000 Viewers - 3.41 quarter
> 
> *July 22 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar vs Punk gain - 201,000 viewers - 3.07 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 341,000 viewers - 3.20 quarter
> 
> *July 29 - n/a*
> 10:00 PM - ... (Kane Vs Bryan)
> Me + Overrun - ... (Cena/Ryback tables)
> 
> *August 05 -*
> 10:00 PM - (small)??? gain - 3.1 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 700,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> 
> *August 12 -*
> 10:00PM - Bryan Vs Cena - 560,000 viewers - 3.3 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Lesnar vs Punk - 400,000 viewers - 3.5 quarter
> 
> Anyone looking at this objectively would agree, Bryan vs Cena is outshining Punk and Lesnar. By far the biggest feud of the PPV, heading in with the most interest.


I'll counter you with, from 2012, the Rock/Cena feud ratings and the Taker/HHH feud ratings:

1/30:
Overrun- Taker/HHH/Laurinaitis- 753,000- 3.9 (might not be 100% accurate but it should be around this rating)

2/13:
10PM- HBK/HHH promo- 822,000 gain- 3.56 

2/20:
10PM- Taker/HHH promo- 1,122,000 gain- 3.85 

2/27:
Overrun- Rock promo- 643,000 gain- 3.53 

*3/5:
9PM (opener)- HBK/HHH promo- 3.45
Overrun- Rock/Cena- 763,000- 3.57

3/12:
10PM- Taker/HBK Promo- 869,000- 3.73
Overrun- Rock Concert- 509,000- 3.51

3/19:
10PM- Cena vs. Henry with Rock coming out- 327,000- 3.2
Overrun- Taker/HBK/HHH- 597,000- 3.32*

3/26:
Overrun- Rock/Cena- 626,000- 3.57

--

As you can see, Taker/HHH was out-performing Rock/Cena in quarter ratings. Does that make it a bigger match? No. Does that mean it sold WM28? Fuck no. Actually Rock/Cena this year out-did what they did last year, but does that make the rematch bigger than the original? Hell fucking no! It's true that Bryan/Cena has out-performed Punk/Lesnar in the ratings, but the match that has the biggest star of the bunch, Lesnar, is what's selling the PPV and the biggest match on the card.


----------



## Biast

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> I still think that this is the best phrase of the year. Why am I not surprised that Paul Heyman is behind it? The guy won last year's best phrase for Master of the Brocktagon, too.


There were pics of Punk as Wolverine and Lesnar as Hulk with the caption The Best vs The Beast on the funny wrestling pictures thread way before Heyman and Punk started mentioning it. This leads me to think that creative lurks this forum or Punk and Heyman themselves lurk it. It's either one or the other. :lmao


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Summerslam 2011 was also the highest grossing Summerslam ever held at the staple centre with it grossing over 1 million in attendance which 2012 didn't.
> 
> Summerslam 2011 was more financial successful then Summerslam 2012 for WWE. Lesnars pricing crippled the positive reflection of the butyrate number.
> 
> Extreme Rules 2013 also had a lower profit income compared to 12 and 11. Bottom line I think Lesnar losing his first match back did kill some of his aura but he's not doing mega business. and 392,000 buys isn't a ridiculous number at all for a PPV "now a days". Look at UFC


Just what exactly are you trying to prove with all this? That Lesnar doesn't draw or that he isn't worth the money they're paying him? If it's the former then you're talking complete nonsense. His first 2 matches back at ER 12 and SS 12 produced ridiculous numbers for *WWE *PPV. Why would you even bring UFC into the discussion here when everybody knows WWE can't touch UFC PPV numbers outside of Wrestlemania and even then it's a struggle. I assumed you would know that since you seem to know so much about WWE's PPV business. 

Brock Lesnar made way more people buy those PPV's and was the reason for the increase in buys. The buyrate has nothing to do with what he gets paid. That's on WWE and Lesnar very clearly negotiating a very good deal for himself. Of course ER 13 is going to be down on the previous year. That much should be obvious and in this case, yeah, his pay cut probably had an impact on the overall revenue of the show. It's only natural that his impact decreases as time goes on and he becomes less 'special' for lack of a better term. It's common sense. 

At the end of the day, one show got almost 100,000 buys more than the other and the clear difference maker is Brock Lesnar. WM 29 had a higher gate than WM 28 yet WM 28 beat it in PPV buys. What does that prove? Nothing. The difference between WM and every other PPV is that it has the ability to cope with the payouts for Lesnar and Rock. No other show does yet they broke even with SS 12 if the numbers we have add up correctly. Whether or not he's worth what they're paying him? That's for WWE to decide and I imagine that as time rolls on, his cut will decrease in relation to the numbers he's producing. 



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Yes it does because WWE are paying him more then anyone in the company with the exception of Cena. Evidently WWE expected him to have the same guaranteed butyrate success that he had in the UFC and while a increase of 100,000 is really good. It Isnt nearly as much as he was doing for UFC or matchign up WWE's (be it somewhat lofty) expectations. Therefore WWE aren't making that big of a profit with Lesnar and his star power has decreased thanks to shitty WWE booking with his return.


If they expected him to bring their B and C PPV's past the 1 million mark they're insane. That sounds incredibly far fetched. WWE can be stupid but they aren't that stupid. Like I said above, as time rolls on it only makes sense that his cut decreases. Unless he somehow manages to hold on to his current deal in which case his appearances won't be worth having from WWE's perspective. If that becomes a reality then you'd wonder why they would continue to book him if they were going to end up with a negative return on investment.

I guess talking about who/what draws and who/what doesn't isn't enough for some folks any more. Now we gotta go talking about what shows are the most financially successful and all because I said Summerslam 2011 bombed in terms of CM Punk's real world impact at the time. Wonderful.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Biast said:


> Bad breakdown. Lesnar wasn't there on July 22. Take that out of the equation and Punk/Lesnar comes on top...


Just because Brock wasn't there for one particular week doesn't take away from the numbers of all the other weeks.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Just because Brock wasn't there for one particular week doesn't take away from the numbers of all the other weeks.


to be fair its just one bad week. Rock/Punk had couple bad weeks (with one of them even worst numbers than Brock/Punk worst week) and Taker/Punk even had 1/2 bad weeks. It doesn't matter what TV Ratings is what matters is the Buyrates, that is what Rock/Punk was for and what Brock/Punk is for.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If there's one thing The Rock and Brock Lesnar produce it's buyrates. Irrespective of what they're getting paid by WWE, the numbers they bring in clearly reflect above average interest in their matches and in some cases WAY above average interest in their matches. That is the definition of a drawing act no matter the 'financial success' of the show. It's not Rock or Lesnar's fault that they negotiated great deals for themselves in order to get a big cut. That's on WWE. The actual buyrate number itself? That's on Rock and Lesnar.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> to be fair its just one bad week. Rock/Punk had couple bad weeks (with one of them even worst numbers than Brock/Punk worst week) and Taker/Punk even had 1/2 bad weeks. It doesn't matter what TV Ratings is what matters is the Buyrates, that is what Rock/Punk was for and what Brock/Punk is for.


This Everything has a bad/disappointing week or two at some point. Punk/Rock, Lesnar/HHH, Taker/Punk, Taker/HHH last year (the overrun one), Rock/Cena last year that same week... it's the overall picture that matters and Punk/Lesnar overall has been doing well, much like all those feuds mentioned above. And as mentioned, it's also irrelevant to how big of a PPV draw guys like Rock and Lesnar are, and they're pretty much the only two today. The only other guy who might be is Taker, but he's only been at Mania the past few years (with one bigger match each year) so we really have no way of knowing that. Rock and Lesnar are two of a kind and they bring more people's attention to WWE, and get them to pay their money for it.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> The 20 min overrun segment with the rock return in 2011 did 3.7 quarter rating with 1.2m viewer gain.


Cheers, bro. Thought it'd be higher. Bork got over 1 million.

When was it last over 4.0 rating?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Waffelz said:


> Cheers, bro. Thought it'd be higher. Bork got over 1 million.
> 
> When was it last over 4.0 rating?


Whole show or just a quarter? Quarter-wise, Rock/Cena on Old-School Raw this year got a 4.1, and that's the highest quarter rating outside of Raw 1000 in a couple of years at least. Brock's return got a 4.0 rating and the Punk/Rock promo from the same night got a 4.03.

Then you had several quarters on Raw 1,000 getting over a 4.0, the highest being a 4.43 for the overrun.

If you're talking whole show, it's been since the Trump Commercial-free Raw in 2009. Raw hasn't been able to get consistent 4.0's though since 2007, and that was during Mania season.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Its not been over 4.0 for the show for that long? :|


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They made money of Lesnar, of course. But they botched his return so bad that the returns are WAY smaller than they could've been. That's not even a debate. They are pretty much breaking even with his matches and getting a few good numbers. Not even close to what it could've been.

Wrestlemania should've done a way higher number than it did. That PPV Should've been a dominant Brock that killed Cena and HHH going against Taker, and Rock/Cena II was fine. But, of course, everyone knows what happened.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just saying that people can get carried away with buyrate numbers without factoring other forces that can diminish WWE's success of certain events. 

Am I denying Lesnars a draw. God no. He's second the Rock. But I think WWE had lofty expectations that Lesnar would be doing big business and he isn't really doing that (no fault of his own, losing his return match cooled him off) because of how much his pay takes away from the profit WWE gets from the buys he produces.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Interestingly enough, I'm just looking at Gerweck.net now and looking at the last time they got a string of 4.0's consistently (2007), and then 5.0's consistently (2001). There were 6 years in between and 6 years since 2007. And if the trend continues, this is the last year we'll see consistent 3.0's, though with the way ratings have been, it may still be a couple of years before that happens and the 3.0 becomes a rarity. Then again Rock might be the reason they're still consistently doing 3.0's at all. 

Don't know what the viewership was like back then though.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't even know how they'd manage to get a 4.0 to be honest.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Waffelz said:


> I don't even know how they'd manage to get a 4.0 to be honest.


Impossible, they don't have enough big time starts to cover for 12 segments a show.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You won't get any complaints from me about how they've booked Lesnar. Making him lose his first match back is probably one of the most idiotic things they have ever done.

Bringing up the financial success of the show has no bearing on wrestler A's ability to make money though. It's WWE's fault they're breaking even with Lesnar. So far he has held up his end of the bargain by producing the numbers. At the same time, he was smart enough to broker a deal that leaves him on the right side of things. You can't fault the guy for that. Brock Lesnar is the reason a particular show does so well and Brock Lesnar takes a big chunk out of the money be brings in for said show. You want to make money you have to spend it. If it ever reaches a point where Lesnar results in significant losses because he isn't bringing in more than he costs, I doubt they'll use him. What business person would?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Waffelz said:


> I don't even know how they'd manage to get a 4.0 to be honest.


The only card I could see doing a 4.0 nowadays on Raw maybe would be with this card (and this is if they had every big wrestling star still alive available to them):

Austin vs. Hogan
Rock vs. Lesnar
Taker vs. HBK vs. HHH
Cena vs. Batista

Even if they had those four matches scattered throughout the show, I'd still say it's far from a guarantee. Of course even if they did have all those matches available to do, they obviously wouldn't waste them on a Raw. 4.0's are gone forever as far as a whole show is concerned until the next boom period... if there is one again.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

wrestling just not as popular as once was. it is what is.

Attitude Era got between 6.0 - 8.0 ratings in their sleep and made it look easy. After that it began to decline ( still good during Ruthless Agression Era). But after that wrestling as a popularity figure went down big.

at least they are not at the point they were in 1994/1995. Truly awful years for WWF and almost made go out of business


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Competition would really help create a new boom period, but I don't see TNA getting remotely close to WWE's level anytime soon.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I personally don't think it's possible to sustain a 4.0 rating for a 3 hour show. They couldn't even do it for Raw 1000 and they had every big name on that show not named Hogan or Austin not to mention and unprecedented amount of hype behind the whole thing too. This year the RTWM, again chock full of star power, didn't even come close. Of course all that could change if we do end up back in another boom period but outside of that happening, they just can't sustain the audience needed for a 4.0 for 3 whole hours. The good news is that for a select few feuds or segments, they can tap into those numbers but it isn't going to be a common thing.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wrestling really isn't popular, is it?

Like, here in the UK, I'd say there are 60 million people. The X Factor and Britain's Got Talent sometimes have gotten over 10 million people watching. 1/6 of the country. Compare that to Wrestling in the US...Shiiiiiiiii


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Y'all realize a 4.0 is what some network shows pull right? And it's considered a success? Judging th popularity of wrestling today based on the rating, especially when you compare it to past ratings is idiotic. I'm not saying its as popular as it always was, but to make that conclusion from looking at ratings is incorrect


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

A lot of the posters here aren't American, so I don't know if they understand just how impossible to get a 4.0 or even anything a bit lower than that consistently is.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Do Americans just not watch TV? Because it's hard to imagine a rating of 4.0 being such a big success.


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> Comparing Lesnar vs Punk and Bryan vs Cena angles starting the RAW after MITB PPV.
> 
> *July 15 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar Vs Punk gain - 498,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 669,000 Viewers - 3.41 quarter
> 
> *July 22 -*
> 10:00 PM - Lesnar vs Punk gain - 201,000 viewers - 3.07 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 341,000 viewers - 3.20 quarter
> 
> *July 29 - n/a*
> 10:00 PM - ... (Kane Vs Bryan)
> Me + Overrun - ... (Cena/Ryback tables)
> 
> *August 05 -*
> 10:00 PM - (small)??? gain - 3.1 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Bryan vs Cena gain - 700,000 viewers - 3.4 quarter
> 
> *August 12 -*
> 10:00PM - Bryan Vs Cena - 560,000 viewers - 3.3 quarter
> ME + Overrun - Lesnar vs Punk - 400,000 viewers - 3.5 quarter
> 
> Anyone looking at this objectively would agree, Bryan vs Cena is outshining Punk and Lesnar. By far the biggest feud of the PPV, heading in with the most interest.



Cena is king


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Waffelz said:


> Do Americans just not watch TV? Because it's hard to imagine a rating of 4.0 being such a big success.


It's not just that. There are also more channels and shows than ever before, so the viewership is spread out among a far bigger field than in any time in history. I think somebody once showed this statistic that said that the WWE has actually done better in maintaining their ratings from a decade ago than most other shows/channels. Basically, it takes a lot more to get a 4.0 now than ever before.

Good to see that :henry1 still has that drawing power.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Slowhand said:


> Brock is like a 200 million dollar action movie that makes 250 million back. Sure, 250 mill is a lot, but take off the big ass costing price and you're only 50 ahead, not really that big of a deal.


Ok, Now do Punk.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

There are over 600 channels on SKY in the UK. Can't be much more in the US.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Judge Judy averages about 9million a day
People still watch tv


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^That's on network tv, and I'd bet that the audience is mostly made up of old people.

Shows that rely on younger viewers don't do as well as shows that used to. Especially if they've been around awhile.

Things like football are the only thing I can think of that retain huge ratings. That, and like I said, shows that rely on old folk. There are just too many more options now.

If you look at a show like American Idol, it was getting around 30 million viewers. Now it gets around 15 million viewers.

Dancing With the Stars used to have around 20 million viewers, I believe. Now it's around 13 million.

It is a fair point that WWE should be doing better, because they have the market essentially to themselves. Things just age, though. 

One could make the argument that a show that's targeted to the especially young like WWE is now, should be able to create more interest. New potential fans are being born every day. Why aren't people passing things down to their new kids/siblings? Perhaps the fact that there are so many more options for entertainment now, comes into play. On the other hand, that should also mean that the WWE is easier to pass down now, though (old matches are just at your finger tips).


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



GillbergReturns said:


> Yeah and Survivor Series 10 did better than 11. Rumble 12 did better than 13. The only thing that proves is WrestleMania is the only event big enough to support Rock and Brock and turn a profit.


Survivour Series 2010=244000 buys


Survivour Series 2011= 312,000 final buys


Increase of around 70k



Royal Rumble 2012= 481000(final buys)


Royal Rumble 2013= 562,000(final buys)


Increase of over 80k


Still not profitable?With $50 PPV per home price,70-80k thousand number should translate to around~ $4 million mark?Correct me,if I am mistaken.


If Rock/Brock bring extra $4m with their name value,then it should offset their high salary,I think(unless their salaries are extremely exorbitant,lol)?


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> Survivour Series 2010=244000 buys
> 
> 
> Survivour Series 2011= 312,000 final buys
> 
> 
> Increase of around 70k
> 
> 
> 
> *Royal Rumble 2012= 481000(final buys)
> 
> 
> Royal Rumble 2013= 562,000(final buys)
> *
> 
> Increase of over 80k
> 
> 
> Still not profitable?With $50 PPV per home price,70-80k thousand number should translate to around~ $4 million mark?Correct me,if I am mistaken.
> 
> 
> If Rock/Brock bring extra $4m with their name value,then it should offset their high salary,I think(unless their salaries are extremely exorbitant,lol)?


The RR buys was a success as it was the highest in about 8 years. As for the SS it isn't really a success as it costed them way more than you think, they expected way more as it's the first Rocky match in years. I think they expected above 400,000 buys or something.


----------



## dmccourt95

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Im sure Rock and Brocks merchandise sales offset their salaries alone never mind PPV buys


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> The RR buys was a success as it was the highest in about 8 years. As for the SS it isn't really a success as it costed them way more than you think, they expected way more as it's the first Rocky match in years. I think they expected above 400,000 buys or something.


I know why you are mentioning the uber impressive RR 2013 buys now in multiple threadsunk :lol


But on a serious note,it takes two to tango,had Rock got a strong rival to work with at SVS2011,that PPV could have easily crossed 400k buys.


The fact that almost 70k extra people bought the PPV just to see the Rock return(against a lame team like A-Truth-whom Cena could tame alone) is very impressive.


Remember that Cena single handedly destroyed Awesome -Truth just days before SVS 2011 :lmao



Why need the GOAT :rock4,when the champ could do the job all by himself :cena4


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wasn't the Survivor Series 2011 buys the reason Miz got depushed? The entire build for it was strange. They completely undercut the whole story simply because they didn't want to make Cena look bad.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fatcat said:


> Wasn't the Survivor Series 2011 buys the reason Miz got depushed? The entire build for it was strange. They completely undercut the whole story simply because they didn't want to make Cena look bad.


Yes agreed.It wasn't Miz or Truth's fault at all.The story writers must take the blame for booking Cena so dominant against these two just days prior to the main-event of SVS2011.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> I know why you are mentioning the uber impressive RR 2013 buys now in multiple threadsunk :lol
> 
> 
> But on a serious note,it takes two to tango,had Rock got a strong rival to work with at SVS2011,that PPV could have easily crossed 400k buys.
> 
> 
> The fact that almost 70k extra people bought the PPV just to see the Rock return(against a lame team like A-Truth-whom Cena could tame alone) is very impressive.
> 
> 
> Remember that Cena single handedly destroyed Awesome -Truth just days before SVS 2011 :lmao
> 
> 
> 
> Why need the GOAT :rock4,when the champ could do the job all by himself :cena4


I actually mentioned both the WM/RR and labeled it as a success, so you lose your ignorant argument.

So teaming up with Cena against the hottest tag team at that time is not good enough? hell that team got arrested and crazy stuff played out for them. Just because Cena got the upper hand a week before doesn't mean anything if you actually pay attention to the product. It was still Rocky first match in a decade, it should be higher than that since the cost for the PPV was too high according to Meltzer. You're just a biased Rock mark that doesn't want to admit that Rock didn't pull off a good number for even once.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Sonnen Says said:


> I actually mentioned both the WM/RR and labeled it as a success, so you lose your ignorant argument.
> 
> So teaming up with Cena against the hottest tag team at that time is not good enough? hell that team got arrested and crazy stuff played out for them. Just because Cena got the upper hand a week before doesn't mean anything if you actually pay attention to the product. It was still Rocky first match in a decade, it should be higher than that since the cost for the PPV was too high according to Meltzer. You're just a biased Rock mark that doesn't want to admit that Rock didn't pull off a good number for even once.


I consider 70k(70,000 X $50= $3.5 MILLION)increase for that lame ass main-event a success:cool2


And Rock's first appearance was WM27 which did almost 2,40,000(1.12 m against 880k) extra buys.


And you're calling Awesome-Truth hottest tag team,when Cena killed whatever momentum they had a week before SVS2011 by beating both of them single handedly.LMAO


That event was bound to be doomed after that,the fact that 70k odd people STILL ordered that PPV to see The Rock in action speaks volumes.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> I consider 70k(70,000 X $50= $3.5 MILLION)increase for that lame ass main-event a success:cool2
> 
> 
> And Rock's first appearance was WM27 which did almost 2,40,000(1.12 m against 880k) extra buys.
> 
> 
> And you're calling Awesome-Truth hottest tag team,when Cena killed whatever momentum they had a week before SVS2011 by beating both of them single handedly.LMAO
> 
> 
> That event was bound to be doomed after that,the fact that 70k odd people STILL ordered that PPV to see The Rock in action speaks volumes.


I mean in the ring big difference. So that last week made people not to pay? People can still consider paying for it weeks before, it's not because of that one week don't be stupid. Rock is a bigger star than ever before him pulling over 400k should have been easy for him, but it didnt happen. He did better ones later on but that was not a good number and your'e still too stubborn to admit it.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

they only get 55%ish from that 3.5million because the satellite/cable provider get a cut of ppv buys.

And Sonnen Says is right, For that quarter or whatever of the fiscal year when Surivor Series happened they actually lost money despite PPV buys and the only explanation was the "cost of survivor series" aka rocks pay check aka it must have been at least 2million bucks


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I was just watching last nights Daily Show and John Oliver used the phrase "like a heel in WWE", so to go back to the debate dozens of pages ago about how many smarks (people in the know) there are thanks to the internet, I think it's fair to say it's a lot.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Boots2Asses said:


> Survivour Series 2010=244000 buys
> 
> 
> Survivour Series 2011= 312,000 final buys
> 
> 
> Increase of around 70k
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Rumble 2012= 481000(final buys)
> 
> 
> Royal Rumble 2013= 562,000(final buys)
> 
> 
> Increase of over 80k
> 
> 
> Still not profitable?With $50 PPV per home price,70-80k thousand number should translate to around~ $4 million mark?Correct me,if I am mistaken.
> 
> 
> If Rock/Brock bring extra $4m with their name value,then it should offset their high salary,I think(unless their salaries are extremely exorbitant,lol)?


A Majority of the money goes to the cable company's. You have to pay for Rock's base pay, and he probably gets a cut of the PPV's as well.

Oh and RR did about 585,000 I believe, it was on the latest observer. RR was very profitable, SS11 was not.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> A Majority of the money goes to the cable company's. You have to pay for Rock's base pay, and he probably gets a cut of the PPV's as well.
> 
> Oh and RR did about *585,000* I believe, it was on the latest observer. RR was very profitable, SS11 was not.


Wow,that's almost 600k.Indeed a huge number especially in this modern dull period.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

585.000 buys has international buys included, of course. Still a good number though.


----------



## TEWA

Da Silva said:


> I was just watching last nights Daily Show and John Oliver used the phrase "like a heel in WWE", so to go back to the debate dozens of pages ago about how many smarks (people in the know) there are thanks to the internet, I think it's fair to say it's a lot.


Heel is used in film too


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good god, 585,000? :rock2 is truly breaking barriers.

Anyone check out this cool statistical breakdown of PPV buys? Worth a read, especially if you're a big math guy.

http://www.voicesofwrestling.com/2013/08/16/which-wwe-ppvs-did-better-than-they-should-have/


----------



## #Mark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TEWA said:


> Heel is used in film too
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


No it isn't.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TEWA said:


> Heel is used in film too


Like the guy above said, it really isn't. I even googled 'heel film terms' and well, it really isn't. It's an exclusively wrestling term.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> Good god, 585,000? :rock2 is truly breaking barriers.
> 
> Anyone check out this cool statistical breakdown of PPV buys? Worth a read, especially if you're a big math guy.
> 
> http://www.voicesofwrestling.com/2013/08/16/which-wwe-ppvs-did-better-than-they-should-have/


That was a very interesting read along with the link to the guy's first article too. He actually has Summerslam 2012 as the best performing (or show that over performed) from Aug 2012 to June 2013 which I wasn't expecting since you'd think it would be the Rumble 13. But these are his parameters and he's only counting domestic buys due to the unavailability of overseas numbers for all shows. 

Expectedly, rematches had quite the cool off except for the Rock/Punk EC rematch and he feels this is due to it coming right after the Rumble match and not a case of having to 'reheat' programs months after their initial encounters like they had to do with Rock/Cena and HHH/Lesnar. Despite that, all the initial matches of HHH/Lesnar and Rock/Punk as well as the rematches were in the 5 best performing PPV's of the stated time period under his method. 

Wrestlemania 29's numbers are kinda revealing. 



> *In terms of domestic buys, WrestleMania 29′s 623,000 was actually lower than WrestleMania 27, where The Rock was simply the guest host — not even wrestling in a match.*


Royal Rumble 2013 had just over half the amount of domestic buys for Wrestlemania 29 and Summerslam 2012 had just under half the amount of domestic buys for Wrestlemania 29. I find that quite revealing. You can't help but think that had they kept HHH/Lesnar as a first time match for Wrestlemania 29 would it have pulled the number up overall considering the domestic success of Summerslam 2012. Similarly, had they ran a first time Rock/Punk program for Wrestlmania 29, again, would it have pulled the domestic numbers up? Both RR 13 and SS 12 were 1 match shows. Had they kept both Rock/Punk and HHH/Brock for Wrestlemania 29, would it have performed better instead of the rematches we got? It's just something cool to consider. 

He also highlights just how horribly they have destroyed Ryback. HIAC 2012 was the only over performing PPV of the stated year that didn't feature a part time talent and he credits that to Ryback who was the clear difference maker. Just one month later after they had him lose he was back to meaning nothing again. 

His analysis of Cena's drawing power is also quite interesting. 



> _*All Cena-headlined shows, including WrestleMania, scored an average of -9,967. Shows without Cena in the main event averaged a score of +16,852. All of those featured a special guest, except for Hell in a Cell 2012.*_


Year on year increases and 'Who moved the needle' in 2012:

*Rock vs. Cena, +82,333
Lesnar vs. HHH, +80,000
Lesnar vs. Cena, +43,609
Ryback vs. Punk, +36,859
Royal Rumble match, +20,500
Laurinaitis vs. Cena, +17,442
Show vs. Cena, +2,692
Kane vs. Cena, Elimination Chamber matches, +1,442
Ryback vs. Punk vs. Cena, -3,141
Punk vs. Cena, -11,141
Punk vs. Miz vs. Del Rio, HHH vs. Nash -13,391
Cena, et al. Money in the Bank matches, -26,224*

BIG JOHNNY WITH DAT DRAWING POWER

Cool read.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Royal Rumble 2013 had just over half the amount of domestic buys for Wrestlemania 29 and Summerslam 2012 had just under half the amount of domestic buys for Wrestlemania 29. I find that quite revealing. You can't help but think that had they kept HHH/Lesnar as a first time match for Wrestlemania 29 would it have pulled the number up overall considering the domestic success of Summerslam 2012. Similarly, had they ran a first time Rock/Punk program for Wrestlmania 29, again, would it have pulled the domestic numbers up? Both RR 13 and SS 12 were 1 match shows. Had they kept both Rock/Punk and HHH/Brock for Wrestlemania 29, would it have performed better instead of the rematches we got? It's just something cool to consider.


I'm certain the WM29 number would've been considerably better than it was even if you just consider what Punk/Rock I for the title would've done. It would've been Punk with a 500+ day title reign going against arguably the most popular WWE superstar of all-time, who's trying to win his first title in about a year. Then assuming he doesn't get injured, you can have him drop it at ER (he worked EC so I don't think working Extreme Rules would've been out of the realm of possibility). But I'm almost certain just taking that into account, WM29 would've done better than it did. Wouldn't have beaten Rock/Cena I of course, but with the whole title reign stuff it would've done better than Rock/Cena II.

Then you add on top of that: Taker/Brock, Taker/Cena, or Brock/HHH for the first time and I think there'd be a chance of beating WM28. If you put Taker/Cena AND Brock/HHH for first time each, along with the Punk/Rock title match, I think they'd have a strong shot of topping WM28. Of course it could be considered overkill to do that all on one card, but a card where Brock/HHH I is the third biggest match on the card is a card that has potential for the biggest Mania buyrate ever. 

But of course, we got what we got, and even though it wasn't as big as it could've been, Mania 29 still did very well buyrate wise, and because of how they approached it it did spread the wealth to RR 2013 and SS 2012. Had they done what I suggested above, what would Summerslam 2012 and RR 2013 have? SS 2012 would probably have Punk/Cena one-on-one, which would've just done worse than the year prior due to diminishing returns... of course that's assuming Lesnar's on the card. What does Lesnar do? Who knows. Maybe fuck Punk/Cena and give Lesnar a rematch with Cena and a win which would send him into Mania 29 with plenty of momentum. Still, Lesnar/Cena II wouldn't have done as well as Lesnar/HHH I. 

Then Royal Rumble would be the problem, because if Rock's not there for that, what does it have? They _could_ do Taker/Punk or Punk/HHH, hyping it similar to how they hyped Punk/Rock in terms of it being their first WWM Championship in years. Or actually maybe on top of that, have Rock be in the Rumble and win it, and that's how he gets his ticket for Mania, while Punk gets a big win over Taker or HHH. 

Speculating over shit that's already done and done with is fun. 

OMG, WOULD HHH STILL HAVE IS LONG HAIR IF HE DIDN'T COMPETE AND GET HIS ARM BORKED AT SUMMERSLAM? 

Only somewhere in an alternate universe, there are answers.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Even though MANIA 27 was horrible, it still had snooki and a returning Rock and wasn't predictable. MANIA 29 lacked live promos and had no unpredictability. HHH needed his win back, Cena needed his win back, no way Taker was losing, Shield had a hot streak, hell no had a hot streak, Jericho is a jobber, and Jack got in trouble. HHH vs Brock was the most silent match of the night and rightfully so. Was probably the reason HBK was there. Honestly not sure why WWE made the card so predictable.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> Good god, 585,000? :rock2 is truly breaking barriers.
> 
> Anyone check out this cool statistical breakdown of PPV buys? Worth a read, especially if you're a big math guy.
> 
> http://www.voicesofwrestling.com/2013/08/16/which-wwe-ppvs-did-better-than-they-should-have/


I forgot just how crap the 2010 PPV year was for WWE. Ouch. Great read, though.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So pretty much they are depending on guys like Rock, RVD(well kinda, just for one ppv), and Lesnar to increase buys? if anyone asks why wwe brings in part timers this is your answer(even though its completely short sighted)


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The tease of C.M. Punk vs. Paul Heyman at the end of Monday's Raw drew in WWE's biggest audience of the past three months. Whether it translates to Summerslam PPV buys for Punk vs. Brock Lesnar and the rest of the card remains to be seen.
> 
> Raw's over-run segment produced a 2.63 rating (1.647 million viewers) in the key male demographic of males 18-49. This topped the previous high-mark of the last three months - a 2.53 over-run rating on the July 15 episode following the Money in the Bank PPV.
> 
> Included was Raw's peak viewership of 1.778 million m18-49 viewers at 11:12 p.m. for the conclusion of the Punk-Lesnar brawl after Heyman avoided facing Punk in a match.
> 
> - Following Punk-Heyman in the rankings, the final promo exchange between John Cena and Daniel Bryan for Summerslam and the #1 contender U.S. Title battle royal matched each other.
> 
> Cena-Bryan averaged 1.520 million viewers over the course of 18 minutes in the desirable top-of-the-third hour timeslot. Included was peak viewership of 1.638 million viewers at 10:14 p.m.
> 
> Later, the U.S. Title battle royal averaged 1.572 million viewers. Included was peak viewership of 1.675 million viewers at 10:50 p.m. near the conclusion of the match.
> 
> Overall, the combination of Punk-Heyman, Cena-Bryan, and the battle royal helped make Raw's final hour the second-most-watched third hour since April. And give WWE momentum heading into Summerslam.
> 
> Overall Show Break Down in Males 18-49 Demo
> 
> - OVERALL: Raw scored a 2.05 m18-49 rating and averaged 1.283 million m18-49 viewers
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened with a show-low 1.61 rating for an immediate jump into the ring for Daniel Bryan vs. Wade Barrett, plus one commercial. By comparison, Bryan's show-opening "corporate make-over" segment last week scored a 2.02 rating in Q1.
> 
> - Q2: Raw stayed at a 1.63 rating for Randy Orton vs. Damien Sandow and one commercial.
> 
> - Q3: Raw jumped to a 1.82 rating for the finish of Orton-Sandow, which produced a stair-step increase from Q1 & Q2, plus two full commercial breaks.
> 
> - Q4: Raw was flat with a 1.81 rating for the Mixed Tag Botch Match, plus one full commercial break.
> 
> - Q5: Raw jumped to a 2.19 rating at the top of the second hour for McMahon Family Drama involving Mr. McMahon and Triple H, one commercial, and Kane vs. Titus O'Neil. The rest of the hour steadily dropped off from here.
> 
> - Q6: Raw dropped to a 2.05 rating for the first-half of World champion Alberto Del Rio vs. Kofi Kingston and one commercial.
> 
> - Q7: Raw slipped again to a 2.01 rating for the end of Del Rio-Kingston, one commercial, various non-wrestling segments, and half of a commercial.
> 
> - Q8: Raw fell below the 2.0-mark with a 1.99 rating for The Real Americans vs. The Usos and one-and-a-half commercials leading to the top of the hour.
> 
> Overall during Raw's second hour, there was tremendous channel-flipping between Raw and "American Pickers" on History Channel. During the hour, a total of 253,000 viewers came over to Raw from Pickers and a total of 247,000 viewers left to Pickers.
> 
> - Q9: Raw jumped to a 2.37 rating for the first-half of the Cena-Bryan promo exchange. During this segment, Raw gained a chunk of viewers from "South Park."
> 
> - Q10: Raw fell to a 2.10 rating for the conclusion of Cena-Bryan, Fandango vs. R-Truth, and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> - Q11: Raw was even with a 2.11 rating for the first-half of the #1 contender U.S. Title battle royal and two full commercial breaks packed into the segment.
> 
> - Q12: Raw jumped to a 2.35 rating for the finish of the U.S. Title battle royal and one final commercial.
> 
> - Over-Run: Raw jumped to a 2.63 rating for the Heyman-Punk tease that turned into another Punk-Lesnar fight to conclude Raw. At the start of the over-run, Raw got a chunk of viewers from FX's Monday night movie and other programming that wrapped up at 11:00 EST.
> Share on facebook


PWtorch ratings report is so better then the Observer/


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

unk2 and :heyman wit :brock bringing in dem viewers!

Though I do wish we could get the overall viewership breakdown in the style of these PWTorch ones, but oh well. 

And damn, that battle royal really drew, didn't it? Edging out Bryan/Cena even. Brilliant idea having it branch most of the gap between that and the Punk vs. Heyman match.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Cena-Bryan averaged 1.520 million viewers over the course of 18 minutes in the desirable top-of-the-third hour timeslot. *Included was peak viewership of 1.638 million viewers at 10:14 p.m.*


:bryan :cena4


----------



## joeycalz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> I'm certain the WM29 number would've been considerably better than it was even if you just consider what Punk/Rock I for the title would've done. It would've been Punk with a 500+ day title reign going against arguably the most popular WWE superstar of all-time, who's trying to win his first title in about a year. Then assuming he doesn't get injured, you can have him drop it at ER (he worked EC so I don't think working Extreme Rules would've been out of the realm of possibility). But I'm almost certain just taking that into account, WM29 would've done better than it did. Wouldn't have beaten Rock/Cena I of course, but with the whole title reign stuff it would've done better than Rock/Cena II.
> 
> Then you add on top of that: Taker/Brock, Taker/Cena, or Brock/HHH for the first time and I think there'd be a chance of beating WM28. If you put Taker/Cena AND Brock/HHH for first time each, along with the Punk/Rock title match, I think they'd have a strong shot of topping WM28. Of course it could be considered overkill to do that all on one card, but a card where Brock/HHH I is the third biggest match on the card is a card that has potential for the biggest Mania buyrate ever.
> 
> But of course, we got what we got, and even though it wasn't as big as it could've been, Mania 29 still did very well buyrate wise, and because of how they approached it it did spread the wealth to RR 2013 and SS 2012. Had they done what I suggested above, what would Summerslam 2012 and RR 2013 have? SS 2012 would probably have Punk/Cena one-on-one, which would've just done worse than the year prior due to diminishing returns... of course that's assuming Lesnar's on the card. What does Lesnar do? Who knows. Maybe fuck Punk/Cena and give Lesnar a rematch with Cena and a win which would send him into Mania 29 with plenty of momentum. Still, Lesnar/Cena II wouldn't have done as well as Lesnar/HHH I.
> 
> Then Royal Rumble would be the problem, because if Rock's not there for that, what does it have? They _could_ do Taker/Punk or Punk/HHH, hyping it similar to how they hyped Punk/Rock in terms of it being their first WWM Championship in years. Or actually maybe on top of that, have Rock be in the Rumble and win it, and that's how he gets his ticket for Mania, while Punk gets a big win over Taker or HHH.
> 
> Speculating over shit that's already done and done with is fun.
> 
> OMG, WOULD HHH STILL HAVE IS LONG HAIR IF HE DIDN'T COMPETE AND GET HIS ARM BORKED AT SUMMERSLAM?
> 
> Only somewhere in an alternate universe, there are answers.



Great post. The decision for both rematches is what ultimately hurt the PPV in the end.


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> :bryan :cena4


Later, the U.S. Title battle royal averaged 1.572 million viewers. *Included was peak viewership of 1.675 million viewers at 10:50 p.m.* near the conclusion of the match.

*The tease of C.M. Punk vs. Paul Heyman at the end of Monday's Raw drew in WWE's biggest audience of the past three months. * Raw's over-run segment produced a *2.63 rating (1.647 million viewers)* in the key male demographic of males 18-49. Included was *Raw's peak viewership of 1.778 million m18-49 viewers at 11:12 p.m. for the conclusion of the Punk-Lesnar brawl after Heyman avoided facing Punk in a match.*

unk/:heyman/:brock > US title Battle Royal match > :bryan :cena4 :clap


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The tease of C.M. Punk vs. Paul Heyman at the end of Monday's Raw drew in WWE's biggest audience of the past three months. Whether it translates to Summerslam PPV buys for Punk vs. Brock Lesnar and the rest of the card remains to be seen.


C.

M.

GOAT.

The fucking battle royal outdrew Bryan/Cena. :lol Dat Bryan.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The battle royal is still the reason for the peak overrun viewership lmao. The finish of the Battle Royle was a tremendous lead in for Punk/Lesnar angle, aside from the movie wrap-ups in other channels. Q12 before overrun hit a 2.35 rating that obviously didn't happen the past three months, enabling the overrun to peak with the lead-in combined with the returning viewers.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sooo... Raw ratings predictions? Last year after SummerSlam: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...jor-crimes-warehouse-13-bunheads-more/145531/

Hour 1 - 4.352m / 1.5 18-49 rating
Hour 2 - 4.657m / 1.6 18-49 rating
Hour 3 - 4.426m / 1.6 18-49 rating

Would be nice to see it slightly higher than that, but I imagine it will be in the same ball-park.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah, I think it will be same ballpark as last year too. Depends where they place certain segments in order to get the best lift possible. HHH/Orton/Bryan stuff goes where if you're the one making the decision since that's the big talking point and hook of the show? Open, 9, 10 or close?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Cena-Bryan averaged 1.520 million viewers over the course of 18 minutes in the desirable top-of-the-third hour timeslot. *Included was peak viewership of 1.638 million viewers at 10:14 p.m. *


The two faces of the company:

:cena4 

:bryan


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It will be very good tonight, as I think we will see Lesnar and Cena.

After tonight, though, not so much.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think we're going to see higher numbers this year. I mean, you have the fallout from Punk and Lesnar, and that feud, which fills the Lesnar/HHH fallout, and then you also have HHH TURNING HEEL and seemingly forming a team of sorts with Orton. This should have A LOT of casuals tuned in. TBH, I think if they start the show with Punk/Lesnar/Heyman, do a Cena promo at the 9PM, and then just constantly advertise the HHH/Orton stuff throughout the night and it closing the show, it should be the biggest overrun rating in months and I could potentially see the whole show average over 5 million. Or at the very least, whatever opens (where it Punk, Lesnar, Heyman, Bryan, HHH, Orton, or Cena) no matter who and that getting over 5 million.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Going to be very interesting to see how this Bryan vs. Orton/Triple H/McMahons storyline develops and draws. I think it is going to do well. At least, by today's standards, which is fine.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings _should_ be up after the awesome PPV we witnessed. Will they, though? I hope for something better than last year's.


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This thread could get UGLY in the upcoming weeks. Punk marks vs Orton marks and its gonna happen and im just gonna sit back and watch. Their two of my favorite wrestlers could care less care less about who puts on better ratings. Their both on the same level imo.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Holy crap C2D, almost didn't recognize you with a new avatar!

I can tell ya right now, after everything they've put into the angle, if ratings aren't considerably above what they were last year, then oh boy, this thread is gonna get wild.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> it should be the biggest overrun rating in months and I could potentially see the whole show average over 5 million. Or at the very least, whatever opens (where it Punk, Lesnar, Heyman, Bryan, HHH, Orton, or Cena) no matter who and that getting over 5 million.


i would be amazed if the show does over 5 million average for 3 hours, amazed, lets not forget raw the night after the rumble with rock winning his first title in 11 years just scraped the 5 million mark and thats the fucking rock, tonight has strong competition from the nfl on espn something that post rumble show didn't have

my prediction 4.3 million over 3 hours, post mania raw did 4.6 million and tonight isn't going to beat that either

edit: just to add the level of interest of summerslam in the states using google trends is well down compared to mania and rumble earlier this year both of which had over 500k searches the night of those shows...its actually around same level as mitb last month which isn't a good sign for tonights rating or the buyrate, however the interest level in the uk is very high


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



rabidwolverine27 said:


> This thread could get UGLY in the upcoming weeks.


Oh it's going to get ugly all right. Cena out, Orton with the title, Bryan getting pushed, Punk doing whatever the hell he's doing and the biggest one of them all, MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL starting soon. Even a HHH heel turn can't compete with that. Things going to get straight up crazy. Go get the popcorn lol. 



The Sandrone said:


> I think we're going to see higher numbers this year. I mean, you have the fallout from Punk and Lesnar, and that feud, which fills the Lesnar/HHH fallout, and then you also have HHH TURNING HEEL and seemingly forming a team of sorts with Orton. This should have A LOT of casuals tuned in. TBH, I think if they start the show with Punk/Lesnar/Heyman, do a Cena promo at the 9PM, and then just constantly advertise the HHH/Orton stuff throughout the night and it closing the show, it should be the biggest overrun rating in months and *I could potentially see the whole show average over 5 million*. Or at the very least, whatever opens (where it Punk, Lesnar, Heyman, Bryan, HHH, Orton, or Cena) no matter who and that getting over 5 million.


That's being very optimistic.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

last year did 4.417 million viewers with 3.14 rating. Something similar will likely happen.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Maybe predicting 5 million for show average was going overboard, especially now that Brock isn't going to be there. I could see it getting somewhere in the 4.5-4.7 million range, with the overrun (assuming it's Orton/HHH/Cena/Bryan stuff) getting over 5 million.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Brock isn't going to be there for tonight's Raw? Oh man 

I'm going to miss him so much!


----------



## Sonnen Says

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They need to have a major team like Evolution to boost ratings above 3.5
Hopefully two new members with HHH and Orton.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No matter what they do they aren't going to pull 5 million viewers consistently when up against MNF. It's just not happening. If they can hover around where they are now and see the year out at the 3.0 mark I'd consider that a success. No matter what they do they're going to get hammered from here on out. This just isn't their time of year.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

4.2 million viewers or lower, not enough interest in the actual ppv for it to be higher and they finally have competition in terms of nfl preseason, we shall see


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Watch Raw get a 2.9. And you all know why it will get a 2.9.

:cena4


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Im expecting a lot of "lol orton is not a draw" in the coming weeks lol


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Ratings _should_ be up after the awesome PPV we witnessed. Will they, though? I hope for something better than last year's.


The McMahon/Orton VS Bryan is a far bigger swerve than Punk turning heel to feud with Cena. But NFL is starting up soon again and that always kills off RAW's ratings. RAW has a better chance of doing better, but wether it will remains to be seen really.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> The McMahon/Orton VS Bryan is a far bigger swerve than Punk turning heel to feud with Cena. But NFL is starting up soon again and that always kills off RAW's ratings. RAW has a better chance of doing better, but wether it will remains to be seen really.


IDK about that, I remember this forum losing it when punk turned heel and having big old discussions about it


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> The McMahon/Orton VS Bryan is a far bigger swerve than Punk turning heel to feud with Cena. But NFL is starting up soon again and that always kills off RAW's ratings. RAW has a better chance of doing better, but wether it will remains to be seen really.


That's correct, but right after Punk turned heel was when everyone was buzzing about it similarly to how everyone's buzzing about HHH and Orton's. However of course, Punk isn't the draw HHH is, and Bryan's a much hotter and more sympathetic babyface right now than Cena's been... like... ever. It should definitely do better than Punk/Cena did last year and by a fair amount tbh. If it gets around the same or considerably worse... well, that'll be fun to hear be explained.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Expected audience is *4,172,000* this week - that's a small increase from last week's RAW.

For reference, the average increase in the TV audience following a PPV is 6% (once other factors are controlled for).

_(Note: this is what my model is saying, although I have a hunch that the audience will be a bit higher...)_


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



VGooBUG said:


> IDK about that, I remember this forum losing it when punk turned heel and having big old discussions about it





The Sandrone said:


> That's correct, but right after Punk turned heel was when everyone was buzzing about it similarly to how everyone's buzzing about HHH and Orton's. However of course, Punk isn't the draw HHH is, and Bryan's a much hotter and more sympathetic babyface right now than Cena's been... like... ever. It should definitely do better than Punk/Cena did last year and by a fair amount tbh. If it gets around the same or considerably worse... well, that'll be fun to hear be explained.


I wasn't meaning to say Punk's heel turn wasn't big. It was, it was when he actually began to main event as Champion, he also sew the seeds for a Rock feud. But the problem was, Rock didn't stay, and Punk's feud with Cena was simply same old same old as we had seen a year previous. (With Cena especially being the same, my main enjoyment then came from Punk's mini-feuds with legends)

Anyhow, what I was meaning to say was as Sandrone said in the latter of his post. The situation here is far more sympathetic towards the babyface for the whole crowd, and the feud is completely fresh, coupled in the fact that Orton/HHH/McMahons are full time heels now against the hottest babyface who just beat Cena completely clean leads to a much more enthralling storyline. 

What effect this all has on those numbers remains to be seen


----------



## What_A_Maneuver!

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

MNF will be tough to go up against


----------



## NyQuil

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



What_A_Maneuver! said:


> MNF will be tough to go up against


He is. This is his "I'm gone for a bit" speech.


----------



## NyQuil

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Forum crash in 3..2..1..


----------



## Prayer Police

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No he di'int!!!!


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Now that Cena has gone, I'll be able to test for a Cena effect in the ratings over the next six months. Stay tuned...


----------



## Amuroray

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

the ratings will be 2.2 by sept


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So The Shield group are now just attack dogs for Triple H?

Pretty much lines right up with what they've already been doing.


----------



## joeisgonnakillyou

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sin caroed.


----------



## DoinkTheClown1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

ROB VAN DAM!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Weltschmertz said:


> Now that Cena has gone, I'll be able to test for a Cena effect in the ratings over the next six months. Stay tuned...


I don't think it matters much now.WWE has HHH,who is arguably their biggest draw after Cena(Rock and Lesnar are exceptions)


----------



## pochepiller

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

is it me or this RAW is particulary good? Maybe its the booze.


----------



## La Parka

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cool tag!


----------



## Dirk504

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Did HHH really tell someone else to check their ego???


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think the ratings will be pretty poor. Cena will do alright, but the opening never does well. Punk-Heyman should do strong at the head of the third hour, and the overrun should be good, but down on last week.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They should've promote Cena's opening segment.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The opener this week was the direct fallout from Summerslam. It'll do fine.


----------



## Banjo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

With the NFL season upon us very soon, a lot of people will be tempted to watch Monday Night Football.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. But if you still want to be a loyal RAW viewer, I strongly recommend getting Hulu if you don't have it! Great shows, plus they edit RAW down to an action packed 90 minutes that you can watch whenever you want. It cuts ALL the filler out. The show flows so much better and you will enjoy it so much more. I am a happy subscriber

In fact, I think I saw you can get a two month free trial of Hulu Plus. Get on that!


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

We will see Monday Night Preseason football was on tonight at exactly 8. That last hour stunk but that last segment rocked, it was a very polar raw. Interested indeed..


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

How long was the Monday Night Preseason Football?


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

377,874 was the social media activity score according to Trendrr.TV, highest since the post-Mania Raw which had over 500,000. Slightly lower than the Royal Rumble score which was 389,815.

Compares with 316,972 last year post-SummerSlam: http://www.pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/quicknews/article_64489.shtml


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I expect The opening segment, The Punk/Axel brawl and the ending to do well. The rest of the show were filler


----------



## ChickenEater567

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

hour 1 - 4.095 million
hour 2 - 4.452 million 
hour 3 - 5.014 million

OMG! 

HHH/Orton heels draw.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 2 and Hour 3 are really impressive. DAT GAME


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> Hour 2 and Hour 3 are really impressive. DAT GAME


I think you be gettin' worked. unk2

... or you're with him and workin' me for makin' me think he's workin' you. unk


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:HHH


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

HOLY SHIT.

:HHH2 rton2 :vince


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> -- Buzz coming out of WWE's Summerslam PPV translated into strong Social Media Activity on Monday night for Raw.
> 
> Raw scored 377,874 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, up 45 percent compared to the Summerslam lead-in episode. It was the most socially-active episode since the Raw the night after WrestleMania.
> 
> Raw still ranked #3 on cable TV on Monday, though, trailing "Teen Wolf" and English Premier League Soccer. Raw topped ESPN's Pre-Season NFL game. It was the seventh consecutive week that Raw ranked #3.


Via PWTorch


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sorry folks. The numbers are bullshit.

This hasn't shown up on tv by the numbers or anywhere.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Beat Monday Night Football :hb:side:


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> I think you be gettin' worked. unk2


unk3 



The Sandrone said:


> ... or you're with him and workin' me for makin' me think he's workin' you. unk


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Oh man, if only social media score was directly related to ratings... DEM RATINGS BE THRU DA ROOF! unk2 :heyman :HHH2 rton :bryan


----------



## hag

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Lady Killer said:


> Beat Monday Night Football :hb:side:


pre-season. lol


----------



## ChickenEater567

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The ratings I posted are legit. 

Also Bryan/Orton/Trips overrun did a 3.9 rating. Had a huge gain of around 987,000.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ChickenEater567 said:


> The ratings I posted are legit.
> 
> Also Bryan/Orton/Trips overrun did a 3.9 rating. Had a huge gain of around 987,000.


Source?


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DMH2013 said:


> pre-season. lol


I know, hence the use of the :side: smiley.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ChickenEater567 said:


> The ratings I posted are legit.
> 
> Also Bryan/Orton/Trips overrun did a 3.9 rating. Had a huge gain of around 987,000.


If true

:bryan rton :HHH2

:yes


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Who needs :cena3, when you have :HHH2 ?


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If those numbers are legit... holy shit.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ChickenEater567 said:


> The ratings I posted are legit.
> 
> Also Bryan/Orton/Trips overrun did a 3.9 rating. Had a huge gain of around 987,000.


Still going on workin' people I see, but I'll bite:

-Where are the sources? And how do you have that info so early?

I will say, the numbers you posted aren't entirely unbelievable, but I don't see them on tellbythenumbers, where I usually see them.


----------



## Shenroe

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:ambrose :reigns :rollins carried the hour 1 and 2.
DEM RATINGZ if true. Get Cena off of my tv for good:avit:


----------



## TheWFEffect

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3743 hour 1 4273 hour 2 4317 hour 3


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TheWFEffect said:


> 3743 hour 1 4273 hour 2 4317 hour 3


4.3 million viewers Hour 3?

:bryan rton :HHH2 :vince5

Can't wait to see the final quarter-hour and overrun.

DAT STORYLINE.

:yes


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Still don't see a source. Don't see them on tellbythenumbers anyway.

BTW, didn't the final segment only happen in the overrun/last few minutes of Q12? I'm not sure that segment would have an effect on the overall hour 3 number if it was all in the overrun.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Still don't see a source. Don't see them on tellbythenumbers anyway.
> 
> BTW, didn't the final segment only happen in the overrun/last few minutes of Q12? That segment wouldn't have an effect on the overall hour 3 number if it was all in the overrun.


Corporation came out in the last few minutes of the final quarter hour. And I see people here going nuts on the overrun anytime someone they like is involved. My turn


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Corporation came out in the last few minutes of the final quarter hour. And I see people here going nuts on the overrun anytime someone they like is involved. Like last week. My turn


Touche.

Still, those numbers aren't legit... or at least not proven legit, yet. I'm hoping hour 3 does well though. After all, Punk was legitimately in hour 3 this week. unk5 (Although to be fair, we'd still need to see the quarter numbers).


----------



## ChickenEater567

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The hourly numbers doesn't matter. WE NEED QUARTER HOURS!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Touche.
> 
> Still, those numbers aren't legit... or at least not proven legit, yet. I'm hoping hour 3 does well though. After all, Punk was legitimately in hour 3 this week. unk5


For the first time in awhile, I'm very curious how a particular storyline will do (Bryan/Orton/HHH/McMahons).


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If those numbers are true, then practically no jump from last week. 

Let's see if this week's overrun can out do the overrun last week that gave WWE their biggest audience in 3 months.

unk :brock :heyman


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> If those numbers are true, then practically no jump from last week.
> 
> Let's see if this week's overrun can out do the overrun last week that gave WWE their biggest audience in 3 months.
> 
> unk :brock :heyman


Even if it doesn't, clear as day this is a MUCH bigger angle. That's all that matters.

:yes :vince5 :HHH2 rton :ambrose :rollins :reigns


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

TVbytheNumbers haven't reported any numbers yet, should be out in the next hour.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wrestlinfan, Showstopper, STOP IT! You're both setting a bad example for the other Punk/Bryan marks.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

But.. I'm just having fun.



Okay, I'll start getting serious over DA RATINGS.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It doesn't really matter, Showstopper's wrong anyway. :henry1 was in that final segment. He's the reason it's gonna pull a big number.


----------



## tonsgrams

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I knew 5 million viewers was too good to be true.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ip-for-the-week-ending-august-18-2013/198479/

In top 25 on cable last week: # 8 (3rd hour), #10 ( 2nd hour), and # 17(1st hour) 

Duck Dynasty and Rizzoli & Isles(again) were top 2 most watched cable programs


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT 3rd hour doing big numbers hopefully. :HHH2 rton :vince :bryan

And of course the biggest draw of them all... :henry1


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> DAT 3rd hour doing big numbers hopefully. :HHH2 rton :vince :bryan
> 
> And of course the biggest draw of them all... :henry1


Henry was on the show?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

8PM- 4.076
9PM- 4.485
10PM- 4.333

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2013/08/20/monday-cable-ratings-nfl-preseason-football-coverage-wins-night-wwe-monday-night-raw-basketball-wives-ti-tiny-marrying-the-game-more/198368/

Very nice numbers.


----------



## fabi1982

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour1 4.076
Hour2 4.485
Hour3 4.333

Interesting last hour dropped. Source tvbtn


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-wives-ti-tiny-marrying-the-game-more/198368/

Hour 1 - 4.076 million
Hour 2 - 4.485 million
Hour 3 - 4.333 million


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> my prediction 4.3 million over 3 hours, post mania raw did 4.6 million and tonight isn't going to beat that either


wizard


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^You two slowpokes are so slow, Khali gets to the ring faster than you can type "Punk FTW".


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

NFL Pre-Season Football was Monday's highest rated cable program with a 2.1 adults 18-49 rating. WWE Monday Night RAW was second with a 1.7 adults 18-49 rating during its most-watched hour. 

8:00-9:00 PM: A18-49: 1.4, 4.076 million viewers	
9:00-10:00 PM: A18-49: 1.6, 4.485 million viewers	
10:00-11:12 PM: A18-49: 1.7, 4.333 million viewers

tvbythenumbers


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*THE REAL NUMBERS*

Hour 1 - 4.076m
Hour 2 - 4.485m
Hour 3 - 4.333m


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Anyone else wanna post it? You're all beneath me, but don't let that stop you! :bryan


----------



## Your_Solution

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Put on a good product and you will be rewarded, WWE


----------



## ChickenEater567

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

My source was a bit off in the 3rd hour. 1st and 2nd hours were close to the final number though. 


Told you guys I was legit.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

2012



D.M.N. said:


> Sooo... Raw ratings predictions? Last year after SummerSlam: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...jor-crimes-warehouse-13-bunheads-more/145531/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.352m / 1.5 18-49 rating
> Hour 2 - 4.657m / 1.6 18-49 rating
> Hour 3 - 4.426m / 1.6 18-49 rating
> 
> Would be nice to see it slightly higher than that, but I imagine it will be in the same ball-park.


Year-on-year actually slightly down - 4.48 million (2012, see above) vs 4.30 million (2013).


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 2 doing better than hour 3, interesting. What was in that hour? Start of Punk's promo, and what else?


----------



## checkcola

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I wonder how bad Wade/Miz did


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Dat hour 3 drop.

unk

Should have put the new corporation in more than just the overrun. Still good numbers.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nice numbers. I was not expecting a drop in the hour 3.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> 2012
> 
> 
> 
> Year-on-year actually slightly down - 4.48 million (2012, see above) vs 4.30 million (2013).


Hm, interesting.

Last year, Punk, Heyman, Bryan, Orton (?) and Cena were all on the show, and they were all on the show last year. HHH was on the show this year but last year wasn't... OMFG HHH DA RATINGS KILLER! :HHH


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

With such a huge heel turn, and practically no gain from last week, not sure if I would call that good. Breakdown will tell us more.

Bryan and Orton have never done well though. It's all up to the McMahons.

:vince2


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Hm, interesting.
> 
> Last year, Punk, Heyman, Bryan, Orton (?) and Cena were all on the show, and they were all on the show last year. HHH was on the show this year but last year wasn't... OMFG HHH DA RATINGS KILLER! :HHH


We all know why last year's Raw had better numbers..

:brock


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> We all know why last year's Raw had better numbers..
> 
> :brock


Nah, Brock brings in normal ratings. Da game kills ratings. :HHH


----------



## ChickenEater567

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah them numbers aren't a good sign for the next few months. I know we have an awesome storyline with the new corporation but people forget we still have so much crap and filler on the show that makes people turn off. 

RAW really needs to drop that 3rd hour.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

On a serious note, ratings are only going to go down from here. If this is a sign of things to come, last year's September-December ratings are gonna look good in comparison. Of course, it's just the first week, so let's not jump the gun just yet.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ChickenEater567 said:


> Yeah them numbers aren't a good sign for the next few months. I know we have an awesome storyline with the new corporation but people forget we still have so much crap and filler on the show that makes people turn off.
> 
> RAW really needs to drop that 3rd hour.


'Tis true, unfortunately. I said it last night, too. Outside of the new storyline, it felt like a filler Raw in October. Nothing noteworthy happened outside of that. But, baby steps, I suppose.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They need to go back to 2 hours. 3 hour Raw has so much filler.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I cant be the only one that thought that 3rd hour was horrible except for the last segment??


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3 hours is just too much. Sitting through all of those boring/Non-noteworthy matches/promo's just to get to the final segment sucked.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ChickenEater567 said:


> RAW really needs to drop that 3rd hour.


nobody in their right mind is dropping an hour of prime time especially given how much extra cash its bringing in, vince will live with a few shows doing 2.7s for the next few months


----------



## CM BORK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If the card wasn't full of jobber matches the ratings would be much higher.

The main event was Miz vs. Barrett. R-Truth, Justin Gabriel and Zack Ryder were on the show ffs.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



VGooBUG said:


> I cant be the only one that thought that 3rd hour was horrible except for the last segment??


Well there was the Punk segment with the Punk/Axel brawl... the Wyatt match with Truth... the Barrett/Miz match... and then the final segment. Am I missing anything? If not, it was a pretty bad third hour aside from the Punk segment-Punk/Axel brawl and the final segment.


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> nobody in their right mind is dropping an hour of prime time especially given how much extra cash its bringing in, vince will live with a few shows doing *2.7s* for the next few months


eh... try lower, they got a 2.66 during the NBA playoffs, and that gets LESS viewers then monday night football. Like 4 million to 8 million less


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Axel is terrible. I can barely sit through any segment involving him. They tried with him, but he doesn't have it. Sitting through that last hour felt like it was a 3 hour show in and of itself.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Didn't watch but I believe there 3 filler matchs between Punk/Heyman/Axel and Orton nonsense (according to results)

Wyatt/Truth, Usos/3MB, and Miz/ Barrett I believe


----------



## ChickenEater567

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> nobody in their right mind is dropping an hour of prime time especially given how much extra cash its bringing in, vince will live with a few shows doing 2.7s for the next few months


2.7? Try 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6's. If this years viewership is telling something it could even drop as low as 2.3 and 2.2.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



VGooBUG said:


> eh... try lower, they got a 2.66 during the NBA playoffs, and that gets LESS viewers then monday night football. Like 4 million to 8 million less


that was a game 7 which pulled in 12 million viewers, its not the number of viewers but the importance of the event

there will be some raw over the next few months that do lower than 2.7 but the average last year was 2.75 and it will be similar this year


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

These shows would be fantastic if they were 2 hours long.

They're good ATM but 3 hours is just too long. I feel physically fatigued after watching the shows.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just out of interest, if this was a two hour show, this is probably how it would have gone:

Q1 - Cena/Bryan/Stephanie
Q2 - Sandow/Rhodes
Q3 - Shield vs Ziggler
Q4 - AJ/Layla vs Funkadactyls
Q5 - Punk/Heyman/Axel segment
Q6 - del Rio vs Cara and Wyatt/Truth
Q7 - Shield vs Show
Q8 + Overrun - Coronation segment

- the Heyman in-ring segment, PTP/Real Americans, USOs/3MB and Barrett/Miz probably wouldn't have survived a two hour show.


----------



## Vyer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think WWE should build up some more midcard storylines that would take advantage of the 3 hours that they have.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Vyer said:


> I think WWE should build up some more midcard storylines that would take advantage of the 3 hours that they have.


You might as well have typed that sentence in a foreign language, because that's exactly what it looks like to WWE creative.


----------



## TheWFEffect

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.somthing ain't bad.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

They really need to go back to two hours. You lose viewers with so much filler in between the big segments.

I'm more interested in seeing the breakdown. That's coming out tomorrow, right?


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



RatedR10 said:


> They really need to go back to two hours. You lose viewers with so much filler in between the big segments.
> 
> I'm more interested in seeing the breakdown. That's coming out tomorrow, right?


Agreed, just imagine how good 2 hours would be. Orton/Bryan in Opening and Closing segments of the Show. Punk at the 10 O'clock segment. You have the Shield Mid Card Feuds(That people actually care about) sprinkled through out the night with Ambrose/Ziggler and SHIELD/Show&Henry. And you get RVD/ADR in a segment, and Wyatt in a segment. And maybe one other Mid Card match/feud. Would work out SO much better.

Like honestly, there was a good 30 MINUTES of pure filler from Punk/Axel to the Coronation. No one in their right mind is just gonna watch jobbers wrestler for 30 minutes.


----------



## Kassimo

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Want a push in the wwe? Just tell everyone you are gay.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.24 final rating


----------



## Mqwar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Don't know if already posted.. from Torch - 



> WWE Raw on Thursday, August 19 scored a 3.24 rating, up ten percent from last week's 2.95 rating leading into Summerslam.
> 
> It was the highest rating since a 3.45 rating the night after WrestleMania on April 8.
> 
> *Raw was strengthened by a 25 percent increase in the males 18-34 demographic, registering the highest m18-34 rating since March 25 before WrestleMania. Also, Raw scored the highest males 12-17 rating of the year.*
> 
> - Raw averaged 4.298 million viewers, increasing five percent compared to pre-Summerslam viewership.
> 
> Hourly Break Down: 4.076 million first hour viewers, 4.485 million second hour viewers, and a drop-off to 4.333 million third hour viewers.
> 
> The second hour was the most-watched second hour since April 22 and the third hour was virtually even with last week's 4.317 million viewers. Last week's third hour included a strong line-up of the C.M. Punk-Paul Heyman teaser, the final Cena-Bryan hype for Summerslam, and #1 contender battle royal.
> 
> - On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #2 in overall viewers behind "Major Crimes" on TNT. Raw ranked #1 in all key male demos.
> 
> - Last year's Raw after Summerslam scored a 3.14 rating and averaged 4.478 million viewers, placing this year's post-Summerslam Raw in-between the two metrics.


Great number considering the three hour format burning out audience.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not anything brilliant, but good stuff.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Mqwar said:


> Don't know if already posted.. from Torch -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWE Raw on Thursday, August 19 scored a 3.24 rating, up ten percent from last week's 2.95 rating leading into Summerslam.
> 
> It was the highest rating since a 3.45 rating the night after WrestleMania on April 8.
> 
> *Raw was strengthened by a 25 percent increase in the males 18-34 demographic, registering the highest m18-34 rating since March 25 before WrestleMania. Also, Raw scored the highest males 12-17 rating of the year.*
> 
> - Raw averaged 4.298 million viewers, increasing five percent compared to pre-Summerslam viewership.
> 
> Hourly Break Down: 4.076 million first hour viewers, 4.485 million second hour viewers, and a drop-off to 4.333 million third hour viewers.
> 
> The second hour was the most-watched second hour since April 22 and the third hour was virtually even with last week's 4.317 million viewers. Last week's third hour included a strong line-up of the C.M. Punk-Paul Heyman teaser, the final Cena-Bryan hype for Summerslam, and #1 contender battle royal.
> 
> - On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #2 in overall viewers behind "Major Crimes" on TNT. Raw ranked #1 in all key male demos.
> 
> - Last year's Raw after Summerslam scored a 3.14 rating and averaged 4.478 million viewers, placing this year's post-Summerslam Raw in-between the two metrics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great number considering the three hour format burning out audience.
Click to expand...


That underdog Daniel Bryan bringing in da male demos. :bryan2:yes:dazzler:bryan


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Very good to see that fans are interested in seeing :bryan in the big leagues. Crazy to see how far he has come. I'm so happy for him.


----------



## Mr. I

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Kassimo said:


> Want a push in the wwe? Just tell everyone you are gay.


Well that's a gross oversimplification of what happened.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.24 is not bad at all. Hope they continue upwards.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.24 is really good, but can't see them keeping it up. I'm not too familiar with football, but I assume whenever they regular season starts is when things are going to dip dramatically. The question is can they stay above last year, which most around here were considering death? I certainly hope so and expect it to unless for some reason the casuals don't get into it for some reason, or are shunned away by the heel actions, which certainly isn't what they would intend.


----------



## KingLobos

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:russo Corporation is working :russo


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> 3.24 is really good, but can't see them keeping it up. I'm not too familiar with football, but I assume whenever they regular season starts is when things are going to dip dramatically. The question is can they stay above last year, which most around here were considering death? I certainly hope so and expect it to unless for some reason *the casuals don't get into it for some reason, or are shunned away by the heel actions*, which certainly isn't what they would intend.


That would be quite sad.


----------



## xdoomsayerx

The Sandrone said:


> 3.24 is really good, but can't see them keeping it up. I'm not too familiar with football, but I assume whenever they regular season starts is when things are going to dip dramatically. The question is can they stay above last year, which most around here were considering death? I certainly hope so and expect it to unless for some reason the casuals don't get into it for some reason, or are shunned away by the heel actions, which certainly isn't what they would intend.




Very good point, Football season starts September 8th.... And ratings will drop. Football is just way too big for wwe ratings NOT to drop. I actually watch a Monday night game I'm interested in over raw, but I'll dvr raw. Raw being 3 hours doesn't help either.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Dem :bryan2 ratings


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

For a post-Summerslam RAW, especially with a HUGE heel turn and new champion, that isn't very good. At all.

But the show was practically all filler so I can see why.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

beat last year which was 3.14 rating (although it had more viewership)


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's it? And last year had more viewership? All last year had to talk about was Punk retaining and Lesnar beating Triple H, no where _near_ a heel turn the magnitude of Triple H and Randy Orton, and John Cena losing the WWE title.

That just isn't impressive, and just has to be a little disappointing to WWE I would think. It's a solid number, don't get me wrong. You would just think that something big like that would perform a bit better.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

When you really think about it, outside of this one storyline, nothing is going on. What program is there outside of the new Corporation that is supposed to make new viewers want to watch?


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> When you really think about it, outside of this one storyline, nothing is going on. What program is there outside of the new Corporation that is supposed to make new viewers want to watch?


Plus you can't expect numbers to skyrocket after one night. If they keep up the good storylines, they have more of a chance in viewers increasing. Although going back to 2 hours would do them plenty of favors in the ratings department which obviously wont happen because they profit from it elsewhere.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> When you really think about it, outside of this one storyline, nothing is going on. What program is there outside of the new Corporation that is supposed to make new viewers want to watch?


 Apart from Punk/Heyman and Cody/Damien, there is nothing much happening.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not saying new viewers, but with a supposed "big star" in Triple H turning heel, I would think it would bring a much bigger buzz than a 3.2. But you're right, those entire 3 hours were mostly filler, even the dumb and dragged out Punk/Axel fight. So the breakdown will show us a lot more.

@C2D, sure, but with a HHH/Orton heel turn, something huge like that, a rise overnight should kind of be expected. Don't you think?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Oliver-94 said:


> Apart from Punk/Heyman and Cody/Damien, there is nothing much happening.


Yep, and with Punk feuding with Axel now, that's why I didn't mention that. If Punk and Lesnar were still feuding week in and week out going forward, I would have included that angle, too. But Axel sucks. And while I like both Cody and Sandow, that storyline is so fucked up with who's supposed to be the face and who isn't. It makes very little sense. That's not going to grab the attention of new viewers. Us die-hards don't even like it.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I also think the Wyatts are getting kinda boring. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big Wyatt fan, but they need to do more than just squash jobbers each week and cut some freaky promo. Kidnap someone, sacrifice someone, just do something different. That'd be another way to grab viewers.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wyatt and his lame stable have certainly not lived up to their hype if you ask me.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> That's it? And last year had more viewership? All last year had to talk about was Punk retaining and Lesnar beating Triple H, no where _near_ a heel turn the magnitude of Triple H and Randy Orton, and John Cena losing the WWE title.


last years summerslam drew 400,000 buys so alot of people wanted to see where the hhh retirement tease angle went, more viewership is meaningless because usa is in close to 1 million less homes than this time last year, the rating is all that matters and all wwe and the network are interested in 3.14 < 3.24


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Solid numbers, what people have to realize is your not going to get great increase in ratings these days unless the product hits a run of form which is longer than a an episode or two, it would require 6 months of hot TV with word of mouth spreading to finally see that translated in the numbers going up. 

for the moment and for the past 7 years their just fighting the tide, which is always coming down.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

As long as WWE doesn't make any irrational decisions and continues booking this Corporation storyline well as time progresses, the numbers will go up. The highest rated show since the night after Wrestlemania, not bad. Just keep booking the program well and build up other guys while you're at it, create interesting storylines up and down the card and the viewers will come and they'll be interested. It's a start.


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Great rating for this week's show. They deserved it for jump-starting a new angle that should grab viewers attention unless something drastically happens to change it all. They just need to make all the other angles important and engaging as well. But a 3.24 is something to cheer about for sure.


----------



## TKOW

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm just hoping the rating doesn't drop dramatically next week now the kiddies know Cena is away until 2014. You just know if it does that WWE will panic and do something stupid.


----------



## EternalFlameFilms

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



RatedR10 said:


> As long as WWE doesn't make any irrational decisions and continues booking this Corporation storyline well as time progresses, the numbers will go up. The highest rated show since the night after Wrestlemania, not bad. Just keep booking the program well and build up other guys while you're at it, create interesting storylines up and down the card and the viewers will come and they'll be interested. It's a start.


The Post summerslam viewership is down from last year, the rating is just different for some reason. They could get the same exact viewrship next week, and it could very well be a 3.07. It didnt really draw that well


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Great numbers considering the only interesting thing on the show is the Corporation storyline.


----------



## Robb Stark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Highest rating since post-Mania?

I guess Randal is a draw as champ. rton2

Oh wait, that's being selective and cherry picking statistics to support my views? Well it's not like people have ever done that to shit on Orton...


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.24 is a great number! Viewership was over 4 million for all 3 hours and was actually almost pushing 4.5 million. Success. I really enjoyed the show but damn the last hour dragged until the coronation. Punk being a primadonna and then 4 filler matches straight through was tough to watch and I actually sat up live for this. The USO tag was awesome, I have to say that. I was struggling but damn it was worth it for the GOATNESS we got at the end. Overrun should be an interesting number. They really went all out for that. Given the viewership of hour 3 and based on other hour 3's with similar numbers, my guess is between a 3.4-3.6 for the overrun rating. From the looks of it, 9pm should also have a healthy number too since that was a highly rated hour. The only bad thing about it all for WWE is that nothing is going to be able to compete with Football once it starts. At least we should have some great TV to bring us into the RTWM this year though and that's all I care about. 

LET DA MARK WARZ COMMENCE 8*D


----------



## Robb Stark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I really enjoyed the show *but damn the last hour dragged until the coronation*. Punk being a primadonna and then 4 filler matches straight through was tough to watch and I actually sat up live for this. The USO tag was awesome, I have to say that. I was struggling but damn it was worth it for the GOATNESS we got at the end.


I couldn't agree more. I had a massive headache at the time too, couldn't even think straight. Was getting angrier and angrier as they were drawing out the show as much as they could. Took the piss. The fucking ads too. THE FUCKING ADS!


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Robb Stark said:


> I couldn't agree more. I had a massive headache at the time too, couldn't even think straight. Was getting angrier and angrier as they were drawing out the show as much as they could. Took the piss. The fucking ads too. THE FUCKING ADS!


Couldn't agree more. Fuck sake WWE and USA, cool it with the damn ads!


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punks segments are going to tank so hard in the ratings now that he's feuding with Axel :wenger2


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Cliffy Byro said:


> Punks segments are going to tank so hard in the ratings now that he's feuding with Axel :wenger2


:HHH2 got a 3.4 with Axel

:cena5 got a 3.2 with Axel

IT CAN BE DONE!


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Highest rating since post WM RAW? I think we all know who's responsible. :bryan


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> Highest rating since post WM RAW? I think we all know who's responsible. :bryan


What?

:HHH2


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> What?


:HHH2 *+* :bryan *= One Sad* unk3




Starbuck said:


> LET DA MARK WARZ COMMENCE 8*D


You know dat war's over. Bryan's won.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> :HHH2 *+* :bryan *= One Sad* unk3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know dat war's over. Bryan's won.


Mark wars are never over I'm afraid. Now we're going to have Punk marks vs. Bryan marks vs. Orton marks for the rest of the year peppered with some 'We need John Cena back' and 'HHH/McMahons can't draw.' Things are going to get nasty lol.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> :HHH2 *+* :bryan *= One Sad* unk3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know dat war's over. Bryan's won.


What did you think of Bryan's 2.6 and Punk's 3.5 last week.

A million more people wanted to watch Punk then Bryan. There wasn't a war to begin with.unk2


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Mark wars are never over I'm afraid. Now we're going to have Punk marks vs. Bryan marks vs. Orton marks for the rest of the year peppered with some 'We need John Cena back' and 'HHH/McMahons can't draw.' Things are going to get nasty lol.


Come on now. You know you're gonna be laughing that ass off every step of the way. 




The Cynical Miracle said:


> What did you think of Bryan's 2.6 and Punk's 3.5 last week.
> 
> A million more people wanted to watch Punk then Bryan. There wasn't a war to begin with.unk2


I think Punk got lucky that battle royal boosted his numbers. What did you think of 2 of Punk's segments getting smoked by a diva's match for the first and second time in the history of RAW? :lmao

War's over. :bryan2 = PRESENT AND FUTURE


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Come on now. You know you're gonna be laughing that ass off every step of the way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think Punk got lucky that battle royal boosted his numbers. What did you think of 2 of Punk segments getting smoked by a diva's match for the first and second time in the history of RAW? :lmao
> 
> War's over. :bryan2


Divas out drew Bryan last week too. Well everything did lol. People would rather watch divas wrestle then the best worker in the world. A million and a half people watch Total Divas. Theres a lot of sad people out their who watch shit. What can I say.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> What did you think of Bryan's 2.6 and Lesnar's 3.5 last week.
> 
> A million more people wanted to watch Lesnar then Bryan. There wasn't a war to begin with.:brock



Fixed.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Divas out drew Bryan last week too. Well everything did lol. People would rather watch divas wrestle then the best worker in the world. A million and a half people watch Total Divas. Theres a lot of sad people out their who watch shit. What can I say.


Are we just making shit up now? Last week there was a divas mixed tag with Big E Langston and AJ Lee vs. The Great Khali and Natalya. It was the match with the ref botch. It drew a 1.81 quarter rating. Bryan drew a 2.6 as you said. Nice lie...er try.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So it begins.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> So it begins.


I gotta school these poor kids. And I can't disappoint you.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Are we just making shit up now? Last week there was a divas mixed tag with Big E Langston and AJ Lee vs. The Great Khali and Natalya. It was the match with the ref botch. It drew a 1.81 quarter rating. Bryan drew a 2.6. Nice lie...er try.





> *The Daniel Bryan vs. Wade Barrett and Randy Orton vs. Damien Sandow matches featuring two of the company’s current big four stars both only did 2.6 ratings, so the viewers weren’t there.
> 
> The Great Khali & Natalya vs. Big E Langston & A.J. Lee segment grew about 140,000 viewers*. The segment with Vince McMahon in the ring with Brad Maddox and then HHH coming out to set him up as the referee for the SummerSlam title match grew about 560,000 viewers to a 3.2 quarter. Alberto Del Rio vs. Kofi Kingston lost about 300,000 viewers. Then the Usos vs. Jack Swagger & Antonio Cesaro lost about 140,000 viewers. So the huge second hour gains were really all for the McMahon/Maddox segment carrying the hour as opposed to the entire hour. The Miz TV segment with John Cena and Daniel Bryan gained about 560,000 viewers as well, doing a 3.3. But it lost roughly the same 560,000 viewers when Fandango and R-Truth did their dance off. The Battle Royal did well, gaining about 400,000 viewers and then the C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman, Brock Lesnar and Curtis Axel segment gained more than 400,000 viewers as well, basically normal overrun, ending at a 3.5.


Dont argue with me about numbers ever again son. I got connections


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The thing is Punk and Bryan are good friends in real life. It would be funny a hell if they read this thread. :lol


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> I gotta school these poor kids. And I can't disappoint you.


I have heel Triple H back on my TV. Nothing can disappoint me now lol.


----------



## WWE

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Can't wait until the NFL season is back.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Happenstan, you're getting confused between the Males 18-49 numbers and the total audience numbers breakdowns that get posted weekly.


----------



## SonoShion

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



rabidwolverine27 said:


> The thing is Punk and Bryan are good friends in real life. It would be funny a hell if they read this thread. :lol


Probably drop a basement joke and facepalm for stupid marks arguing about ratings.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Dont argue with me about numbers ever again son. I got connections


Your connections need glasses.



The Cynical Miracle said:


> - Q2: Raw stayed at a 1.63 rating for Randy Orton vs. Damien Sandow and one commercial.
> 
> - Q4: Raw was flat with a 1.81 rating for the Mixed Tag Botch Match, plus one full commercial break.
> 
> - Q9: Raw jumped to a 2.37 rating for the first-half of the Cena-Bryan promo exchange. During this segment, Raw gained a chunk of viewers from "South Park."
> 
> - Q10: Raw fell to a 2.10 rating for the conclusion of Cena-Bryan, Fandango vs. R-Truth, and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PWtorch ratings report is so better then the Observer/
Click to expand...

 I'll take YOUR word for it. 1.81 vs a 2.37 that dropped to a 2.10. Orton drew a 1.63. :lol





D.M.N. said:


> Happenstan, you're getting confused between the Males 18-49 numbers and the total audience numbers breakdowns that get posted weekly.


As i said in a previous post I prefer talking about quarter hour breakdowns. That's about as accurate as you can get IMO but even then it isn't perfect.




Starbuck said:


> I have heel Triple H back on my TV. Nothing can disappoint me now lol.


You're gonna get a used shovel for Christmas.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> *Your connections need glasses.*
> 
> 
> 
> I'll take YOUR word for it. 1.81 vs a 2.37 that dropped to a 2.10. Orton drew a 1.63. :lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As i said in a previous post I'm talking about quarter hour breakdowns. That's about as accurate as you can get IMO but even then it isn't perfect.


Must admit, Pretty damn witty 

Good job leaving off DB's opening number and leaving on the one with the biggest star with the company



> - *Q1: Raw opened with a show-low 1.61 rating for an immediate jump into the ring for Daniel Bryan vs. Wade Barrett, plus one commercial. By comparison,* Bryan's show-opening "corporate make-over" segment last week scored a 2.02 rating in Q1.
> 
> - Q2: Raw stayed at a 1.63 rating for Randy Orton vs. Damien Sandow and one commercial.
> 
> - Q3: Raw jumped to a 1.82 rating for the finish of Orton-Sandow, which produced a stair-step increase from Q1 & Q2, plus two full commercial breaks.
> 
> - Q4: Raw was flat with a 1.81 rating for the Mixed Tag Botch Match, plus one full commercial break.


So eveything on the show drew higher then the DB match. Dont think thats happened Punk


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> Highest rating since post WM RAW? I think we all know who's responsible. :bryan


It was post Summerslam the 2nd biggest PPV of the year, maybe 3rd if you think the Rumble is bigger. The rating was gonna be pretty good im sure.

We'll see how it is next week.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Must admit, Pretty damn witty
> 
> Good job leaving off DB's opening number and leaving on the one with the biggest star with the company
> 
> 
> 
> So eveything on the show drew higher then the DB match. Dont think thats happened Punk


Yep, you're right. I didn't see last weeks opening so I wasn't looking for Bryan that early in the breakdown. You got me there, but I'd wager the same thing has happened to Punk as well due to less people watching the first hour. Like the breakdown shows, Orton was 2 tenths higher and now he's WWE champ. LEt's get back to what is really important. Bryan's soaring and Punk's dumpster diving with Axel.


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

heheheh, I am a mark and I will use whatever number or argument I can in such a biased way, to justify my idol as a draw, while the guys I don't like are not draws and if they get high ratings is only because there was a cool match before or he was in a segment with a real top draw (oh wait this same argument could be applied to my favourites, but hell I don't care, I just have to make a point here)

You guys should get a job from WWE, since you seem to understand audience fluctuation better than directives.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Yep, you're right. I didn't see last weeks opening so I wasn't looking for Bryan that early in the breakdown. You got me there, but I'd wager the same thing has happened to Punk as well due to less people watching the first hour. Like the breakdown shows, Orton was 2 tenths higher and now he's WWE champ. LEt's get back to what is really important. *Bryan's soaring* and Punk's dumpster diving with Axel.


If by that you mean Bryan getting killed by the Corporation every week until Cena saves his ass and he becomes the conquerer. Then yeah.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



MaybeLock said:


> You guys should get a job from WWE, since you seem to understand audience fluctuation better than directives.


No I don't. Just wise enough to see no one draws consistently apart from Cena and the part timers. I like exposing FOOL's thinking DB's a ratings draw.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> If by that you mean Bryan getting killed by the Corporation every week until Cena saves his ass and he becomes the conquerer. Then yeah.


They won't do that for the next 3-6 months. This whole Corporate storyline is about elevating Bryan. The blind can see that.




The Cynical Miracle said:


> No I don't. Just wise enough to see no one draws consistently apart from Cena and the part timers. I like exposing FOOL's thinking DB's a ratings draw.


At this point Bryan draws just as well as Punk does. Big when working with other big names, and not at all when by themselves. Considering the pushes both have had that makes Punk look pathetic and Bryan very green at the moment.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> They won't do that for the next 3-6 months. *This whole Corporate storyline is about elevating Bryan*. The blind can see that.
> 
> 
> 
> At this point Bryan draws just as well as Punk does. Big when working with other big names, and not at all when by themselves. Considering the pushes both have had that makes Punk look pathetic and Bryan very green at the moment.


lol

Yeah he does, but son, no one else does any better then anyone except Cena and par timers. the WWE machine won't get behind punk or DB to make them mega stars or face's of the company because they're small. Deal with it. The only reason why they are getting pushed at all is because the audience demanded it. You think Vince wanted to push either guy, theres a glass ceiling for both. DB's not getting a higher status then Punk because he's even smaller then him.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> lol


Heard the same reaction a year and a half ago after Mania 28 when I said Bryan would be the next big thing. Keep laughing. You'll see.



The Cynical Miracle said:


> You think Vince wanted to push either guy, theres a glass ceiling for both. DB's not getting a higher status then Punk because he's even smaller then him.


Vince, no. HHH, possibly. Bryan also has somethings going for him that Punk never will. 1. HHH's best bud HBK is pushing for Bryan. 2. Bryan is a nice guy who is easy to work with and puts on stellar matches bitch free. Punk has already been surpassed by Bryan. Bryan beat Cena CLEAN. Punk never has, and never will. Bryan is the lead face with Cena out. Punk is going to be fighting Axel for the IC title next RAW, and he'll probably lose there too due to Heyman. Game Over, son.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Heard the same reaction a year and a half ago after Mania 28 when I said* Bryan would be the next big thing.* Keep laughing. You'll see.
> 
> 
> 
> Vince, no. HHH, possibly. Bryan also has somethings going for him that Punk never will. 1. HHH's best bud HBK is pushing for Bryan. 2. Bryan is a nice guy who is easy to work with and puts on stellar matches bitch free. *Punk has already been surpassed by Bryan*. Bryan beat Cena CLEAN. Punk never has, and never will. Bryan is the lead face with Cena out. Punk is going to be fighting Axel for the IC title next RAW, and he'll probably lose there too due to Heyman. Game Over, son.


lol k. Punk and Bryan are fighting each other at WM in the middle of the card. Sorry to disappoint you.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> They won't do that for the next 3-6 months. This whole Corporate storyline is about elevating Bryan. The blind can see that.


No it's not. He's just filler for them til Cena comes back. Once they're done with him, he'll be back in the midcard. It's unfortunate but true.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^^ You 2 will see. The clean win over Cena should be a tip off but some people choose to remain blind right up until the end.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

3.24 is great, and over 4 million throughout. Successful show. Let's hope they can build on this positivity and steadily keep that interest. Ratings aren't go to spark into craziness overnight, it will take slow build and interesting TV.

Also, I wouldn't say Bryan is going to be jobbed out till Cena returns or such, he just beat Cena clean after a long build of going over everybody cleanly. I'd say they have a plan for him in the long term.



Starbuck said:


> So it begins.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It's sad a 3.2 is considered strong nowadays. Wasn't a 3.4-3.5 considered strong just few years ago. Next year will a 3.0 be a strong rating with a 2.8 avg? WWE future doesn't look to bright.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



CenaBoy4Life said:


> It's sad a 3.2 is considered strong nowadays. Wasn't a 3.4-3.5 considered strong just few years ago. Next year will a 3.0 be a strong rating with a 2.8 avg? WWE future doesn't look to bright.


For a 3 hour show, 3.2 looks strong. They kept 4 million viewers for a 3 show full of filler. That's strong.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Now that we are over a year into the three-hour experiment, here are some statistics:

- The yearly average from July 23rd, 2012 through to July 15th, 2013 was *4.21 million* viewers
- Three editions recorded an average above 5 million viewers (Raw 1000, Jan 28, Mar 4)
- 17 editions recorded an average below 4 million viewers

More statistics:

Highest ratings
1) 6.02 million (July 23rd, 2012) - Raw 1000
2) 5.02 million (January 28th, 2013) - post-Royal Rumble
3) 5.02 million (March 4th, 2013) - 'Old School' Raw
4) 4.81 million (March 11th, 2013)
5) 4.81 million (February 4th, 2013)
6) 4.71 million (February 25th, 2013)
7) 4.66 million (February 18th, 2013) - post-Elimination Chamber
8) 4.62 million (March 25th, 2013)
9) 4.61 million (April 8th, 2013) - post-WrestleMania
10) 4.55 million (January 14th, 2013) - Raw 20th Anniversary

Lowest ratings
1) 3.14 million (December 24th, 2012) - Christmas Eve
2) 3.44 million (December 3rd, 2012)
3) 3.50 million (October 1st, 2012)
4) 3.55 million (December 31st, 2012) - New Year's Eve
5) 3.55 million (October 22nd, 2012) - go-home Hell in a Cell
6) 3.68 million (June 3rd, 2013)
7) 3.76 million (December 10th, 2012)
8) 3.77 million (July 29th, 2013) - taped-Raw
9) 3.79 million (September 24th, 2012) - Punk/Ryback storyline beginning
10) 3.84 million (November 19th, 2012) - post-Survivor Series

And also, biggest gains and losses week on week:

Biggest gains
1) 868,000 (January 7th, 2013) - previous week was New Year's Eve + The Rock return
2) 703,000 (January 28th, 2013) - post-Royal Rumble
3) 606,000 (October 8th, 2012)
4) 548,000 (October 29th, 2012) - post-Hell in a Cell
5) 466,000 (December 17th, 2012) - post-TLC: Tables Ladders and Chairs
6) 411,000 (August 5th, 2013) - 
7) 408,000 (December 31st, 2012) - previous week was Christmas Eve
8) 402,000 (February 18th, 2013) - post-Elimination Chamber
9) 356,000 (March 25th, 2013)
10) 345,000 (August 20th, 2012) - post-SummerSlam (2012)

Biggest losses
1) 1.52 million (July 30th, 2012) - previous week was Raw 1000
2) 1.09 million (December 24th, 2012) - Christmas Eve
3) 553,000 (March 18th, 2013)
4) 550,000 (February 11th, 2013)
5) 484,000 (December 3rd, 2012)
6) 461,000 (April 15th, 2013)
7) 434,000 (October 22nd, 2012) - go-home Hell in a Cell
8) 368,000 (May 6th, 2013)
9) 358,000 (November 19th, 2012) - post-Survivor Series
10) 311,000 (April 1st, 2013) - go-home WrestleMania


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

And finally, monthly averages:

2012
- August - 4.37 million
- September - 4.04 million
- October - 3.85 million
- November - 4.01 million
- December - 3.63 million

2013
- January - 4.58 million
- February - 4.61 million
- March - 4.68 million
- April - 4.35 million
- May - 4.03 million
- June - 3.95 million
- July - 4.00 million
- August - 4.20 million (so far)


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Highest ratings
> 1) 6.02 million (July 23rd, 2012) - Raw 1000
> 2) 5.02 million (January 28th, 2013) - post-Royal Rumble
> 3) 5.02 million (March 4th, 2013) - 'Old School' Raw
> 4) 4.81 million (March 11th, 2013)
> 5) 4.81 million (February 4th, 2013)
> 6) 4.71 million (February 25th, 2013)
> 7) 4.66 million (February 18th, 2013) - post-Elimination Chamber
> 8) 4.62 million (March 25th, 2013)
> 9) 4.61 million (April 8th, 2013) - post-WrestleMania
> 10) 4.55 million (January 14th, 2013) - Raw 20th Anniversary


^ Essentially only RAW 1000 and Wrestlemania season numbers?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Practically all the highest performing shows took place on the RTWM while most of the lowest performing shows happened between Sept-Dec at the end of the year. This is surprising to no one.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SonoShion said:


> Probably drop a basement joke and facepalm for stupid marks arguing about ratings.


Well, if you saw how Punk went off on that fat dude...LOLno.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Jof said:


> ^ Essentially only RAW 1000 and Wrestlemania season numbers?





Starbuck said:


> Practically all the highest performing shows took place on the RTWM while most of the lowest performing shows happened between Sept-Dec at the end of the year. This is surprising to no one.


Indeed.

Will be interesting to see if the ratings go as low as last year. I hope not, as the main event program is stronger than last year. Last year we were lumbered with Ryback vs Punk that not even Heyman could save.


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KingLobos said:


> :russo Corporation is working :russo


lol. 


But yeah it is working and fun to watch. Hopefully they won't fuck it up. Although I get the feeling the corporation or whatever they're calling it, is just way too dominant. I mean heel Triple H? Vince Mcmahon? heel Orton? Fuck Bryan can't compete with that... not even in kayfabe. And really Bryan's character isn't all serious/tough like Steve Austin either. Not sure how this whole storyline is going to work out for them with a goofy topface. I mean the Yes/No can only work for so long before casuals realize its just a glorified comedy act.


----------



## murder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



CenaBoy4Life said:


> It's sad a 3.2 is considered strong nowadays. Wasn't a 3.4-3.5 considered strong just few years ago. Next year will a 3.0 be a strong rating with a 2.8 avg? WWE future doesn't look to bright.





Bryan D. said:


> For a 3 hour show, 3.2 looks strong. They kept 4 million viewers for a 3 show full of filler. That's strong.


It's not a bad rating, a 2.5 would be a bad rating. But let's be honest, it's not "strong" either. A rating in the high 3's would be strong.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Holy god damn, breakdown is gonna be fun today. Bryan's got a segment that's guaranteed to do well (in the overrun), but one that isn't exactly guaranteed (the opener, although being the direct fallout from Summerslam really should do well). Assuming it goes down that the opener disappoints as it has been for months now, and the overrun does exceptionally well, it's gonna be fun watching Bryan marks/haters battling it out. :lmao


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Holy god damn, breakdown is gonna be fun today. Bryan's got a segment that's guaranteed to do well (in the overrun), but one that isn't exactly guaranteed (the opener, although being the direct fallout from Summerslam really should do well). Assuming it goes down that the opener disappoints as it has been for months now, and the overrun does exceptionally well, it's gonna be fun watching Bryan marks/haters battling it out. :lmao


The breakdown will be posted today?


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Also going forward, its gonna really interesting with ratings because the main character in all of this, Triple H isn't a full timer wrestler/performer. This is not heel HHH from 2000, he's playing the heel boss and a kayfabe one at that(Its not truly Mr.mcmahon from the 90s if you know what I mean). He won't be physically getting in the middle of the ring and battle it out with Bryan, like he used to with Batista. Again, it all goes back to RAW desperately needing a Steve Austin, to make this work even for Triple H, otherwise it's going to flop. And I'm not sure Bryan is that guy honestly.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The opening segment these days is always one of the lower rated segments these days. I doubt this past week was any different.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> The breakdown will be posted today?


Well, it normally gets posted on Wednesdays... or at least used to. It's been a day behind for what seems like every other week for awhile now.



> The opening segment these days is always one of the lower rated segments these days. I doubt this past week was any different.


This week's opener is the direct fallout from Summerslam, which had the hook of the HHH heel turn. If that doesn't get people to tune in right away, then from this point on, yeah, we can't expect anything different. But the first quarter at the very least should do around a 3.0 this week with all things considered.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

"May - 4.03 million
- June - 3.95 million
- July - 4.00 million"

It''s a shame them months haven't been great for viewers, as they've arguably been the best months for quality wise in years.


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This week's opener had lot of hooks from Cena losing the title, Bryan clean win, HHH turn and finally Orton cashing in and NEW champ. You can even add Punk/lesnar fallout to that.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Well, it normally gets posted on Wednesdays... or at least used to. It's been a day behind for what seems like every other week for awhile now.
> 
> 
> 
> This week's opener is the direct fallout from Summerslam, which had the hook of the HHH heel turn. If that doesn't get people to tune in right away, then from this point on, yeah, we can't expect anything different. But the first quarter at the very least should do around a 3.0 this week with all things considered.


That's true. I guess it should do alittle higher than usual.


----------



## Mqwar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> That's true. I guess it should do alittle higher than usual.


RAW opened exactly against NFL preseason game at 7:59, that drew a strong 5.57 million viewers for ESPN. Above 4m for the first hour is a success.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Mqwar said:


> RAW opened exactly against NFL preseason game at 7:59, that drew a strong 5.57 million viewers for ESPN. Above 4m for the first hour is a success.


I agree above 4 million for the first hour is a success. Hell, they did above 4 million all 3 hours, which was a surprise to me.


----------



## ecabney

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> No it's not. He's just filler for them til Cena comes back. Once they're done with him, he'll be back in the midcard. It's unfortunate but true.


:lmao at people still thinking Bryan's gonna get demoted to midcard after he beat Cena clean as a whistle in the middle of the ring. Bryan will be booked as the number 2 guy at worst moving forward.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan isn't as solidified as some would make out, but he's not going back to the mid-card after beating Cena clean. At the very worst, he'll be a low-tier main eventer, and that's it.


----------



## El Capitano

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Bryan isn't as solidified as some would make out, but he's not going back to the mid-card after beating Cena clean. At the very worst, he'll be a low-tier main eventer, and that's it.


Yup he's main event now. Can't see him becoming the face of the company permenantly but he will be the number 2 guy


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

He'll be the main event guy until the part-timers start to show up again for Mania. Even then, he'll have a very high-level match - either for the title or against a part-timer (HHH).


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good. Bryan bringing in the highest rating since post Raw WM.

And Bryan isn't falling too much when Cena returns..he beat him in the middle of the ring. Str8 up. They're not doing some immediate rematch when returns either. It's gonna be Mania season and Cena is gonna get murdered by the Undertaker.


----------



## Jupiter Jack Daniels

AthenaMark said:


> Good. Bryan bringing in the highest rating since post Raw WM.


Thanks to the King of Kings and the Viper 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## El Capitano

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



AthenaMark said:


> *Good. Bryan bringing in the highest rating since post Raw WM.*
> 
> And Bryan isn't falling too much when Cena returns..he beat him in the middle of the ring. Str8 up. They're not doing some immediate rematch when returns either. It's gonna be Mania season and Cena is gonna get murdered by the Undertaker.


Didnt realise the overrun was just Bryan standing in the ring by himself :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I didn't realize the overrun rating was out. :lol


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Fresh Dougie said:


> Thanks to the King of Kings and the Viper


BUT CRIPPLE H AND BLANDY CAN'T DRAW!!!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

We've already been through this. 

You Bryan/Orton/HHH marks need to realize it's :henry1 that brought in the viewers on Raw this week.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Blandy has never drew in his [email protected] to give him credit for Cripple talking for him. Haha..the internet is so cute.


----------



## Mqwar

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Was mark henry even there on RAW? I don't seem to recall if he was.


----------



## Jupiter Jack Daniels

AthenaMark said:


> Blandy has never drew in his [email protected] to give him credit for Cripple talking for him. Haha..the internet is so cute.


I bet he drew in kindergarten. 

I bet he draws his bath water.

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



El Capitano said:


> Didnt realise the overrun was just Bryan standing in the ring by himself :lol


The whole thing was set up because everyone knew Bryan was coming out to interrupt...u think a heel celebration is a hook to draw viewers? Are u crazy? Especially two heels that have drove away viewers since Benoit was alive. Lol..get fucking real.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> We've already been through this.
> 
> You Bryan/Orton/HHH marks need to realize it's :henry1 that brought in the viewers on Raw this week.


HHH has marks? I count about 5 of us including me lol. Where are these GAME marks. We must band together and start burying bitches.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> HHH has marks? I count about 5 of us including me lol. Where are these GAME marks. We must band together and start burying bitches.


Yup, they're around. First recruit austin3:16g.o.a.t to your burying stable. He makes up about 10 worth. Then find the rest. :HHH2


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Them Bryan marks trying to defend their boy after he's been bombing every week now.

:bryan2

Dat show-low 2.6 last week.

(Sorry, had to. The butthurt, it's just so funny.)


----------



## ecabney

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Them Bryan marks trying to defend their boy after he's been bombing every week now.
> 
> :bryan2
> 
> Dat show-low 2.6 last week.
> 
> (Sorry, had to. *The butthurt, it's just so funny.*)



The irony :jordan


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What do I have to be butthurt about though? CM GOAT brings it, something Bryan and Orton can't do. Them 2.6s, that 3.5.


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> HHH has marks? I count about 5 of us including me lol. Where are these GAME marks. We must band together and start burying bitches.


Ahem.


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This thread is hilarious lol.


----------



## ecabney

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> *What do I have to be butthurt about though?* CM GOAT brings it, something Bryan and Orton can't do. Them 2.6s, that 3.5.


CM Trap not being chosen to be the top face of the company while Cena's out :jordan

Bringing up irrelevant top hour numbers when no one is pulling three's in the first hour :jordan


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Happenstan is now using ratings to justify why Bryan is now better than Punk. Since when is having people watching your segments an indicator of talent and ability? I'm pretty sure Khali drew some pretty big numbers back in 2006, that tell you how important ratings are.

God, what a dumb ass. Next he's probably going to tell us about the secret pro-Bryan messages he's getting in his Alpha-Bits as proof.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think I read somebody on here say that Bryan is the number 2 guy. Pretty sure it was Happenstan too. Because you know, a few weeks of the main event and the guy eclipses Orton and Punk. He's got a whiles to go.

Besides, you can't forget about those TOUR BUSES.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> What do I have to be butthurt about though? CM GOAT brings it, something Bryan and Orton can't do. Them 2.6s, that 3.5.





ecabney said:


> CM Trap not being chosen to be the top face of the company while Cena's out :jordan
> 
> Bringing up irrelevant top hour numbers when no one is pulling three's in the first hour :jordan







That's all this is.



Starbuck said:


> HHH has marks? I count about 5 of us including me lol. Where are these GAME marks. We must band together and start burying bitches.


I'm a Game mark...Let them bicker amongst themselves, we REALLY know who was responsible for that rating Monday :HHH2

The nose is a draw.


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So who did better in art class when they were a kid ? I herd Punk couldn't draw well or Bryan couldn't either. :troll


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

FFS, HENRY DRAWS BETTER THAN EVERYONE! LEAVE IT AT FUCKING THAT!

Oh, and :rock4


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*










That starpower.

:mark:


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I think I read somebody on here say that Bryan is the number 2 guy. Pretty sure it was Happenstan too. Because you know, a few weeks of the main event and the guy eclipses Orton and Punk. He's got a whiles to go.
> 
> Besides, you can't forget about those TOUR BUSES.


Bryan is above Punk currently in the pecking order. Surely, you can agree to that?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> Bryan is above Punk currently in the peckign order. Surely, you can agree to that?


Do you really believe that?

It's Bryan and Orton's time to be in the top of the card, but you think that means they're both suddenly above Punk/Cena? Those two are secured as the two top dogs in the WWE and will be for a long time now.

Bryan's _just_ starting his push, too. Sit down, marks.


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

When will Bryan get his own tour bus and private jet ?


:cena2rton2unk2


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Lady Killer said:


> Ahem.


ME YOU AND KOK THAT'S IT WE ARE THREE US AGAINST THE WORLD



KO Bossy said:


> I'm a Game mark...


Well fuck sake speak up Bossy. You're letting the team down. 

Current GAME mark count: 4


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Do you really believe that?
> 
> It's Bryan and Orton's time to be in the top of the card, but you think that means they're both suddenly above Punk/Cena? Those two are secured as the two top dogs in the WWE and will be for a long time now.
> 
> Bryan's _just_ starting his push, too. Sit down, marks.


What's there to believe? Its the way it is, you did watch Summerslam and Raw right? No one talked about Cena. No need to bring him up.


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I been a fan of Triple H since 2001. WM 17 Taker vs Triple H I will never forget that match. I was 5 and I thought they were gonna wrestle on Smackdown at the time. Didn't know any better so my dad bought me the WM 17 on VHS I must have watched that 100 times when I was a kid.


----------



## BIGFOOT

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ecabney said:


> The irony :jordan


I dont think irony means what you think it does. :brock

When it comes to heel HHH, consider me the Kelly Kelly Fan of HHH marks. Minus the Downs Syndrome of course.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

We need JDMan back. He's worth about 100 HHH marks.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan and Orton are definitely the two top guys for the company at the moment. Cena is out with the injury so he's not even in the equation until he returns.

With that said, the biggest draw this company has is definitely:


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> We need JDMan back. He's worth about 100 HHH marks.


The pedigreeing his cat posts will always be the greatest in this forum's history.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> Bryan is above Punk currently in the pecking order. Surely, you can agree to that?


Punk has spent almost the entire year facing guys like Cena, Rock, Taker and Brock Lesnar. The only guy Bryan has fought who comes close is just Cena. Just because Bryan is currently in the top angle doesn't translate to him being a bigger star.


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk and bryan marks arguing about ratings and shit is a damn shame. No wonder why cm punk dislikes his marks. 

I love how last year punk was doing horribly in the ratings and punk marks were like ratings don't matter and aren't accurate but now they are trying to put down bryan for the same damn thing.


----------



## jonyrko

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yes! Raw Was Awasome


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Them Bryan marks trying to defend their boy after he's been bombing every week now.
> 
> :bryan2
> 
> Dat show-low 2.6 last week.
> 
> (Sorry, had to. The butthurt, it's just so funny.)


Instead of worrying about what Bryan and Orton are doing in the ratings department, shouldn't you be focusing on how awesome CM Punk is going to look with that IC title around his waist? :lmao :lmao :lmao


Also, Starbuck sign me up as a temporary HHH mark. I have to mark for somebody while my darling Sheamus is injured.

:angel


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Its funny Punk marks get butthurt when someone talks about Bryan surpassing Punk, when you guys did the exact same shit back in 2011. Remember "Punk surpassed Orton" posts? lol


----------



## The Lady Killer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG, FUCK! :HHH


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:lmao


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Slowhand said:


> Punk has spent almost the entire year facing guys like Cena, Rock, Taker and Brock Lesnar. The only guy Bryan has fought who comes close is just Cena. Just because Bryan is currently in the top angle doesn't translate to him being a bigger star.


Punk never beat Cena clean. EVER. Bryan did it in his first PPV match itself and is now feuding against entire fucking corporate WWE. Plus Punk never beat any part time stars. Loss after loss. Humiliation.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:taker

This thread has just went to a whole other level.

(Oh, and we needed the Taker smilie used asap)


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> Happenstan is now using ratings to justify why Bryan is now better than Punk. Since when is having people watching your segments an indicator of talent and ability? I'm pretty sure Khali drew some pretty big numbers back in 2006, that tell you how important ratings are.
> 
> God, what a dumb ass. Next he's probably going to tell us about the secret pro-Bryan messages he's getting in his Alpha-Bits as proof.


The biggest marks are always the ones that use ratings to justify who is talented or not when in reality it has no baring on talent whatsoever.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



rabidwolverine27 said:


> So who did better in art class when they were a kid ? I herd Punk couldn't draw well or Bryan couldn't either. :troll


Punk could draw when borrowed stencils from Rock, Cena, Taker and the like, but he couldn't hold up by himself. unk



The Lady Killer said:


> CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG, FUCK! :HHH


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I never thought I'd see the day when CM Punk and Daniel Bryan marks went to war with each other. Dear Lord. But I'll be damned if it isn't the funniest thing I've ever seen. This is fucking splendid.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I never thought I'd see the day when CM Punk and Daniel Bryan marks went to war with each other. Dear Lord. But I'll be damned if it isn't the funniest thing I've ever seen. This is fucking splendid.


Come on, you had to have seen it coming. In fact, pretty sure there were some back when they were feuding in 2012... although now Bryan marks have something strong to back it up (beating Cena clean and being the focal point in this storyline).

Eh, I'm enjoying it. I'm a mark for both. unk2 :bryan


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I wanna see Triple H squash Punk and Bryan to see this forum explode. :lol


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Come on, you had to have seen it coming. In fact, pretty sure there were some back when they were feuding in 2012... although now Bryan marks have something strong to back it up (beating Cena clean and being the focal point in this storyline).
> 
> Eh, I'm enjoying it. I'm a mark for both. unk2 :bryan


Bryan marks seem happy and are perhaps overreacting a little to his push at the minute but that happens when your guy gets a run at the top. Punk marks though, well, they just seem mad at the world right now. I don't know what the fuck is going on but it's hilarious.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Crusade said:


> The biggest marks are always the ones that use ratings to justify who is talented or not when in reality it has no baring on talent whatsoever.


Wrestling ratings-last refuge of proof for a fool.

Can't we all just be happy that :HHH owned that final segment? I don't understand why people get on him for being long winded, either. That's how he's always been.

Imagine them doing some segments showing how great it is to be corporate, and how Bryan's beard makes him a nobody? Like have Hunter and Orton at the country club shooting 9 holes (and Trips needs to be in khaki shorts, a salmon colored golf shirt, deck shoes and is wearing a tam). And its just them acting rich and cool, living the high life. Then you see some guy who has a beard like Bryan try to get in and security just tosses him out while Orton/Hunter laugh and drink champagne. Make them really rub it in how great it is to be face of the WWE, and how someone like Bryan was just destined to be below them. I want cocky, douchebag corporate Triple H and Orton.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*






Fast forward to 30 minutes in. That's the shirt Triple H needs to be wearing.


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk was the champ for 434 days for fuck sake. Would Punk marks still bitch if he squashed Taker Cena and Rock in under a minute ? :lol:lol:lol


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^^^^^^^ Yeah, I'm pretty sure they would actually. Never happy that lot. 



KO Bossy said:


> Wrestling ratings-last refuge of proof for a fool.
> 
> Can't we all just be happy that :HHH owned that final segment? I don't understand why people get on him for being long winded, either. That's how he's always been.
> 
> Imagine them doing some segments showing how great it is to be corporate...


BREAKFAST WWE CORPORATE STYLE


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I never thought I'd see the day when CM Punk and Daniel Bryan marks went to war with each other. Dear Lord. But I'll be damned if it isn't the funniest thing I've ever seen. This is fucking splendid.


Lucky for me I'm just a fan, not a mark. I don't care which of the two is the bigger star, both being where they are right now is like fantasy booking come to life. 

As for ratings, I give less than zero about it.


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> Fast forward to 30 minutes in. That's the shirt Triple H needs to be wearing.


I miss that intro so much.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> BREAKFAST WWE CORPORATE STYLE


If that picture had the salmon golf shirt, it'd be 100% perfect.

It needs to be a video, then have Trips saying "garcon! WHERE ARE THE CAPERS?!" He even looks somewhat unimpressed, like the waiter forgot the Hollondaise on his eggs benedict.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> ^^^^^^^ Yeah, I'm pretty sure they would actually. Never happy that lot.


I'm happy with how they handle Punk


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> I'm happy with how they handle punk


Well, you've always been the sensible Punk mark around here. Something that's about as easy to find as aliens.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> I'm happy with how they handle Punk


Same. He just had a 434 day reign and had some great feuds with Taker and Lesnar/Heyman. Not to thrilled about a possible Axel feud but then again it's mostly just gonna be used to continue Heyman/Lesnar vs Punk.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Can anyone enlighten me on who are all these Punk marks who are "unhappy/angry"? I mean, I don't follow all the posts, but I can think of maybe 1-2 that fit the bill for what's being described.

I'm personally happy with how they've handled Punk and while someone like Axel may be beneath him, it furthers the feud with Heyman and gives Punk something to do instead of floating around aimlessly.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I have no complaints about Punk. I wanted him to beat Brock, but they put out a classic match so who cares? Punk's had a stellar year and the best 3 matches in the WWE in 2013. On fire like always.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Where's this bitching all of you are complaining about coming from?

I am loving Punk's position. No problem with him losing another big match to Lesnar either, because it was an incredible, five star bout imo. He doesn't need to be in the top program all of the time to be recognized as the best performer currently.


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Who even cares? Fuck punk and his butthurt marks. Get back to ratings and the GOAT :bryan. 




Dunmer said:


> Same. He just had a 434 day reign and had some great feuds with Taker and Lesnar/Heyman. Not to thrilled about a possible Axel feud but then again it's mostly just gonna be used to continue Heyman/Lesnar vs Punk.


Epic sig :lol


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/general-wwe/928889-curtis-axel-does-not-deserve-cm-punk.html

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/929777-punk-vs-axel-ic-title-what-should-happen.html

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/926033-daniel-bryan-discussion-thread-ii-62.html

Knock yourself out.


----------



## rabidwolverine27

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The worst Punk mark on here is mblonde09.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/general-wwe/928889-curtis-axel-does-not-deserve-cm-punk.html
> 
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/929777-punk-vs-axel-ic-title-what-should-happen.html
> 
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/926033-daniel-bryan-discussion-thread-ii-62.html
> 
> Knock yourself out.


Not gonna read through all the posts, but most of what I skimmed over seems fine. Just a couple of people who want Punk to be WWE Champion and main event Mania for the next 50 years and nothing less.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:ti this thread never disappoints


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> I'm happy with how they handle Punk


Me too, he is in the storyline of the year right now with Heyman and his guys and is still in a very high profile feud. Loving Punk's character too.

Punk and Bryan are my two guys and they are the two top faces currently with Cena out. I couldn't be any happier.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Crusade said:


> Me too, he is in the storyline of the year right now with Heyman and his guys and is still in a very high profile feud. Loving Punk's character too.
> 
> Punk and Bryan are my two guys and they are the two top faces currently with Cena out. I couldn't be any happier.


I agree completely. Some people just want more than the world.


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> he is in the *storyline of the year* right now with Heyman


lol.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> lol.


You're like, the worst troll ever.

Seriously, bring back JDMan.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> lol.


:lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Storyline of the year right now?

:HHH2


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> lol.


:lmao.

Really? That's the response you give me? At least be a little imaginative if you're trying to insult me unk2

The new corporation/Bryan storyline has just started so its way too early to tell how good it'll end up. Punk/Heyman has had way more time and has thus far delivered big time, hence why I said that.


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*










Dis thread man.

BRING ON THE BREAKDOWNS(both ratings and mark)


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nothing in the last two years even comes close to Heyman/Lesnar vs. Punk. I don't even care what anybody says, from the build to the match, it was pro wrestling perfection.

Opinions, though~~


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ok So Crusade purposely drops the "storyline of the year" statement to get the marks going, but now I'm the troll here?


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

When the fuck did Bryan and Punk marks started feuding? Are Punk marks mad because there can only be one indy, vanilla midget on top?


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> Ok So Crusade purposely drops the "storyline of the year" statement to get the marks going, but now I'm the troll here?


How am I trying to get the marks going? By stating my opinion? Boy you are an idiot :lmao fpalm.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> Ok So Crusade purposely drops the "storyline of the year" statement to get the marks going, but now I'm the troll here?


Well it certainly looks like it got you going.


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Crusade said:


> How am I trying to get the marks going? By stating my opinion? Boy you are an idiot :lmao fpalm.




You knew a statement like that was going to get a reaction from Bryan fans, especially with the ongoing Bryan vs Mcmahon saga. Don't act like you didn't realize because if you didn't, it really makes you seem dumb.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Some of you are blowing the Punk/Bryan mark wars out of proportion, Starbuck especially with her baiting.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Holy crap, all this mention of unk is bringing a lot of views to this thread. unk2 is doin' his thing drawing in viewers. People need to accept that unk3 is the biggest draw of all time and the sooner unk4 is recognized in that light, the sooner people can accept unk5 is the GOAT. unk6 > :bryan rton :HHH :vince3


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> You knew a statement like that was going to get a reaction from Bryan fans, especially with the ongoing Bryan vs Mcmahon saga. Don't act like you didn't realize.


Do you even see who I have in my signature?! fpalm. And you are calling me dumb...

I'm not trying to troll anybody, I was simply stating how happy I was for my two favourite wrestlers in the E' and in the current positions and storylines they are in. And yeah I dropped my opinion on the Punk/Lesnar feud, so what? I can't have an opinion now without people like you accusing me of trying to get a reaction? I wasn't trying to do anything. You're just being paranoid and reading into everything.

You realize when people criticize others for being such delousional marks for their favourite wrestlers to the point of insanity that this is the type of shit they are talking about?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

A Punk/Bryan mark war wouldn't even work. Bryan just isn't even in the same league. Might as well be having a Cena/Del Rio mark war while we're at it.

unk :cena3


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Holy crap, all this mention of unk is bringing a lot of views to this thread. unk2 is doin' his thing drawing in viewers. People need to accept that unk3 is the biggest draw of all time and the sooner unk4 is recognized in that light, the sooner people can accept unk5 is the GOAT. unk6 > :bryan rton :HHH :vince3


DAT SANDRONE! :vince5


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The only thing all this mention of unk has brought, is a bad reputation to this thread. Seriously more than 50% of the posters in this forum, consider this thread a joke and it happened because of Punk marks overrating the fuck outta their guy. You know its true.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I can't wait to watch these next few months unfold. If you think there is some anger on here now, wait a few months.

:yes

And Bryan and Punk not in the same league? Obviously everyone in WWE doesn't feel that way. unk


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> The only thing all this mention of unk has brought, is a bad reputation to this thread. Seriously more than 50% of the posters in this forum, consider this thread a joke and it happened because of Punk marks overrating the fuck outta their guy. You know its true.


No, the fact that so many think ratings are even important made this thread a joke.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> The only thing all this mention of unk has brought, is a bad reputation to this thread. Seriously more than 50% of the posters in this forum, consider this thread a joke and it happened because of Punk marks overrating the fuck outta their guy. You know its true.


Can't overrate perfection unk2


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> The only thing all this mention of unk has brought, is a bad reputation to this thread. Seriously more than 50% of the posters in this forum, consider this thread a joke and it happened because of Punk marks overrating the fuck outta their guy. You know its true.


This thread had a good reputation?

When? When was this?


----------



## Contrarian

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Slowhand said:


> No, the fact that *so many think* ratings are even important made this thread a joke.


Yeah like Punk marks.


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> A Punk/Bryan mark war wouldn't even work. Bryan just isn't even in the same league. Might as well be having a Cena/Del Rio mark war while we're at it.
> 
> unk :cena3


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm actually :lmao at the stupidity of this guy Contrarian actually thinking I'm trying to bait people.

NEWSFLASH GENIUS: 1) You can be a fan of both Punk and Bryan, I know it might seem alien to you but you can and 2) You can state an opinion without trying to stir something up....you know, just saying what you think.

I swear this guy is hitting the nimrod/HEELkris/KKF level of stupidity.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> This thread had a good reputation?
> 
> When? When was this?


Back when Rock316GOAT was burying everyone who had debuted since 2004.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> Yeah like Punk marks.


:lmao

Yeah sure. Should have seen the Rock fans during Mania season, fucking ridiculous.


----------



## ecabney

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> I can't wait to watch these next few months unfold. If you think there is some anger on here now, wait a few months.
> 
> :yes
> 
> And Bryan and Punk not in the same league? Obviously everyone in WWE doesn't feel that way. unk


Punk out chea feuding with bums like Axel in top of the hour segments. No overruns for him until mania season


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RATINGS THREAD HISTORY 101 (from my POV):

1) Punk does shoot, mentions "Dwayne"
2) Rock marks offended
3) Weekly ratings threads ensue as a means for Rock marks to trash Punk's talents and later segments, even in segments that didn't do horribly
4) Punk marks respond, do go overboard with certain things, and then everyone not a Punk mark turns against them
5) 2012 thread is made
6) 434 day title reign, Punk gets trashed for ratings going down throughout the year
7) In the midst of the above, 2013 thread is made
8) Bryan rolls a lot of momentum into Summerslam, wins, and Bryan marks celebrate
9) Punk marks try to discredit Bryan's push, and Bryan marks go overboard in response
10) Punk/Bryan mark wars ensue

_*When referring to "Punk marks", "Rock marks", and "Bryan marks", I am not speaking about the whole group, only the worst of the worst of them._


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Contrarian said:


> Yeah like Punk marks.


Why comment on things you clearly don't even comprehend? If anything ruined what credibility this thread had lol), it was actually Punk haters who kept blaming him and him alone for the low ratings. Guys like Billion Dollar Man, Bossdude and Hawksea coming in every week and calling a 2.7 overall rating all his fault, despite Punk's one segment being the highest rated.

Do me a favor-draw me a direct correlation with undeniable proof that shows how a rating can prove that one person is more talented and has better ability than another. I'll be interested to see that.

This thread serves a single purpose. People try to manipulate numbers to justify their own personal feelings. Bryan segment did well? Well that means he's the best in the company and this number somehow proves it. Punk segment didn't do well? He's an overrated piece of shit who should be a mid carder, and you should all hate him like I do because this number says so. Why? Because some number indicates how many people across America are watching. Forget personal opinions or tastes, that number is the only factor that can tell you what and what not to enjoy. A fucking number. Not what's going on on TV, but how many people are watching it equates to its goodness or lack thereof. A FUCKING NUMBER.

That is the logic of the incredibly stupid/mentally retarded.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

God bless Rock316AE.

That trailblazer PAVED THE WAY into wrestling fans talking about numbers. It didnt happen before him. But when the master preached dat wisdom of numbers, ratings, buyrates etc people have been doing it ever since.

Many have try'd to duplicate his talent e.g Billion Dollar Man, Hawksea etc. But simply no one compares 

truly one of the GOAT WF Members


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That's a lie. CM Punk's one segment was DAMN sure not the highest of the whole show at that point. He didn't get anywhere near close to decent ratings until he did some stuff with AJ Lee, Vince McMahon, Paul Heyman that one time, and eventually the Rock feud. He was getting some of the worst ratings since Michaels and Diesel were on top. It was pre-Austin levels of debauchery.

And numbers do matter..that's the whole justification for why Cena has been on top this entire time.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock316AE is a legend in here. It was hilarious how many jimmies he rustled when he first registered and kept burying Punk. :lol

He was such a draw, rants made about him, youtube comments directed at him and I think he's even been name-dropped in other forums. Hell, his name shows up on google search suggestions.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Rock316AE is a legend in here. It was hilarious how many jimmies he rustled when he first registered and kept burying Punk. :lol
> 
> He was such a draw, rants made about him, youtube comments directed at him and I think he's even been name-dropped in other forums. Hell, his name shows up on google search suggestions.


He first registered and started the burying back when you liked Punk in 2011. Man, that's too long ago. It's a damn shame he only posts in the football thread now


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> He first registered and started the burying back when you liked Punk in 2011. Man, that's too long ago. It's a damn shame he only posts in the football thread now


Haha, I remember that. But he came through with facts so I would always stay out of arguments with him since there was no comeback material despite other hardcore Punk marks' efforts with the same ol' "WHY U CARE ABT RATINGZZZ!!!??".


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Its a damn shame that Rock316AE and Tyrion Lannister never had an argument over CM Punk and The Rock. 

I'd legit pay money to see that.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Rock316AE is a legend in here. It was hilarious how many jimmies he rustled when he first registered and kept burying Punk. :lol
> 
> He was such a draw, rants made about him, youtube comments directed at him and I think he's even been name-dropped in other forums. Hell, his name shows up on google search suggestions.


Wow, he's right. There's even a Wrestling Forum Wiki page about him.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The sooner you irrelevant extremists on both sides of the Punk/Bryan "mark war" (or in any mark war, really) realize how stupid and childish you all sound, the better this forum will get.

Pathetic.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> RATINGS THREAD HISTORY 101 (from my POV):
> 
> 1) Punk does shoot, mentions "Dwayne"
> 2) Rock marks offended
> 3) Weekly ratings threads ensue as a means for Rock marks to trash Punk's talents and later segments, even in segments that didn't do horribly
> 4) Punk marks respond, do go overboard with certain things, and then everyone not a Punk mark turns against them
> 5) 2012 thread is made
> 6) 434 day title reign, Punk gets trashed for ratings going down throughout the year
> 7) In the midst of the above, 2013 thread is made
> 8) Bryan rolls a lot of momentum into Summerslam, wins, and Bryan marks celebrate
> 9) Punk marks try to discredit Bryan's push, and Bryan marks go overboard in response
> 10) Punk/Bryan mark wars ensue
> 
> _*When referring to "Punk marks", "Rock marks", and "Bryan marks", I am not speaking about the whole group, only the worst of the worst of them._


So was it at step 9 that Punk marks decided to act like mini-Pyros.



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Its a damn shame that Rock316AE and Tyrion Lannister never had an argument over CM Punk and The Rock.
> 
> I'd legit pay money to see that.


I think they conversed once or twice about the subject, but it sadly never got vicious.



BIG E WINNING said:


> The sooner you irrelevant extremists on both sides of the Punk/Bryan "mark war" (or in any mark war, really) realize how stupid and childish you all sound, the better this forum will get.
> 
> Pathetic.


Damn, Winning, your gif keeps distracting me everytime I see it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> So was it at step 9 that Punk marks decided to act like mini-Pyros.


A few of them, yes.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The best Rock316AE moment for me was when he tried to transfer his propaganda into the one thread in this website worth a damn (Official DVD/Match Thread) only to get shunned and crushed.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This thread is better than wrestling itself.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> This thread is better than wrestling itself.


Nope. The GOAT Thread (RIP :taker) was the only thing better than wrestling itself. Frequent Rock316AE posts.


----------



## #Mark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Anyone else remember when Bryan marks were Punk marks and vice versa? It's a rarity to see that nowadays.


----------



## Da Silva

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



#Mark said:


> Anyone else remember when Bryan marks were Punk marks and vice versa? It's a rarity to see that nowadays.


The vast majority of people like both Punk and Bryan. You've only gotten that impression because this forum draws some particularly load, vitriolic cunts who argue about small differences as though the fate of all that fucking exists depended on it. And they drown out the largely apathetic masses who don't really care enough to argue with them.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Went to take a nap, came back and this thread... what the fuck happened!? 

Never change, ratings thread. Never change. :lmao


----------



## EndOfAnEra

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Who much gained the final segment?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



EndOfAnEra said:


> Who much gained the final segment?


Bryan gained much in final segment.


----------



## EndOfAnEra

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Bryan gained much in final segment.


:bryan


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Where is the breakdown?


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

bboy > rock316


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> Back when Rock316GOAT was burying everyone who had debuted since 2004.


What the hell ever happened to him anyway? He kind of pissed off into oblivion after Cena beat Rock at Mania it seems.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> What the hell ever happened to him anyway? He kind of pissed off into oblivion after Cena beat Rock at Mania it seems.


He's still around. I've spotted him viewing this thread _today_. But he doesn't post very often outside of the football threads in the bottom of the main page.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Rock316AE's trying to emulate his idol. Posts here as often as Rock wrestles. :rock4


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Did we ever get a breakdown or is this just hhh, Bryan, and orton marks fighting for all these pages? lol


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> He's still around. I've spotted him viewing this thread _today_. But he doesn't post very often outside of the football threads in the bottom of the main page.


Ah I see. You would think he would have at least posted a few times in the Punk/Lesnar thread? I mean that thread seemed like a goldmine for his opinions :lol.



The Sandrone said:


> Rock316AE's trying to emulate his idol. Posts here as often as Rock wrestles. :rock4


Sounds about right :lol.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just read the last few pages of this thread.

Fuckin' awesome. :lmao


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

He's not worried about ratings during this time of year, he'll make his triumphant return when the important stuff is about to go down and relegates the rest down pecking order :rock4 unk3 :bryan2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

OMG, what if Rock doesn't return? Does that mean no Rock316AE posts in this thread ever again? 





(posted this one because NearFall beat me to "Leave the Memories Alone")


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



VGooBUG said:


> Did we ever get a breakdown or is this just hhh, Bryan, and orton marks fighting for all these pages? lol


:lmao:lmao:lmao I just desperately look through all the shenanigans hoping to find it. I just hope everyone is at least having fun debating. That's what's really good about this thread and the forum at least.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well enough of this where's waldo shit, back to the funny...of watching Punktards try to convince us all their world isn't shattering.



Fresh Dougie said:


> I bet he draws his bath water.


Orton goes to the papers with this sort of thing....wet wipes.




KO Bossy said:


> Happenstan is now using ratings to justify why Bryan is now better than Punk. Since when is having people watching your segments an indicator of talent and ability? I'm pretty sure Khali drew some pretty big numbers back in 2006, that tell you how important ratings are.
> 
> God, what a dumb ass. Next he's probably going to tell us about the secret pro-Bryan messages he's getting in his Alpha-Bits as proof.


Are you ever gonna get over me? I told you, it's not you, it's me. I was lying, but you don't need to know that. Take all this obsession and funnel it into something productive like suicide. :flip 




LovelyElle890 said:


> Instead of worrying about what Bryan and Orton are doing in the ratings department, shouldn't you be focusing on how awesome CM Punk is going to look with that IC title around his waist? :lmao :lmao :lmao


:lol Incoming green rep.




Contrarian said:


> Its funny Punk marks get butthurt when someone talks about Bryan surpassing Punk, when you guys did the exact same shit back in 2011. Remember "Punk surpassed Orton" posts? lol


What are you doing? You can't use facts to back up your position. 




JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> When the fuck did Bryan and Punk marks started feuding? Are Punk marks mad because there can only be one indy, vanilla midget on top?


Yes. Yes they are.




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> A Punk/Bryan mark war wouldn't even work. Bryan just isn't even in the same league. Might as well be having a Cena/Del Rio mark war while we're at it.


----------



## joeycalz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The one week that I ACTUALLY want to see the ratings, everybody is bitching and complaining. Sigh.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> What the hell ever happened to him anyway? He kind of pissed off into oblivion after Cena beat Rock at Mania it seems.


He doesn't post much about wrestling but he gives me constant red reps ending with *The Rock is GOAT.Hogan second*.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow, reading the last few pages it is clear there is a war coming soon.

Kinda weird seeing how a year ago, the Punk marks and Rock marks were going at it, due to Rock316AE and his goons arguing with the Punk marks (I had my share of arguments with the Rock marks as well). Now the Punk marks are going to start doing the same to the Daniel Bryan marks. Seeing as Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are my two favorites, it will be interesting and hilarious to see what goes on in here.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*










LOL that should be viewership breakdown.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well, here he is:


> In the segment-by-segment, the first segment with John Cena, Daniel Bryan and Stephanie McMahon opened with a strong 3.4 rating. Cody Rhodes vs. Damien Sandow lost about 530,000 viewers. The Paul Heyman interview next stayed even. Cameron & Naomi vs. A.J. Lee & Layla lost about 135,000 viewers. Dolph Ziggler vs. The Shield gained about 500,000 viewers at 9 p.m., a strong gain to a 3.3. Alberto Del Rio vs. Sin Cara stayed even, which is really good in that slot. Sin Cara has often over performed as a ratings draw but at this point that doesn’t matter because he’s done. The Prime Time Players vs. Antonio Cesaro & Jack Swagger gained about 250,000 viewers to a 3.5 quarter. Considering who was in the match and it’s not at the normal top of the hour growth period, this absolutely says that the Darren Young story led to people telling people to tune in. It probably played a small part in the rating of the show just with all the mainstream talking about it because that was an abnormal jump for guys of that level in that slot. Big Show vs. The Shield lost about 265,000 viewers. The C.M. Punk promo with Paul Heyman and the Punk vs. Curtis Axel brawl gained about 400,000 viewers to a strong 3.6, tying the high point of te show at 10 p.m. Bray Wyatt vs. R-Truth lost 550,000 viewers. The Usos vs. Heath Slater & Jinder Mahal lost another 265,000 viewers. The Miz vs. Wade Barrett gained about 135,000 viewers. The big angle in the main event slot with the McMahons, Randy Orton, Daniel Bryan, the long HHH promo and The Shield all involved gained about 670,000 viewers to a 3.6.


But again a lot "about" in this one!!!!! So not really informative.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Damn, all angles that matter doing good.

That unk2 SUPER DRAW.

SHIELD AND ZIGGLER WITH THAT 3.3, goes to shown when you have a group of mid card guys that matter, then ratings will be good. Wish they could do that for the whole show. And here comes D YOUNG Super Man Push.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Damn, all angles that matter doing good.
> 
> That unk2 SUPER DRAW.
> 
> SHIELD AND ZIGGLER WITH THAT 3.5, goes to shown when you have a group of mid card guys that matter, than ratings will be good. Wish they could do that for the whole show. * And here comes D YOUNG Super Man Push.*


I know, right. :lmao

Ziggler been impressive for how long now? :cool2


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

All Viewers - Quarter Hours - August 19th, 2013
Q1 - 3.42 rating / 4.54 million
Q2 - 3.02 rating / 4.01 million
Q3 - 3.02 rating / 4.01 million
Q4 - 2.92 rating / 3.88 million
....
Q5 - 3.30 rating / 4.38 million
Q6 - 3.30 rating / 4.38 million
Q7 - 3.48 rating / 4.63 million
Q8 - 3.29 rating / 4.36 million
....
Q9 - 3.59 rating / 4.76 million
Q10 - 3.17 rating / 4.21 million
Q11 - 2.97 rating / 3.95 million
Q12 - 3.07 rating / 4.08 million
OR - 3.58 rating / 4.75 million


----------



## Jammy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

All Key Storylines are drawing, quite obviously. End of story, all this 'mark wars' are completely unnecessary.


----------



## deatawaits

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good numbers for punk but he is gonna do some abysmal ones in next week.
Kinda disappointing ME given the hype.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Jammy said:


> All Key Storylines are drawing, quite obviously. End of story, all this 'mark wars' are completely unnecessary.


Comopletely agree. Here is the breakdown for the post SummerSlam show last year: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/11928988-post5449.html

This year's breakdown is much more promising from that context.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



deatawaits said:


> Good numbers for punk but he is gonna do some abysmal ones in next week.
> *Kinda disappointing ME given the hype.*


No it's not. Not when you kill the anticipation by putting all of what came in that horrendous third hour on TV. It was bad, really bad. If I didn't care so much about the main angle, I would've watched something else. It was absolutely painful to sit through all of that, in addition to watching the two hours before that.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> All Viewers - Quarter Hours - August 19th, 2013
> Q1 - 3.42 rating / 4.54 million
> Q2 - 3.02 rating / 4.01 million
> Q3 - 3.02 rating / 4.01 million
> Q4 - 2.92 rating / 3.88 million
> ....
> Q5 - 3.30 rating / 4.38 million
> Q6 - 3.30 rating / 4.38 million
> Q7 - 3.48 rating / 4.63 million
> Q8 - 3.29 rating / 4.36 million
> ....
> Q9 - *3.59 rating / 4.76 million*
> Q10 - 3.17 rating / 4.21 million
> Q11 - 2.97 rating / 3.95 million
> Q12 - 3.07 rating / 4.08 million
> OR - *3.58 rating / 4.75 million*


Punk drew way more then HHH, DB, and Orton.

They should be fired and set straight to the indies.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That Punk Rating was pretty surprising, you can't even say that it was because of people thinking Lesnar would be there because they were starting the Punk/Axel Fight.


----------



## TrentBarretaFan

LOL at that random Sin Cara/ADR match not losing a lot of viewers...

Good to see The Shield vs Ziggler drawing that rating


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> This year's breakdown is much more promising from that context.


raw opened this week with a 3.42 rating whereas last year with lesnar the show opened with a 2.97


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

OMG, FUCKIN' unk2 DRAWIN' IN AS MUCH/MORE THAN THE OVERRUN!

OMG, DA OVERRUN GETTIN' HIGHEST IN 5 MONTHS. :bryan

Hell, lookin' at the previous breakdowns, both the 10PM and Overrun did the best since the same night, March 4th(10PM that night was a HHH promo that did a 3.6 as well, but with a slightly higher gain, and the Overrun from that night was #1 contenders match for the streak between Punk/Orton/Sheamus/Show with a Taker appearance at the end). 

On the 10PM, I'm really surprised it did that well considering it was mostly the Punk/Axel brawl, which I thought would tune people out... but I guess not. I guess working with another big part-timer helped Punk's drawing power out again, this time though Punk won't be taking any breaks to diminish whatever impact it has. 

And the overrun, while it truthfully is attributed mostly to HHH, I'm certain Bryan is responsible for a good portion of it as well as I'm sure people were expecting Bryan to come out at the end. Great ending segment.

Oh, and that's a fuckin' great opener. I was expecting it to do somewhere in the 3.1-3.2 range, but that blew away what I thought it was gonna be.

Edit: Oh, and DAT COMING OUT MADE YOUNG A DRAW! Everyone should come out now if they want to be a draw!

This all being said, it'll be interesting to see the 18-49 breakdown which, while not the whole picture, gives us more detail.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> On the 10PM, I'm surprised it did that well considering it was mostly the Punk/Axel brawl, which I thought would tune people out... but I guess not.


I was looking at the discussion thread and I noticed that Punk's 'shoot' towards the crowd member happened at 22:01, i.e. as soon as the third hour started.

I wonder if the tone of that basically kept people watching that segment? Got to assume that it had some effect.


----------



## checkcola

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Happy for the Prime Time Players.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

THOSE MILLIONS OF RATINGS FOR DARREN YOUNG. 

:mark:

:bryan unk :cena3 :HHH2 rton2 all doing good. Not a surprise.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Damn, DAT STRONG OPENING SEGMENT.

AND DAT INSANE OVERRUN.

:bryan :HHH2 rton

Good start. But this storyline has the potential to do even better if they book it right.


----------



## Shenroe

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Damn :ziggler3 and:ambrose2:reigns:rollins almost gained back all the fuckery damian sandow, cody rhodes and the divas have done lol 
dat 3.3 ratingzz


----------



## Twisted14

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Gee, they haven't hit 3.6 in a while. When was the last time they got to a 3.6? Must have been around Wrestlemania? Good ratings this week. We'll see how it holds up.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'll leave the trolling to the rest of you this week because that is the most positive breakdown WWE has had in a long time. Best overall rating in months, best opening rating in months, strong 9pm, best 10pm in months and best overrun in months. Gains in random segments or segments holding steady and not losing much. Viewership over 4 million for the entire duration of the show. I don't think they could ask for much better than that tbh. 

Opening with 3.4 shows interest was obviously very high. They haven't touched an opening number like that in what feels like forever. More importantly than that, John Cena said he was gone for a couple of months and people stuck around for the rest of the segment and the rest of the show. That's encouraging. 

9pm did great and I think that this Corporation angle being interwoven with so many guys could end up having a positive effect on lots of things because it isn't just about 1 person. It's about lots of people and maybe viewers will want to tune in to see what goes down with all the players. Great number for Shield/Ziggles. 

That's got to be a real feel good moment for Darren Young and it's nice to see tbh. Whether it lasts or was just a one time thing, it doesn't really matter. People were obviously interested enough to tune in and put a face to the name that's been in the press this past week. Good for D Young. 

I'll throw a line to Sin Cara here as well because there have been many occasions where he has produced a steady number despite all the fuck ups surrounding him. 

10pm did it's best number in months. Strong number and good sign for Punk although I won't jump the gun on that yet. Earlier this year off the back of the Taker feud his first segment had a good number and then things went back to normal. Will be interesting to see if it happens again or whether he can finally start to move numbers on his own. If he does manage to sustain numbers like that against Axel of all people then kudos to him. I do think that the abnormally strong entire previous hour contributed to the overall of 10pm. Either way, it's still a very strong number. 

The final hour fucking haemorrhaged viewers until the end and I'm not surprised at all because it dragged so badly. There's also no way in hell a Miz/Barrett match gained viewers lol. I refuse to believe that and unless the PWTorch minute by minute stuff comes out and says otherwise, I think it's fair to assume that that gain can be attributed to the overrun as well with people waiting for that segment to actually start. If I'm wrong on that then SUPER MIZ AND DAT DRAWING POWA. 

Overrun produces its best number in months with a huge gain, basically pulling back every viewer who checked out during that abysmal third hour. Strong number and a great sign for this storyline going forward. It produced the best performing opening and closing segments for Raw in months and clearly lifted the entire rating of the show overall. 

After all that the only question to be asked is whether they can maintain viewer interest. Actually there's 2 questions, the other being when does Football start, for obvious reasons of course. If they can manage to hover around the 2.9/3.0 mark for the rest of the year I'd consider that a success tbh. 

3.2 and not a part timer in sight apart from HHH. Just goes to show that if you do something interesting you can get people to watch. Let's see if they can keep them watching.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Holy crap, I overlooked Barrett/Miz gaining.

DAT BARRETT BARRAGE!


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> ...when does Football start, for obvious reasons of course.


Sept 9th I believe. That gives them 2 more RAWs before the real competition begins.




The Sandrone said:


> Holy crap, I overlooked Barrett/Miz gaining.
> 
> DAT BARRETT BARRAGE!


Bryan gives him a win last week and behold the results.

DAT DAZZLER DANIEL BRYAN! :dazzler


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:bryan :HHH2 :vince :heyman :axel and







bringing in them numbers.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Somebody really needs to make that Steph face a smiley lol. :lol It's gold. 

So 2 weeks before football? If....when they suddenly drop off there we'll know why.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Somebody really needs to make that Steph face a smiley lol. :lol It's gold.
> 
> So 2 weeks before football? If....when they suddenly drop off there we'll know why.


3 weeks. 2 unopposed RAWs then the battle begins. What if ratings for this corporation angle don't drop that badly? I think this Corp angle with Bryan could recapture some lost audience even if it is via DVR.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I like seeing quality segments receive quality ratings. The opening with Stephanie and Bryan going back and forth was fantastic. Stephanie plays a hell of a troll, and I loved seeing Bryan go back at her HARD. Very happy about that segment did well. Wasn't expecting it to do quite that well, because that part of the show usually doesn't.

And the overrun speaks for itself. That Triple H promo was GOAT. Was also interesting to see that he gave a different style heel interview than he would give in the past. He was more cool, calm, and collected during this heel promo than he would have been during a Triple H heel promo back in the day. I love Bryan but he had me rolling at the "good little technichan" line and the "check your ego at the door, not everything is about you" line. DAT GOAT HEEL.

:HHH2


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> 3 weeks. 2 unopposed RAWs then the battle begins. What if ratings for this corporation angle don't drop that badly? I think this Corp angle with Bryan could recapture some lost audience even if it is via DVR.


If they can hover between 2.9/3.0 then I think that can be considered a success. If not and they do the same numbers as last year then I think it just proves that no matter what they do there's just simply no competing with football.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Very positive breakdown!

-Opener did fantastic. People were obviously intrigued to see Cena and Bryan's reaction to the cash-in.

-Some filler stuff losing viewers ain't surprising, but Heyman holds his own

-Ziggler/SHIELD gaining 500,000 to a 3.3 is great. Positive for both sides and good for the 9pm slot.

-I'd say Sin Cara's injury is what kept viewers there (harsh but true), PTP gaining strong was a real shocker, but its nice to see. I guess people wanted to see the man behind the buzz of coming out in WWE. Big Show/SHIELD lost viewers, perhaps a bit of a break for some and the shield already did have an appearance earlier.

-Punk/Heyman continues its success. I'm surprised how well it did to gain to a 3.6 , good showing from Punk/Heyman/Axel, but I have to say the expectancy of a Lesnar appearance probably attributed to some viewers. Either way, hopefully this trend continues for them and it gives Axel some ground to work from.

-Rest of the hour losing stuff isin't surprising expect for Miz/Barrett. DAT AWESOME BARRAGE.

-Overrun number was great. Best in months, just like the opener. Again another 3.6 segment. They must be pleased. The corporation storyline shone throughout the night.

Final note: unk rton2 :HHH2 :vince :heyman :bryan Let's hope they can keep up with football.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I reckon Punk ripping that fat guy from the crowd led to lot of interest. Other than that, I think the Preseason game ended at 10 which would have brought a big influx of viewers to RAW since it was the post summerslam show. Punk did well in any case considering all he had was Axel.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ziggler has been gaining some solid numbers as of late. Even his matches with Big E had some decent numbers.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Holy SHIT at that 10 pm. This isn't even a joke, Punk just drew better than the supposed top angle with a newly heel Triple H and Randy Orton, Bryan and the McMahon family. Punk worked with Axel, had a commercial in the middle of the segment, and it did better than the overrun. 

Even the biggest of haters have to admit that's fucking huge. Dat CM fuckin' GOAT.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Holy SHIT at that 10 pm. This isn't even a joke, Punk just drew better than the supposed top angle with a newly heel Triple H and Randy Orton, Bryan and the McMahon family. Punk worked with Axel, had a commercial in the middle of the segment, and it did better than the overrun.
> 
> Even the biggest of haters have to admit that's fucking huge. Dat CM fuckin' GOAT.


Get as much mileage out of that as you can, bro. The following weeks aren't going to be good for that angle.

And the overrun did the same number. It also did better than last weeks supposed historical overrun featuring Brock and Punk, which was supposedly unbeatable. Yet, took all of one week to beat.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Get as much mileage out of that as you can, bro. The following weeks aren't going to be good for that angle.
> 
> And the overrun did the same number. It also did better than last weeks supposed historical overrun featuring Brock and Punk, which was supposedly unbeatable. Yet, took all of one week to beat.


not surprising since Post PPV always does better than the go home with the big matches angles.

Example like go home Rumble and Post Rumble: Rock/Punk final angle on go home lost 100,000+ viewers and did 3.01 than Post-Rumble did like gain 280,00 with 4.03 and Chamber go 

just like with Cena/Bryan did 3.3 last week and after SS opening did 3.4 and ending did 3.6


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Get as much mileage out of that as you can, bro. The following weeks aren't going to be good for that angle.
> 
> And the overrun did the same number. It also did better than last weeks supposed historical overrun featuring Brock and Punk, which was supposedly unbeatable. Yet, took all of one week to beat.



Y U SO MEAN to Punk and us Punk marks. unk3

Edit: Though based on the gains and losses, Punk/Axel did very slightly better. Just sayin'. unk2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> not surprising since Post PPV always does better than the go home with the big matches angles.
> 
> Example like go home Rumble and Post Rumble: Rock/Punk final angle on go home lost 100,000+ viewers and did 3.01 than Post-Rumble did like gain 280,00 with 4.03 and Chamber go
> 
> just like with Cena/Bryan did 3.3 last week and after SS opening did 3.4 and ending did 3.6


Of course. You know that. I know that.



> *The Sandrone*
> Showstopper's just mean to Punk and us Punk marks.


Nah man, I actually like Punk. But some are alittle over the top. And much more since the Bryan push. When Punk was getting his push, I sat back and enjoyed it.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Holy shit, that's a damn good breakdown. All the big angles are drawing and even the random parts are drawing too. Ziggler-Shield drawing as much as they did is great. Punk-Axel/Heyman... wow and obviously the overrun. It's obviously great moving forward for a guy like Ziggler to draw that (along with The Shield) at 9pm. No doubt they play a big part in this Corporation storyline.

And then you got D-Young bringing in dem millions of ratings.


----------



## Jammy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Of course. You know that. I know that.
> 
> 
> 
> Nah man, I actually like Punk. But some are alittle over the top. And much more since the Bryan push. When Punk was getting his push, I sat back and enjoyed it.


It's mostly guys like WFan35 and mblondelol who shit on Bryan and put Punk on a pedestal, and few other Bryan marks who do the same vice versa.

Punk is great (personally don't like him much, but credit where it's due, dude is blazing on the mic), Bryan is great (my personal favorite) and as of late I'm starting to really like Cena (wtf is happening to me)

Ratings are reflective of the storyline and effort being put in to hook viewers, it's quite obvious.


----------



## El Capitano

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ziggler bringing in another good draw :ziggler3

Great to see that all storylines are doing well


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good to see the overrun doing strong numbers. The third hour was so shit that even The Miz vs Barrett gained.

Don't see any mark wars this week since everyone did well.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Y U SO MEAN to Punk and us Punk marks. unk3
> 
> *Edit: Though based on the gains and losses, Punk/Axel did very slightly better. Just sayin'. unk2*





That's okay. I'm satisfied with this week's overrun beating last week's. And I'm very confident about the Corporaton/Bryan storyline going forward. As for the rest of the angles going forward, TBD, I suppose.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Next week will certainly be telling. If they drop all of a sudden back to just hovering around 4 million, then clearly they're gonna go considerably below 4 million when football starts a couple of weeks later. It's gonna get to a point where the top segment of the night will be struggling to break 3.0, unless the Bryan/HHH/Orton stuff really hits it off. Actually come to think of it, does the Monday Night Football game run for all the hours Raw does? If not, the overrun should still do well if the angle is a big hit (so higher than 3.0's). However all of Raw won't be able to be saved, and most certainly the 9PM, and maybe 10PM, won't have the gains/numbers they do now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Next week will certainly be telling. If they drop all of a sudden back to just hovering around 4 million, then clearly they're gonna go considerably below 4 million when football starts a couple of weeks later. It's gonna get to a point where the top segment of the night will be struggling to break 3.0, unless the Bryan/HHH/Orton stuff really hits it off. Actually come to think of it, does the Monday Night Football game run for all the hours Raw does? If not, the overrun should still do well if the angle is a big hit (so higher than 3.0's). However all of Raw won't be able to be saved, and most certainly the 9PM, and maybe 10PM, won't have the gains/numbers they do now.


Yeah man, once the regular season starts, I don't know how any of this is going to perform. The NFL is a ratings juggernaut. Hell, even if Stone Cold Steve Austin himself were to return, I still think the gain wouldn't be a pimple on the football game's ass. MNF and Raw both appeal to a large chunk of the same audience, the 18-49 year old male. So, it's a problem for WWE. Always will be going forward, most likely.


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan & Punk drawing.

:yes unk2


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Get as much mileage out of that as you can, bro. The following weeks aren't going to be good for that angle.
> 
> And the overrun did the same number. It also did better than last weeks supposed historical overrun featuring Brock and Punk, which was supposedly unbeatable. Yet, took all of one week to beat.


Why did you just get so sensitive? I'm not trying to rub it in your face or any other of the Bryan marks'. I'm just staying a fact that yeah, Punk just pulled off a better number than Bryan, Orton, Triple H and the McMahon family. He topped the night with Axel, with that huge storyline on the same show, so yes that is a huge accomplishment even you would have to recognize. 

And yeah the overrun did better than last weeks, but nobody called last week historic. That's just making you sound kind of bitter for no reason. All I said was last weeks overrun was raw's largest in 3 months, and now Punk's segment this week is the largest in three months. The GOAT is just on a roll now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Why did you just get so sensitive? I'm not trying to rub it in your face or any other of the Bryan marks'. I'm just staying a fact that yeah, Punk just pulled off a better number than Bryan, Orton, Triple H and the McMahon family. He topped the night with Axel, with that huge storyline on the same show, so yes that is a huge accomplishment even you would have to recognize.
> 
> And yeah the overrun did better than last weeks, but nobody called last week historic. That's just making you sound kind of bitter for no reason. All I said was last weeks overrun was raw's largest in 3 months, and now Punk's segment this week is the largest in three months. The GOAT is just on a roll now.


:lmao You made last weeks overrun sound like it was completely and utterly unbeatable...

Only to be beat exactly one week later.

That is funny more than anything else. Don't be made because Bryan is the center of the show now.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

A bit more ratings detail I've done:

August 19th, 2013
- 3.24 rating
- 3.700 million households
- 4.298 million viewers
- an average of 1.16 viewers per household that watches Raw

- 1.57 Adults 18-49 rating
- 1.986 million viewers in Adults 18-49 demographic

- 2.312 million viewers fall outside of Adults 18-49 demographic

What this means is that Raw is watched by a _lot_ of people individually and not with anyone. Why is that important? Let's do the above... with Raw 1000:

Raw 1000
- 3.84 rating
- 4.404 million households
- 6.019 million viewers
- an average of 1.37 viewers per household that watches Raw

- 2.27 Adults 18-49 rating
- 2.902 million viewers in Adults 18-49 demographic

- 3.117 million viewers fall outside of Adults 18-49 demographic

In the past few weeks, the rating/households/viewers/p.h. has gone:

- 29/07 - 2.86 / 3.266 / 3.768 / 1.15 viewers per household
- 05/08 - 2.96 / 3.380 / 4.178 / 1.24 viewers per household
- 12/08 - 2.95 / 3.369 / 4.111 / 1.22 viewers per household
- 19/08 - 3.24 / 3.700 / 4.298 / 1.16 viewers per household

Between April 29th and August 12th, the rating has always been between 2.65 / 3.026 million households and 3.06 / 3.495 million households.

The night after WrestleMania had 3.43 / 3.92 million viewers - i.e. a good 700,000 households tune out straight after WrestleMania. And although post SummerSlam did not gain much in viewership, an extra 350,000 households decided to tune in.

IF there were 1.24 viewers per household, that would have been 4.574 million viewers average across the three hours instead of the 4.298 million viewers average. If Raw was being watched by 1.36 viewers per household though each week, like Raw 1000 was, ratings would be significantly higher. 

The rating it still very important because that says how many households are tuning in. 330,000 liked what happened at SummerSlam, so it will be interesting to see if those households remain, or whether some tune back out again.

(okay, I realise I'm rambling now, so I'll stop there  )


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> :lmao You made last weeks overrun sound like it was completely and utterly unbeatable...
> 
> Only to be beat exactly one week later.
> 
> That is funny more than anything else. Don't be made because Bryan is the center of the show now.


How? What else did I say other than last weeks overrun being the best in three months, to make it seem like it was so unbeatable? Maybe it seemed so unbeatable because I was comparing it to Bryan's 2.6 that same night. :lol

It was beat by this weeks overrun, which was then beat by Punk/Axel the same show, which is actually a lot more impressive considering post PPV shows do better overall than go home shows. So you don't have much ammo here son. 

unk


----------



## Jammy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> (okay, I realise I'm rambling now, so I'll stop there  )


I have a feeling a significant portion of the people who browse this thread don't understand what you write and just come here for the mark wars :lmao

Very informative post, as usual.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

KO Bossy, where are you? Showstopper and Wrestlinfan need you.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> How? What else did I say other than last weeks overrun being the best in three months, to make it seem like it was so unbeatable? Maybe it seemed so unbeatable because I was comparing it to Bryan's 2.6 that same night. :lol
> 
> It was beat by this weeks overrun, which was then beat by Punk/Axel the same show, which is actually a lot more impressive considering post PPV shows do better overall than go home shows. So you don't have much ammo here son.
> 
> unk


Yes, the mighty draw that is CM Punk. The same guy who got outdrawn by a freakin' divas match a couple of months ago. You'll have to excuse me if I don't laugh my ass off here.

The Punk/Axel segment drew a 3.59 rating, the overrun drew a 3.58 rating. We're not even talking a tenth of a point here. We're talking 0.01. Basically, no difference whatsoever. 

And you are right Post-PPV Raws do better than anyother kind. Which is why we most likely should attribute the Axel/Punk segment doing so well to casuals thinking/hoping they would get an appearance from Brock.

And no ammo? Please. I'm a Punk fan, but he is the same guy creative felt the need to book Cena as pretty much Punk's "co-champion" during Punk's reign because they clearly didn't have a lot of confidence in him as the champion. And I don't get any pleasure out of that, being someone who doesn't really like Cena, and likes Punk. But it's the truth.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Everyone drew. Excellent news. Needs more Henry.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good stuff. Cm Punk has come a long way and Daniel Bryan is just beginning. Both are my favorites so if they can draw on their own, my dream WrestleMania match may happen in a few years.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Warrior said:


> Good stuff. Cm Punk has come a long way and Daniel Bryan is just beginning. Both are my favorites so if they can draw on their own, my dream WrestleMania match may happen in a few years.


That would absolutely be amazing if a CM Punk vs Daniel Bryan can become a dream match for casuals just as it's a dream match for all of us. If that day ever happens, we'll know that there will no longer be a difference between internet fans and casuals, because they will be one and the same.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> That would absolutely be amazing if a CM Punk vs Daniel Bryan can become a dream match for casuals just as it's a dream match for all of us. If that day ever happens, we'll know that there will *no longer be a difference between internet fans and casuals, because they will be one and the same.*


Nobody would watch wrestling, the WWE would be forced to rebrand as the WRE (World Ratings Entertainment).


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Yes, the mighty draw that is CM Punk. The same guy who got outdrawn by a freakin' divas match a couple of months ago. You'll have to excuse me if I don't laugh my ass off here.
> 
> The Punk/Axel segment drew a 3.59 rating, the overrun drew a 3.58 rating. We're not even talking a tenth of a point here. We're talking 0.01. Basically, no difference whatsoever.
> 
> And you are right Post-PPV Raws do better than anyother kind. Which is why we most likely should attribute the Axel/Punk segment doing so well to casuals thinking/hoping they would get an appearance from Brock.
> 
> And no ammo? Please. I'm a Punk fan, but he is the same guy creative felt the need to book Cena as pretty much Punk's "co-champion" during Punk's reign because they clearly didn't have a lot of confidence in him as the champion. And I don't get any pleasure out of that, being someone who doesn't really like Cena, and likes Punk. But it's the truth.


Well you don't have to look much further than last week when good ol' Daniel Bryan and Randy Orton were outdrawn by the divas and every other segment on the show. I'll gladly laugh my ass off here. 

There is a difference though. Punk drew better, doesn't matter if its .01 better, he did better, so I'm not wrong. And way to bring in the lesnar thing when it went an entire 15 minutes, had a fucking commercial in the middle of it, and it still topped the night. That was all Punk, and to a lesser extent Heyman. 

There's really no need to dispute anything here. Both segments did great, Punk however out drew everybody in that overrun, and that's just fucking impressive. No need to get so upset about it.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

How bad do you guys think Punk's gonna do when he doesn't have Heyman or Lesnar carrying him in the ratings?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> How bad do you guys think Punk's gonna do when he doesn't have Heyman or Lesnar carrying him in the ratings?


Just like he did before them, well. Have you even been looking at Punk's numbers throughout the year, because he's always done well in his segments. I assume you haven't since there are a lot of ignorant Punk haters here, that do the same. You probably believe Axel carried Punk as well this week, I bet.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

No Axel obviously didn't carry Punk, but how do you know people weren't expecting Lesnar to walk out? Through this entire Punk vs Lesnar feud the biggest gain Punk and heyman confrontations/promos drew, without Lesnar, is about 200,000 viewers. Thats it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Well you don't have to look much further than last week when good ol' Daniel Bryan and Randy Orton were outdrawn by the divas and every other segment on the show. I'll gladly laugh my ass off here.
> 
> There is a difference though. Punk drew better, doesn't matter if its .01 better, he did better, so I'm not wrong. And way to bring in the lesnar thing when it went an entire 15 minutes, had a fucking commercial in the middle of it, and it still topped the night. That was all Punk, and to a lesser extent Heyman.
> 
> There's really no need to dispute anything here. Both segments did great, Punk however out drew everybody in that overrun, and that's just fucking impressive. No need to get so upset about it.


Lesnar gets mentioned because he's a much bigger draw than Punk. So yes, he gets more credit than Punk does. That's how it goes. And there is little to no doubt in most people's minds that that is the only reason the Punk/Axel segment got the rating it got this past week. 

Punk should be getting huge ratings week in and week out, no matter his opponent, actually. He's feuded with Cena, Taker, and Lesnar over the past year AND had a WWE title reign that went well over a year. He should be a HUGE draw right now. But he isn't. I don't like Cena, but there is a reason why he has still been the number one guy this entire time, even after the Punk title reign. Just the way it goes, unfortunately. They are going with Bryan as the number one face while Cena is gone, which is interesting.
And just :lol at the divas thing.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I think this definitely will get Bryan over in a huge way, especially to tv viewers. Everyone loves the underdog story. If it backfires, you can't blame Bryan...If his merchandise keeps selling and people keep cheering him in arenas like they have been...but the ratings aren't good, thats the creative's fault...Not Bryan's...He's only doing what he's told. But with this storyline, he's hit a gold mine...Having the whole locker room at the ramp made no sense though, I'm sure Bryan was uncomfortable due to the fact that he's basically being anointed the top guy right in front of them, with the main storyline, its as if the McMahons were rubbing it in the locker room's faces or something...but still, gold storyline, just gold...Football is overrated, I stopped watching Baseball just because of wrestling lately.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Dammit, Wrestlinfan35, you're above this. Stop conversing with the enemy!


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Next week should be fun. :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I told myself I wouldn't get involved, but this is too easy not to.



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Lesnar gets mentioned because he's a much bigger draw than Punk. So yes, he gets more credit than Punk does. That's how it goes. And there is little to no doubt in most people's minds that that is the only reason the Punk/Axel segment got the rating it got this past week.
> 
> Punk should be getting huge ratings week in and week out, no matter his opponent, actually. He's feuded with Cena, Taker, and Lesnar over the past year AND had a WWE title reign that went well over a year. He should be a HUGE draw right now. But he isn't. I don't like Cena, but there is a reason why he has still been the number one guy this entire time, even after the Punk title reign. Just the way it goes, unfortunately. They are going with Bryan as the number one face while Cena is gone, which is interesting.
> And just :lol at the divas thing.


1) Lesnar is a bigger draw than Punk. However he wasn't advertised for the show. He wasn't advertised for the segment. Had he been out there with Heyman earlier, you may have a point, but he wasn't. And I don't know who these "people" are that make up most of who thought Lesnar would show up in the Punk/Axel segment. YOU might have expected Lesnar. That doesn't mean most people did. I certainly didn't after I didn't see him out there with Heyman earlier in the night. 

2) Punk should be, could be, would be a HUGE draw. He's not. He does fine in the numbers though, and is capable of getting the big numbers on his own better than anyone who aren't a part-timer and not named Cena. Since working with Rock, he's been able to pull in big numbers in segments on his own. However he has hiccups, as does anybody else (even DA ROCK!). This week the segment he was in got a 3.6. Last week it was a 3.5. Two weeks ago, WITH BROCK, it was a 3.1. A week before that, the "OMG DA DIVAS BEAT HIM!" week, he wasn't in one of the three main time slots (and he was only there at the end of the match he interfered in). It's not good, but it's much better than what happened with Bryan a week ago. Then he did a 3.1 with Heyman before that, and a 3.41 the night after MITB. Just to be clear, a 3.1 isn't a failure. It's a decent number normally and usually above the average rating for the show. His most disappointing number since returning was against Orton in the overrun that did a... well, a 3.1. For the overrun though that's a disappointment. However, it was against Orton, who disappointed even more with Bryan a couple of weeks prior. Both matches should've done better, one due to the star power, and the other due to the build it got. But as you see, you put Punk there, even without the build, it pulls a better number.

And just to be clear, I'm a big mark for Bryan right now. I'm invested in the main event storyline almost solely on him. However, he's at best, tied with Punk as the #1 wrestler in the company, at worst behind Punk and Orton (if we're only doing full-timers), and that's only because Cena's injured. This storyline literally just started, he got one big win over Cena, and Bryan marks jump the gun and call him the biggest star in the business (again, amongst full-timers), without looking at the big picture. And yeah, Punk marks did the same a couple of years ago. I'll save you the trouble of mentioning it. However when Punk was feuding with HHH in September 2011 when Cena and Del Rio was a mid-cardish WWE Title feud, did that make Punk the #1 face? No. It takes more than one show, more than one month for that matter to surpass a guy who's done what Punk has done at this point. If you want to consider Bryan the #1 face, fine, but realize it's that type of overreacting that Punk marks did back in 2011, when he really hadn't accomplished much. In the grand scheme of things, I'd call Punk the #1 face in the company right now, although the man who's right now "the face of the company"... as in the guy who's at the top and filling Cena's spot by default, is HHH, who probably for this storyline will be around on a full-time basis. 

And just to be clear, I'm not "butt-hurt" that Bryan has "surpassed" Punk to some people. He's being used in a bigger storyline right now (which is actually much bigger than him right now), but that's it. The day it does actually happen, the day he truly becomes the #1 guy, the face of the company, I'll be markin' out with the rest of the Bryan marks. But I made the mistake of jumping the gun with Punk a couple of years ago, and I'm not doing the same with Bryan. I'll wait this time around before making ridiculous claims. There's plenty of time for WWE to fuck it up.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan is such a good person in real life its just ridiculous! I love the fact that he's in the spotlight, it makes me feel good. I hope they spotlight him even more in interviews and the public sees how he is outside of the ring more and Total Divas is totally helping with that and it'll add to his appeal even more and older women and grandparents will end up loving him and children already love him. So just for that I think he'll be ahead of Punk in the future. Even if he has a beard, his laid back always himself attitude will win more fans over...Older folks don't like the tattoos and the recklessness, thats why Punk is at a disadvantage, but they both help the company out ten fold...I just think in the grand scheme of things, the WWE prefers Bryan probably due to the fact that he's a very nice guy.


----------



## Hurricane24

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk get bails out again by the 3rd part timer he has feuded this year. Dem part timers exposure.... :rock4 :taker :brock


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The WWE isn't very patient when it comes to talent and ratings though. You need to write better storylines and give the wrestlers' better dialogue if you want to keep the fans interested. The wrestler's are only doing what they're told to do and they spin it in their own style to get a reaction...but when nobody is watching, its probably due to the stale storyline going on at the time. Cena is on top because he's been around a long time and he gets ratings because people are used to him.....Creative can't just give up on an idea because no one is watching, they just need to spin it better and make it work..and be patient, its not like they'll go out of business....they make billions a year.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



markedfordeath said:


> Bryan is such a good person in real life its just ridiculous! I love the fact that he's in the spotlight, it makes me feel good. I hope they spotlight him even more in interviews and the public sees how he is outside of the ring more and Total Divas is totally helping with that and it'll add to his appeal even more and older women and grandparents will end up loving him and children already love him. So just for that I think he'll be ahead of Punk in the future. Even if he has a beard, his laid back always himself attitude will win more fans over...Older folks don't like the tattoos and the recklessness, thats why Punk is at a disadvantage, but they both help the company out ten fold...I just think in the grand scheme of things, the WWE prefers Bryan probably due to the fact that he's a very nice guy.


If Bryan continues on the current path, he'll surpass Punk definitely by the end of this program. And I think Bryan deserves it more than Punk. He definitely seems like a nicer guy, never that he has a chip on his shoulder, and of course he appeals to more than Punk does. I'm praying they don't fuck things up.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> I told myself I wouldn't get involved, but this is too easy not to.
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Lesnar is a bigger draw than Punk. However he wasn't advertised for the show. He wasn't advertised for the segment. Had he been out there with Heyman earlier, you may have a point, but he wasn't. And I don't know who these "people" are that make up most of who thought Lesnar would show up in the Punk/Axel segment. YOU might have expected Lesnar. That doesn't mean most people did. I certainly didn't after I didn't see him out there with Heyman earlier in the night.
> 
> 2) Punk should be, could be, would be a HUGE draw. He's not. He does fine in the numbers though, and is capable of getting the big numbers on his own better than anyone who aren't a part-timer and not named Cena. Since working with Rock, he's been able to pull in big numbers in segments on his own. However he has hiccups, as does anybody else. This week the segment he was in got a 3.6. Last week it was a 3.5. Two weeks ago, WITH BROCK, it was a 3.1. A week before that, the "OMG DA DIVAS BEAT HIM!" week, he wasn't in one of the three main time slots (and he was only there at the end of the match he interfered in). It's not good, but it's much better than what happened with Bryan a week ago. Then he did a 3.1 with Heyman before that, and a 3.41 the night after MITB. Just to be clear, a 3.1 isn't a failure. It's a decent number normally and usually above the average rating for the show. His most disappointing number since returning was against Orton in the overrun that did a... well, a 3.1. For the overrun though that's a disappointment. However, it was against Orton, who disappointed even more with Bryan a couple of weeks prior. Both matches should've done better, one due to the star power, and the other due to the build it got. But as you see, you put Punk there, even without the build, it pulls a better number.
> 
> And just to be clear, I'm a big mark for Bryan right now. I'm invested in the main event storyline almost solely on him. However, he's at best, tied with Punk as the #1 guy in the company, at worst behind Punk and Orton (if we're only doing full-timers), and that's only because Cena's injured. This storyline literally just started, he got one big win over Cena, and Bryan marks jump the gun and call him the biggest star in the business (again, amongst full-timers), without looking at the big picture. And yeah, Punk marks did the same a couple of years ago. I'll save you the trouble of mentioning it. However when Punk was feuding with HHH in September 2011 when Cena and Del Rio was a mid-cardish WWE Title feud, did that make Punk the #1 face? No. It takes more than one show, more than one month for that matter to surpass a guy who's done what Punk has done at this point. If you want to consider Bryan the #1 face, fine, but realize it's that type of overreacting that Punk marks did back in 2011, when he really hadn't accomplished much. In the grand scheme of things, I'd call Punk the #1 face in the company right now, although the man who's right now "the face of the company"... as in the guy who's at the top and filling Cena's spot by default, is HHH, who probably for this storyline will be around on a full-time basis.
> 
> And just to be clear, I'm not "butt-hurt" that Bryan has "surpassed" Punk to some people. He's being used in a bigger storyline right now (which is actually much bigger than him right now), but that's it. The day it does actually happen, the day he truly becomes the #1 guy, the face of the company, I'll be markin' out with the rest of the Bryan marks. But I made the mistake of jumping the gun with Punk a couple of years ago, and I'm not doing the same with Bryan. I'll wait this time around before making ridiculous claims. There's plenty of time for WWE to fuck it up.


1) Most casual fans and kids don't know whether or not Lesnar is advertised for Raw, or not. They know he worked a match he night previous, and they are hopeful he is going to be there. And when they see Punk out there with Heyman, they know doubt are holding out hope that Brock is going to show up and attack Punk. Just because he wasn't advertised doesn't mean a lot of casual fans and kids know that he wasn't.

2) I never said Punk can't pull in decent numbers. Obviously, he can or he wouldn't have been in feuds with Cena, Taker, and Brock to begin with. But some people make him out to be a lot more than that. Not saying you necessarily, but there are some. Sorry.

I also don't think think Bryan is the face of the company, at least not overall. I think he is the face in the main event storyline right now, while the #1 face is out for a few months with an injury. Bryan's not the face of the company. If people want to call him the #1 babyface while Cena is out, it is debatable, I suppose. But if you're the only babyface in the main event storyline, I can see how and why some would call him the #1 babyface right now at the moment. I personally don't care one way or the other if he is labeled that or not. But it does show some confidence on WWE's part in Bryan that they decided to put him in this storyline as the face while Cena is out. Very encouraging. Where it goes from here, we shall see. But I will say, for the first time in awhile, I'm actually interested in their top storyline. They can still easily fuck it up. I guess that's part of why we watch, though.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah but if you think about it though, they tried to fuck things up with him. 18 seconds at WM ( and no, it wasn't the plan all along, they wanted to make Sheamus an over monster) and that backfired and worked for Bryan, putting him in a tag team with Kane and doing the anger management skits to make him look like a comedy act so we wouldn't take him seriously, that backfired because fans loved it and cheered him even more. he got cheers even as a heel and everyone loved how funny he was and he just kept getting over. I don't see it changing, because he can excel doing anything. If they send him back down to the midcard, he'll just excel there and work his way back up. he is one of the best things that has ever happened to the company, he's very valuable. He's been popular wherever he's been and because of that, I don't see anything ever working against him....He's going to have a bright future, people that don't watch him are nuts....Look at all the Yes signs at the arenas and the Respect the Beard shirts......maybe people aren't watching him on tv, but they're obviously going to see him in person....that could even be more valuable.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> 1) Most casual fans and kids don't know whether or not Lesnar is advertised for Raw, or not. They know he worked a match he night previous, and they are hopeful he is going to be there. And when they see Punk out there with Heyman, they know doubt are holding out hope that Brock is going to show up and attack Punk. Just because he wasn't advertised doesn't mean a lot of casual fans and kids know that he wasn't.
> 
> 2) I never said Punk can't pull in decent numbers. Obviously, he can or he wouldn't have been in feuds with Cena, Taker, and Brock to begin with. But some people make him out to be a lot more than that. Not saying you necessarily, but there are some. Sorry.
> 
> I also don't think think Bryan is the face of the company, at least not overall. I think he is the face in the main event storyline right now, while the #1 face is out for a few months with an injury. Bryan's not the face of the company. If people want to call him the #1 babyface while Cena is out, it is debatable, I suppose. But if you're the only babyface in the main event storyline, I can see how and why some would call him the #1 babyface right now at the moment. I personally don't care one way or the other if he is labeled that or not. But it does show some confidence on WWE's part in Bryan that they decided to put him in this storyline as the face while Cena is out. Very encouraging. Where it goes from here, we shall see. But I will say, for the first time in awhile, I'm actually interested in their top storyline. They can still easily fuck it up. I guess that's part of why we watch, though.


1) It's not just about being advertised, it's also about the fact he wasn't in the Heyman segment beforehand. There was no indication he was there or going to show up. Sure, maybe some people thought that, but the draw in for that segment was Punk's response to Heyman and nothing more. The fact it seems like a lot of people stayed for the whole Punk/Axel brawl is amazing in itself.

2) I know you didn't say he can't pull decent numbers, but he can also on occasion pull in big numbers, even without a bigger star. It's shaky though, he hasn't proven to be consistent yet, but he does a lot better than he did a year ago/during his last face run. And yeah, I know some will make it seem like Punk is the biggest draw ever, but there are die-hard marks of any group of fans that will exaggerate anything there guy does, to some extent. Not just Punk marks, but Taker, HBK, HHH, Orton, etc. Even Rock was made out to be a perfect miracle worker by his die-hards, and I'm sure back in the day, before Cena made his claim as a draw, there were die-hards overrating his drawing ability as well. Hell even today, wasn't there that bboy fellow? Didn't pay too much attention to it. I'm sure there are those die-hards for Cena out there today as well.

Also, Punk/Heyman is a main event storyline and the main event storyline involving Punk. Punk/Axel is just a piece of the puzzle, and how it will be featured on the show remains to be seen. It could very well main event this upcoming Raw.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> 1) It's not just about being advertised, it's also about the fact he wasn't in the Heyman segment beforehand. There was no indication he was there or going to show up. Sure, maybe some people thought that, but the draw in for that segment was Punk's response to Heyman and nothing more. The fact it seems like a lot of people stayed for the whole Punk/Axel brawl is amazing in itself.
> 
> 2) I know you didn't say he can't pull decent numbers, but he can also on occasion pull in big numbers, even without a bigger star. It's shaky though, he hasn't proven to be consistent yet, but he does a lot better than he did a year ago/during his last face run. And yeah, I know some will make it seem like Punk is the biggest draw ever, but there are die-hard marks of any group of fans that will exaggerate anything there guy does, to some extent. Not just Punk marks, but Taker, HBK, HHH, Orton, etc. Even Rock was made out to be a perfect miracle worker by his die-hards, and I'm sure back in the day, before Cena made his claim as a draw, there were die-hards overrating his drawing ability as well. Hell even today, wasn't there that bboy fellow? Didn't pay too much attention to it. I'm sure there are those die-hards for Cena out there today as well.
> 
> Also, Punk/Heyman is a main event storyline and the main event storyline involving Punk. Punk/Axel is just a piece of the puzzle, and how it will be featured on the show remains to be seen. It could very well main event this upcoming Raw.


We'll have to agree to disagree on the Brock point here, then. The night after one of the biggest PPV shows of the year, one of the two biggest matches on the show, I think there is a decent to good chance the casuals (who make up the majority of viewers) are tuning in with the idea there's a decent chance they see Brock. Casuals don't check the internet every single day to see if Brock is going to be on Raw. I think there is a decent to good chance a lot of the viewers were tuning in hoping to see Brock the night after SS. Just my opinion.

I agree there are huge, crazy marks for guys. I consider myself a big HBK mark. But I don't let it twist me into thinking he was a huge draw. Even though, the wrestling business was a much different business in 1996 than it is today. But still. But marks will mark, agree with that.

Punk/Heyman is a big storyline, but it's not as big as the new Corporation/WWE Championship. Come on.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Punk/Heyman is a big storyline, but it's not as big as the new Corporation/WWE Championship. Come on.


There's a reason I put "a main event storyline". 

Oh, if you mean in regards to Punk/Heyman/Axel stuff main eventing, it could very well, and it probably will main event 1-2 Raws going into Night of Champions. Of course it's not gonna as much as the Bryan/Corporation storyline as it's not as big of an angle, but it'll have it's nights. 

And on the marks thing, I'm not talking about big marks of people. I'm talking the irrational ones who will do everything in their power to make people think their guy is the greatest or among the greatest indisputably, and won't stop until they can convert everyone to that line of thinking.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> There's a reason I put "a main event storyline".
> 
> Oh, if you mean in regards to Punk/Heyman/Axel stuff main eventing, it could very well, and it probably will main event 1-2 Raws going into Night of Champions.


Well yeah, I don't expect for them to give us Bryan/Orton or Bryan/HHH on Raw. Or, if you mean just segments ie, promos/brawls main eventing, then yeah. They usually like to switch that up for good reason. Unless Cena is involved


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LOL, at those trying to discredit Punk, by mostly attributing the rating for his segment to Lesnar.



Hurricane24 said:


> Punk get bails out again by the 3rd part timer he has feuded this year. Dem part timers exposure.... :rock4 :taker :brock


Clear off, Hawksea.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

in the long run, if you're popular with the fans and get real good arena reactions, you'll always be at the top of the card, or at one of the top spots....Punk and Bryan are there for the rest of their careers now.....because they're over as heels and faces.....the ratings score shouldn't matter in the long run, that will just keep them from being the face of the company, but if you continually get a reaction out of fans, then you're past the midcard.....


----------



## reorex

*RAW Ratings - Darren Young Draws*

In the segment breakdown, the first segment with John Cena, Daniel Bryan and Stephanie McMahon opened with a strong 3.4 rating. Damien Sandow vs. Cody Rhodes lost around 530,000 viewers. Paul Heyman's interview stayed even. Cameron and Naomi vs. AJ Lee and Layla lost around 135,000 viewers. Dolph Ziggler vs. The Shield gained around 500,000 viewers in the 9pm timeslot for a good 3.3 quarter rating.

Sin Cara vs. Alberto Del Rio stayed even, which is really good for that timeslot. Darren Young and Titus O'Neil vs. Antonio Cesaro and Jack Swagger gained around 250,000 viewers for a 3.5 rating. Considering who was in the match and the fact that it's not at the normal top of the hour growth period, this shows that the Young story led to an increase in viewers. Big Show vs. The Shield lost around 265,000 viewers. CM Punk's promo with Paul Heyman and the brawl with Curtis Axel gained around 400,000 viewers for a strong 3.6 quarter rating.

R-Truth vs. Bray Wyatt lost 550,000 viewers. The Usos vs. Heath Slater and Jinder Mahal lost another 265,000 viewers. Wade Barrett vs. The Miz gained around 135,000 viewers. The big main event angle with Triple H, the McMahons, Randy Orton, Daniel Bryan and The Shield gained around 670,000 viewers for a 3.6 overrun rating.


----------



## Karma101

*Re: RAW Ratings - Darren Young Draws*

Sounds like some pretty solid proof you have there.


----------



## ABrown

*Re: RAW Ratings - Darren Young Draws*


----------



## SubZero3:16

*Re: RAW Ratings - Darren Young Draws*



reorex said:


> In the segment breakdown, the first segment with John Cena, Daniel Bryan and Stephanie McMahon opened with a strong 3.4 rating. Damien Sandow vs. Cody Rhodes lost around 530,000 viewers. Paul Heyman's interview stayed even. Cameron and Naomi vs. AJ Lee and Layla lost around 135,000 viewers. *Dolph Ziggler vs. The Shield gained around 500,000 viewers in the 9pm timeslot for a good 3.3 quarter rating.*
> 
> Sin Cara vs. Alberto Del Rio stayed even, which is really good for that timeslot. Darren Young and Titus O'Neil vs. Antonio Cesaro and Jack Swagger gained around 250,000 viewers for a 3.5 rating. Considering who was in the match and the fact that it's not at the normal top of the hour growth period, this shows that the Young story led to an increase in viewers. Big Show vs. The Shield lost around 265,000 viewers. CM Punk's promo with Paul Heyman and the brawl with Curtis Axel gained around 400,000 viewers for a strong 3.6 quarter rating.
> 
> R-Truth vs. Bray Wyatt lost 550,000 viewers. The Usos vs. Heath Slater and Jinder Mahal lost another 265,000 viewers. Wade Barrett vs. The Miz gained around 135,000 viewers. The big main event angle with Triple H, the McMahons, Randy Orton, Daniel Bryan and The Shield gained around 670,000 viewers for a 3.6 overrun rating.


The Shield baby!!! 

Although it is interesting to note that when paired with the Big Show that viewership fell by over a 1/4 million. I guess people really don't want to see Big Show wrestle.

To be sure that PTP brings the numbers you would have to pair them again against another team. People could also be watching for Zeb Coulter.

R Truth, Wyatt, Usos and 3MB losing more viewers than the divas :shocked:

The last segment was awesome, so no surprise there.


----------



## Biast

*Re: RAW Ratings - Darren Young Draws*



reorex said:


> CM Punk's promo with Paul Heyman and the brawl with Curtis Axel gained around 400,000 viewers for a strong 3.6 quarter rating.


But he can't draw!! :lmao


----------



## Chrome

*Re: RAW Ratings - Darren Young Draws*

And guess what big ratings get you?


----------



## tylermoxreigns

*Re: RAW Ratings - Darren Young Draws*

MILLIONS OF DOLLARS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS

Nice to see The Shield are still drawing too.


----------



## BarackYoMama

*Re: RAW Ratings - Darren Young Draws*



Biast said:


> But he can't draw!! :lmao


We all know that was because of Curtis and Paul, had nothing at all to do with CM Punk :

but nice to see PTP drawing in the ratings! Shield and Ziggler also nice, can't just say it's Shield cause it lost ratings with Big Show.


----------



## Phantomdreamer

*Re: RAW Ratings - Darren Young Draws*



SubZero3:16 said:


> The Shield baby!!!
> 
> Although it is interesting to note that when paired with the Big Show that viewership fell by over a 1/4 million. I guess people really don't want to see Big Show wrestle.
> 
> To be sure that PTP brings the numbers you would have to pair them again against another team. People could also be watching for Zeb Coulter.
> 
> R Truth, Wyatt, Usos and 3MB losing more viewers than the divas :shocked:
> 
> The last segment was awesome, so no surprise there.


Or maybe, just maybe, could it be possible that people DO want to see Ziggler wrestle? Just throwing it out there.


----------



## checkcola

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It could also be repeating the same basic segment causing viewership fatigue


----------



## Osize10

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't know where to do this, but almost the entire product right now is working their ass off. We should be giving a majority of the roster the credit they deserve.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: RAW Ratings - Darren Young Draws*



Biast said:


> But he can't draw!! :lmao


Next RAW some of you are gonna be so sad...but at least Punk will be a 2 time IC champion. :lol


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Lesnar gets mentioned because he's a much bigger draw than Punk. So yes, he gets more credit than Punk does. That's how it goes. And there is little to no doubt in most people's minds that that is the only reason the Punk/Axel segment got the rating it got this past week.
> 
> Punk should be getting huge ratings week in and week out, no matter his opponent, actually. He's feuded with Cena, Taker, and Lesnar over the past year AND had a WWE title reign that went well over a year. He should be a HUGE draw right now. But he isn't. I don't like Cena, but there is a reason why he has still been the number one guy this entire time, even after the Punk title reign. Just the way it goes, unfortunately. They are going with Bryan as the number one face while Cena is gone, which is interesting.
> And just :lol at the divas thing.


Using somebody that isn't there is such a shit excuse to bash on somebody's starpower. I would think even you are above that. All it's doing is making you seem really bitter and upset, for some reason. Try giving credit where it's fucking due. Punk's segment went the full 15, had a commercial in middle of it, and the graphic advertising the segment the entire show just read "CM PUNK; Tonight." I might as well give Cena all the credit for the overrun because, hey, he's a much bigger draw than Bryan and everybody thought Cena would show up in the overrun segment, right? Give it a rest.

He has been getting great ratings ever since feuding with those guys, have you not been seeing them? Nothing mind-blowing, but no full timer gets mind-blowing rating results, yes including Cena. They're going with Bryan because it's his time in the main event. Punk's had two years of the spotlight, he won't be in there constantly. That's how the business has and always will work. I don't mind that Bryan and Orton are in the main event picture now at all, only for the fact that it's going to be boring as shit.

Also, :lmao. So the entire time you've been using that "beat by a Divas segment" line, it was the week Punk ran out after Axel's match? The one where Punk was out there for an entire minute? Must suck knowing Bryan's segment where he was featured the entire last week was beat by the Divas/every other segment.

Way to grasp at straws buddy.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Using somebody that isn't there is such a shit excuse to bash on somebody's starpower. I would think even you are above that. All it's doing is making you seem really bitter and upset, for some reason. Try giving credit where it's fucking due. Punk's segment went the full 15, had a commercial in middle of it, and the graphic advertising the segment the entire show just read "CM PUNK; Tonight." I might as well give Cena all the credit for the overrun because, hey, he's a much bigger draw than Bryan and everybody thought Cena would show up in the overrun segment, right? Give it a rest.
> 
> He has been getting great ratings ever since feuding with those guys, have you not been seeing them? Nothing mind-blowing, but no full timer gets mind-blowing rating results, yes including Cena. They're going with Bryan because it's his time in the main event. Punk's had two years of the spotlight, he won't be in there constantly. That's how the business has and always will work. I don't mind that Bryan and Orton are in the main event picture now at all, only for the fact that it's going to be boring as shit.
> 
> Also, :lmao. So the entire time you've been using that "beat by a Divas segment" line, it was the week Punk ran out after Axel's match? The one where Punk was out there for an entire minute? Must suck knowing Bryan's segment where he was featured the entire last week was beat by the Divas/every other segment.
> 
> Way to grasp at straws buddy.


Okay. I can agree with about 99% of that. Even though, I think some still overplay Punk's consistency considering who he has worked with. And I don't think it would have been crazy at all to think there is a possibility Brock could have appeared, again, from the casual fans' perspective, not yours or mine. Except for the part this this new storyline is going to be boring. :lol wut? The new Corporation angle is going to be better than anything Punk has been involved in. It already has tied in other guys (like the Shield), thus finding new ways to utilize other parts of the roster, in a major storyline. It's only going to get more and more interesting as time goes. This was just Week 1 of the storyline. It's going to be awesome. And who's the babyface of the storyline? You guessed it.

:bryan


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Okay. I can agree with about 99% of that. Even though, I think some still overplay Punk's consistency considering who he has worked with. And I don't think it would have been crazy at all to think there is a possibility Brock could have appeared, again, from the casual fans' perspective, not yours or mine. Except for the part this this new storyline is going to be boring. :lol wut? The new Corporation angle is going to be better than anything Punk has been involved in. It already has tied in other guys (like the Shield), thus finding new ways to utilize other parts of the roster, in a major storyline. It's only going to get more and more interesting as time goes. This was just Week 1 of the storyline. It's going to be awesome. And who's the babyface of the storyline? You guessed it.
> 
> :bryan


I don't know, because while Punk has worked with all of these guys, he has not once come out on top. Until this program with Lesnar, he hasn't been involved in any programs that would make the casuals think "damn, this guy can hang with these legends" once the programs were over. The Lesnar program/match actually did do that, in my opinion, but because he was heel for the other programs, Punk was made out to look like a fool throughout the program, and then lost. Not to mention that his entire WWE title run he only feuded with guys who were beneath him. With this in mind, Punk has been able to pull of some great numbers. It'd be foolish to think at this point he would be able to pull off numbers like Rock and Lesnar. But when comparing him to Cena, as far as pulling good numbers go, he's not far off at all. Maybe just less consistent.

I suppose the whole "boring" part comes down to opinion. Don't find anything entertaining about either Orton or Bryan, so you can expect that I'm not too stoked about that. I'll likely just not watch any of it. Now, better than anything Punk has been involved in? That definitely comes down to opinion. An opinion I would strongly disagree with, but we don't have to go there.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I don't know, because while Punk has worked with all of these guys, he has not once come out on top. Until this program with Lesnar, he hasn't been involved in any programs that would make the casuals think "damn, this guy can hang with these legends" once the programs were over. The Lesnar program/match actually did do that, in my opinion, but because he was heel for the other programs, Punk was made out to look like a fool throughout the program, and then lost. Not to mention that his entire WWE title run he only feuded with guys who were beneath him. With this in mind, Punk has been able to pull of some great numbers. It'd be foolish to think at this point he would be able to pull off numbers like Rock and Lesnar. But when comparing him to Cena, as far as pulling good numbers go, he's not far off at all. Maybe just less consistent.
> 
> I suppose the whole "boring" part comes down to opinion. Don't find anything entertaining about either Orton or Bryan, so you can expect that I'm not too stoked about that. I'll likely just not watch any of it. Now, better than anything Punk has been involved in? That definitely comes down to opinion. An opinion I would strongly disagree with, but we don't have to go there.


Yeah, when it comes right down to it, I don't think any of the full timers are going to rival the ratings that the part-timers can pull in. During his title run, it makes sense that he was only feuding with guys under him on the card. There was only one guy above him, and that was the guy he beat for the title, so they already did that. Everyone else was beneath him, like you said. So, there was no one else he could feud with who was a full timer that was above him.


----------



## saadzown

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

RAW was great this week


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

wait! some wrestling fans find Bryan boring? wow! he's super action packed, super quick, panders to the crowd, has a catch phrase and he actually takes bumps well and wrestles amazingly...how is he boring? Orton is the super monotone boring one......


----------



## Hurricane24

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Still find it funny how Punk doesn't get any of those massive gains when he isn't feuding or be in a segment with any part timer/legends though. In the end of the day, that's still Brock's number.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> It'd be foolish to think at this point he would be able to pull off numbers like Rock and Lesnar. *But when comparing him to Cena, as far as pulling good numbers go, he's not far off at all.* Maybe just less consistent.


You really need to stop this because it's embarrassing and makes you look very silly which is unfortunate when you actually make a proper post about something. Cena 'and Punk' this, Cena 'and Punk' that. There is no Cena 'and Punk.' 

It's Cena...







...then Punk in terms of star power. 

Every time you make a post you're constantly lumping Punk in there with Cena when it's simply not the case. At all. John Cena is head and shoulders above CM Punk in star power that to keep putting Punk in there with him defeats the purpose of any serious or intelligent post you try to make because saying something like that is just stupid, there's no other word for it. There is a clear tier when it comes to star power in WWE. Cena and the part timers are in the first group and _everybody _else is in the second group and that includes Punk. Is he at the top of that group? Absolutely. But you're acting like Punk is on par with Cena and so far above everybody else and that is not true. You had me agreeing with everything you said until I got to this part where I lol'd. 

You seem to have it in your head that because Punk is number 2 that that somehow means he's not that far behind Cena and that he's so far ahead of everybody else. Batista was number 2 to Cena. He was a far bigger star than CM Punk right now and _he _wasn't even close to touching Cena after 2005. In 2006 it was Edge. In 2008 it was Jeff Hardy. In 2009 it was Randy Orton. From 2011 it has been CM Punk. Just because you're number 2 it doesn't mean you're close to touching number 1. I seriously doubt you would say Batista, Edge, Hardy or Orton were "not far off at all" from John Cena in terms of star power but because it's Punk suddenly he is.

If you want to keep discussing this then really, you ought to leave the whole Cena 'and Punk' thing out of your arguments because nobody can take you seriously when you say things like that. It reeks of markdom which is exactly what it is. You want to have an objective discussion about numbers? Try being objective.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> You really need to stop this because it's embarrassing and makes you look very silly which is unfortunate when you actually make a proper post about something. Cena 'and Punk' this, Cena 'and Punk' that. There is no Cena 'and Punk.'
> 
> It's Cena...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...then Punk in terms of star power.
> 
> Every time you make a post you're constantly lumping Punk in there with Cena when it's simply not the case. At all. John Cena is head and shoulders above CM Punk in star power that to keep putting Punk in there with him defeats the purpose of any serious or intelligent post you try to make because saying something like that is just stupid, there's no other word for it. There is a clear tier when it comes to star power in WWE. Cena and the part timers are in the first group and _everybody _else is in the second group and that includes Punk. Is he at the top of that group? Absolutely. But you're acting like Punk is on par with Cena and so far above everybody else and that is not true. You had me agreeing with everything you said until I got to this part where I lol'd.
> 
> You seem to have it in your head that because Punk is number 2 that that somehow means he's not that far behind Cena and that he's so far ahead of everybody else. Batista was number 2 to Cena. He was a far bigger star than CM Punk right now and _he _wasn't even close to touching Cena after 2005. In 2006 it was Edge. In 2008 it was Jeff Hardy. In 2009 it was Randy Orton. From 2011 it has been CM Punk. Just because you're number 2 it doesn't mean you're close to touching number 1. I seriously doubt you would say Batista, Edge, Hardy or Orton were "not far off at all" from John Cena in terms of star power but because it's Punk suddenly he is.
> 
> If you want to keep discussing this then really, you ought to leave the whole Cena 'and Punk' thing out of your arguments because nobody can take you seriously when you say things like that. It reeks of markdom which is exactly what it is. You want to have an objective discussion about numbers? Try being objective.


Well, I was strictly talking about numbers. It's not like Cena's been taking the world by storm as far as his segments go recently. I'm not wrong when I say ever since Punk's program with Rock, Cena and Punk have been pulling in very similar quarter numbers in their respective segments. I'm not saying Punk's on the same level as Cena right now, that's absurd. Cena's been _the _top dog for eight years. It'd be absolutely silly to put Punk up there after his two years at the top. But when you look at the roster, I don't think I'm wrong when I say that Cena and Punk are the two top dogs, and that there's a big gap between them, and the other guys. It's not me either, Jim Ross, Steve Austin and others have gone on record to say that these two are at the top with not many of their peers being even close. Right now it's debatable that Bryan's recent push is putting him on track to reaching that level, but he's just beginning.

The way I see it right now, looking at things objectively, it goes..

Cena


..then Punk..


..then everybody else.

I don't think that's far from the truth at all, seeing the way WWE promotes these two.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

what is your beef with Bryan? The McMahons and Triple H know talent when they see it, and they're pushing Bryan because they see star potential in him......everyone loves the guy. yet you act as if he's just a flavor of the month....well, that month has lasted since 2012 now. He will have drawing power real soon, he's getting there...him and Punk will end up being equals..And Cena sees it too, or else he wouldn't have lost to him cleanly.....Cena has direction of how he loses and since he lost cleanly to Bryan, that means even he sees the potential there for star power.....


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I don't think there's a big gap, if any, between Punk and Orton. Specially now the latter's back on top and is the #1 heel. I can understand the argument for Bryan since it's his first big push and he's only getting started but there's no way anyone can convince me Punk is sooooo far ahead of Orton the way Punk marks try to make it out to be. Orton was made before Punk was even in the company and you don't even need to tell me about Punk working with part-timers because Orton has already been there and faced The Rock, Undertaker and Triple H before. All of them at Wrestlemania I might add.


----------



## Catsaregreat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Drawen Young.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Torch:


> The quarter-hour ratings winners from Monday's show were the show-closing Randy Orton Coronation and Daniel Bryan-McMahon Family confrontation, C.M. Punk's promo response to Paul Heyman, and the combination of the Prime Time Players and Ryback's backstage bullying skit.
> 
> Another winner in a comparison to previous weeks was the show-opening segment featuring John Cena's farewell, then Daniel Bryan and Stephanie McMahon's in-ring confrontation.
> 
> This Q1 segment scored a 2.11 rating in the males 18-49 demographic, which was in the middle of the pack compared to the rest of the show, but was easily the highest-rated segment of the first hour and the highest-rated Q1 since we began tracking m18-49 demos in May.
> 
> Winners Break Down in M18-49 demo
> 
> - Over-Run: The show-closing segment involving Orton, the McMahons, Bryan, and The Shield with the roster on-stage scored a 2.75 over-run rating, which was the highest-rated over-run since we began tracking in May.
> 
> Peak viewership was 1.738 million viewers at 11:09 p.m. when the action peaked. Raw then went off the air with 1.726 million viewers at 11:11 p.m.
> 
> - Peak viewership of the show came at the top of the third hour for C.M. Punk's promo on Paul Heyman and physicality with Curtis Axel. During this Q9 segment, Raw hit 1.836 million viewers at 10:01 p.m. when viewers flipped in from other shows that ended at 10:00 p.m.
> 
> Raw then hit 1.832 million viewers at 10:15 p.m. for the end of the Punk-Axel brawl to conclude the segment.
> 
> - The most-watched segment of the second hour was a combination of the Prime Time Players and Ryback's latest locker room bullying skit.
> 
> In the Q7 segment, the end of the Players's match against the Real Americans drew 1.676 million viewers at 9:34 p.m. This was the most-watched minute of the second hour until Ryback's bullying drew more viewers - 1.790 million viewers at 9:42 p.m., then Raw then went to commercial with 1.739 million viewers at 9:44 p.m.
> 
> Raw Quarter-Hour Ratings Flow in m18-49 demo
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened with a 2.11 rating for the immediate Summerslam fall-out. Peak viewership was 1.463 million viewers at 8:13 p.m.
> 
> - Q2: Raw dropped to a show-low 1.76 rating for the end of the opening segment, two full commercial breaks, and the first few minutes of Cody Rhodes vs. Damien Sandow.
> 
> Peak viewership was 1.471 million viewers at 8:17 p.m. for the conclusion of the opening segment.
> 
> - Q3: Raw increased to a 1.84 rating for the end of Rhodes-Sandow, one commercial, and Paul Heyman's promo segment addressing Brock Lesnar's victory over C.M. Punk at Summerslam. Peak viewership was 1.412 million viewers at 8:42 p.m. prior to a commercial.
> 
> - Q4: Raw dipped to a 1.77 rating for a Divas tag match wrapped around two commercial breaks.
> 
> - Q5: At the top of the second hour, Raw jumped to a 2.19 rating for Dolph Ziggler vs. The Shield in a handicap match, one commercial, and ring introductions for Alberto Del Rio vs. Sin Cara.
> 
> In this segment, peak viewership was for the ring introductions. Peak viewership for the handicap match was 1.496 million viewers at 9:06 p.m., while peak viewership during ring intros was 1.586 million viewers at 9:13 p.m.
> 
> - Q6: Raw increased to a 2.25 rating for Del Rio vs. Sin Cara, one commercial, Zeb Colter's promo for the Real Americans, and the first-half of the Real Americans vs. Prime Time Players.
> 
> Peak viewership was 1.701 million viewers for the referee stoppage at 9:19 p.m.
> 
> - Q7: Raw increased to a second-hour-high 2.43 rating for the end of the Players vs. Real Americans, a backstage Big Show promo, one commercial, and Ryback bullying wrestlers in the locker room.
> 
> - Q8: Raw dipped to a 2.26 rating for Big Show vs. The Shield in a handicap match with two full commercial breaks dragging down the rating. Peak viewership was 1.685 million viewers at 9:52 p.m. for the meat of the handicap match.
> 
> - Q9: Raw jumped to a 2.56 rating at the top of the third hour for C.M. Punk's promo on Paul Heyman, one commercial waiting for Heyman's response, and the Punk-Axel physicality on the other side of the break.
> 
> - Q10: Raw dipped to a 2.28 rating for the "comedown segment" of Bray Wyatt vs. R-Truth and two full commercial breaks dragging down the rating.
> 
> - Q11: Raw dipped to a 2.15 rating - the lowest rating of the last two hours - for The Usos vs. 3MB, one commercial, and ring introductions for the default main event.
> 
> - Q12: Raw increased to a 2.29 rating for the final segment before the over-run. The default main event of The Miz vs. Wade Barrett actually drew fewer viewers than Usos-3MB, but the rating increased because the final segment of the show started at the end of Q12.
> 
> This is reflected by 1.625, 1.685, and 1.689 million viewers from 10:57 to 10:59 p.m. for the start of Orton's Coronation segment.
> 
> - Over-Run: Raw jumped to a 2.75 rating for the Orton, Bryan, McMahons segment. Included was peak viewership of 1.738 million viewers at 11:09 p.m.


Note: 1.0 rating = 625,600 viewers (12/13 Season)


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> I don't think there's a big gap, if any, between Punk and Orton. Specially now the latter's back on top and is the #1 heel. I can understand the argument for Bryan since it's his first big push and he's only getting started but there's no way anyone can convince me Punk is sooooo far ahead of Orton the way Punk marks try to make it out to be. Orton was made before Punk was even in the company and you don't even need to tell me about Punk working with part-timers because Orton has already been there and faced The Rock, Undertaker and Triple H before. All of them at Wrestlemania I might add.


"Punk marks" aren't the ones making it out to be that way, WWE is. Like, it's just the way it is now. They promote Cena and Punk as their two top draws, and they have since the end of 2011. Both in media and on WWE TV, WWE have given these two guys the top promotion and Orton has not seen that spotlight since 2009. That is a damn long time. I'm not saying Orton will never get back to that point, but to say Punk and Orton are equal right now and saying "no way anybody can convince me otherwise" sounds like you're being awfully protective about it.



> - Peak viewership of the show came at the top of the third hour for C.M. Punk's promo on Paul Heyman and physicality with Curtis Axel. During this Q9 segment, Raw hit 1.836 million viewers at 10:01 p.m. when viewers flipped in from other shows that ended at 10:00 p.m.
> 
> Raw then hit 1.832 million viewers at 10:15 p.m. for the end of the Punk-Axel brawl to conclude the segment.


So the audience stayed the entire fifteen minutes of that segment, even with the commercial. Damn impressive, and again countering that "people were expecting Lesnar" argument.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I can understand claiming that Punk is #2 but I still don't believe in any way that he's ahead of Orton the way you talk about the gap between him and the rest of the roster. Orton still gets plenty of promotion and even when he was directionless, his booking was dominant and he won most of his matches. Last year, yeah, Punk was really on top while Orton was being overshadowed even by the likes of Sheamus and Ryback but a year later, things have changed and Orton didn't need months long build up to return into the main event scene. All because he has the credibility to be there and WWE are certainly putting a lot of stock into him now by making him the corporate champion and the guy that does the dirty work for the McMahon family.

In short, I can buy into the idea that Punk is #2 but not into the statement that the gap between him and #3 (plus the rest of the roster) is almost as big as it is between Cena and everyone else.

----------------

Also good to see that the main event segment was doing well!


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

DAT STARBUCK WITH DAT TRUTH. For 8 years, many men have challenged Cena's spot at #1, but the only one that went past him was Batista in 2005, and even then that was more of a case of Cena usurping Batista than the other way around. I really thought Orton would do it in 2009 considering that he was the biggest thing going that year, but Cena won that horrible feud. Punk has no chance and never did in all honesty. You can outpop Cena and beat him in matches and merchandise sales all you want, but none of that will put you over Cena's status. The man is just too big. 

It should be worth noting that Cena's starpower seems to have decreased over time, and now the gap isn't as big as it was a couple years ago. However, that is once again more so due to Cena's diminishing starpower rather than anyone else's rise. Of course, let it also be known that in the second half of 2012, you can argue that both Punk and Ryback were better "ratings performers" than Cena who had his worst stretch of "drawing" in his career.

DAT :ziggler1


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> A bit more ratings detail I've done:
> 
> August 19th, 2013
> - 3.24 rating
> - 3.700 million households
> - 4.298 million viewers
> - an average of 1.16 viewers per household that watches Raw
> 
> - 1.57 Adults 18-49 rating
> - 1.986 million viewers in Adults 18-49 demographic
> 
> *- 2.20 Males 18-49 rating
> - 1.376 million viewers in Males 18-49 demographic
> 
> - 0.95 Womens 18-49 rating
> - 0.610 million viewers in Womens 18-49 demographic*
> 
> - 2.312 million viewers fall outside of Adults 18-49 demographic


Males 18-49 Breakdown - August 19th, 2013
*Q1 - 2.11 rating / 1.320 million*
--> 20:13 - 2.34 rating / 1.463 million (peak)
*Q2 - 1.76 rating / 1.101 million*
--> 20:17 - 2.35 rating / 1.471 million (peak)
*Q3 - 1.84 rating / 1.151 million*
--> 20:42 - 2.26 rating / 1.412 million (peak)
*Q4 - 1.77 rating / 1.107 million*
*Q5 - 2.19 rating / 1.370 million*
--> 21:06 - 2.39 rating / 1.496 million
--> 21:13 - 2.54 rating / 1.586 million (peak)
*Q6 - 2.25 rating / 1.408 million*
--> 21:19 - 2.72 rating / 1.701 million (peak)
*Q7 - 2.43 rating / 1.520 million*
--> 21:34 - 2.68 rating / 1.676 million
--> 21:42 - 2.86 rating / 1.790 million (peak)
--> 21:44 - 2.78 rating / 1.739 million
*Q8 - 2.26 rating / 1.414 million*
--> 21:52 - 2.69 rating / 1.685 million (peak)
*Q9 - 2.56 rating / 1.602 million*
--> 22:01 - 2.93 rating / 1.836 million (peak)
*Q10 - 2.28 rating / 1.426 million*
--> 22:15 - 2.93 rating / 1.832 million (peak)
*Q11 - 2.15 rating / 1.345 million
Q12 - 2.29 rating / 1.434 million*
--> 22:57 - 2.60 rating / 1.625 million
--> 22:58 - 2.69 rating / 1.685 million
--> 22:59 - 2.70 rating / 1.689 million (peak)
*OR - 2.75 rating / 1.720 million*
--> 23:09 - 2.78 rating / 1.738 million (peak)
--> 23:11 - 2.76 rating / 1.726 million


----------



## Stad

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Hurricane24 said:


> Punk get bails out again by the 3rd part timer he has feuded this year. Dem part timers exposure.... :rock4 :taker :brock


Hawksea back in rare form. How long until you get banned on this account?


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> DAT STARBUCK WITH DAT TRUTH. For 8 years, many men have challenged Cena's spot at #1, but the only one that went past him was Batista in 2005, and even then that was more of a case of Cena usurping Batista than the other way around. I really thought Orton would do it in 2009 considering that he was the biggest thing going that year, but Cena won that horrible feud. Punk has no chance and never did in all honesty. You can outpop Cena and beat him in matches and merchandise sales all you want, but none of that will put you over Cena's status. The man is just too big.
> 
> It should be worth noting that Cena's starpower seems to have decreased over time, and now the gap isn't as big as it was a couple years ago. However, that is once again more so due to Cena's diminishing starpower rather than anyone else's rise. Of course, let it also be known that in the second half of 2012, you can argue that both Punk and Ryback were better "ratings performers" than Cena who had his worst stretch of "drawing" in his career.
> 
> DAT :ziggler1


You should have more common sense t. It's not that he's too big. It's that he is who the company pushes and protects like he's Hulk Hogan from the 80s. Simple. He's not and he's only a guy who gets mixed reactions but he doesn't sell out arenas week in and week out. He gets cheered when he's injured now and that's been going for at least 5 years. 

CM Punk wasn't drawing shit in 2012 but 2.4s and 8000 fans for Survivor Series.


He interacted with the Rock and his numbers went up a little bit this year. That was it.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> You really need to stop this because it's embarrassing and makes you look very silly which is unfortunate when you actually make a proper post about something. Cena 'and Punk' this, Cena 'and Punk' that. There is no Cena 'and Punk.'
> 
> It's Cena...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...then Punk in terms of star power.
> 
> Every time you make a post you're constantly lumping Punk in there with Cena when it's simply not the case. At all. John Cena is head and shoulders above CM Punk in star power that to keep putting Punk in there with him defeats the purpose of any serious or intelligent post you try to make because saying something like that is just stupid, there's no other word for it. There is a clear tier when it comes to star power in WWE. Cena and the part timers are in the first group and _everybody _else is in the second group and that includes Punk. Is he at the top of that group? Absolutely. But you're acting like Punk is on par with Cena and so far above everybody else and that is not true. You had me agreeing with everything you said until I got to this part where I lol'd.
> 
> You seem to have it in your head that because Punk is number 2 that that somehow means he's not that far behind Cena and that he's so far ahead of everybody else. Batista was number 2 to Cena. He was a far bigger star than CM Punk right now and _he _wasn't even close to touching Cena after 2005. In 2006 it was Edge. In 2008 it was Jeff Hardy. In 2009 it was Randy Orton. From 2011 it has been CM Punk. Just because you're number 2 it doesn't mean you're close to touching number 1. I seriously doubt you would say Batista, Edge, Hardy or Orton were "not far off at all" from John Cena in terms of star power but because it's Punk suddenly he is.
> 
> If you want to keep discussing this then really, you ought to leave the whole Cena 'and Punk' thing out of your arguments because nobody can take you seriously when you say things like that. It reeks of markdom which is exactly what it is. You want to have an objective discussion about numbers? Try being objective.


:HHH2 would be proud


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Well, I was strictly talking about numbers. It's not like Cena's been taking the world by storm as far as his segments go recently. I'm not wrong when I say ever since Punk's program with Rock, Cena and Punk have been pulling in very similar quarter numbers in their respective segments. I'm not saying Punk's on the same level as Cena right now, that's absurd. Cena's been _the _top dog for eight years. It'd be absolutely silly to put Punk up there after his two years at the top. But when you look at the roster, I don't think I'm wrong when I say that Cena and Punk are the two top dogs, and that there's a big gap between them, and the other guys. It's not me either, Jim Ross, Steve Austin and others have gone on record to say that these two are at the top with not many of their peers being even close. Right now it's debatable that Bryan's recent push is putting him on track to reaching that level, but he's just beginning.
> 
> The way I see it right now, looking at things objectively, it goes..
> 
> Cena
> 
> 
> ..then Punk..
> 
> 
> ..then everybody else.
> 
> I don't think that's far from the truth at all, seeing the way WWE promotes these two.


Nobody is saying that Punk isn't number 2. You aren't wrong when you say Cena and Punk are 1 and 2. You're wrong when you say that because of that, they are on equal footing with all this Cena 'and Punk' stuff because they very clearly aren't. There you go again with Bryan reaching their level. It's Cena's level and Punk isn't on it. That isn't me talking about talent because this isn't about talent. It's about star power and they aren't mutually exclusive. CM Punk is not on the same level as John Cena when it comes to star power. He's not even close. Punk's _work _can be at a level above everybody else and you're perfectly within your rights to think that. It's your opinion. Star power though? Nope. It's not opinion based. 

You say Cena and Punk have pulled similar numbers since the Royal Rumble? OK then. Punk has worked with Rock, Taker and Lesnar. Cena has worked with Rock, the Shield, Ryback, Mark Henry and Daniel Bryan. I hope you can see the difference. If what you said is true then Punk is pulling the same numbers as Cena with legitimate star attractions and proven draws while Cena is pulling the same numbers as Punk with lesser stars and unproven draws. Punk is working with the star while Cena IS the star. The gap between John Cena and CM Punk is more than likely infinite and the same goes for Cena and everybody else on the full time roster. Nobody is touching him for a long time. Punk? He can easily be caught, just like he easily caught Orton 2 years ago. If they push Bryan and invest 2 years into him like they have Punk, let him work programs with the part timers then who's to say he won't move ahead? Orton has come back into relevancy. Lots of new guys are on the rise. That wasn't the case from 2011 through 2012. It's a different climate. Right now CM Punk is solidly the second biggest full time star they have. I agree with that. Acting like the gap between him and everybody else is significant however is just foolish. That's where you're wrong and that's where you're not being objective. Switch the players for a second. If Orton were in Punk's place right now and Punk in Orton's, would you be telling me that Orton was so far ahead of everybody and that he'd never be caught? I don't think so. You'd be saying that he was on the same level as everybody else purely because he'd be Randy Orton and not CM Punk.

I don't even know why you keep brining up 2 top dogs anyway. Why not say we have 3 top dogs or 4 top dogs? Why not stretch it out to Cena, Punk, Orton and Bryan or why not just Cena? I think it's pretty obvious why. Cena 'and Punk' implies Punk is at a level that everybody knows he isn't on, everybody but you. But if you say Cena, Punk, Orton and Bryan, it implies they're all on a similar level and you don't want Orton and Bryan up there so we're back to this whole Cena 'and Punk' thing again. This isn't an Austin 'and Rock' situation where the 2 of them were literally neck and neck and battling it out for the number ONE spot. It isn't a Cena 'and Batista' situation where they were battling it out for the number ONE spot until Batista got hurt and Cena firmly became THE guy. It's Cena...then the guys battling it out for number TWO. 

John Cena




CM Punk
Randy Orton/Daniel Bryan
Everybody else


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

do you think the WWE wants Bryan to surpass Cena once Cena is gone, or is this just a "take advantage of the profit while its there" situation, and they just want the fans to be happy real quick......?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Nobody is saying that Punk isn't number 2. You aren't wrong when you say Cena and Punk are 1 and 2. You're wrong when you say that because of that, they are on equal footing with all this Cena 'and Punk' stuff because they very clearly aren't. There you go again with Bryan reaching their level. It's Cena's level and Punk isn't on it. That isn't me talking about talent because this isn't about talent. It's about star power and they aren't mutually exclusive. CM Punk is not on the same level as John Cena when it comes to star power. He's not even close. Punk's _work _can be at a level above everybody else and you're perfectly within your rights to think that. It's your opinion. Star power though? Nope. It's not opinion based.


Why are you continuing to debate that I think Cena and Punk are equals, I never said that. I actually made a point as to why Cena is far ahead of Punk. On the topic of Bryan, he won't be reaching Cena's level, nobody else will either, like you said. And as for reaching Punk's level, he's got a long ways to go for that as well. My main grip is a select few thinking Bryan's reached Punk or even Cena status (lol) because of one month of a main event run. I'm just trying to prove how that isn't the case. And I never even brought up talent so no point in bringing that up, I was also strictly talking star power. Punk has been in the spotlight for two years, Cena for eight, Bryan has a long ways to go to reach either of their positions. Surely we can agree on that part. 



> You say Cena and Punk have pulled similar numbers since the Royal Rumble? OK then. Punk has worked with Rock, Taker and Lesnar. Cena has worked with Rock, the Shield, Ryback, Mark Henry and Daniel Bryan. I hope you can see the difference. If what you said is true then Punk is pulling the same numbers as Cena with legitimate star attractions and proven draws while Cena is pulling the same numbers as Punk with lesser stars and unproven draws. Punk is working with the star while Cena IS the star. The gap between John Cena and CM Punk is more than likely infinite and the same goes for Cena and everybody else on the full time roster. Nobody is touching him for a long time. Punk? He can easily be caught, just like he easily caught Orton 2 years ago. If they push Bryan and invest 2 years into him like they have Punk, let him work programs with the part timers then who's to say he won't move ahead? Orton has come back into relevancy. Lots of new guys are on the rise. That wasn't the case from 2011 through 2012. It's a different climate. Right now CM Punk is solidly the second biggest full time star they have. I agree with that. Acting like the gap between him and everybody else is significant however is just foolish. That's where you're wrong and that's where you're not being objective. Switch the players for a second. If Orton were in Punk's place right now and Punk in Orton's, would you be telling me that Orton was so far ahead of everybody and that he'd never be caught? I don't think so. You'd be saying that he was on the same level as everybody else purely because he'd be Randy Orton and not CM Punk.


Punk's also worked with Del Rio, Orton, Axel, and the Prime Time Players. All successful in their quarter hour segments. Also similar to the numbers Cena's been bringing in. That's where I can compare them, at the moment. Punk isn't as consistent maybe, although neither guy is, but that is where a comparison can be made right now. Overall, who's a bigger star? Obviously Cena, and I never said otherwise. 



> I don't even know why you keep brining up 2 top dogs anyway. Why not say we have 3 top dogs or 4 top dogs? Why not stretch it out to Cena, Punk, Orton and Bryan or why not just Cena? I think it's pretty obvious why. Cena 'and Punk' implies Punk is at a level that everybody knows he isn't on, everybody but you. But if you say Cena, Punk, Orton and Bryan, it implies they're all on a similar level and you don't want Orton and Bryan up there so we're back to this whole Cena 'and Punk' thing again. This isn't an Austin 'and Rock' situation where the 2 of them were literally neck and neck and battling it out for the number ONE spot. It isn't a Cena 'and Batista' situation where they were battling it out for the number ONE spot until Batista got hurt and Cena firmly became THE guy. It's Cena...then the guys battling it out for number TWO.
> 
> John Cena
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CM Punk
> Randy Orton/Daniel Bryan
> Everybody else


I bring up two top dogs because the top two are the only two positions set in stone, while it's a clusterfuck for every other spot. Who's number three, Bryan, Sheamus or Orton? Who's a spot below them, Big Show, Henry, or Ryback? Those are the spots that are debatable. Cena and Punk are undisputed number one and two respectively. Judging by how I see the WWE promote their superstars and their product, I do see that there is also a gap between Punk and everybody else. At this point, Punk is settled at number two, with everybody else fighting for number three. Now if you ask me, can the landscape change in a year? Easily can. But that's the way I see it now.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Holy crap, Punk/Axel not only was peak of the show but they kept that number throughout the segment? Surprised it had more viewers than the overrun, even in the 18-49. Great stuff though for Punk.

And before Summerslam, I wouldve said Punk was definite number 2. After though I'd say it's a fair toss up between him and Bryan (I'd personally have Punk above him, but not by much). Orton though is #4 and I wouldn't consider putting him above those two. He's an afterthought in this Bryan/Corporation storyline.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> And before Summerslam, I wouldve said Punk was definite number 2. After though I'd say it's a fair toss up between him and Bryan. Orton though is #4 and I wouldn't consider putting him above those two. He's an afterthought in this Bryan/Corporation storyline.


One month of build and that trumps 2 years of top angles and year long title reigns? Don't see how.

Like I said, Punk's on his break now from the main event for Bryan and Orton. That's just what happens in the business, you can't always see the same top guys in the main event picture. Would you have said Punk was above Cena during that month period where Punk was feuding with Triple H back in '11?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://www.wwe.com/inside/polls/who-would-you-pick-to-be-the-face-of-wwe

for fun - poll who is the face of the WWE right now

Punk - 26 %
Cena - 23 %
Bryan - 22 %
Orton - 18 %

(so far)


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://www.wwe.com/inside/polls/who-would-you-pick-to-be-the-face-of-wwe
> 
> for fun - poll who is the face of the WWE right now
> 
> Punk - 26 %
> Cena - 23 %
> Bryan - 22 %
> Orton - 18 %
> 
> (so far)


unk


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://www.wwe.com/inside/polls/who-would-you-pick-to-be-the-face-of-wwe
> 
> for fun - poll who is the face of the WWE right now
> 
> Punk - 26 %
> Cena - 23 %
> Bryan - 22 %
> Orton - 18 %
> 
> (so far)


Bummer that creative doesn't feel the same way. unk The rest of those 1200 who voted will be singing a different tune soon enough, just as WWE already is. 

:troll

Catching up on the thread, sucks that I missed Starbuck completely and utterly eviscerating this thread earlier.

:damn


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Okay. I can agree with about 99% of that. Even though, I think some still overplay Punk's consistency considering who he has worked with. And I don't think it would have been crazy at all to think there is a possibility Brock could have appeared, again, from the casual fans' perspective, not yours or mine. Except for the part this this new storyline is going to be boring. :lol wut? *The new Corporation angle is going to be better than anything Punk has been involved in.* It already has tied in other guys (like the Shield), thus finding new ways to utilize other parts of the roster, in a major storyline. It's only going to get more and more interesting as time goes. This was just Week 1 of the storyline. It's going to be awesome. And who's the babyface of the storyline? You guessed it.
> 
> :bryan


The only way this angle is going to be better than "anything Punk's been involved in", is if Punk gets involved. However, I'd wager they'll keep Punk away from this, so he won't steal Bryan's (or Orton or even HHH's) thunder... because if he does get involved in this program, he'll instantly become the best thing in it, thus taking the focus off Bryan - and that's not what they want.



Stad said:


> Hawksea back in rare form. *How long until you get banned on this account*


It's been 135 posts too long, already. Someone should've noticed by now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> The only way this angle is going to be better than "anything Punk's been involved in", is if Punk gets involved. However, I'd wager they'll keep Punk away from this, so he won't steal Bryan's (or Orton or even HHH's) thunder... because if he does get involved in this program, he'll instantly become the best thing in it, thus taking the focus off Bryan - and that's not what they want.


Nah. The angle is a week into it's existence and has more potential than anything this company has done in quite awhile. Not that this company has been on a roll or anything, so I suppose that's not saying much. I'll give WWE credit for doing a good job casting the roles in this storyline, though. First time in awhile that I am interested in an angle and seeing where it goes. Unpredictability is a good thing.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> The only way this angle is going to be better than "anything Punk's been involved in", is if Punk gets involved. However, I'd wager they'll keep Punk away from this, so he won't steal Bryan's (or Orton or even HHH's) thunder... because if he does get involved in this program, he'll instantly become the best thing in it, thus taking the focus off Bryan - and that's not what they want.


 So basically whatever Punk touches turns into gold, right? You do know that Punk has been in some bad feuds before, right?


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just like I posted before, 10:01pm was the peak because of a big chunk of viewers tuning in from other channels when the game ended. Same happened on August 5th RAW as well. True gain was the overrun with a huge 2.75 rating. 



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> *So the audience stayed the entire fifteen minutes of that segment*, even with the commercial. Damn impressive, and again countering that "people were expecting Lesnar" argument.


They didn't actually. The viewership must have dropped throughout before picking back up again towards the end. That is why the rating and the overall average of the quarter is down, even though it had the peak viewership of the show at 10:01. Overrun had steady viewership in comparison.



D.M.N. said:


> *Q9 - 2.56 rating / 1.602 million*
> --> 22:01 - 2.93 rating / 1.836 million (peak)
> 
> 
> *OR - 2.75 rating / 1.720 million*
> --> 23:09 - 2.78 rating / 1.738 million (peak)
> --> 23:11 - 2.76 rating / 1.726 million


 
Note the rating and overall average, 2.56 rating and 1.6m even though the peak viewership was 1.836m viewers. Note the same for overrun and see the difference. 


Don't get me wrong, Punk did do well all things considered but the viewers absolutely did not stay through the entire 15mins like you think. Torch just didn't report the low point of the quarter.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://www.wwe.com/inside/polls/who-would-you-pick-to-be-the-face-of-wwe
> 
> for fun - poll who is the face of the WWE right now
> 
> Punk - 26 %
> Cena - 23 %
> Bryan - 22 %
> Orton - 18 %
> 
> (so far)


Del Rio being an option = :ti


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> Del Rio being an option = :ti


Vince McMahon is also there. I found it funny. :lol


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> The only way this angle is going to be better than "anything Punk's been involved in", is if Punk gets involved. However, I'd wager they'll keep Punk away from this, so he won't steal Bryan's (or Orton or even HHH's) thunder... because if he does get involved in this program, he'll instantly become the best thing in it, thus taking the focus off Bryan - and that's not what they want.
> 
> 
> It's been 135 posts too long, already. Someone should've noticed by now.


This doesn't really work, when Daniel Bryan is simply more over than Punk :lol. Everyweek on RAW he gets the biggest reaction by far. If punk was the best thing going, then how come Bryan makes him an afterthought?


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This is seriously ridiculous...Look back at all the Punk/Bryan matches throughout WWE and the indies, Bryan carries Punk in those matches...Punk carries all the other opponents he faces in matches, he's the ring general and he whispers in their ears telling them what to do...but when he faces Bryan, Bryan is the ring general....Bryan is just a better wrestler......anyone that disagrees doesn't know what they're talking about...EVERYONE wanted to be Bryan Danielson while coming up in the indies...EVERYONE wanted to face him on the card because that means their match would get the most attention......Its a fact..and now its happening in the WWE. Punk might be the more engaging personality, but wrestler? you're crazy!


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan is a better wrestler, but none of the Punk/Bryan matches were carryjobs. Punk's spotcalling is very obvious, and you can definitely see it occur very often in their Over The Limit match. Those two just have tremendous chemistry; nobody is carrying anyone. Punk and Bryan also seem to switch between each other with regards to who the most over guy is on a given night along with face Orton. Why are Bryan and Punk marks even fighting? Be happy that the top two guys now are the two most talented guys in the world. Only time this ever happened was in 2004 when Benoit and Eddie ran wild.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

its just crazy how there is Vince, then Steph, then Trips, followed by Cena, Bryan, and the Bellas.....those 7 people literally own the company at the moment lol they could do whatever they want....Firing Bryan right now would just ruin the company because youd' have no one to fall back on besides Punk and Cena can never be fired and if the Bellas did, then Cena and Bryan would be unhappy...so its a win win for those four.


----------



## donalder

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This war Bryan and Punk is ridiculous we have two wrestlers that they are the best in the world we have to enjoy with them,this stupid war betwen Cena and Punk ok beacuse in the iwc we hate Cena but Punk and Bryan the two stars of the iwc the best man in the ring and in the microphone(ok,Punk has better microphone than Bryan but they are the best) we have to be happy that two stars that they are wich main eventers and i wait see soon Ziggler too.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> Just like I posted before, 10:01pm was the peak because of a big chunk of viewers tuning in from other channels when the game ended. Same happened on August 5th RAW as well. True gain was the overrun with a huge 2.75 rating.
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't actually. The viewership must have dropped throughout before picking back up again towards the end. That is why the rating and the overall average of the quarter is down, even though it had the peak viewership of the show at 10:01. Overrun had steady viewership in comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note the rating and overall average, 2.56 rating and 1.6m even though the peak viewership was 1.836m viewers. Note the same for overrun and see the difference.
> 
> 
> Don't get me wrong, Punk did do well all things considered but the viewers absolutely did not stay through the entire 15mins like you think. Torch just didn't report the low point of the quarter.


None of what you wrote is true, given that there was a commercial half way through the Punk segment. Viewers would have tuned out, and back in a few minutes later when the commercial ended.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



donalder said:


> This war Bryan and Punk is ridiculous we have two wrestlers that they are the best in the world we have to enjoy with them,this stupid war betwen Cena and Punk ok beacuse in the iwc we hate Cena but Punk and Bryan the two stars of the iwc the best man in the ring and in the microphone(ok,Punk has better microphone than Bryan but they are the best) we have to be happy that two stars that they are wich main eventers and i wait see soon Ziggler too.


well said, you should be enjoying two of the top talents on earth who are entering the prime of the careers on top of the biggest company on earth instead of arguing who is the biggest draw, the two could be wasting away in tna like their mate samoa joe


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> None of what you wrote is true, given that there was a commercial half way through the Punk segment. Viewers would have tuned out, and back in a few minutes later when the commercial ended.


Not really. The peak was at 10:01pm. If the Punk/Axel angle had interest the peak viewership would have been towards the end, like it was with the overrun where it hit the peak when the coronation angle peaked at 11:09, because there was real interest there. 

Even if the commercial mattered that much(I'll bet the low point of the quarter went below 1.6m at one point), then the quarter hour peak should been just before RAW went to commercial with Punk taunting Axel and Axel walking towards the ring. But that wasn't the case, this is really just a large chunk of viewers switching channels after 10:00. Ultimately, unless torch reports the minute by minute breakdown of the entire quarter or atleast the low points, we won't know for sure, how it really went. 

Again, Punk did well all things considered. Not trying to discredit him.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> Not really. The peak was at 10:01pm. If the Punk/Axel angle had interest the peak viewership would have been towards the end, like it was with the overrun where it hit the peak when the coronation angle peaked at 11:09, because there was real interest there.
> 
> Even if the commercial mattered that much(I'll bet the low point of the quarter went below 1.6m at one point), then the quarter hour peak should been just before RAW went to commercial with Punk taunting Axel and Axel walking towards the ring. But that wasn't the case, this is really just a large chunk of viewers switching channels after 10:00. Ultimately, unless torch reports the minute by minute breakdown of the entire quarter or atleast the low points, we won't know for sure, how it really went.
> 
> Again, Punk did well all things considered. Not trying to discredit him.


Well there was a 4,000 viewer difference between the 22:01 peak and the 22:15 peak. So if anyone was really disinterested then it was a very small proportion of the audience.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yes that's what I said. It dropped and then picked back up again, unlike what wrestlingfan35 thought. The peak 1.836m was at 22:01 and the viewership regain happened at 22:15, commercial was two minutes in between but the overall average is 1.6m, so the drop was going down below 1.6 at some point. Again, we need the complete minute by minute breakdown to know exactly how the Axel/punk angle performed.


----------



## AthenaMark

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

[email protected] Punk being the face of the WWE after Night of Champions 2011. Not in this lifetime.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> Vince McMahon is also there. I found it funny. :lol


With Vince you can make some sort of argument that he is the face of the company with it being his company, but with Del Rio there's 0 arguments for. He's barely even in the top 10 heels of the WWE.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This face of the company argument is so old. Bryan doesn't have much more of a chance of being the top face than Punk did. Cena is gonna be THE MAN for many more years to come.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Slowhand said:


> This face of the company argument is so old. Bryan doesn't have much more of a chance of being the top face than Punk did. Cena is gonna be THE MAN for many more years to come.


Pretty much. Cena is the Hogan of the era and you just can't erase 8 years of being at the top in a half year no matter what you do. You turn him heel and he's stronger than he's been in years. He puts someone over clean well it's still temporary. 

This is a process that takes years and really removing his invincibility is just step 1.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:cena5


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

did you just say half a year? Daniel Bryan has been getting consistent Daniel Bryan chants ever since he won the briefcase in 2011 MITB...even when he was a heel people laughed at his comedic skits and he was a fan favorite...in the indies people paid to see him wrestle...what's getting old is no one recognizing the fact that Daniel Bryan has been loved everywhere he goes.......he'll be the face!! they have 2000% more faith in him then they do Punk....they just tolerate Punk. They push Punk because it makes good business sense and gives them a profit....Punk even admitted people dont' really talk to him backstage....Bryan is loved by everyone.....there you go!


----------



## Hurricane24

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Can't wait 'till Punk gets his trademark 2.5, 2.6's again when the casuals start to realize Brock won't be back for a while.

Now who's the next part timer to bail Punk out?


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-coverage-estimates-as-of-august-2013/199072/


USA Network is near the top of that list(meaning more people have USA Network than most other channels). Syfy is fairly close to the top too.


----------



## Mr.S

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> The only way this angle is going to be better than "anything Punk's been involved in", is if Punk gets involved. However, I'd wager they'll keep Punk away from this, so he won't steal Bryan's (or Orton or even HHH's) thunder... because if he does get involved in this program, he'll instantly become the best thing in it, thus taking the focus off Bryan - and that's not what they want.
> 
> 
> It's been 135 posts too long, already. Someone should've noticed by now.


Bar the mic Punk is a Bryan Wannabe, so how come he can steal Bryan's thunder seeing he isnt even in that league?


----------



## Ace

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Slowhand said:


> This face of the company argument is so old. Bryan doesn't have much more of a chance of being the top face than Punk did. Cena is gonna be THE MAN for many more years to come.


 Cena will the guy till Reigns is ready. As much as fans hate to admit it Bryan doesn't have the look to be the face of the company and Punk is a loose cannon.


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> The only way this angle is going to be better than "anything Punk's been involved in", is if Punk gets involved. However, I'd wager they'll keep Punk away from this, so he won't steal Bryan's (or Orton or even HHH's) thunder... because if he does get involved in this program, he'll instantly become the best thing in it, thus taking the focus off Bryan - and that's not what they want.


Or maybe, the reason why the WWE will not have Punk involved in this storyline is because it's not his storyline and therefore he doesn't need to be involved?


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> The only way this angle is going to be better than "anything Punk's been involved in", is if Punk gets involved. However, I'd wager they'll keep Punk away from this, so he won't steal Bryan's (or Orton or even HHH's) thunder... because if he does get involved in this program, he'll instantly become the best thing in it, thus taking the focus off Bryan - and that's not what they want.
> 
> 
> It's been 135 posts too long, already. Someone should've noticed by now.


Punk getting involved would kill the ratings just like during his reign when he became the lowest drawing world champion of all time.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> Punk getting involved would kill the ratings just like during his reign when he became the lowest drawing world champion of all time.


What if the ratings are already dead before he gets involved? unk2


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> What if the ratings are already dead before he gets involved? unk2


They won't be unless they fuck up the main storyline with Bryan/Orton/HHH/Vince/Steph. People are actually invested in this angle hence why last RAW outdrew the post Summerslam RAW from last year.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> They won't be unless they fuck up the main storyline with Bryan/Orton/HHH/Vince/Steph. People are actually invested in this angle hence why last RAW outdrew the post Summerslam RAW from last year.


What about when Punk outdrew all five of those people with Curtis f'n Axel?

unk


----------



## Fatcat

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings will go in the tank once casuals realize Cena really is injured and isn't coming back for a while.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> What about when Punk outdrew all five of those people with Curtis f'n Axel?
> 
> unk


People were expecting the Lesnar feud to continue. Now they know it won't be and Punk is feuding with Axel. The ratings for Punk's segment this week are gonna suck balls, and I can't wait to rain down I told you so's.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> People were expecting the Lesnar feud to continue. Now they know it won't be and Punk is feuding with Axel. The ratings for Punk's segment this week are gonna suck balls, and I can't wait to rain down I told you so's.


And you know this for a fact?

Don't start, I'm just trolling the trolls, because it's so easy thanks to this week's ratings.

:axel > :bryan rton


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> People were expecting the Lesnar feud to continue. Now they know it won't be and Punk is feuding with Axel. The ratings for Punk's segment this week are gonna suck balls, and I can't wait to rain down I told you so's.


Out of curiosity, what would your reaction be, if, for Night of Champions, building to Punk/Axel, every week out-drew the Bryan/Corporation angle (with both in either the 9PM, 10PM, and/or 11PM every week)?

Just for curiosity's sake...



> They won't be unless they fuck up the main storyline with Bryan/Orton/HHH/Vince/Steph. People are actually invested in this angle hence why last RAW outdrew the post Summerslam RAW from last year.


You didn't answer my question. unk3

Also, last year's post-Summerslam Raw outdrew this year's. This year's just had a better rating.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

"Oh, people were expecting _____ to show up."

The signs of a sad little troll.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

"Trollin' the trolls"

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

That's rich reading some of the comments made here..

:lmao

Anyways, this shit is just to easy at the point. Butt-hurt will be butt-hurt.

Fact.

:bryan


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> And you know this for a fact?


Yes. Punk/Lesnar draws ratings, Punk alone never has before this feud. Now suddenly a Punk segment (after their PPV fight) gets big ratings. I wonder what the common denominator here is. 

Let me simplify.

:brock *+* unk *= RATINGS* (See even Punk is shocked he's finally drawing something other than flies.)

*99% of the roster + * unk3 *= :no: Ratings* (One sad Punk.)





The Sandrone said:


> Out of curiosity, what would your reaction be, if, for Night of Champions, building to Punk/Axel, every week out-drew the Bryan/Corporation angle (with both in either the 9PM, 10PM, and/or 11PM every week)?
> 
> Just for curiosity's sake...


Shock, but acceptance. I don't make excuses for Bryan. He will either draw or he won't. I do think it is unfair to compare today's Bryan with Punk given the length of their pushes. Even then with Bryan whipping Punk's ass, I can't complain too hard about it. One month of a Bryan mega push is out popping 2 years of CM Shit the Bed. That is just too funny.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lol, Showstopper, weren't you also one of the people crediting it to Lesnar? I can't even find the patience to have that conversation over once again. Just, lol.



> Yes. Punk/Lesnar draws ratings, Punk alone never has before this feud.


Yes he has. What is wrong with you, exactly?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Everyone's butt-hurt.

Everyone except me. unk5 :bryan


----------



## Vyer

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why can't we all just get along?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> lol, Showstopper, weren't you also one of the people crediting it to Lesnar? I can't even find the patience to have that conversation over once again. Just, lol.


I didn't completely credit or discredit him. My only point re: that situation is I wouldn't be surprised if the casual fans (again, not guys like us who check the internet for this stuff all the time) tuned into Raw (for the entire night, not just the Punk/Axel segment to be fair to them) hoping Brock would be on.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

"Bryan didn't get top segment? I'm going to get all butt-hurt about it for the next week."

Sounds about right. And this is just the first week of his push. Some hilarious posts will ensue these next few weeks.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> "Bryan didn't get top segment? I'm going to bitch about it for the next week."
> 
> Sounds about right. And this is just the first week of his push. Some hilarious posts will ensue these next few weeks.


My curiosity is aroused again...

What will your reaction be if Bryan's storyline not only out-draws, but totally destroys what Punk/Axel/Heyman does for the next several weeks leading into NOC?

Again, just for my curiosity.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Expecting it. How do you think I'll act? I'll recognize it, give the guys involved props and move on.

It just won't be as fun to troll all of the sensitive Bryan marks.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

By the way, I think I'm a draw. Whenever I post in this thread we seem to get a ton of people viewing this thread out of nowhere. So if it makes both Punk and Bryan marks/haters of one or the other feel better, I'm a bigger draw than both of them. :sandow


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> By the way, I think I'm a draw. Whenever I post in this thread we seem to get a ton of people viewing this thread out of nowhere. So if it makes both Punk and Bryan marks/haters of one or the other feel better, I'm a bigger draw than both of them. :sandow


Nah, it's not you. I only posted here because I thought Brock Lesnar was going to make an appearance.

:brock


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> My curiosity is aroused again...
> 
> What will your reaction be if Bryan's storyline not only out-draws, but totally destroys what Punk/Axel/Heyman does for the next several weeks leading into NOC?
> 
> Again, just for my curiosity.


It better out draw the Punk storyline, he's feuding with CURTIS AXEL. I'll laugh if it doesn't.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> My curiosity is aroused again...
> 
> What will your reaction be if Bryan's storyline not only out-draws, but totally destroys what Punk/Axel/Heyman does for the next several weeks leading into NOC?
> 
> Again, just for my curiosity.


Same as it has always been. Deny until the facts are thrown in his face, then make excuses.




Tyrion Lannister said:


> It better out draw the Punk storyline, he's feuding with CURTIS AXEL. I'll laugh if it doesn't.


Let's blame all though, right? On 1 side is Punk and Axel with Heyman....and on the opposite side there is Bryan, Orton, HHH and Vince.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Same as it has always been. Deny until the facts are thrown in his face, then make excuses.


Deny what? What facts? :lmao

The only fact that I've been talking about the entire time is that Punk/Axel performed better this week. Never did I say that would continue. I actually expect the opposite if you took the time to read posts. And as for facts, "people expected Lesnar" isn't a fact. It's something you've forced yourself to believe because you hate the _fact_ that Punk with Axel out-performed your boy this week.

Do you even bother thinking before posting?


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Where is Starbuck with DAT SHOVEL?

:angel


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

We desperately need Starbuck to :berried some more fools. First Happenstan, then mblonde. Heck, maybe even me.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You quenched, dehydrated, Sahara desert suffering, thirst mothafuckas asking for Starbuck.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



BIG E WINNING said:


> You quenched, dehydrated, Sahara desert suffering, thirst mothafuckas asking for Starbuck.


DAT SIG. I'm quenching at that :datass


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Dunmer said:


> Punk getting involved would kill the ratings just like during his reign when he became the lowest drawing world champion of all time.


bret, shawn, nash, sid etc could only dream of drawing 4.8 million average (2012 average btw when dvr were added) during their reigns as wwe champion


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I am just so excited to see what Punk will be doing to make that IC belt his own? Will he draw those magnificent little X's across the white strap of the belt, just like on his wrist tapes, or will he come up with something more creative?

:angel


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> bret, shawn, nash, sid etc could only dream of drawing 4.8 million average (2012 average btw when dvr were added) during their reigns as wwe champion


Punk would have drew the same as those guys if he was champion during that time period.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Starbuck no selling these pleas to bury people. 

Dat bitch... :HHH


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Punk would have drew the same as those guys if he was champion during that time period.


Pointless to talk about things that are pure speculation, no?


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Pointless to talk about things that are pure speculation, no?


 Well since the subject was brought up, why not?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Pointless to talk about things that are pure speculation, no?


CM Punk in the New Generation era? No, I feel very confident making that statement. Even Hulk Hogan wasn't anywhere near the same draw during these years. You'll have to forgive me if I don't think Punk would have been the saving grace of the business during some of the worst years in wrestling business history.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Oliver-94 said:


> Well since the subject was brought up, why not?


Because it would go nowhere because that's impossible to predict. :lol You really needed that to be explained?

@Showstopper, why so hostile? I wasn't even defending Punk or anything, I was legitimately just asking. It is, in fact, pure speculation. Seriously, everybody gets so sensitive these days.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Holy crap, this thread's on a roll and it's not even Monday yet, let alone Tuesday. Now we're gonna try and compare Punk to the top guys from the mid-90's? Dis gunna be good. :lmao


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Starbuck no selling these pleas to bury people.
> 
> Dat bitch... :HHH


Starbuck is waiting for that main event level burial. It's what's best for business.

:HHH2


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Because it would go nowhere because that's impossible to predict. :lol You really needed that to be explained?


 It was relevant to the post of someone trying to compare Nash and Punk's drawing ability.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Starbuck no selling these pleas to bury people.
> 
> Dat bitch... :HHH


:cena5 would be proud.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Chrome said:


> :cena5 would be proud.


Starbuck's Cena impersonation?

Meh. 4/10.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Oliver-94 said:


> It was relevant to the post of someone trying to compare Nash and Punk's drawing ability.


Somebody called Punk the worst drawing champion ever, somebody else replied with some numbers to prove that wrong. That... that's it... 

You can't compare when Punk wasn't in that era. And it's impossible to tell because you can't put him in that era. So it is really, pure speculation. I can't believe I'm having to talk you through this.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Somebody called Punk the worst drawing champion ever, somebody else replied with some numbers to prove that wrong. That... that's it...
> 
> You can't compare when Punk wasn't in that era. It is really, pure speculation. I can't believe I'm having to talk you through this.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

nobody could save 1995 ratings. Absolutely nobody. The highest rating of that entire year was 2.7 with an average 2.3 and the lowest was 1.9. its pointless to compare eras because that year was unsalvageable. Completely different time now then that time


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sometimes, I just take solace in the fact that in parallel universe, RAW gets 4.0+ weekly and all people in the top 2-3 feuds are big draws, and there exists a much much better ratings thread.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> nobody could save 1995 ratings. Absolutely nobody. The highest rating of that entire year was 2.7 with an average 2.3 and the lowest was 1.9. its pointless to compare eras because that year was unsalvageable. Completely different time than now.


My sentiments exactly.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Didn't expect Pyro to post here, lol.



The Sandrone said:


> Everyone's butt-hurt.
> 
> Everyone, specially me. unk5 :bryan


Correct.



funnyfaces1 said:


> We desperately need Starbuck to :berried some more fools. First Happenstan, *then mblonde*. Heck, maybe even me.


There's no need for the latter. He buried himself the moment he breathed his first breath.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Correct.


unk3



NearFall said:


> Sometimes, I just take solace in the fact that in parallel universe, RAW gets 4.0+ weekly and all people in the top 2-3 feuds are big draws, and there exists a much much better ratings thread.


And Rock316AE/Happenstan are the biggest Punk marks on this forum. unk


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> We desperately need Starbuck to :berried some more fools. First Happenstan, then mblonde. Heck, maybe even me.



I've told you before...keep my name and other parts of my anatomy out of your mouth.

Dammit man. No means no. :no:




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I wasn't even defending Punk...


That constitutes 90% of your posts man. What kind of compensation do you get for being Punk's personal PR campaign? Is it a set monetary value of do you just get to live in Punk's asshole free of charge? 




The Sandrone said:


> And Rock316AE/Happenstan are the biggest Punk marks on this forum. unk


Actually I am a fan of his speaking and wrestling ability. I have 3 problems with Punk. 1. I just don't like the self entitlement that he and his fans give off in droves. 2. I don't like that he gets away with things (breaking the fourth wall every 4th promo) other guys could only dream of. 3. He is pushed way too hard at the expense of others and he isn't drawing enough to justify a continued push of the size he has recieved the past 2 years.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> And Rock316AE/Happenstan are the biggest Punk marks on this forum. unk


----------



## D-Bry is Fly

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^ :lmao. They seem to get the most defensive about Punk. I'm a fan, but I acknowledge ratings weren't great, but there are two reasons for this

1. No one draws amazingly anymore. Wrestling is past it's prime for the mainstream.

2. Punk doesn't appeal to everyone, and he doesn't have the same star power as Cena for the time he's been in WWE (though he's done well), and IMO his 434 day reign got old after like a month, and that's as fan of the guy.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D-Bry is Fly said:


> ^ :lmao. They seem to get the most defensive about Punk. I'm a fan, but I acknowledge ratings weren't great, but there are two reasons for this
> 
> 1. No one draws amazingly anymore. Wrestling is past it's prime for the mainstream.
> 
> 2. Punk doesn't appeal to everyone, and he doesn't have the same star power as Cena for the time he's been in WWE (though he's done well), and IMO his 434 day reign got old after like a month, and that's as fan of the guy.



 When do I ever get defensive for or about Punk? I agree with everything you just posted and none of it was particularly pro-Punk.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Where is Sandrome (AKA the RAWK :vince) when you need him?


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...etwork-for-the-8th-consecutive-summer/199312/



> WWE Raw continued to draw a massive audience with 4.5 million total viewers, and 2 million in both P18-49 and P25-54.


In terms of total viewers, Burn Notice, Suits and Royal Pains all had above 5 million, but I don't know if this takes into repeats or not.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> In terms of total viewers, Burn Notice, Suits and Royal Pains all had above 5 million, but I don't know if this takes into repeats or not.


none of those shows were doing close to 5 million on first screenings anymore so they must be adding in repeats, suits is barely doing half of what raw does

RP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Royal_Pains_episodes#Season_5:_2013
Burn notice http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Burn_Notice_episodes#Season_7:_2013
suits http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Suits_episodes#Season_3_.282013.29


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> In terms of total viewers, Burn Notice, Suits and Royal Pains all had above 5 million, but I don't know if this takes into repeats or not.


Numbers are a blend of Live+7, Live+3 and Live+SD!


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> Numbers are a blend of Live+7, Live+3 and Live+SD!


Ah, okay.

I do wonder how much Raw increases within 7 days - from Live+SD to Live+7...


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The predicted audience for tonight's RAW is *4,007,000* viewers - so a large fall from last week's RAW.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

prediction= not reality....still over 4 million though, that's a good thing.


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



markedfordeath said:


> prediction= not reality....still over 4 million though, that's a good thing.


Average prediction error is plus/minus 120,000 viewers (3% off target) which is pretty tight. Also predicted the direction (rise/fall) of audience correctly 11/12 times. I challenge anyone to beat my predictions on a consistent, weekly basis (!) :doug.


----------



## Ehhhhhhh

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Awful shows like tonight aren't going to help matters. Triple H shouldn't of gloated about that rating.


----------



## Bob Lincoln

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This is literally the first time I've seen this happen...


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm curious to see how well Punk/Axel and Bryan/Rollins will do. Which superstar is going to win the war this week? Punk or Bryan?

:vince


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> I'm curious to see how well Punk/Axel and Bryan/Rollins will do. Which superstar is going to win the war this week? Punk or Bryan?
> 
> :vince


Neither, because no matter what does what, marks/haters of one or the other are just going to fight it out. Even if the Punk/Heyman/Axel segment gets something like a 3.5 and the Bryan gauntlet stuff gets a 3.0, or vice versa.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sigh.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Social media score of 276,428, disappointingly a drop of 100k on last week. There were a few more trends than pre-SummerSlam though so I'm hopeful the average will be the right side of 4 million.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Neither, because no matter what does what, marks/haters of one or the other are just going to fight it out. Even if the Punk/Heyman/Axel segment gets something like a 3.5 and the Bryan gauntlet stuff gets a 3.0, or vice versa.


True. Maybe we'll see Orton marks and the Axel mark jump into the ratings war too.


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It should be interesting to see the numbers for last night's RAW. I want to CHECK OUT THOSE RATINGS :trips.


----------



## Joshi Judas

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

First of many Raws without Cena. Will be interesting.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Last week's Raw in the UK averaged *214,000 viewers*, the highest for WWE since Money in the Bank (265,000 viewers) and the highest Raw viewership since April 8th (217,000 viewers).


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What people need to think about is that if WWE talks about ratings, they could be talking about ratings WORLDWIDE and not just USA. Info that NOBODY except those in WWE has access to.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...or-monday-august-26-have-been-delayed/199586/

Sad panda means that *Raw ratings will probably be delayed until Wednesday.*


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> -- Monday's WWE Raw took its usual week-after-a-PPV tumble in Social Media Activity, down 27 percent from last week's post-Summerslam social score.
> 
> Raw scored 276,428 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, down from 377k last week. Similarly, the second Raw after Money in the Bank in July scored 276,945.
> 
> Raw ranked #2 on cable TV on Monday, trailing English Premier League Soccer on Monday afternoon. Raw has not ranked #1 since June 17.


via PWTorch


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...or-monday-august-26-have-been-delayed/199586/
> 
> Sad panda means that *Raw ratings will probably be delayed until Wednesday.*


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

WWE Monday Night RAW was Monday's top program with a 1.6 adults 18-49 rating during its most-watched hour, down from last week's 1.7 adults 18-49 rating. Teen Mom came in second with a 1.1 adults 18-49 rating.

WWE Entertainment USA 10:00 PM 4.151 1.6
WWE Entertainment USA 9:00 PM 4.291 1.5
WWE Entertainment USA 8:00 PM 4.129 1.4


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

just look at that, stayed above 4 million all night..guess its staying consistently...love it. see, they'll do alright.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour 1 - 4.129 million
Hour 2 - 4.291 million
Hour 3 - 4.151 million

Top Program on Cable on Monday Night


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

see, guess the GOAT is a draw afterall.....no Cena equals no matter lol


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

First hour doing better now while the last two are only slightly down from last week. Good numbers!


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



markedfordeath said:


> see, guess the GOAT is a draw afterall.....no Cena equals no matter lol


um...no..Preseason wasnt even on last night and it didnt even do that great. Hell COmpare to last year in the same time frame

Raw August 27 2012

Hour 1: 4.16 million
Hour 2: 4.78 million	
Hour 3: 4.49 million

They certainly arent growing an audience


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

people are tuning in for the first hour to see the revenge Bryan will get...and who cares about last year's numbers at this time? tv is different this year, not as many people watch it due to DVR and all of that...so a growth is a growth at least..celebrate it.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

First hour did decently. Hour 2/3 are poorer than before but nothing shocking. Breakdown should be interesting, hopefully they continue positively.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

i'm sure they're proud regardless, still won the night..thats all that matters, is winning the night!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

First hour once again doing better than usual.

:bryan

:runs:


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nice numbers.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> First hour once again doing better than usual.
> 
> :bryan
> 
> :runs:


Psh, we all know Triple H's nose carried that segment. GOAT nose for sure.


----------



## xD7oom

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sorry but i'm sure it's not because of Bryan or Randy at all..
*First heel turn since 2006 :HHH2*


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Hour two the highest. It was kicked off by CM GOAT, so no surprise there.


----------



## DoubleDeckerBar

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

People thinking Bryan is responsible for decent ratings?

It's clearly all down to DAT PRIDDY FACE rton2

DAT GAME said it himself.... :HHH2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> First hour doing better now while the last two are only slightly down from last week. Good numbers!


You heard Triple H last night. Business is booming.

:HHH2 rton2 :bryan


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



VGooBUG said:


> They certainly arent growing an audience


we will know when the rating comes in if the audience is growing or not, physical numbers mean very little when you realise that roughly one million LESS households are carrying usa network right now compared to august 2012, so thats over 2.5 million potential viewers lost


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

All hours above 4 million? Success. I think a lot of people are going to be eating their words for the Punk/Axel match. Get ready Bryan fans. This segment happened at 9pm and judging from the hourly breakdown there, DAT PUNK could end up topping the night again lol. Oh dear. Things going to get ugly...again. 

unk2


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nice rating, when was the last time they did 4 million on the three hours? 

unk :heyman2 :HHH2 :bryan2 rton2


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'm waiting for the ultimate swerve where Orton/Christian at 10pm tops the night. 

BUSINESS IS BOOMING WITH DA CORPORATE CHAMP 

rton2


----------



## checkcola

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> All hours above 4 million? Success. I think a lot of people are going to be eating their words for the Punk/Axel match. Get ready Bryan fans. This segment happened at 9pm and judging from the hourly breakdown there, DAT PUNK could end up topping the night again lol. Oh dear. Things going to get ugly...again.
> 
> unk2


I just think its the nature of the way the show is structured now. Some people will watch the first and second hours; other people will watch the second and third hours.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

All 3 hours above 4 million. And what was featured in all 3 hours?










The GOAT nose bringing in dem ratings.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> I'm waiting for the ultimate swerve where Orton/Christian at 10pm tops the night.
> 
> BUSINESS IS BOOMING WITH DA CORPORATE CHAMP
> 
> rton2


Perhaps the Orton marks will have to step in here as well an begin their arguments with the Punk and Bryan marks.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Final Rating - 3.07


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



checkcola said:


> I just think its the nature of the way the show is structured now. Some people will watch the first and second hours; other people will watch the second and third hours.


Depends. You can put certain segments in certain spots and expect them to do better than others. 9pm tends to be a spot on the show where a lot of people tune in regardless of who is in it because their other shows are over at that stage. They can put Ziggler/Shield in there and it will do a nice number purely based on the timeslot alone. But they can also put something like a Cena/Henry segment in there and it will do a lot better that Ziggler/Shield you know. Since the Punk/Axel stuff did so well last week, I don't think it's a stretch to think it can do another good number this week, especially with the advantageous 9pm spot. 

The things that seems to be hit or miss are 10pm and the overrun. Depending on what's in those segments they'll either do well or bomb.

DAT SUMMERSLAM HYPE COME DOWN


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> we will know when the rating comes in if the audience is growing or not, physical numbers mean very little when you realise that roughly one million LESS households are carrying usa network right now compared to august 2012, so thats over 2.5 million potential viewers lost


and that means wwe didn't gain viewers they lost viewers from last year, it's their fault they are stuck on a network that's losing viewers


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Hour 1 - 4.129 million
> Hour 2 - 4.291 million
> Hour 3 - 4.151 million


All hours about 4 million? Nice. Considerably down from last year though, but still, good enough. We still have one more Raw before football starts (?), so if that does all above 4 million as well, and then it only goes slightly below 4 million from there... I think that'd be fine.

Hour 2 tops the night, and while that is probably due to Punk/Axel (as I can't recall there being anything else major during that hour), I wouldn't say for certain that that tops the night, because the average isn't that far apart from the other two. Opening segment could do best of the night considering it had HHH, and same thing for the overrun, which is what I do expect to top the night. I'd be shocked if the 10PM was what did the peak of the night.

Edit:

Oh, as far as the 9PM/10PM/11PM advantages... judge for yourselves with these numbers:

9PM:
8/19: 500,000 (3.3)- Dolph Ziggler vs. The Shield 
8/12: 560,000 (3.2)- Vince/Maddox/HHH
8/5: 420,000 (??)- Cena/Orton/Shield
7/29: 361,000 (3.06)- Ziggler/Big E
7/22: 373,000 (3.19)- Henry/The Shield/Usos + Ziggler/Young
7/15: 273,000 (3.19)- Ziggler vs. Del Rio
7/8: 424,000 (3.41)- Henry/Cena
7/1: 217,000 (2.98)- Kane vs. Orton
6/24: 333,000 (??)- Jericho vs. Del Rio
6/17: 248,000 (3.13)- Bryan vs. Orton


10PM:
8/19: 400,000 (3.6)- Punk/Heyman/Axel
8/12: 560,000 (3.3)- Bryan/Cena Miz TV
8/5: ????? (3.1)- Punk vs. Axel and Lesnar interference
7/29: 60,000 (2.9)- Bryan/Kane 
7/22: 201,000 (3.07)- Punk/Heyman
7/15: 498,000 (3.41)- Punk/Heyman/Lesnar
7/8: 553,000 (3.55)- Vickie/Vince/Stephanie/HHH
7/1: 21,000 (3.0)- Punk-Axel vs. Prime Time Players
6/24: 117,000 (3.21)- Punk/Heyman
6/17: 738,000 (3.57)- Henry/Cena

11PM:
8/19: 670,000 (3.6)- Bryan/HHH/Orton/Vince/Stephanie/Shield
8/12: 400,000 (3.5)- Punk/Heyman/Lesnar
8/5: 700,000 (3.4)- Cena-Bryan-Orton/The Shield
7/29: 769,000 (3.29)- Cena/Ryback with Bryan coming out at the end
7/22: 331,000 (3.2)- Bryan vs. Ryback and Cena coming out
7/15: 669,000 (3.41)- Cena picking Bryan for Summerslam
7/8: 48,000 (3.13)- Punk vs. Orton with Bryan run-in
7/1: 567,000 (3.25)- Cena vs. Del Rio and Henry/Ziggler coming out
6/24: 104,000 (2.92)- Bryan vs. Orton
6/17: 636,000 (3.42)- Punk vs. Del Rio and Lesnar/Ziggler coming out

Overrun is fairly secured and the safest place as far as overall rating/gains are. 10PM I'd say is second as it has some great gains and generally had better quarters. 9PM's gains are more consistent than 10PM's, but their quarter ratings are lower than 10PM's.

In fact, 9PM hasn't peaked the night in at least 2 months.

Going back, last time 9PM did peak the show was for March 18th, which had Taker/Punk's feud in it. :taker unk2


----------



## #Mark

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> All hours above 4 million? Success. I think a lot of people are going to be eating their words for the Punk/Axel match. Get ready Bryan fans. This segment happened at 9pm and judging from the hourly breakdown there, DAT PUNK could end up topping the night again lol. Oh dear. Things going to get ugly...again.
> 
> unk2


I fail to see how that's a bad thing. Granted, Punk marks are rather annoying but the better the show does without Cena the better it is for us viewers. The ME scene with Bryan, Punk, HHH, Orton is probably the most interesting it's been in quite some time. I for one am excited to see all of them do well, especially if we we end up getting a Punk/Bryan feud near Mania time, which is certainly proving to be a big money angle.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



#Mark said:


> I fail to see how that's a bad thing. Granted, Punk marks are rather annoying but the better the show does without Cena the better it is for us viewers. The ME scene with Bryan, Punk, HHH, Orton is probably the most interesting it's been in quite some time. I for one am excited to see all of them do well, especially if we we end up getting a Punk/Bryan feud near Mania time, which is certainly proving to be a big money angle.


It's not a bad thing. It means nothing to me and will actually turn this thread into an even bigger war zone so I'm all for it lol.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Cant wait till big Dave posts the quarter hours with Punk drawing more then Austin so I can call out the Happenstan kid and shower him with cold, hard numbers.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:austin


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

lets be real tho.

Orton V Christian in the 10pm slot :ti

They have great matches. But its reaching Ziggler v Kofi levels of repetitiveness. I'll be shocked if that does well.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



#Mark said:


> I fail to see how that's a bad thing. Granted, Punk marks are rather annoying but the better the show does without Cena the better it is for us viewers. The ME scene with Bryan, Punk, HHH, Orton is probably the most interesting it's been in quite some time. I for one am excited to see all of them do well, especially if we we end up getting a Punk/Bryan feud near Mania time, which is certainly proving to be a big money angle.


I really have to shake my head anytime people identify Punk marks being annoying when Bryan marks are running rampant, but whatever. Marks in general suck. Fans are where its at.

Anyway, its all about enjoying who you want to enjoy and respecting people's opinions enough to let them do the same. Its the guys like AthenaMark and Happenstan upon whom this concept is lost.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ziggler/Kofi
Barrett/Miz

If I see either of these two matches again I'll fast forward through them quicker than the last time.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> Ziggler/Kofi
> Barrett/Miz
> 
> If I see either of these two matches again I'll fast forward through them quicker than the last time.


Has Barrett/Miz actually happened that much?

Mania pre-show
Night after Mania

... then last week. Can't recall any other one-on-ones between them. :/

But yeah, they both are mediocre in the ring, so most probably would fast-forward through them the first time they watch a match of theirs (though personally, I thought the night after Mania was a very decent match).


----------



## Weltschmertz

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This is the fourth week in a row that they have done better than expected.

4,179,848 | 3,970,000	-5.00%
4,111,100 | 3,980,000	-3.19%
4,298,000 | 4,172,000	-2.93%
4,190,333 | 4,007,000	-4.38%

The probability of this pattern being just noise is 6%. So it looks like something meaningful has happened which is making more viewers want to tune in...


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Not bad... and if it keeps up like this maybe it will show Cena isn't as special as he has been treated for years. The show is doing well without him.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

i have no idea what there is to criticize...obviously Bryan is going to start getting serious and he'll end up having back up...i like it when he's happy and humiliating them..he knows he's a bad ass..


----------



## ChickenEater567

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I hope they enjoy their last okay rating for a few months next week. Or could we be shocked and not get "Punk numbers" DEM 2.5's.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*










Epic Triple H face lmao.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

as long as Raw stays in the top five, they're golden each week.


----------



## checkcola

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Triple H's nose looks Huge in that photo lol


----------



## ChickenEater567

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



markedfordeath said:


> as long as Raw stays in the top five, they're golden each week.


If you think that then you must be insane. RAW will take a huge dive in 2 weeks when Football starts up again. They will be back to their usual mid 2's by the start of October.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Cant wait till big Dave posts the quarter hours with Punk drawing more then Austin so I can call out the Happenstan kid and shower him with cold, hard numbers.


:lol.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

anyway forget ratings, its all about....


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> 11PM:
> 8/19: 670,000 (3.6)- Bryan/HHH/Orton/Vince/Stephanie/Shield
> 8/12: 400,000 (3.5)- Punk/Heyman/Lesnar
> 8/5: 700,000 (3.4)- Cena-Bryan-Orton/The Shield
> 7/29: 769,000 (3.29)- Cena/Ryback with Bryan coming out at the end
> 7/22: 331,000 (3.2)- Bryan vs. Ryback and Cena coming out
> 7/15: 669,000 (3.41)- Cena picking Bryan for Summerslam
> 7/8: 48,000 (3.13)- Punk vs. Orton with Bryan run-in
> 7/1: 567,000 (3.25)- Cena vs. Del Rio and Henry/Ziggler coming out
> 6/24: 104,000 (2.92)- Bryan vs. Orton
> 6/17: 636,000 (3.42)- Punk vs. Del Rio and Lesnar/Ziggler coming out


You know whats funny. If you strike out the overruns which involves any of the top 5 stars that is Rock/Lesnar/HHH/taker/Cena from here, you get this - 

8/19: 670,000 (3.6)- Bryan/HHH/Orton/Vince/Stephanie/Shield
8/12: 400,000 (3.5)- Punk/Heyman/Lesnar
8/5: 700,000 (3.4)- Cena-Bryan-Orton/The Shield
7/29: 769,000 (3.29)- Cena/Ryback with Bryan coming out at the end
7/22: 331,000 (3.2)- Bryan vs. Ryback and Cena coming out
7/15: 669,000 (3.41)- Cena picking Bryan for Summerslam
*7/8: 48,000 (3.13)- Punk vs. Orton with Bryan run-in*
7/1: 567,000 (3.25)- Cena vs. Del Rio and Henry/Ziggler coming out
*6/24: 104,000 (2.92)- Bryan vs. Orton*
6/17: 636,000 (3.42)- Punk vs. Del Rio and Lesnar/Ziggler coming out

Two of the lowest gains and lowest rated overruns in this year. rtonunk:bryan2 - The current three top guys.

Clearly what RAW Overruns need is this man, :henry1


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



checkcola said:


> Triple H's nose looks Huge in that photo lol


Naturally, they have to get a good picture of the show's #1 star.

GOAT nose=ratings


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

GOAT Nose :lmao.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Came for the rating, stayed for the Mark Wars.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Cynical Miracle said:


> Cant wait till big Dave posts the quarter hours with Punk drawing more then Austin so I can call out the Happenstan kid and shower him with cold, hard numbers.


Yeah, you out me. You're so eager to throw out insults and keep your lifetime position inside Punk's asshole you're too stupid to proof read what you write. Austin? Punk outdrew Austin? 


EDIT: I also said if Bryan didn't draw I would be sad but accept that. I'm not like the Punktards who come up with every excuse in the book to justify Punk's place.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*Nielsen US TV universe estimates for the 2013-14 season which are being used effective August 26, 2013.*

Nielsen Estimates 2013-14 - Popluation (Millions) - A 1.0 Rating Equals
*Adults 18-49 - 126.96 - 1.2696 Million*
Adults 25-54 - 119.75 - 1.1975 Million
Adults 18-34 - 67.63 - 676,300

tvbythenumbers


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Yeah, you out me. You're so eager to throw out insults and keep your lifetime position inside Punk's asshole you're too stupid to proof read what you write. Austin? Punk outdrew Austin?
> 
> 
> EDIT: I also said if Bryan didn't draw I would be sad but accept that. I'm not like the Punktards who come up with every excuse in the book to justify Punk's place.


So, AthenaMark got his... when are you getting yours?


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



mblonde09 said:


> So, AthenaMark got his... when are you getting yours?


1. I'm pretty sure Athena is female.
2. Got what? What are you even talking about?


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

August 26th, 2013
- 3.07 rating (-0.17 on last week)
- 3.02 million households
- 4.190 million viewers (-108,000)
- an average of 1.39 viewers per household that watches Raw

- 1.50 Adults 18-49 rating (-0.07)
- 1.904 million viewers in Adults 18-49 demographic (-82,000)

- 2.286 million viewers fall outside of Adults 18-49 demographic (-26,000)


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Detailed A18-49 viewership:
8/26
8:00: 1,815 million viewers 
9:00: 1,903 million viewers 
10:00-11:06: 1,982 million viewers 

8/19
8:00: 1,711 million viewers 
9:00: 2,036 million viewers
10:00-11:12: 2,132 million viewers 

Live+SD

Edit:
@D.M.N.
USA Network (13/14 season): 1.0 (Cable) HH rating = 986,470 households


----------



## Eddie Ray

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

before everyone descends into mark wars can everyone please remember there will undoubtedly be a drop off from the show after Summerslam due to last weeks show being super pivotal to the plot and came off a great PPV. that needs to be acknowledged before everyone cries for Cena back and rant about indy talent. The one thing I find this thread lacks is perspective. Ratings don't go down on talent alone, the storylines and what they do with said storylines is the deciding factor. does a storyline sustain interest? does it leave you with questions that you want answering? these things are the most important thing. unfortunately I feel that the storylines could be slightly more compelling and I do wonder if it keeps the interest of casuals. The Punk/Heyman feud is a bit touch and go (Curtis Axel isn't helping)and the Bryan/Corporation runs the risk of becoming repetitive. we won't be able to tell from one week, we'd need to watch the overall trend though.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



wb1899 said:


> Detailed A18-49 viewership:
> 8/26
> 8:00: 1,815 million viewers
> 9:00: 1,903 million viewers
> 10:00-11:06: 1,982 million viewers
> 
> 8/19
> 8:00: 1,711 million viewers
> 9:00: 2,036 million viewers
> 10:00-11:12: 2,132 million viewers
> 
> Live+SD
> 
> Edit:
> @D.M.N.
> USA Network (13/14 season): 1.0 (Cable) HH rating = 986,470 households


Ah, okay, I didn't realise the household ratings were cable only.

Seeing as you appear to have detailed information, any chance for any breakdowns before Torch/Observer report them?


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This is what happens when Triple H sings "When You Wish Upon A Star" and "Deebo's" the entire roster. :HHH2

Daniel Bryan is such an adorable, bearded, little teddy bear. They should make a teddy bear that has the Yes! chant come out of it if you squeeze it.

Orton is killing me with all of his facial expressions after something devious happens.

Also, even though I don't care for Punk that much, this Heyman/Axel/Punk thing is hilarious. Heyman is killing me, Axel is a cardboard cutout, and Punk looks better when he is being beaten down. I look forward to Heyman slashing the tires on Punk's tour bus, while having Axel throw a brick through the window of it.

Everyone is doing well. I'm glad. Now, only if Sheamus was back...

:angel


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Triple H is like

"_Hey everybody, check out da ratings._"

:HHH2


----------



## murder

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Eddie Ray said:


> before everyone descends into mark wars can everyone please remember there will undoubtedly be a drop off from the show after Summerslam


Not necessarily because unlike last week, there was no NFL pre-season game on this Monday. 

Also a lot of times the quality of one show will show in the next one's rating.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



murder said:


> Also a lot of times the quality of one show will show in the next one's rating.


ratings are a lagging indicator, raw was putting on great shows throughout 1997 and it took a full year before fans finally got the word 

raw the night after mania 28 is one of the best shows in the history of that program and 20% of viewers watching that night didn't tune in the next week


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

http://adf.ly/Uk87D



> *CHANGES TO HOW TV RATINGS WILL BE DETERMINED AND WHAT THIS MEANS FOR WWE & TNA GOING FORWARD*
> 
> By Mike Johnson on 2013-08-28 10:20:54
> 
> Beginning with the 2013-2014 TV season that will kick off this Fall, the Nielsen company will begin counting households that don't watch TV traditionally (i.e. over the air antennas, cable, etc.) but instead stream their programming.
> 
> What this means is that the overall average number of homes that will be accounted for will be greater (an estimate at TVByTheNumbers.com suggests 1.5 million new homes) overall, so ratings are expecting to drop a little across the board, since Nielsen's system measures the percentage of homes watching specific TV programming in comparison to the amount of TVs being viewed at that time.
> 
> So, WWE and TNA programming will drop a slight amount in the ratings, even though the homes don't technically receive USA Network, Spike, etc. but have been added to the base of potential homes that could be watching their programming.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> http://adf.ly/Uk87D


Interesting. If I got that right, does this mean that most of the IWC (who stream or download wrestling) could be counted in the ratings? If this is true guys like Bryan and Punk's segments should be through the damn roof no?


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Why does the breakdown take so long?


----------



## Jof

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Last year, the viewership did actually increased over summerslam post-ppv Raw, however that was due to Triple H's retirement angle that had big interest. This year they don't have that kinda hook to keep viewers tuned in, its just heels(too many of them) beating up on Bryan. They need some strong babyface opposition to increase interest in this angle. Bryan is ridiculously outmatched. However the story is still in its infancy, we have to wait and see how they build it. My guess is, around survivor series ratings will increase as interest goes up when Henry, Big show and possibly Sheamus will be back, along with bryan to feud against corporation/shield. Should be fun tv regardless of ratings.

Above 4m for all shows is still a big success. Losing Cena meant nothing it seems.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

cool..this means i'm going to start counting in the ratings...that Nielsen thing, NOBODY I know has one of those boxes..its a bogus system.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



THANOS said:


> Interesting. If I got that right, does this mean that most of the IWC (who stream or download wrestling) could be counted in the ratings? If this is true guys like Bryan and Punk's segments should be through the damn roof no?


Not at all. The post JY had was saying that people who stream TV shows and such through recognized services (i.e paid services), instead of just watching via a satellite/cable box will also be included into Neilson's potential viewer number (as it works ratings as actual viewers VS potential viewers). So it could add say X potential viewers to RAW as it now records X new people. But they could be watching anything, just like everyone else, so the ratings could see a decrease, while the viewership stays stable.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Exactly, paid services. They're not going to be including illegal streams and downloads, lol. Also, still waiting on that breakdown.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Torch:


> WWE Raw Quarter-Hour Ratings Trends 8/26
> 
> - BIG WINNERS: C.M. Punk-Paul Heyman, Daniel Bryan Gauntlet, A.J. Lee promo.
> 
> The latest teaser for C.M. Punk getting his hands on Paul Heyman generated the highest-rated quarter-hour rating of this week's Raw episode.
> 
> WWE's latest version of Daniel Bryan running the gauntlet also delivered again, scoring nearly an identical rating in Q8 among the key demographic of males 18-49.
> 
> The over-run - with the conclusion of Bryan's gauntlet vs. The Shield and tension rising for someone to help D-Bryan - then jumped to the highest over-run rating since we began tracking the m18-49 quarter-hour demos in May.
> 
> Specific Numbers: 2.39 m18-49 rating for the Punk-Heyman teaser in Q5, 2.38 rating for the Bryan Gauntlet in Q8, and 2.83 rating for the over-run (vs. 2.75 rating over-run last week).
> 
> The remainder of this week's Raw hovered in the middle-ground of a 2.0-2.2 rating.
> 
> Within the quarter-hours, it's worth noting that A.J. Lee's brief "worked shoot" promo on "Total Divas" drew the most-watched minute of the show prior to the over-run segment.
> 
> Raw Ratings Flow in M18-49 Demo
> 
> - OVERALL: 2.19 rating / 1.376 million viewers
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened with a 2.16 rating for 15 minutes of an uninterrupted promo segment involving Triple H, Daniel Bryan, and Randy Orton.
> 
> - Q2: Raw increased to a first-hour-high 2.19 rating for a five-minute conclusion to the promo segment, one commercial, Cody Rhodes vs. Fandango, and half of a commercial.
> 
> The increase came from the five-minute promo conclusion. Within Q1 and Q2, Raw increased from 1.2 million to 1.3 million to 1.4 million to 1.5 million to 1.6 million in Q1, then finished with 1.7 million at 8:18 p.m. EST when the segment concluded.
> 
> When the segment concluded at 8:21 p.m., a big chunk of viewers bailed to "American Pickers" on History. During the first hour, "Pickers" drew the most viewers away from Raw, followed by a "Duck Dynasty" re-run on A&E.
> 
> - Q3: On the other side of the break, Raw dipped to a show-low 1.97 rating for Rhodes & Miz vs. Fandango & Damien Sandow, backstage segments, and one-and-a-half commercials.
> 
> - Q4: Raw stayed at a show-low 1.97 rating for the first-half of C.M. Punk vs. Curtis Axel and two full commercial breaks. During the last break, another chunk of viewers bailed to "American Pickers."
> 
> - Q5: Raw jumped 21.3 percent to a 2.39 rating at the top of the second hour for the teaser of Punk getting his hands on Paul Heyman, the extended beat down on Punk that went until 9:12 p.m. EST, and one commercial at the end of the segment.
> 
> Peak viewership was 1.692 million viewers at 9:07 p.m. The segment then concluded with 1.690 million viewers at 9:10 p.m.
> 
> At the top of the hour, Raw got chunks of viewers from Duck Dynasty, American Pickers, and Real Housewives of OC once those shows concluded.
> 
> - Q6: Raw began sliding with a 2.16 rating for Brie Bella vs. Natalya, A.J. Lee's post-match "worked shoot" promo on the "Total Divas" show, and one commercial.
> 
> However, within the segment, A.J.'s promo popped to 1.731 million viewers at 9:23 p.m., then 1.770 million viewers at 9:24 p.m.
> 
> - Q7: Raw dipped again to a 2.13 rating for another round of Alberto Del Rio vs. Rob Van Dam, plus one commercial.
> 
> Notable in Q7 was a significant chunk of viewers (96,000) coming over from "Lizard Lick Towing"
> at 9:31 p.m. This contributed to TruTV being the second-largest contributor of viewers to Raw during the second hour.
> 
> - Q8: Raw dipped to a second-hour-low 2.05 rating for backstage interview segments and two full commercial breaks, "bringing the crowd down" from the second hour action.
> 
> There was one minute where Raw popped to 1.717 million viewers for Heyman and Curtis Axel's backstage interview before getting in their car and leaving.
> 
> - Q9: At the top of the third hour, Raw actually declined again to a 2.04 rating for WWE champion Randy Orton vs. Christian.
> 
> Compared to the Top of the Second Hour, Raw did not draw in a significant number of new viewers in the Top of the Third Hour. The top source was 17,000 viewers from "General Hospital."
> 
> - Q10: Raw stopped the ratings slide with a 2.10 rating for the final few minutes of Orton-Christian, Daniel Bryan's post-match paint-job backstage, one commercial, and Triple H & Orton surveying the paint-job after the break.
> 
> The final few minutes of Orton-Christian redeemed the meat of the match in Q8, as the finish of the match popped to 1.632 million viewers, which easily topped the Q9 segment and anything else in Q10.
> 
> - Q11: Raw dipped to a 2.07 rating for Titus O'Neil vs. Jack Swagger, a Wyatts vignette, and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> The only notable movement of the third hour was 48,000 viewers bailing to "Baseball Tonight" on ESPN from 10:42 to 10:43 p.m. during the second commercial break of the hour.
> 
> - Q12: Raw jumped 15 percent to 2.38 rating for Bryan vs. Seth Rollins and one mid-match commercial.
> 
> - Over-Run: Raw jumped 18.9 percent to a 2.83 over-run rating for the end of Bryan-Rollins, Shield jumping Bryan to cancel out the rest of the gauntlet, and the show-closing angle with Triple H holding back the roster from helping Bryan.
> 
> Included were the most-watched minutes of the show with 1.790 million viewers at 11:03 p.m., then 1.877 million viewers at 11:04 p.m., and 1.788 million viewers at 11:05 p.m. when Raw signed off.
> 
> At the start of the over-run, Raw gained 37,000 viewers from "Basketball Wives," then a steady trickle of viewers tuned in from other shows during the remainder of the over-run.


Note: 1.0 rating = 629,400 viewers


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

ignore


----------



## deatawaits

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> The latest teaser for C.M. Punk getting his hands on Paul Heyman generated the highest-rated quarter-hour rating of this week's Raw episode.


So punk has the overall most rated segment.Not bad in the m18-49 demo either.
Bryan is seriously securing his place as a top guy,and this breakdown shows that.Did orton lose viewers at Q9?


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> People were expecting the Lesnar feud to continue. Now they know it won't be and Punk is feuding with Axel. The ratings for Punk's segment this week are gonna suck balls, and I can't wait to rain down I told you so's.





Happenstan said:


> Yes. Punk/Lesnar draws ratings, Punk alone never has before this feud. Now suddenly a Punk segment (after their PPV fight) gets big ratings. I wonder what the common denominator here is.
> 
> Let me simplify.
> 
> :brock *+* unk *= RATINGS* (See even Punk is shocked he's finally drawing something other than flies.)
> 
> *99% of the roster + * unk3 *= :no: Ratings* (One sad Punk.)


:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## DesolationRow

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

My life fades. The vision dims. All that remains are memories. I remember a time of chaos. Ruined dreams. This wasted IWC. Bust most all, I remember the Mark Warrior. The man we called *DesolationRow*. To understand who he was, you have to go back to another time. When the Internet Wrestling Community was powered by polarization and hatreds. And the online vastness sprouted great wrestling websites of pipe dreams and silly delusions. Gone now, swept away. For reasons long forgotten, multiple mark warrior tribes went to war and touched off an online blaze which engulfed them all. It was, it turns out, the Official Raw Ratings Thread. Without segments utterly failing, they were nothing. They built a house of straw. The thundering arguments and endless bitching sputtered and stopped. Their factious leaders talked and talked and talked. But nothing could stem the avalanche. Their world crumbled. The forum threads exploded. A whirlwind of trolling, a firestorm of fail. Trolls began to feed on trolls. On the pages of perpetual mark war threads it was a 25-posts-per-page white line nightmare. Only those mobile enough to survey, brutal enough to pilfer from certain outstanding individuals would survive. The gangs (Punk, Orton, Rock, Bryan, Triple H, Cena and others, they called themselves after certain contentious deities) took over the threads, ready to wage war for a shitload of green rep. And in this maelstrom of decay, ordinary marks were battered and smashed. Men like *DesolationRow*. The warrior *Deso*. In the lifeless droning hum of a computer, he lost everything. And became a shell of a man, a burnt out, desolate man (for he was *DesolationRow*!), a man haunted by the mark warrior demons of his past, a man who wandered out of the circuitous wasteland threads of ceaseless mark wars. And it was here, in this blighted place, that he learned to live again......

(I'm kidding... I enjoy checking out the discussions here!)


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Orton/Christian LOST Viewers LOL

Match was good, but that's what happens when you have 1 character that no one cares about, and one that is booked as HHH's bitch.

From Dave Meltzer-



> "Punk and Heyman Segment gained over 680,000 viewers for a 3.4 rating, a tremendous gain and segment, the star segment of the night"
> 
> "Bryan Gauntlet gained over 1,090,000 viewers to a 3.7 rating, the best over run segment in a long time"
> 
> "Randy Orton and Christian Lost 140,000 viewers at 10PM, horrible gain for that segment"


All from Meltzer

The vanilla midgets can't draw, right guys?

:bryan unk2

Punks doing good 2 weeks in a row, and Bryan has been steadily climbing up the ratings ladder so to speak, great for those guys.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



> Bryan Gauntlet gained over 1,090,000 viewers to a 3.7 rating, the best over run segment in a long time


For real? Holy crap.

:dazzler


----------



## checkcola

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> For real? Holy crap.
> 
> :dazzler


It is kind of amazing when you think of the amount of times DB and the Shield have worked against one another, audiences don't seem to tire of it.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Bryan D. said:


> For real? Holy crap.
> 
> :dazzler


None of you guys probably are subscribed to F4W, but check around the Wrestling Multimedia section, someone trys to post all the shows on their.

But yeah, Just Ridiculous for Bryan.


----------



## deatawaits

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

That is a huge gain for both segments.Bryan is at the verge of becoming huge,punk drew that big with curtis axel????Orton gets in something important again and he loses viewers.who needs Cena?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



DesolationRow said:


> My life fades. The vision dims. All that remains are memories. I remember a time of chaos. Ruined dreams. This wasted IWC. Bust most all, I remember the Mark Warrior. The man we called *DesolationRow*. To understand who he was, you have to go back to another time. When the Internet Wrestling Community was powered by polarization and hatreds. And the online vastness sprouted great wrestling websites of pipe dreams and silly delusions. Gone now, swept away. For reasons long forgotten, multiple mark warrior tribes went to war and touched off an online blaze which engulfed them all. It was, it turns out, the Official Raw Ratings Thread. Without segments utterly failing, they were nothing. They built a house of straw. The thundering arguments and endless bitching sputtered and stopped. Their factious leaders talked and talked and talked. But nothing could stem the avalanche. Their world crumbled. The forum threads exploded. A whirlwind of trolling, a firestorm of fail. Trolls began to feed on trolls. On the pages of perpetual mark war threads it was a 25-posts-per-page white line nightmare. Only those mobile enough to survey, brutal enough to pilfer from certain outstanding individuals would survive. The gangs (Punk, Orton, Rock, Bryan, Triple H, Cena and others, they called themselves after certain contentious deities) took over the threads, ready to wage war for a shitload of green rep. And in this maelstrom of decay, ordinary marks were battered and smashed. Men like *DesolationRow*. The warrior *Deso*. In the lifeless droning hum of a computer, he lost everything. And became a shell of a man, a burnt out, desolate man (for he was *DesolationRow*!), a man haunted by the mark warrior demons of his past, a man who wandered out of the circuitous wasteland threads of ceaseless mark wars. And it was here, in this blighted place, that he learned to live again......
> 
> (I'm kidding... I enjoy checking out the discussions here!)


:lmao

Arrive. GOAT. Leave. Never to be seen again for another 6 months.... 

I had a feeling the Punk/Heyman stuff would do well and it did. There's no way they could have got a 3.6 one week if people weren't interested in what they were watching and that has translated to this week. Talk about eating your words Bryan marks lol. Ouch that's got to sting. Some of you are just going to have to accept that this storyline has peoples interest without Lesnar being there. I do find it strange how the Punk/Heyman (without Brock) solo promos before Summerslam got lower numbers than the Punk/Axel stuff after Summerslam when the hook for this program is obviously Punk/Heyman and not Punk/Axel as proven this week by Punk/Axel doing shitty and then the Heyman tease jumping 18% or whatever it was 

DAT CURTIS AXEL STAR POWER

:axel

AJ's promo struck a chord and that's always great to see. It's also good that the minute by minute numbers can prove that because the entire quarter was down and if it was just the regular breakdown then we wouldn't know about this so that's good. AJ has had some really impressive numbers overall never mind for a diva. Kudos to her. 

DAT WWE CHAMP DRAWING DEM NUMBERS.......:side: Not a good indictment of Mr. Orton at 10pm there although going from the minute by minute stuff they did claw viewers back by the end of the match (in 1 demo) but yeah, overall not good. -1 for the Orton marks this week.

Just when they go and do the best overrun in months last week, they actually top it this week. Mind = blown. Big 3.7 for Bryan/Rollins and then the post match beat down. Obviously the Corporation angle is working big time right now. If they can keep this up when football starts more power to them. 

Don't know what the opener did but from the minute by minute stuff the audience grew and grew right through the segment which is good for obvious reasons. It was never touching last weeks which was way above average for opening segment numbers these past few months and the direct fallout from the PPV. If I had to guess based on the information we have on everything else, I'd say it did a 3.1 maybe? I guess we'll see if they ever release the Observer breakdown. 

Points to troll over this week:

:bryan & unk over-performing 

rton2 under-performing

Ready.....set......GO!!!!!!!!!


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well it looks like we have our Wrestlemania main event.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



deatawaits said:


> Who needs Cena?


It's because WWE has the GOAT heel and is giving us arguably the biggest storyline in recent times


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> Well it looks like we have our Wrestlemania main event.


unk2 vs. :bryan will break the Nielsen system at Wrestlemania XXX

:rock4 :brock :HHH2 :taker :cena2 will cower in fear at the almighty numbers produced by men half their size. 

What is the world coming to?

:vince4 :vince6 :vince4 :vince6


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> Well it looks like we have our Wrestlemania main event.


:axel vs. :dazzler?


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

You fools. How dare you forget :henry1?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

How can WWE not do Punk V DB at WM for the WWE championship at this rate. 

That card that was reported a few months back for WM is looking all the more accurate.


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> You fools. How dare you forget :henry1?


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

full breakdown from Observer will be out next week.

Anyways good for Punk & Bryan


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

What the hell? Rock316AE is here.

We also forgot to credit Lesnar because surely the audience was expecting him to come out.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

BIGGEST SEGMENTS ON RAW FOR 2012 (based on audience gain)
1,233,000 - CM Punk vs. Vince McMahon

1,181,000 - John Cena vs. Big Show for SummerSlam title shot

1,122,000 - Undertaker/HHH in-ring confrontation

1,084,000 - John Cena & Ryback vs. C.M. Punk & Dolph Ziggler

1,058,000 - C.M. Punk vs. Sheamus champion vs. champion lumberjack match

1,036,000 - Brock Lesnar return, F-5 on John Cena

1,033,000 - John Laurinaitis fires Big Show

hopefully somebody can throw up the biggest gains of 2013 because i don't have them to hand


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

"Bryan Gauntlet gained over 1,090,000 viewers to a 3.7 rating, the best over run segment in a long time"

Pretty certain that is the best overrun of the entire year in terms of gain. Let's not forget Bryan has always drawn fairly well, remember Raw 1000, the wedding with him and AJ and the aftermath did a very good gain at the time.

Also, I think the number is a very, very positive sign for the angle. Now *don't fuck this up*, please!

Looking through the archive, that is definitely up there with the biggest number of the year. I did find this, night after the Rumble:



> And the overrun with McMahon and Heyman’s performance review and the return of Brock Lesnar gained 750,000 viewers to a 4.00 overrun


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



validreasoning said:


> BIGGEST SEGMENTS ON RAW FOR 2012 (based on audience gain)
> 1,233,000 - CM Punk vs. Vince McMahon
> 
> 1,181,000 - John Cena vs. Big Show for SummerSlam title shot
> 
> 1,122,000 - Undertaker/HHH in-ring confrontation
> 
> 1,084,000 - John Cena & Ryback vs. C.M. Punk & Dolph Ziggler
> 
> 1,058,000 - C.M. Punk vs. Sheamus champion vs. champion lumberjack match
> 
> 1,036,000 - Brock Lesnar return, F-5 on John Cena
> 
> 1,033,000 - John Laurinaitis fires Big Show
> 
> hopefully somebody can throw up the biggest gains of 2013 because i don't have them to hand




^It's not surprising that John Cena is involved in 3 of the 7 biggest gains.

The biggest shocker is the lack of Rock.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> 11PM:
> *8/26 - 1,090,000 (3.7)* - Bryan gauntlet
> 8/19: 670,000 (3.6)- Bryan/HHH/Orton/Vince/Stephanie/Shield
> 8/12: 400,000 (3.5)- Punk/Heyman/Lesnar
> 8/5: 700,000 (3.4)- Cena-Bryan-Orton/The Shield
> 7/29: 769,000 (3.29)- Cena/Ryback with Bryan coming out at the end
> 7/22: 331,000 (3.2)- Bryan vs. Ryback and Cena coming out
> 7/15: 669,000 (3.41)- Cena picking Bryan for Summerslam
> 7/8: 48,000 (3.13)- Punk vs. Orton with Bryan run-in
> 7/1: 567,000 (3.25)- Cena vs. Del Rio and Henry/Ziggler coming out
> 6/24: 104,000 (2.92)- Bryan vs. Orton
> 6/17: 636,000 (3.42)- Punk vs. Del Rio and Lesnar/Ziggler coming out
> 
> Overrun is fairly secured and the safest place as far as overall rating/gains are. 10PM I'd say is second as it has some great gains and generally had better quarters. 9PM's gains are more consistent than 10PM's, but their quarter ratings are lower than 10PM's.


So the overrun has basically gone 3.2 > 3.3 > 3.4 > 3.5 > 3.6 > 3.7. :yes


----------



## Kenny

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

:yes: :bryan :bryan2 :bryan3


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> So the overrun has basically gone 3.2 > 3.3 > 3.4 > 3.5 > 3.6 > 3.7. :yes


Big 3.8 coming up next week what's it gonna be, Vince?

:vince5


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Overrun had 3.7 rating = ~5.05 million viewers. Big number for WWE in this day and age, and outside of WrestleMania season.


----------



## Kenny

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

5 fucking million? :yes:


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Orton/Christian LOST Viewers LOL
> 
> Match was good, but that's what happens when you have 1 character that no one cares about, and one that is booked as HHH's bitch.
> 
> From Dave Meltzer-
> 
> 
> 
> All from Meltzer
> 
> The vanilla midgets can't draw, right guys?
> 
> :bryan unk2
> 
> Punks doing good 2 weeks in a row, and Bryan has been steadily climbing up the ratings ladder so to speak, great for those guys.


What is this? Where's the rest of the viewership gains and losses?


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

It just goes to show you that storylines matter, and all of the drawing arguments are so stupid.

People shat on Punk when he supposedly "didn't draw." Now look, he's involved in an interesting storyline, and it's totally engaging and drawing viewers.

Hogan's face act had gotten so stale and old that it wasn't drawing much for WCW. Then suddenly he turns heel, and is involved in a huge storyline, and they start creaming the WWF.

So what was the problem? Does it mean that Punk and Hogan were bad draws, or was it that creative was to blame? It's the latter.

As for Orton, he was the only one who had no kind of cliffhanger to get the crowd on edge. With Punk, there was the tease of what would happen with Heyman (with the audience vote prompting it all).

With Bryan we'd already seen him get beaten down, and the whole set-up vs. The Shield was about what would happen at the end of it all. HHH/Maddox kept throwing things at him, so it stood to reason that something would happen in the end with the Corporation storyline.

Orton/Christian was just a random match, with no real kind of teaser. I don't think that it's a similiar situation as the other two, and it can only be compared when he's involved in things that have big teasers or big storyline/promo segments.

If you just look at the actual Axel/Punk match, it says that it stayed at a low until the second half. Thus, one can stand to reason that people were tuning in to see where the Heyman/Punk thing went, which makes sense. Which supports what I'm saying about storylines & teasers mattering. People care less about the random match aspect. 

All in all, I think that the WWE has a couple of really good storylines going right now, and it's great to see that they're being rewarded with viewers.

People will always try to use what they can for mark wars, but there's so much that goes into "drawing." Being part of an interesting, well-built, segment is all part of it.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

^^^^^ Very true. Random matches never do that well. Put something on the line and they can pop big time numbers. Punk/Axel did nothing. The tease of Punk/Heyman saw a 20% increase. Orton/Christian did nothing because it means nothing. So far Orton hasn't been given a 'hook' angle on his own. 

At the same time though, proven draws in compelling angles is what brings the big numbers. There's no way this story line does half as well if it was just Orton/Bryan without the big heel turns and overarching Corporation angle. Which leads back to your point of compelling angles lol .




D.M.N. said:


> Overrun had 3.7 rating = ~5.05 million viewers. Big number for WWE in this day and age, and outside of WrestleMania season.


I'm amazed that the number actually went up from last week. That's awesome. All joking aside, they're going to come down at some point and it's more than likely going to be the first night of football. I don't think we've seen the peak of this angle though. It still has legs and long ones at that. If the entire show rating hovers at 3.0 that's fine because if the main angle is hitting 5 million viewers every other night they can't ask for anything more than that. In 2013 and heading into September, 5 million viewers is just ridiculous. 

You see that, Vince? REAL HEELS AND REAL FACES BRINGS DA RATINGZ. 

When is John Cena coming back lol?

:cena5


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan & Punk drawing :yes:
Best faces in the company drawing :yes:


----------



## Kenny

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan will take over football ratings. :yes:


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KENSENBERG said:


> Bryan will take over football ratings. :yes:


Bridge too far lol. They're taking a big hit once football starts. It's inevitable. I just hope that they go balls to the wall and pull out all the stops in trying to get viewers to stick around. Could make for some great TV and that's all I care about.

Bryan attacking the Corporation with GOAT's cheese please.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

how does RAW do usually on Labor Day (next week)?


----------



## Kenny

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan vs Punk WM30


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I wonder if in hindsight they should have had AJ's pipe bomb at the top of the hour? I can see why they didn't - it was only three minutes long - but if they are planning on taking that somewhere, then a good idea would be to have that at the top of the hour at some point.


----------



## hazuki

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> Orton/Christian LOST Viewers LOL
> 
> Match was good, but that's what happens when you have 1 character that no one cares about, and one that is booked as HHH's bitch.
> 
> From Dave Meltzer-
> 
> 
> 
> All from Meltzer
> 
> The vanilla midgets can't draw, right guys?
> 
> :bryan unk2
> 
> Punks doing good 2 weeks in a row, and Bryan has been steadily climbing up the ratings ladder so to speak, great for those guys.


Link to this?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Would be a bit weird to position your Divas champ over your WWE Champ is my guess. Besides, this whole thing is for Total Divas and not actually for TV right? Although I guess the two will overlap all things considered. Who knows.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> full breakdown from Observer will be out next week.
> 
> Anyways good for Punk & Bryan


So both full breakdowns will be next week. I can't see AJ's promo gaining shit because of the shit before it, could be wrong thou.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



hazuki said:


> Link to this?


Dave talked about it on Wrestling Observer Radio. Full breakdown next week.


----------



## deatawaits

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

As far as I remember, punk vs cena in the start of the year did 3.9,the match which decided the challenger for the streak did 3.7 other than that I think this bryan vs shield match is highest rated match this year. Shouldn't we give bit of credit to shield?


----------



## LovelyElle890

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> It's because WWE has the GOAT heel and is giving us arguably the biggest storyline in recent times


Exactly. Triple H is absolutely deplorable when he is playing a heel. Paul Heyman is such an amazing heel too. I'm not surprised that their feuds are drawing interest.

Good job, Bryan and Punk! Keep up the good work.

:angel


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



deatawaits said:


> As far as I remember, punk vs cena in the start of the year did 3.9,the match which decided the challenger for the streak did 3.7 other than that I think this bryan vs shield match is highest rated match this year. Shouldn't we give bit of credit to shield?


Or to the angle and build? Sure the stars are popular, but with good angles and build comes good results. That same Cena vs Punk had 2 great stars great importance, and promotion and nice build.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Triple H turns heel and starts bossing shit every week. Ratings go up. 

:HHH2

EDIT - The Punk/Cena match was to determine the no. 1 contender to face Rock if I'm not mistaken. BIG ODDS. The streak match was obviously to determine who would challenge for the streak. Again, BIG ODDS. When you put something on the line, viewers have the hook to tune in. What's different about Bryan/Rollins is that there wasn't exactly anything on the line but we all just knew that fuckery was coming in the form of HHH and Orton. 

BIG ODDS + FUCKERY = $$$


----------



## deatawaits

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Of course the angle and the build is important but it seems that people are only giving the credit to the GOAT while forgetting the shield.
to starbuck: that's what I meant to say(tho didn't write lol)


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



deatawaits said:


> Of course the angle and the build is important but it seems that people are only giving the credit to the GOAT while forgetting the shield\


From the minute by minute info we got, Bryan/Rollins on their own and not in the overrun got a 3.4 so they absolutely deserve credit for getting a number like that in Q12 of the show. The overrun can be attributed to Bryan/Rollins, the rest of the Shield, HHH, Orton...basically the entire angle as a whole. But it's not like the number only came from the post match stuff. The match itself was a draw and that's on Bryan/Rollins and any potential ramifications of said match. 

All in all though, the entire angle is the real success here. That is true.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



MaybeLock said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


I'll admit Punk did good Monday night. Of course getting a great spot at the top of the 9 o'clock hour helps but he did good this week. Hey look at that. Unlike some fans, I can admit when I'm wrong.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Aww fuck it. I tried to find a "hey, check out them ratingz" HHH gif to respond to starbuck but failed 



deatawaits said:


> Of course the angle and the build is important but it seems that people are only giving the credit to the GOAT while forgetting the shield\


They're just being DB marks. If their ultimate fave is involved in a very high viewed seg, then it's mark time. it was the same with Punk so it's gonna be the same with DB.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Starbuck said:


> From the minute by minute info we got, Bryan/Rollins on their own and not in the overrun got a 3.4 so they absolutely deserve credit for getting a number like that in Q12 of the show. The overrun can be attributed to Bryan/Rollins, the rest of the Shield, HHH, Orton...basically the entire angle as a whole. But it's not like the number only came from the post match stuff. The match itself was a draw and that's on Bryan/Rollins and any potential ramifications of said match.
> 
> All in all though, the entire angle is the real success here. That is true.


Vince must be wondering what world he's living in this morning. I keep waiting for some report of a ratings glitch Monday night. Great story telling and actual wrestlers wrestling is drawing in tv watchers. Who'd a thunk it?


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The Daniel Bryan Gauntlet gaining almost an entire Impact viewership :HHH2:hogan2

Great to see as many as possible got to see the top rope suplex. It was sweet!

Positivt sign for the angle. See how long it lasts.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JasonLives said:


> *The Daniel Bryan Gauntlet gaining almost an entire Impact viewership* :HHH2:hogan2
> 
> Great to see as many as possible got to see the top rope suplex. It was sweet!
> 
> Positivt sign for the angle. See how long it lasts.


:lmao :lmao Oh God. Is that true? :lol 

:bryan :rollins drawing more than :hogan2 :angle2

YOU CHECK OUT THOSE RATINGS BROTHER?

:vince2

Btw, this thread is a goldmine for using smiley faces lol.


----------



## JasonLives

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Last weeks Impact had 1,246,000 :hogan2


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Well this thread escalated quickly. Rare appearance by DesolationGOAT included. Punk did well, peak of the show again, I guess my doubts regards last week could be somewhat satiated. Orton not doing so well but in a random as hell match he was at a disadvantage.Bryan doing well again the main event with the whole corporation angle adding to it. Good to see the positivity continuing. 

unk2 vs :bryan2 
BOOK IT VINCE


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I see people saying Punk did peak of the show, but I see Bryan gained to over 5,000,000 viewers and a 3.7 rating.

WHO WINS THIS WEEK!?

Doesn't really matter. Since both unk2 and :bryan are bringing in DEM RATINGS! 

Poor rton though...

Edit: Actually reading through the breakdown, looks like Bryan won this week. :yes


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JasonLives said:


> Last weeks Impact had 1,246,000 :hogan2


That's crazy and actually kind of sad tbh. 



The Sandrone said:


> I see people saying Punk did peak of the show, but I see Bryan gained to over 5,000,000 viewers and a 3.7 rating.
> 
> WHO WINS THIS WEEK!?
> 
> Doesn't really matter. Since both unk2 and :bryan are bringing in DEM RATINGS!
> 
> Poor rton though...
> 
> Edit: Actually reading through the breakdown, looks like Bryan won this week. :yes


For the actual 3 hours, going from the minute by minute stuff, I think the difference between the Punk/Heyman and the Bryan/Rollins match is 0.01, same as last week lol. They're basically dead even. But the overrun? That kinda smokes everything else obviously.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> how does RAW do usually on Labor Day (next week)?


usually poorly because there is so much more people per home watching but less homes tuned in, so if raw does 4.2 million average next week don't expect it to top a 2.9

2012
rating dropped 9.6% from previous week on labor day

2011
rating dropped 3.2%

2010
rating dropped 14.5%

2009
rating actually rose 4.4% but that was with bob barker as guest host

2008
can't really compare because raw before labor day was on syfy, however ratings dropped 12.1% from two weeks previous


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> August 26th, 2013
> - 3.07 rating (-0.17 on last week)
> - 3.02 million households
> - 4.190 million viewers (-108,000)
> - an average of 1.39 viewers per household that watches Raw
> 
> - 1.50 Adults 18-49 rating (-0.07)
> - 1.904 million viewers in Adults 18-49 demographic (-82,000)
> 
> *- 2.20 Males 18-49 rating (-0.01)
> - 1.376 million viewers in Males 18-49 demographic (+/-0.00)
> 
> - 0.82 Womens 18-49 rating (-0.13)
> - 0.528 million viewers in Womens 18-49 demographic (-82,000)*
> 
> - 2.286 million viewers fall outside of Adults 18-49 demographic (-26,000)


Interesting, so the majority of the 108,000 loss it appears was actually women tuning out, as the main Males 18-49 demographic was flat week on week. Impressive.

*Males 18-49 Breakdown - August 26th, 2013*
*Q1 - 2.16 rating / 1.360 million (+0.05 / +40,000)*
--> grew from 1.2 million through to 1.6 million
*Q2 - 2.19 rating / 1.378 million (+0.43 / +277,000)*
--> 20:17 - 2.70 rating / 1.70 million (peak - +0.35 / +229,000)
*Q3 - 1.97 rating / 1.240 million (+0.13 / +89,000)*
*Q4 - 1.97 rating / 1.240 million (+0.20 / +133,000)*
*Q5 - 2.39 rating / 1.504 million (+0.20 / +134,000)*
--> 21:07 - 2.69 rating / 1.692 million (peak - +0.15 / +106,000)
--> 21:14 - 2.69 rating / 1.690 million
*Q6 - 2.16 rating / 1.360 million (-0.09 / -48,000)*
--> 21:23 - 2.75 rating / 1.731 million
--> 21:24 - 2.81 rating / 1.770 million (peak - +0.09 / +69,000)
*Q7 - 2.13 rating / 1.341 million (-0.30 / -179,000)*
*Q8 - 2.05 rating / 1.290 million (-0.21 / -124,000)*
--> 21:52 - 2.73 rating / 1.717 million (peak - +0.04 / +32,000)
*Q9 - 2.04 rating / 1.284 million (-0.52 / -318,000)*
*Q10 - 2.10 rating / 1.322 million (-0.18 / -104,000)*
--> 22:17 - 2.59 rating / 1.632 million (peak - -0.34 / -200,000)
*Q11 - 2.07 rating / 1.303 million (-0.08 / -42,000)*
*Q12 - 2.38 rating / 1.498 million (+0.09 / +64,000)*
*OR - 2.83 rating / 1.781 million (+0.08 / +61,000)*
--> five minute overrun versus eleven minutes last week
--> 23:03 - 2.84 rating / 1.790 million
--> 23:04 - 2.98 rating / 1.877 million (peak - +0.20 / +139,000)
--> 23:05 - 2.84 rating / 1.788 million

I hope no Del Rio or RVD marks visit this thread. Although there was a slight drop for Q6, the peak for that quarter was still up week on week. The big drop came in Q7 week-on-week which was Del Rio vs RVD. That mostly killed the second half of the show, but Orton vs Christian as already discussed added to it. They gained ground back however.

Positives
- Shield vs Daniel Bryan
- entire first half of the show
--> Punk vs Axel
--> AJ Lee's shoot

Negatives
- Del Rio vs RVD
- Orton vs Christian


----------



## Bryan D.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

The interest on RVD is losing quickly.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Good stuff, especially for those indie midgets. I hope they keep this pace up and really need Orton to start fucking some shit up. 

Hopefully they can capitalize on the momentum

MAKE IT COUNT YOU SONOFABITCH! unk6


----------



## Vyer

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Nice numbers. It's great to see the angles and the wrestlers involved in them doing good.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> unk2 vs :bryan2
> BOOK IT VINCE


Yes. But only if done right. Keep Bryan and Punk completely away from each other until 1 of 2 things happen.

1. At RR, Bryan and Punk are the only 2 in the ring and have a brief fight ala Warrior/Hogan. Bryan wins Rumble and Punk wins title at EC setting up Mania 30.
2. Bryan beats Orton for the title soon and holds it until Punk wins RR and challenges him for it at Mania 30.

Punk and Bryan shouldn't even acknowledge the other exists until the Royal Rumble or the Raw after Royal Rumble depending on which way they go with the above.

EDIT: And make the buildup to the match be about who is the best. Not AJ, Heyman, HHH, underdogs and stolen catchphrases. Simply put, bill it as who is the better wrestler.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Ratings Killer Orton strikes again. In a quarter that usually gains viewers, he lost viewers. Just goes to show who are the true draws in the main angle. :bryan :jpl


----------



## Ace

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Yes. But only if done right. Keep Bryan and Punk completely away from each other until 1 of 2 things happen.
> 
> 1. At RR, Bryan and Punk are the only 2 in the ring and have a brief fight ala Warrior/Hogan. Bryan wins Rumble and Punk wins title at EC setting up Mania 30.
> 2. Bryan beats Orton for the title soon and holds it until Punk wins RR and challenges him for it at Mania 30.
> 
> Punk and Bryan shouldn't even acknowledge the other exists until the Royal Rumble or the Raw after Royal Rumble depending on which way they go with the above.
> 
> EDIT: And make the buildup to the match be about who is the best. Not AJ, Heyman, HHH, underdogs and stolen catchphrases. Simply put, bill it as who is the better wrestler.


 No thanks knowing Punk only has a few years left I'd much prefer if he took on Cena, Brock or SCSA. Punk v Bryan isn't a wrestlemania mainevent taking on Cena, Brock or SCSA is Punks best chance of realizing his dream.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Punk Fan said:


> No thanks knowing Punk only has a few years left I'd much prefer if he took on Cena, Brock or SCSA. Punk v Bryan isn't a wrestlemania mainevent taking on Cena, Brock or SCSA is Punks best chance of realizing his dream.


Bryan's drawing the same rating Punk is minus Punk's 2 year super push...plus Punk isn't exactly best friends with management. At this point Punk would be wise to do whatever they want of him. Austin won't work with Punk in his last match; sadly he'll work with Cena if he returns which isn't likely. Cena's been done and so has Brock. It'll be a lot harder to get a second good match out of Punk/Brock because it will be so similar to the first one IMO...massive bumping on Punk's part with a potential squeaked out victory this time *BUT* they won't have no-DQ to help spice up the match. The first one surprised me but I don't think they can pull that off twice and I doubt HHH and Vince would take that chance. Punk wanted the Brock match to take place at Mania 30 originally and Vince shut him down. I doubt he has changed his mind much.


----------



## CM BORK

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

When will WWE realise that Cena = lower ratings?

He's just a merch machine. That's it.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



CM BORK said:


> When will WWE realise that Cena = lower ratings?
> 
> He's just a merch machine. That's it.


 Aren't PPV buys and merchandise sales more important than ratings?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

CM GOAT and Daniel GOAT with huge numbers this week. Fantastic news, really. Good for the both of them, and everyone else involved. lol at Orton.

The fact that CM Punk being involved in a program with IC champion Curtis Axel is rivaling this huge Corporation storyline in the numbers is remarkable in it's own right.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> CM GOAT and Daniel GOAT with huge numbers this week. Fantastic news, really. Good for the both of them, and everyone else involved. lol at Orton.
> 
> The fact that CM Punk being involved in a program with IC champion Curtis Axel is rivaling this huge Corporation storyline in the numbers is remarkable in it's own right.


:lol It's Mr ECW Paul Heyman, not Axel.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Metzler mentioned that the actual Punk/Axel match didn't do so well but the post match with Heyman is where all the extra 680,000 viewers came from. Makes sense.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

With the 3.6 this week and 3.4 this week, it doesn't matter, the angle between these three is working and drawing a lot of interest it seems. With Punk being the focal point, the majority of the credit will ultimately go to him. Why are you always looking for a war, Happenstan? Relax bub.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> Metzler mentioned that the actual Punk/Axel match didn't do so well but the post match with Heyman is where all the extra 680,000 viewers came from. Makes sense.


That would make sense. Punk isn't a miracle worker and it was in the quarter before the 9PM. 

680,000 gain though? Damn, if true, that's the best 9PM gain since the first Rock/Cena promo this year. 3.4 would also be the best 9PM quarter rating in about two months, and outside of that one, it's the best since the post-Mania Raw. Those are some impressive numbers.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> With the 3.6 this week and 3.4 this week, it doesn't matter, the angle between these three is working and drawing a lot of interest it seems. With Punk being the focal point, the majority of the credit will ultimately go to him. Why are you always looking for a war, Happenstan? Relax bub.


I'm not, Wolverine (Bub? ), I was pointing out who was carrying the feud. As JY57 said, the match with Axel shit the bed.


EDIT: Still laughing about how the over run with Bryan got more viewers to tune in at that moment than TNA gets total each week. :lmao


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> That would make sense. Punk isn't a miracle worker and it was in the quarter before the 9PM.
> 
> 680,000 gain though? Damn, if true, that's the best 9PM gain since the first Rock/Cena promo this year. 3.4 would also be the best 9PM quarter rating in about two months, and outside of that one, it's the best since the post-Mania Raw. Those are some impressive numbers.


wasn't Brock/Heyman destroying Hunter's office the same slot where they gained 900,000+ viewers or was that 7 PM slot?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> validreasoning said:
> 
> 
> 
> BIGGEST SEGMENTS ON RAW FOR 2012 (based on audience gain)
> 1,233,000 - CM Punk vs. Vince McMahon
> 
> 1,181,000 - John Cena vs. Big Show for SummerSlam title shot
> 
> 1,122,000 - Undertaker/HHH in-ring confrontation
> 
> 1,084,000 - John Cena & Ryback vs. C.M. Punk & Dolph Ziggler
> 
> 1,058,000 - C.M. Punk vs. Sheamus champion vs. champion lumberjack match
> 
> 1,036,000 - Brock Lesnar return, F-5 on John Cena
> 
> 1,033,000 - John Laurinaitis fires Big Show
> 
> hopefully somebody can throw up the biggest gains of 2013 because i don't have them to hand
> 
> 
> 
> ^It's not surprising that John Cena is involved in 3 of the 7 biggest gains.
Click to expand...

He's not the only one that is.

unk :cena3


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



JY57 said:


> wasn't Brock/Heyman destroying Hunter's office the same slot where they gained 900,000+ viewers or was that 7 PM slot?


That was 10PM EST.

Also, if my numbers are correct, that Bryan overrun would be the biggest gain of the year, and actually the best overrun as a whole since the Punk/Cena match. It's amazing Bryan's gotten as over as he has. He's obviously one of the hardest workers in the biz, and seems like a really nice guy, so from my perspective, it's very much deserved.


----------



## samizayn

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Numbers up? This must be all thanks to the face of the company, Randy 'Reytingz' Orton :


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> That's fucking awesome. lol at people saying the match did "shitty."


It did. It gained viewers true but the lead in was lower and the match itself didn't regain enough viewers back to move the segment into positive news territory.




greendayedgehead said:


> Numbers up? This must be all thanks to the face of the company, Randy 'Reytingz' Orton :


Apparently you haven't read the ratings breakdown yet.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



greendayedgehead said:


> Numbers up? This must be all thanks to the face of the company,


Fixed.

Edit: If that 300,000 number is true, that's INCREDIBLE for that timeslot. That'd be a 1,000,000 gain for the Punk/Heyman/Axel stuff as a whole. That's amazing, especially in non-overrun segments, no matter how you spin it.


----------



## samizayn

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I was taking the piss :lol


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> It did. It gained viewers true but the lead in was lower and the match itself didn't regain enough viewers back to move the segment into positive news territory.


Certainly not surprised to see you give Punk no credit, but that's okay.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



greendayedgehead said:


> I was taking the piss :lol


Edit: Fuck, thought you were Cynical Miracle. I... ugh, I need to sleep.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> That's fucking awesome. lol at people saying the match did "shitty."
> 
> People don't want to necessarily just see Heyman get his, they want to see Punk give Heyman his. Heyman's the perfect heel to antagonize the perfect face CM Punk is playing. That's why this angle is working. Stop trying to discredit others, they both deserve props for putting on an intriguing must-see storyline.


well he pretty much said (word for word) "not much to the match but the post match did really well." unk4 is going to kick my ass now


----------



## Duberry

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*










Last Monday night on RAW, Daniel Bryan drew more viewers than Hulk Hogan, Kurt Angle, Jeff Hardy, the MMA guys and their mickey mouse federation on his own.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*










Last Monday night on RAW, anticipation for John Cena's quickest and most miraculous return yet in the main event gained more viewers than Hulk Hogan, Kurt Angle, Jeff Hardy, the MMA guys and their mickey mouse federation on his own.


----------



## JY57

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

good news: Axel can draw with Punk, Hunter, & Cena

bad news: he completely sucks without them


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Certainly not surprised to see you give Punk no credit, but that's okay.


 I blamed the previous segments low ratings for probably being the reason. I'm sorry. Let me go full Punktard for you.

_"Oh sweet baby Phil born in a manger. CM Punk just gained massive ratings while wrestling the greatest match in the world against the completely undeserving Curtis Axel. I'm too unworthy to have seen such a match. Someone get me some lube so I can drop my pants for Punk right here and now. Afterwards I'll poke out my eyes as they are unworthy to ever set sight on the living god that is CM Punk."_

Better?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> I blamed the previous segments low ratings for probably being the reason. I'm sorry. Let me go full Punktard for you.
> 
> _"Oh sweet baby Phil born in a manger. CM Punk just gained massive ratings while wrestling the greatest match in the world against the completely undeserving Curtis Axel. I'm too unworthy to have seen such a match. Someone get me some lube so I can drop my pants for Punk right here and now. Afterwards I'll poke out my eyes as they are unworthy to ever set sight on the living god that is CM Punk."_
> 
> Better?


Needs more sucking-up. You didn't even mention ripping your ears off because you don't deserve to hear his magnificent voice. You fail. Try again.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> I blamed the previous segments low ratings for probably being the reason. I'm sorry. Let me go full Punktard for you.
> 
> _"Oh sweet baby Phil born in a manger. CM Punk just gained massive ratings while wrestling the greatest match in the world against the completely undeserving Curtis Axel. I'm too unworthy to have seen such a match. Someone get me some lube so I can drop my pants for Punk right here and now. Afterwards I'll poke out my eyes as they are unworthy to ever set sight on the living god that is CM Punk."_
> 
> Better?


:lol 

Why so mad though.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> :lol
> 
> Why so mad though.


Keep wishing.




> Q4: Raw stayed at a show-low 1.97 rating for the first-half of C.M. Punk vs. Curtis Axel and two full commercial breaks. *During the last break, another chunk of viewers bailed to "American Pickers.*"


It lost viewers. Happy now?




The Sandrone said:


> Needs more sucking-up. You didn't even mention ripping your ears off because you don't deserve to hear his magnificent voice. You fail. Try again.


:lol I know, right? I'd green rep you if I could.


----------



## Edgeheadpeeps

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Poor Orton lol but we gotta cut him some slack here though him and Christian have wrestled about 500 times and not to mention it was a random match and everyone knew it wouldn't do anything to further the Corporation storyline. He did alright given the circumstances I guess. But yeah Bryan and Punk are now the top two faces so no surprise they're pulling in ratings.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Everyone's mad because of


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



hazuki said:


> Link to this?


It's on F4W, need to be a subscriber though



swagger_ROCKS said:


> So both full breakdowns will be next week. I can't see AJ's promo gaining shit because of the shit before it, could be wrong thou.


She lost 550,000, Dave said that.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> It lost viewers. Happy now?


You mean people didn't stick around during the commercial?

:lmao


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> I blamed the previous segments low ratings for probably being the reason. I'm sorry. Let me go full Punktard for you.
> 
> _"Oh sweet baby Phil born in a manger. CM Punk just gained massive ratings while wrestling the greatest match in the world against the completely undeserving Curtis Axel. I'm too unworthy to have seen such a match. Someone get me some lube so I can drop my pants for Punk right here and now. Afterwards I'll poke out my eyes as they are unworthy to ever set sight on the living god that is CM Punk."_
> 
> Better?


No mentions of pseudo-religion, not enough anger, no mentions of how bad Cena/Rock/Bryan/Orton etc are. C'mon man, you even misspelled CM GOAT


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> You mean people didn't stick around during the commercial?
> 
> :lmao



fpalm It measures a quarter hour (that's 15 minutes) at a time not commercial break to commercial break.




NearFall said:


> No mentions of pseudo-religion, not enough anger, no mentions of how bad Cena/Rock/Bryan/Orton etc are. C'mon man, you even misspelled CM GOAT


Well I was just a Punktard in training. Who wants to fully get into the heads of that crowd? Sheesh.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

LOL at this Punk/Bryan war, they both did EXCELLENT, to the level of drawing that Cena and Part time stars get. Just STFU and be happy that they are appearing to be good draws to casual viewers as well.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> fpalm It measures a quarter hour (that's 15 minutes) at a time not commercial break to commercial break.


Dude. That's the minute-to-minute 18-49 breakdown the Torch recieves. 

Again, :lmao


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> LOL at this Punk/Bryan war, they both did EXCELLENT, to the level of drawing that Cena and Part time stars get. Just STFU and be happy that they are appearing to be good draws to casual viewers as well.


Hey I tried. Apparently I didn't complement Punk's big ratings night nearly *HARD* enough.


----------



## scrilla

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

AJ Lee killing the ratings. i'm totally shocked.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Can someone post past 10 O'clock segments? I want something to compare Orton/Christian too.

Pretty sure DB/Kane Vs PRIME TIME PLAYERS gained at 10PM and that was a random throw away match.


----------



## #Mark

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Punk marks get the brunt of criticism but if this thread is proving anything it's that Bryan marks are just as bad if not worse. Both guys did fantastic and are slowly but surely turning into the first proven draws in the past decade not named Cena or Hunter since Batista.. But of course Happenstan and company quickly try to discredit Punk for no good reason at all. It's quite sad actually.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



#Mark said:


> Punk marks get the brunt of criticism but if this thread is proving anything it's that Bryan marks are just as bad if not worse. Both guys did fantastic and are slowly but surely turning into the first proven draws in the past decade not named Cena or Hunter since Batista.. But of course *Happenstan and company quickly try to discredit Punk for no good reason at all.* It's quite sad actually.


Oh my God. Your turn. Please find me all the posts where hardcore Punktards go out of their way to talk up someone not named Phil.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



#Mark said:


> Punk marks get the brunt of criticism but if this thread is proving anything it's that Bryan marks are just as bad if not worse. Both guys did fantastic and are slowly but surely turning into the first proven draws in the past decade not named Cena or Hunter since Batista.. But of course Happenstan and company quickly try to discredit Punk for no good reason at all. It's quite sad actually.


Didn't Happenstan give Punk credit earlier? I don't know, it seems like anything short of getting on your knees and giving Punk a verbal blowjob is seen as "bashing Punk," to a few Punk fans. And I thought everyone was making up.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

everyone should make up....they've proven their both draws..congrats...here's to more epic wrestling.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Oh my God. Your turn. Please find me all the posts where hardcore Punktards go out of their way to talk up someone not named Phil.


It's obvious that for some reason, you go to so much effort just to try and discredit Punk, not even using the correct breakdown to prove that "Punk lost viewers." When really, all it showed was that viewers tuned out once the second commercial of that quarter ran. You have this weird obsession with trying to discredit Punk at any stop and his fans, even going ahead and giving them a cute little nickname.

I'm not Bryan's biggest supporter, but I mentioned how well Bryan did this week. Didn't try to point all the credit to Triple H. Bryan impressed, I gave him props, and I'm happy that this push is working so well for him. Yet you're deluding yourself into thinking that everybody but you is this perfect saint when it's just making you out to look ridiculously obsessive and foolish.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

on Monday, I bet to get heat, Triple H will say something like, "business is booming once again" "that main event gauntlet match last week, high viewership, tons of viewers, all because of three men, the Shield" giving no credit to Bryan two weeks in a row lol


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Didn't Happenstan give Punk credit earlier? I don't know, it seems like anything short of getting on your knees and giving Punk a verbal blowjob is seen as "bashing Punk," to a few Punk fans. And I thought everyone was making up.


Exactly.




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> It's obvious that for some reason, you go to so much effort just to try and discredit Punk, not even using the correct breakdown to prove that "Punk lost viewers." When really, all it showed was that viewers tuned out once the second commercial of that quarter ran. You have this weird obsession with trying to discredit Punk at any stop and his fans, even going ahead and giving them a cute little nickname.


Speaking of which, it's Punk's head cheerleader...and I do mean "head."

I fully admit I mis-read that. The top of the breakdown says it's the quarter hours and it is even formatted that way, I missed the middle of the article where it goes into minute by minute breakdowns. I admit I was wrong (See, I did it again.). Even if I took your word for it that you weren't all Punk all the time (You are.), you would simply be an exception not the rule. The vast majority of Punktards are like those complaining how Punk isn't in the Corporation storyline. Demanding Punk beat everyone and be involved in everything. You guys have such a hard on to make Cena look selfish when you need to look at yourselves and your boy in the mirror. 

And they, like you, have earned that nickname over and over again. And I'm making myself out to be a saint? Wish I knew that before. Saint Happenstan. I like that. On your knees child. No, no, no. Not that. Phil isn't here.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Overrun drew well? Its obvious the fans were tuning in to see the GOAT nose at work.

:HHH2=ratings


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

so they were keeping the main event gauntlet on their tv screens too because the nose was around during that match too? lol he didn't come out until after.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Speaking of which, it's Punk's head cheerleader...and I do mean "head."
> 
> I fully admit I mis-read that. The top of the breakdown says it's the quarter hours and it is even formatted that way, I missed the middle of the article where it goes into minute by minute breakdowns. I admit I was wrong (See, I did it again.). Even if I took your word for it that you weren't all Punk all the time (You are.), you would simply be an exception not the rule. The vast majority of Punktards are like those complaining how Punk isn't in the Corporation storyline. Demanding Punk beat everyone and be involved in everything. You guys have such a hard on to make Cena look selfish when you need to look at yourselves and your boy in the mirror.


This "vast majority," where do you see this? I certainly don't. Hell I think it even happened in this thread, a lot of Punk's biggest fans have said that they are happy with Punk's position right now, myself included. I couldn't care less if he's involved in the Corporation storyline. Along with Heyman, he's been dishing out some great, entertaining segments. That's all I give a damn about. And there you go generalizing again. "You guys have such a hard on to make Cena look selfish." I actually love John Cena so I don't mind how he's booked either. 



> And they, like you, have earned that nickname over and over again. And I'm making myself out to be a saint? Wish I knew that before. Saint Happenstan. I like that. On your knees child. No, no, no. Not that. Phil isn't here.


Classy, and exactly the reason why most people can't take you seriously.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> This "vast majority," where do you see this? I certainly don't. Hell I think it even happened in this thread, a lot of Punk's biggest fans have said that they are happy with Punk's position right now, myself included. I couldn't care less if he's involved in the Corporation storyline. Along with Heyman, he's been dishing out some great, entertaining segments. That's all I give a damn about. And there you go generalizing again. "You guys have such a hard on to make Cena look selfish." I actually love John Cena so I don't mind how he's booked either.


Dude I don't know if you're blind or just trolling. If you can't look around this forum and find dozens of posts and posters wanting Punk to take Bryan's storyline with the New Corp alone I don't know what to say to you. Starbuck posted a few links to such posts not more than 3 days ago. Look it up. And Punktards don't blame Cena for selfishly holding Punk down last year? Really? Are you really gonna go there? 




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Classy, and exactly the reason why most people can't take you seriously.


Coming from you, thanks.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> She lost 550,000, Dave said that.


Except she didn't. Meltzer again going on quarter hours instead of doing detailed looks inside the quarters, providing inaccurate results.

I can tell you that she gained viewers, with the highest minute in hour two in the M18-49 demographic: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/23264881-post4981.html


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Dude I don't know if you're blind or just trolling. If you can't look around this forum and find dozens of posts and posters wanting Punk to take Bryan's storyline with the New Corp alone I don't know what to say to you. Starbuck posted a few links to such posts not more than 3 days ago. Look it up. And Punktards don't blame Cena for selfishly holding Punk down last year? Really? Are you really gonna go there?


But the thing is, you're generalizing. People are allowed to have different opinions. The threads I've seen are mainly people thinking this storyline would fit Punk better, you don't have to agree, it's their opinion. Don't group them all up together, call them Punktards, and talk down to them. "And Punktards don't blame Cena for selfishly holding Punk down last year? Really? Are you really gonna go there?" I'm not even saying that. But once again, you're generalizing. I haven't seen this personally, but even if there are people who believe Cena was holding Punk back, don't take every Punk fan and treat them like they have the same opinion as each other. Jesus, it's just childish.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Except she didn't. Meltzer again going on quarter hours instead of doing detailed looks inside the quarters, providing inaccurate results.
> 
> I can tell you that she gained viewers, with the highest minute in hour two in the M18-49 demographic: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/23264881-post4981.html


Looking back over that post and man they need to do something with RVD fast. Pairing him up with Del Heat Killer clearly isn't it.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> But the thing is, you're generalizing. People are allowed to have different opinions. The threads I've seen are mainly people thinking this storyline would fit Punk better, you don't have to agree, it's their opinion. Don't group them all up together, call them Punktards, and talk down to them. "And Punktards don't blame Cena for selfishly holding Punk down last year? Really? Are you really gonna go there?" I'm not even saying that. But once again, you're generalizing. I haven't seen this personally, but even if there are people who believe Cena was holding Punk back, don't take every Punk fan and treat them like they have the same opinion as each other. Jesus, it's just childish.


fpalm The key words were..vast majority. How that suddenly becomes all in your world is staggering. Enough. I'm done with you. Go find someone else to preach to.


----------



## superuser1

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



markedfordeath said:


> so they were keeping the main event gauntlet on their tv screens too because the nose was around during that match too? lol he didn't come out until after.


Ummmmm maybe they kept it on because they didnt wanna risk missing it??? you talking like he couldn't come out while the match was taking place


----------



## YamchaRocks

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I dislike Punk, but I'll give him credit for those numbers. Looks like ramming him through people's throats for 2 years is slowly starting to work and he's finally doing well on his own. 



Happenstan said:


> Looking back over that post and man they need to do something with RVD fast. Pairing him up with Del Heat Killer clearly isn't it.


True. I like RVD but I refuse to watch anything involving that mexican hack.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

or they like it when Bryan shows them how its done in the ring...top rope German? all I have to say.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



markedfordeath said:


> so they were keeping the main event gauntlet on their tv screens too because the nose was around during that match too? lol he didn't come out until after.


It was completely obvious that the GOAT nose was going to make an appearance. Kinda like how it was obvious last week that Bryan would come out during the Orton coronation. So they kept their screens on, saying "has the nose come out yet? I don't want to miss it."

The nose even gets to the ring before Hunter, that's how important it is. Trips knows his place and yields the right of way. Can't have the #1 star looking like its beneath someone.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Wow, good numbers there. Punk vs Daniel Bryan WrestleMania if this keeps up. Daniel Bryan vs Shield is always great to watch all the way back to the Team Hell No days. Oh and John Cena isn't on the show, so this is great.

The *true* WWE Champion gaining a lot for his match and that overrun with the corporation.


----------



## etta411

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



YamchaRocks said:


> I dislike Punk, but I'll give him credit for those numbers. Looks like ramming him through people's throats for 2 years is slowly starting to work and he's finally doing well on his own.


lol, well we'll see when he isn't given a "rare" segment like "Paul Heyman has to have a match with me now and I get to beat him up", a guy who many people hate and almost never gets attacked, or a fued with a megastar (Cena, Rock, Taker, Brock). Outside of those rare parameters in which anyone being pushed for awhile pulls ratings, we'll see what ratings he pulls "on his own".


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Yeah, it'd be interesting to see what the numbers are for Punk if he's booked to have a pointless match with nothing at stake. From memory, the numbers haven't been very good. Examples are the Tensai handicap match that main evented Raw, the match with Bryan on the Memorial Day Raw from last year and recently, the matches he had with PTP.

Not trying to take away credit from him since I admit he doesn't need to rely on bigger stars all the time to bring in viewers like he used to but it's interesting observation.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

1,090,000 viewers for the Bryan gauntlet. Wow. Bryan is absolutely killing it right now and every part of that Corporation storyline, with the exception of Orton it seems, is killing it. No doubt, these numbers keep up, Bryan is getting that title back before Wrestlemania or he gets his moment at Wrestlemania. 

If Punk keeps up his numbers too, I think Bryan-Punk for Wrestlemania is really likely. I'm stoked to see those numbers. Awesome stuff.


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

So you guys expect Punk to draw people by only showing up and just sit in the ring in silence? He can't face a bigger star, he can't be involved in an interesting rivalry, he can`t be in a "rare" segment or a match that makes sense for the rivalry. Facepalm

Nobody is going to draw by only showing up, unless you are a special attraction like Taker, Rock or Lesnar who rarely show up.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Choke2Death said:


> Yeah, it'd be interesting to see what the numbers are for Punk if he's booked to have a pointless match with nothing at stake. From memory, the numbers haven't been very good. Examples are the Tensai handicap match that main evented Raw, the match with Bryan on the Memorial Day Raw from last year and recently, the matches he had with PTP.
> 
> Not trying to take away credit from him since I admit he doesn't need to rely on bigger stars all the time to bring in viewers like he used to but it's interesting observation.


It's quite a good point. We saw Orton/Christian this week not do the best, but it was a random match out of nowhere really with only a small pre-match announcement. Punk has fluctuated in these kind of matches before and has never had a steady record of holding/gaining viewers. IIRC last year, Cena was the only one who could manage the feat.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

HUGE gain for Danielson, holy shit. Good signs for him overall .


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> LOL at this Punk/Bryan war, they both did EXCELLENT, to the level of drawing that Cena and Part time stars get. Just STFU and be happy that they are appearing to be good draws to casual viewers as well.


Felt this needed to be quoted and reinforced again...


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



NearFall said:


> It's quite a good point. We saw Orton/Christian this week not do the best, but it was a random match out of nowhere really with only a small pre-match announcement. Punk has fluctuated in these kind of matches before and has never had a steady record of holding/gaining viewers. IIRC last year, Cena was the only one who could manage the feat.


Even Cena has failed, like when he had a meaningless match with Big Show in the main event before SummerSlam last year. It gained something like 10,000 viewers.

:ti


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Sure, Punk can't gain consistently in random matches with no story or real purpose to them... but who can? I mean, we don't even get to see guys like Rock/Taker/Lesnar in that type of situation anymore because they're only around for big storylines nowadays... well actually Taker did do a little thing with The Shield, and the match was a big success ratings wise, but even then that can be chalked up due to the fact it was Taker's first Televised match in years, and first one on Raw in even longer. Same thing with the first HHH/Axel match, where it was HHH's first TV match in years, but the second one didn't do anywhere near as well and was more in line with what you'd expect from a random match (actually, considering it was promoted a week in advanced, it's actually more disappointing than you'd think). 

So it's not really a "Punk" thing... more it's just a "thing" that happens to be for anyone currently in the WWE.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

If you book a meaningless match between two people which has no impact in terms of storylines, feuds or angles then of course there is going to be no interest in it which translates into the ratings. Not hard to figure out, of course marks/haters of certain wrestlers will ignore that to try and back up their opinions.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Does anybody have the real QH ratings of this week? I browsed the last 5 pages ITT and all I found are some demographic related numbers that go from 2.0-2.7 that I find pretty useless and by doing a quick google search I couldn't find the regular ratings either, just the same ones posted ITT. How am I supposed to discuss ratings and engage into mark wars without knowing the real quarter hour numbers .


----------



## rkomarkorton

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



RatedR10 said:


> 1,090,000 viewers for the Bryan gauntlet. Wow. Bryan is absolutely killing it right now and every part of that Corporation storyline, *with the exception of Orton it seems,* is killing it. No doubt, these numbers keep up, Bryan is getting that title back before Wrestlemania or he gets his moment at Wrestlemania.
> 
> If Punk keeps up his numbers too, I think Bryan-Punk for Wrestlemania is really likely. I'm stoked to see those numbers. Awesome stuff.


how? he was thrown into a random match that had nothing to do with the corporation angle everybody knew that the important stuff would take place in the main event


----------



## etta411

*A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*

"Punk and Heyman Segment gained over 680,000 viewers for a 3.4 rating, a tremendous gain and segment, the star segment of the night"

"Bryan Gauntlet gained over 1,090,000 viewers to a 3.7 rating, the best over run segment in a long time"

"Randy Orton and Christian Lost 140,000 viewers at 10PM, horrible gain for that segment"


----------



## DCR

*Re: A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*

All of these stats are true.


----------



## CM BORK

*Re: A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*

CM GOAT bringing in dem ratings again.

unk2


----------



## DCR

*Re: A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*

That must be why the WWE already considers them both to be main event superstars.


----------



## -SAW-

*Re: A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*

I will always believe that ratings don't have any impact on who should be pushed or not.

But, god damn. This is awesome.

:yes


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*

so once Punk joins the Bryan storyline, are the mark wars going to officially stop? because all of it is based upon ratings and segments now....so if they're in the same segments going forward, they'd get the same ratings, hence the argument would be null and void correct?


----------



## DCR

*Re: A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*

You could also attribute this to the fact that you're comparing the two biggest WWE storylines ATM to a random mid card match.


----------



## *Eternity*

*Re: A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*



etta411 said:


> "*Bryan Gauntlet gained over 1,090,000 viewers* to a 3.7 rating, the best over run segment in a long time"


Bryan's Gauntlet???? :trips



You must forgot I was there too.:HHH2


----------



## Arya Dark

*Re: A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*

*There's a ratings thread.*


----------



## etta411

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

This can't be right surely? 3.7 is fucking HIGH, especially for this time of year.

Jesus Christ Bryan.

CM Punk is also great.


----------



## Arya Dark

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

*----- merged the closed thread with this one.*


----------



## bjnelson19705

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan and Punk facing the Corporation should DEFINATELY be great for ratings.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*



*Eternity* said:


> Bryan's Gauntlet???? :trips
> 
> 
> 
> You must forgot I was there too.:HHH2


90,000 viewers tuning in for Bryan.

1,000,000 tuning in for the GOAT nose.


That sounds about right. The nose is the show's star.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Still can't believe Bryan got a 1,090,000 increase. Little Danny Bryan continues to impress.

:yes


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*



markedfordeath said:


> so once Punk joins the Bryan storyline, are the mark wars going to officially stop? because all of it is based upon ratings and segments now....so if they're in the same segments going forward, they'd get the same ratings, hence the argument would be null and void correct?


If WWE has a brain in its collective body Punk will be kept far away from this storyline and Bryan until the RR or just after it. It sets up a great Bryan/Punk feud and honestly Punk has had enough of a push the past 2 years. It's Bryan's turn. Enough pushing Phil down our throats already.




bjnelson19705 said:


> Bryan and Punk facing the Corporation should DEFINATELY be great for ratings.


fpalm :no:


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Are you kidding me? We need more of unk2 pushed down our throats.


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



MaybeLock said:


> So you guys expect Punk to draw people by only showing up and just sit in the ring in silence? He can't face a bigger star, he can't be involved in an interesting rivalry, he can`t be in a "rare" segment or a match that makes sense for the rivalry. Facepalm
> 
> Nobody is going to draw by only showing up, unless you are a special attraction like Taker, Rock or Lesnar who rarely show up.


Wrong. We're interested in what ratings Punk pulls when he face a _lesser star than himself_ rather than greater ones, and in addition to that, doesn't have a special segment that would draw regardless (such as Heyman being forced to have a match or some other rare stipulation).

I don't think that's asking for too much since it's only narrowing down the possibile segments he could have by 10% at most. By lesser star I don't mean Health Slater either, it could be a good match with Cody Rhodes or someone else who's a solid wrestler but not overly popular.

The reasoning is obvious. Any segment featuring Brock Lesnar, The Rock, The Undertaker, etc, is going to pull ratings with or without Punk. Stuff like HIAC matches and shit are going to pull with or without Punk. We're interested in how Punk effect the meter when he isn't involved in stuff that moves the needle anyway even when he isn't there.

*Any wrestler's real worth in terms of drawing should be measured this way, not just CM Punk.* Likewise, no wrestler's worth should be measured in what he pulls in segments that will pull viewers regardless. That's all we're getting at. It's weird you're upset about such a logical approach to viewing his worth. If he pulls anyway it will validate his drawing power. Nothing to be upset over.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SinJackal said:


> Wrong. We're interested in what ratings Punk pulls when he face a _lesser star than himself_ rather than greater ones, and in addition to that, doesn't have a special segment that would draw regardless (such as Heyman being forced to have a match or some other rare stipulation).
> 
> I don't think that's asking for too much since it's only narrowing down the possibile segments he could have by 10% at most. By lesser star I don't mean Health Slater either, it could be a good match with Cody Rhodes or someone else who's a solid wrestler but not overly popular.
> 
> The reasoning is obvious. Any segment featuring Brock Lesnar, The Rock, The Undertaker, etc, is going to pull ratings with or without Punk. Stuff like HIAC matches and shit are going to pull with or without Punk. We're interested in how Punk effect the meter when he isn't involved in stuff that moves the needle anyway even when he isn't there.
> 
> *Any wrestler's real worth in terms of drawing should be measured this way, not just CM Punk.* Likewise, no wrestler's worth should be measured in what he pulls in segments that will pull viewers regardless. That's all we're getting at. It's weird you're upset about such a logical approach to viewing his worth. If he pulls anyway it will validate his drawing power. Nothing to be upset over.



Do you think Bryan has proven he can draw with lesser names given the ratings for last Monday with Seth Rollins and a few weeks ago with Cesaro?


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Bryan has proven it actually...that first gauntlet match he lost viewers coming back from commercial before his match with Swagger, but during the Cesaro match, nearly all of those viewers that weren't watching the Swagger match were watching the Cesaro match, so he got them all back again.....and he has never had a huge loss in any of his segments or matches...good sign. that June 24th main event street fight with Orton didn't have huge numbers but he didn't lose any viewers.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



markedfordeath said:


> Bryan has proven it actually...that first gauntlet match he lost viewers coming back from commercial before his match with Swagger, but during the Cesaro match, nearly all of those viewers that weren't watching the Swagger match were watching the Cesaro match, so he got them all back again.....and he has never had a huge loss in any of his segments or matches...good sign. that June 24th main event street fight with Orton didn't have huge numbers but he didn't lose any viewers.


I totally agree. Bryan has proven he can get people to watch him no matter who he is in the ring with. I suppose that could change in time...but right now he's doing good. I just was wondering what SinJackal's opinion was on the matter.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

i doubt it will ever change and I also doubt that his popularity will ever disappear..the dude is just too special....he works his ass off, he always puts on a quality match and he loves what he does..the dude is real and human and a genuine guy and I don't see him ever being hated..


----------



## joeycalz

If this thread has proved anything, it's that Del Rio is utterly useless carrying the World Heavyweight Championship. 

Also Punk and Bryan suck. Who cares if they draw? They still suck. Trololololololllllllllllll.


----------



## mblonde09

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



funnyfaces1 said:


> Are you kidding me? We need more of unk2 pushed down our throats.


This - and I'm not even joking.


----------



## krai999

*Re: A subject is required when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk are confirmed draws*



KO Bossy said:


> 90,000 viewers tuning in for Bryan.
> 
> 1,000,000 tuning in for the GOAT nose.
> 
> 
> That sounds about right. The nose is the show's star.


it's like if your asking for a reply from a Bryan mark


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



rkomarkorton said:


> how? he was thrown into a random match that had nothing to do with the corporation angle everybody knew that the important stuff would take place in the main event


Yes but it's ORTON, THE CHAMPION, you can't be two faced and say Punk is killing ratings when he was gaining around 100,000-200,000 at 10PM, and then defend Orton for LOSING 150,000 at 10PM, complete hypocrisy. It's not a good rating, just say it. People called out Punk fans for being defensive with the ratings, but it's fair to do it to Orton?


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



SinJackal said:


> Wrong. We're interested in what ratings Punk pulls when he face a _lesser star than himself_ rather than greater ones, and in addition to that, doesn't have a special segment that would draw regardless (such as Heyman being forced to have a match or some other rare stipulation).
> 
> I don't think that's asking for too much since it's only narrowing down the possibile segments he could have by 10% at most. By lesser star I don't mean Health Slater either, it could be a good match with Cody Rhodes or someone else who's a solid wrestler but not overly popular.
> 
> The reasoning is obvious. Any segment featuring Brock Lesnar, The Rock, The Undertaker, etc, is going to pull ratings with or without Punk. Stuff like HIAC matches and shit are going to pull with or without Punk. We're interested in how Punk effect the meter when he isn't involved in stuff that moves the needle anyway even when he isn't there.
> 
> *Any wrestler's real worth in terms of drawing should be measured this way, not just CM Punk.* Likewise, no wrestler's worth should be measured in what he pulls in segments that will pull viewers regardless. That's all we're getting at. It's weird you're upset about such a logical approach to viewing his worth. If he pulls anyway it will validate his drawing power. Nothing to be upset over.


So you can't really measure part-timers real worth in terms of drawing, because the simple fact that they come and go will always make them showing up something special that pulls ratings. 

You guys make things too complicated sometimes, really. I don't really care about ratings that much, I would have enjoyed that Heyman/Punk/Axel segment even though the rating was 2.3 Some people said that Punk did good because he draw, but that doesn't matter to me, he did good (well, specially Heyman did good, because he owned that segment) because his segment was entertaining to me, not because some people tuned in again to see whatever they wanted to see, because it can always be discussed, why the tuned in. Was it for Heyman? Was it because he was going to get a beating? Was it for Punk? Was it for Axel? Was it to hear some hilarious Jerry Lawler´s jokes? I guess that if you are a Lawler fan you would say that the entire show is drawing because of him. You can always argue shit like that.

The point is: it´s absurd that we start saying: Oh, this guy draws because he is in a segment with a real star, because there will always something to say against a good rating number. 

Look at the corporation. They are drawing big numbers, and you have marks who argue that it is because of HHH, others because of Orton and others because of Bryan. But they don't realize that it is the whole package involved in a great story that is drawing. 

Sometimes I think WWE must be laughing at these discussion and marks over-analyzing this stuff too much. WWE knows that if you put stars in good segments they will draw, and if you put them in a bad segment or match, because you need to fill a 3hours show, they will draw much less. Nobody is making a big discovery here.

Punk right now is in a interesting storyline, not the main one, because the Corporation is the main storyline. But he´s stuck with the void of charisma that Curtis Axel is, and Heyman, who was already around when for some people Punk was the ratings killer. I see nothing special there, I see nothing that would elevate a non-draw to draw. It´s just a good storyline (a storyline far away from its peak, which was with Brock), and we see all the time the typical nonwrestler character getting a beating. People are simply interested in what this story has to offer, mostly because someone like Punk is involved, who, like or not, draws people in, unless you feed him with crap, like Randy Orton was fed last raw (Christian vs Orton).


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



TakeMyGun said:


> It's on F4W, need to be a subscriber though
> 
> 
> 
> She lost 550,000, *Dave said that*.


Who? 

Anyways, was this loss in the same line as the divas match? If so, that proves my point. If not...TD > AJ lol


----------



## gl83

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> Who?
> 
> Anyways, was this loss in the same line as the divas match? If so, that proves my point. If not...TD > AJ lol



Total Divas and AJ's "Pipebomb" were all in the same quarter-hour.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



gl83 said:


> Total Divas and AJ's "Pipebomb" were all in the same quarter-hour.


I need the official breakdown because it seems like everyone is just listening to some dude named Dave?


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> I need the official breakdown because it seems like everyone is just listening to some dude named Dave?


Meltzer's breakdowns nowadays prove that he spins the truth and the information is quite clearly less accurate than the 1-minute M18-49 ratings.

Oh, and why is this thread no longer official? Does it no longer draw?


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



The Sandrone said:


> Sure, Punk can't gain consistently in random matches with no story or real purpose to them... but who can? I mean, we don't even get to see guys like Rock/Taker/Lesnar in that type of situation anymore because they're only around for big storylines nowadays... well actually Taker did do a little thing with The Shield, and the match was a big success ratings wise, but even then that can be chalked up due to the fact it was Taker's first Televised match in years, and first one on Raw in even longer. Same thing with the first HHH/Axel match, where it was HHH's first TV match in years, but the second one didn't do anywhere near as well and was more in line with what you'd expect from a random match (actually, considering it was promoted a week in advanced, it's actually more disappointing than you'd think).
> 
> So it's not really a "Punk" thing... more it's just a "thing" that happens to be for anyone currently in the WWE.


Totally agree, and I was trying to imply that in my post. What peaks my interest is if Punk can simply improve his record in these matches, but I wouldn't discredit him hugely on a random match, same for Orton this week.


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> Do you think Bryan has proven he can draw with lesser names given the ratings for last Monday with Seth Rollins and a few weeks ago with Cesaro?


I think we need to see more consistently high ratings, and not just during gauntlet matches (the "rare stipulations" I was referring to) before I say he's a good draw. So far he's doing well, but it's in rare stipulations and imo with the new mega heel group creating most of the intrigue.

Right now I'm of the opinion that the storyline (HHH, Shield, Orton, and Vince banding together) is what's pulling the more ratings, so I'm taking a wait and see on Bryan's impact right now, but overall it's definitely headed in the right direction. Much better ratings than last year's WWE title segments by far, that's for damn sure.




MaybeLock said:


> So you can't really measure part-timers real worth in terms of drawing, because the simple fact that they come and go will always make them showing up something special that pulls ratings.
> 
> You guys make things too complicated sometimes, really. *I don't really care about ratings that much*


Sure you can. They appear, they draw. Therefore they're a draw. The fact that their appearances are a special circumstance unto themselves further cements the fact that they're a draw. Rock would draw opposite the least drawing wrestler in the company.

Lemme put it this way: WWE itself draws a certain amount. Let's say 1.8 is their minimum for sake of argument (all of this is for sake of argument, so don't take the numbers as facts or specifics, it's just to argue the point). The two worst/least popular wrestlers on the show pull a 1.8, establishing WWE's minimum rating. Put The Rock next to one, the ratings jump to 3.2-3.5 just because it's him. Rock is a massive draw regardless. Put Cena next to one, they go from 1.8 to say, 2.6 just because it's Cena. Therefore Cena caused a ratings jump of 0.8 just for appearing.

Punk next to one, let's say that draws 0.4. Punk is a solid draw of 0.4, however, it may not reflect in the ratings because the 1.8 tanked the viewers down initially, then Punk appeared to reset it back to just +150k with his added 0.4. Now you put Punk and Cena together, and it's rated around 3.1. Now who's the main reason it's rated 3.1? It isn't Punk alone and he doesn't pull nearly that high when not facing those guys, so that's why you can't credit him when he's facing Cena (or someone else big like Rock, Brock, Taker).

What this means is: Punk does well in segments that matter, against wrestlers that matter, pushing what would already be a good rating to an even better one, but he can't carry a regular segment on his own and typically only pushes it to just beyond 0, drawing only around 100-200k even when he was the WWE champ and had his segment advertised multiple times beforehand. Cena can carry a regular segment to "normal decent ratings" even against shitty wrestlers no one cares about without the WWE title or a stipulation match, and also spikes ratings into the red (or what's considered that now) when he's against someone who matters, especially if he's in a storyline that matters. And no, I don't have to be a Cena fan to make that statement. It's a fact if you read the ratings frequently.

So you can never tell how much of a draw someone is if they're in special circumstances or special storylines against people who are well known and popular and already pull ratings. If you're saying that, then you're saying Curtis Axel just pulled a ton of ratings this week while we all know he didn't. The Heyman situation and Punk were the entire pull, Axel was a footnote at best. So this doesn't mean Punk isn't a draw, it means: Look what happens when Heyman isn't getting beatdown: mediocre ratings (you can blame Axel if you want). Then when Heyman has to have a match: ratings spike.

It speaks for itself as to what drew. You compare and contrast ratings under different circumstances to see who's really drawing, you don't just look at a couple during favorable circumstances and credit your favorite guy who was involved when the other circumstances have already been drawing really well without your fav.

It isn't complicated either, it's pretty simple. It just isn't as dumbed down as, "o luk at da numberz, raytingz!". Really, just: not special stipulation (or rare/major storyline), and not with a star much bigger than themselves. That's as simple as it gets without being entirely dumbed down to "just look at the numbers".

And to the bolded: Perhaps you shouldn't be posting in the ratings thread if you don't care about them? I know I don't post in threads about topics I don't care about.


----------



## MaybeLock

SinJackal said:


> Sure you can. They appear, they draw. Therefore they're a draw. The fact that their appearances are a special circumstance unto themselves further cements the fact that they're a draw. Rock would draw opposite the least drawing wrestler in the company.
> 
> Lemme put it this way: WWE itself draws a certain amount. Let's say 1.8 is their minimum for sake of argument (all of this is for sake of argument, so don't take the numbers as facts or specifics, it's just to argue the point). The two worst/least popular wrestlers on the show pull a 1.8, establishing WWE's minimum rating. Put The Rock next to one, the ratings jump to 3.2-3.5 just because it's him. Rock is a massive draw regardless. Put Cena next to one, they go from 1.8 to say, 2.6 just because it's Cena. Therefore Cena caused a ratings jump of 0.8 just for appearing.
> 
> Punk next to one, let's say that draws 0.4. Punk is a solid draw of 0.4, however, it may not reflect in the ratings because the 1.8 tanked the viewers down initially, then Punk appeared to reset it back to just +150k with his added 0.4. Now you put Punk and Cena together, and it's rated around 3.1. Now who's the main reason it's rated 3.1? It isn't Punk alone and he doesn't pull nearly that high when not facing those guys, so that's why you can't credit him when he's facing Cena (or someone else big like Rock, Brock, Taker).
> 
> What this means is: Punk does well in segments that matter, against wrestlers that matter, pushing what would already be a good rating to an even better one, but he can't carry a regular segment on his own and typically only pushes it to just beyond 0, drawing only around 100-200k even when he was the WWE champ and had his segment advertised multiple times beforehand. Cena can carry a regular segment to "normal decent ratings" even against shitty wrestlers no one cares about without the WWE title or a stipulation match, and also spikes ratings into the red (or what's considered that now) when he's against someone who matters, especially if he's in a storyline that matters. And no, I don't have to be a Cena fan to make that statement. It's a fact if you read the ratings frequently.
> 
> So you can never tell how much of a draw someone is if they're in special circumstances or special storylines against people who are well known and popular and already pull ratings. If you're saying that, then you're saying Curtis Axel just pulled a ton of ratings this week while we all know he didn't. The Heyman situation and Punk were the entire pull, Axel was a footnote at best. So this doesn't mean Punk isn't a draw, it means: Look what happens when Heyman isn't getting beatdown: mediocre ratings (you can blame Axel if you want). Then when Heyman has to have a match: ratings spike.
> 
> It speaks for itself as to what drew. You compare and contrast ratings under different circumstances to see who's really drawing, you don't just look at a couple during favorable circumstances and credit your favorite guy who was involved when the other circumstances have already been drawing really well without your fav.
> 
> It isn't complicated either, it's pretty simple. It just isn't as dumbed down as, "o luk at da numberz, raytingz!". Really, just: not special stipulation (or rare/major storyline), and not with a star much bigger than themselves. That's as simple as it gets without being entirely dumbed down to "just look at the numbers".
> And to the bolded: Perhaps you shouldn't be posting in the ratings thread if you don't care about them? I know I don't post in threads about topics I don't care about.


You kidding? This thread is one of the most entertaining ones in the forum. It draws me in even though I´m not that interested in the main topic. We coud say it is the Rock of threads : Also, I´d be missing DEM mark wars.

You keep saying that you need to see Punk against an average rival, with average stipulations and in an average storyline, so you can see how he draws under those conditions. But I don't think that you need that. In the second storyline going, he´s drawing like the most important storyline (the Corporation is much more important and special than his rivalry with Heyman). He´s in a C condition to draw, and he´s drawing like the guys who are in an A condition to draw. 

I think that is enough to say that Punk really draws. He doesn't draw as much as the part-timers, and he doesn't draw as much as Cena (which by the way, it´s surprising how the ratings of the show are not really going down without him), but he´s slowly becoming a good ratings draw. I didn't rush to say he was a draw when he was facing Lesnar, because those were really favorable circumstances, as you say, but this week, when he was with Axel and Heyman, I don't see those conditions nearly as favorable as you think they are. We´ve seen millions of times guys like Heyman getting beat, and Curtis Axel is a joke. 

Maybe you´re right and people wanted to see Heyman getting beat, but I don't think so, he´s been around for over a year as a heel, and there have been other faces who have gone after him, and ratings were not that remarkable.

Said this, I would be surprised if these great numbers keep coming for Punk, it doesn't matter how great Heyman is in the mic, and how well he can sell a rivalry, it´s still Punk vs Axel, a midcard feud, that until now is getting main event ratings, to my surprise, but it comes to prove IMO that Punk is underrated as a draw for many (which doesn't mean that he is a big big draw).


----------



## SinJackal

MaybeLock said:


> You kidding? This thread is one of the most entertaining ones in the forum. It draws me in even though I´m not that interested in the main topic. We coud say it is the Rock of threads : Also, I´d be missing DEM mark wars.
> 
> *You keep saying that you need to see Punk against an average rival, with average stipulations and in an average storyline, so you can see how he draws under those conditions.* But I don't think that you need that. In the second storyline going, he´s drawing like the most important storyline (the Corporation is much more important and special than his rivalry with Heyman). He´s in a C condition to draw, and he´s drawing like the guys who are in an A condition to draw.
> 
> I think that is enough to say that Punk really draws. He doesn't draw as much as the part-timers, and he doesn't draw as much as Cena (which by the way, it´s surprising how the ratings of the show are not really going down without him), but he´s slowly becoming a good ratings draw. I didn't rush to say he was a draw when he was facing Lesnar, because those were really favorable circumstances, as you say, but this week, when he was with Axel and Heyman, I don't see those conditions nearly as favorable as you think they are. We´ve seen millions of times guys like Heyman getting beat, and Curtis Axel is a joke.
> 
> Maybe you´re right and people wanted to see Heyman getting beat, but I don't think so, he´s been around for over a year as a heel, and there have been other faces who have gone after him, and ratings were not that remarkable.
> 
> Said this, I would be surprised if these great numbers keep coming for Punk, it doesn't matter how great Heyman is in the mic, and how well he can sell a rivalry, it´s still Punk vs Axel, a midcard feud, that until now is getting main event ratings, to my surprise, but it comes to prove IMO that Punk is underrated as a draw for many (which doesn't mean that he is a big big draw).


A'ight I gotcha with why you come here.

To the bolded, yes pretty much that's what I'm saying, in science it would be referred to as "removing the variables" to get a clearer, more precise result. Special stipulation matches draw extra themselves, special storylines draw themselves, and wrestlers have differing drawrates (Punk's for example is higher than most), so in order to truly see what someone's drawing power is, you either need to see what he draws under average conditions, or comparatively to other guys during similar special conditions. Since the latter is more difficult to reproduce, the best way to measure it is how they do under normal conditions, not special ones.

Punk should be pulling far, far higher ratings at this point based on how much effort and how many resources were put into pushing Punk and making him look as good as possible for over two years straight. He's always going to need special storylines, segments, and opponents to pull good ratings. It's basically required maintinence to keep him where he is. He will slip down in prestige very quickly without them. Fans of Punk understand this too, which is why they were so mad about him fueding with Heyman and Axel. When Punk doesn't have a special story or opponent, it makes him look too normal.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Still can't believe Bryan got a 1,090,000 increase. Little Danny Bryan continues to impress.
> 
> :yes


Was Bryan wrestling himself? Because I'd think that increase can be attributed to him AND all 3 Shield members. I somehow don't think the gain would have been that good if he was wrestling Khali or Fandango.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> Was Bryan wrestling himself? Because I'd think that increase can be attributed to him AND all 3 Shield members. I somehow don't think the gain would have been that good if he was wrestling Khali or Fandango.


Oh stop. As much as I love the Shield guys, he was the biggest name out there, he gets the most credit. Somehow, I get the feeling if I said the same thing about Punk, in a Punk/Axel/Heyman segment, you wouldn't have asked me the same thing.

I'm sure that's just me though, right?

:bryan


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> Was Bryan wrestling himself? Because I'd think that increase can be attributed to him AND all 3 Shield members. I somehow don't think the gain would have been that good if he was wrestling Khali or Fandango.


if bryan was wrestling himself he would have atleast got a 4.0

Shield dragging him down!


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Oh stop. As much as I love the Shield guys, he was the biggest name out there, he gets the most credit. Somehow, I get the feeling if I said the same thing about Punk, in a Punk/Axel/Heyman segment, you wouldn't have asked me the same thing.
> 
> I'm sure that's just me though, right?
> 
> :bryan


No, I'd say Punk and Heyman were the draws. Not Axel, though, because he's really meant nothing in this feud and has never been positioned in a way where he actually did. The feud itself is Punk vs Heyman.

And I don't agree that Bryan should get all the credit for that. The Shield have always been booked strong, I think they contributed quite well to that segment. Were it Bryan vs...I dunno, Justin Gabriel and it pulled in those numbers, fine. That's all Bryan. But he wasn't facing a jobber, he was facing 3 of the strongest booked heels in the company who are all at that upper midcard level. I'd say like...60/40 in favor of Bryan, in terms of allotment of credit.


----------



## #Mark

I'm pretty sure Bryan/Khali would have done well.


----------



## KO Bossy

We need Bryan vs the GOAT nose. 1.5 million WM buys, easily. Though the nose goes over...it never does the job.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> No, I'd say Punk and Heyman were the draws. Not Axel, though, because he's really meant nothing in this feud and has never been positioned in a way where he actually did. The feud itself is Punk vs Heyman.
> 
> And I don't agree that Bryan should get all the credit for that. The Shield have always been booked strong, I think they contributed quite well to that segment. Were it Bryan vs...I dunno, Justin Gabriel and it pulled in those numbers, fine. That's all Bryan. But he wasn't facing a jobber, he was facing 3 of the strongest booked heels in the company who are all at that upper midcard level. I'd say like...60/40 in favor of Bryan, in terms of allotment of credit.


The Shield has not *always* been booked great though. Especially not recently. Unfortunately, they've been a bit of an afterthought recently, these past few months. If it was the Shield against someone further down the card, that segment wouldn't have gotten anywhere near a 1,090,000 gain, nor would it have reached over 5 million viewers. Daniel Bryan is hot right now. Time to accept it. Stop being so butt-hurt. Posts like yours above is evidence that you are EXTREMELY butt-hurt over this recent development.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> The Shield has not *always* been booked great though. Especially not recently. Unfortunately, they've been a bit of an afterthought recently, these past few months. If it was the Shield against someone further down the card, that segment wouldn't have gotten anywhere near a 1,090,000 gain, nor would it have reached over 5 million viewers. Daniel Bryan is hot right now. Time to accept it. Stop being so butt-hurt. Posts like yours above is evidence that you are EXTREMELY butt-hurt over this recent development.


When did I not accept it? And what do you mean they haven't always been booked great? They rarely lose, they always look dominant...are you referring to the fact that they were off doing lesser feuds with Mark Henry and the Usos? What does that matter, they still came of extremely well. Their booking was fine, it was the writing for the stories they were in that was lacking.

I'm simply trying to divide up credit where I think its due. That massive gain was NOT all Bryan. The only time its ever ONLY one wrestler who should be credit for a gain is when he's by himself. Like if Bryan was just in ring cutting a solo promo. That I'd credit all to Bryan since he's the only one out there. Do you think no one tuned in maybe to see what Orton and Triple H would do, or if they'd even appear? Hell, I'm sure there are even a few Axel fans out there who tuned in to see him in the Punk/Heyman segment.

What I disagreed with is when you said you can't believe Bryan got a 1,090,000 gain. I disagree because its wrong. He didn't get that gain, his match did, as well as what happened after, and Bryan was not the only person involved. Does he deserve a lot of credit? For sure, but not ALL of it. That's what I'm distinguishing.

And I'm not the least bit butt hurt. I said the same things last year when Punk was champion and people shat on him for the ratings going down. Its NEVER just one person. Only a fool would think it is.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> When did I not accept it? And what do you mean they haven't always been booked great? They rarely lose, they always look dominant...are you referring to the fact that they were off doing lesser feuds with Mark Henry and the Usos? What does that matter, they still came of extremely well. Their booking was fine, it was the writing for the stories they were in that was lacking.
> 
> I'm simply trying to divide up credit where I think its due. That massive gain was NOT all Bryan. The only time its ever ONLY one wrestler who should be credit for a gain is when he's by himself. Like if Bryan was just in ring cutting a solo promo. That I'd credit all to Bryan since he's the only one out there. Do you think no one tuned in maybe to see what Orton and Triple H would do, or if they'd even appear? Hell, I'm sure there are even a few Axel fans out there who tuned in to see him in the Punk/Heyman segment.
> 
> What I disagreed with is when you said you can't believe Bryan got a 1,090,000 gain. I disagree because its wrong. He didn't get that gain, his match did, as well as what happened after, and Bryan was not the only person involved. Does he deserve a lot of credit? For sure, but not ALL of it. That's what I'm distinguishing.



Oh please, enough. You know just as well as I do if I or someone else posted the same thing about a Punk segment in recent months, you wouldn't have questioned that person about it. So, don't try the whole "I'm just trying to do the right thing and divide equal credit" thing here. It's very transparent.

I mentioned Bryan by name, because he was absolutely the biggest reason his segment with the Shield got that big of a viewer increase. And yes, the Shield being an afterthought these past few months IS a factor. I wonder if their matches with the Uso's have ever received that big of an increase. I'm not saying Bryan deserves ALL of the credit, but he definitely deserves the majority of it in this situation.

And yes, you are butt-hurt. Your other posts in other threads that have NOTHING to do with Bryan, yet you bring him or a "Triple H nose drawing" comment into it shows that. You're extremely butt-hurt, actually.


----------



## KO Bossy

And besides, what exactly is there to be butt hurt about? That Bryan is succeeding? What do I care? Are numbers supposed to dictate what I like? The segment could have drawn like shit and I'd have been entertained. I thought the Orton/Christian match was solid and that match lost lots of viewers. I'm entertained by what I like. So I don't get why you'd think I'm butt hurt. I've explained to you before, I'm a fair guy, and so to be fair, I'm crediting everyone with doing well in that segment. What's wrong with that? Are others butt hurt because they don't think I credit Bryan enough? I already gave him the most for that segment.


----------



## VGooBUG

To be Honest orton doesnt seem like the champ, it feels like its triple h


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KO Bossy said:


> And besides, what exactly is there to be butt hurt about? That Bryan is succeeding? What do I care? Are numbers supposed to dictate what I like? The segment could have drawn like shit and I'd have been entertained. I thought the Orton/Christian match was solid and that match lost lots of viewers. I'm entertained by what I like. So I don't get why you'd think I'm butt hurt. I've explained to you before, I'm a fair guy, and so to be fair, I'm crediting everyone with doing well in that segment. What's wrong with that? Are others butt hurt because they don't think I credit Bryan enough? I already gave him the most for that segment.


Okay, fair enough, if you say so. Some of your other comments in other threads that have nothing to do with Bryan say otherwise. But I'll take your word for it.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Oh please, enough. You know just as well as I do if I or someone else posted the same thing about a Punk segment in recent months, you wouldn't have questioned that person about it. So, don't try the whole "I'm just trying to do the right thing and divide equal credit" thing here. It's very transparent.
> 
> I mentioned Bryan by name, because he was absolutely the biggest reason his segment with the Shield got that big of a viewer increase. And yes, the Shield being an afterthought these past few months IS a factor. I wonder if their matches with the Uso's have ever received that big of an increase. I'm not saying Bryan deserves ALL of the credit, but he definitely deserves the majority of it in this situation.


How do you know? I started posting in this thread again like what...a week or two ago? And now you're putting words in my mouth, trying to get me to say and do things I haven't. Why do you over analyze every single thing I say? I said what I said at face value, I'm not pushing some subtle agenda. Are you that paranoid that you think I am? When Punk and Brock had a great segment, did I come in and start saying "YO, PUNK JUST KILLED IT IN THAT SEGMENT, IT WAS ALL HIM!" No, because that'd be stupid. It clearly wasn't all him.

Just because I happen not to be a fan of certain things about Bryan doesn't mean I'm organizing some conspiracy against him. I ENJOYED his segment for everyone's involvement, including his. So why am I catching shit for it? Because I dared to say I feel everyone should be credited? Like Rollins for doing his part in pulling off a good match, or Hunter for being a badass heel and staring everyone down to make sure they didn't get involved, or Orton for doing that cool, cocky RKO where he let Bryan hang, or Roman Reigns for that beastly powerbomb. Everyone was great, so I'm praising them all. And yeah, I think people tuned in to see everyone because they know of the Bryan/Shield history and their track record for good matches. That, I believe, is a draw, or more of a draw than a random Bryan/Fandango match, for example. The former sounds much more intriguing than the latter, so the concept itself is a draw. Bryan was the main focus, yes, but all deserve credit. 

And yeah, you DID credit Bryan with that gain. I even quoted you on it. 



> Still can't believe Bryan got a 1,090,000 increase


I agree he deserves the majority, and that's why I SAID he did. 

Enough of this, this is why I hate this stupid thread. Nothing ever ends well.


EDIT-upon seeing the last post, things have calmed down a bit. I think an understanding has been reached.


----------



## KO Bossy

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Okay, fair enough, if you say so. Some of your other comments in other threads that have nothing to do with Bryan say otherwise. But I'll take your word for it.


Did I say somewhere that I wasn't enjoying the Bryan/Corporation angle? I think its great stuff. However, it takes two to tango. Bryan being a great underdog against heel Brad Maddox would suck. Bryan against uber heel Triple H? Now you've got something.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> How do you know? I started posting in this thread again like what...a week or two ago? And now you're putting words in my mouth, trying to get me to say and do things I haven't. Why do you over analyze every single thing I say? I said what I said at face value, I'm not pushing some subtle agenda. Are you that paranoid that you think I am? When Punk and Brock had a great segment, did I come in and start saying "YO, PUNK JUST KILLED IT IN THAT SEGMENT, IT WAS ALL HIM!" No, because that'd be stupid. It clearly wasn't all him.
> 
> Just because I happen not to be a fan of certain things about Bryan doesn't mean I'm organizing some conspiracy against him. I ENJOYED his segment for everyone's involvement, including his. So why am I catching shit for it? Because I dared to say I feel everyone should be credited? Like Rollins for doing his part in pulling off a good match, or Hunter for being a badass heel and staring everyone down to make sure they didn't get involved, or Orton for doing that cool, cocky RKO where he let Bryan hang, or Roman Reigns for that beastly powerbomb. Everyone was great, so I'm praising them all. And yeah, I think people tuned in to see everyone because they know of the Bryan/Shield history and their track record for good matches. That, I believe, is a draw, or more of a draw than a random Bryan/Fandango match, for example. The former sounds much more intriguing than the latter, so the concept itself is a draw. Bryan was the main focus, yes, but all deserve credit. Don't like it? Whatever, that's not my problem.
> 
> And yeah, you DID credit Bryan with that gain. I even quoted you on it.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree he deserves the majority, and that's why I SAID he did.
> 
> Enough of this, this is why I hate this stupid thread. Nothing ever ends well.


Yeah, I'm sure there has never been anyone in this thread who said "What a great increase for Punk!" or "Wow, Cena did really well that segment!" Those statements are just like the one I made about Bryan that you're referring to. It singles out the biggest name in the segment. Bryan in his segment with the Shield. And you could say the same for Punk and Cena in any of their segments, as well. The other guys deserve credit, too. But singling out the main eventer in the segment is not something I think has never been done before. Add on to that, Bryan is a "new" main evener in WWE, and it's even more exciting to see a new guy blossom in the main event. That's all. Wasn't meant as a slight on the Shield. I love the Shield. Have praised them many, many times on this board since I've been here. I'm a huge Rollins fan, have been since his Tyler Black days.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KO Bossy said:


> Did I say somewhere that I wasn't enjoying the Bryan/Corporation angle? I think its great stuff. However, it takes two to tango. Bryan being a great underdog against heel Brad Maddox would suck. Bryan against uber heel Triple H? Now you've got something.


That's fine, I guess. I just can't see you saying the same thing if I singled out Punk in a segment.


----------



## KO Bossy

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Yeah, I'm sure there has never been anyone in this thread who said "What a great increase for Punk!" or "Wow, Cena did really well that segment!" Those statements are just like the one I made about Bryan that you're referring to. It singles out the biggest name in the segment. Bryan in his segment with the Shield. And you could say the same for Punk and Cena in any of their segments, as well. The other guys deserve credit, too. But singling out the main eventer in the segment is not something I think has never been done before. Add on to that, Bryan is a "new" main evener in WWE, and it's even more exciting to see a new guy blossom in the main event. That's all. Wasn't meant as a slight on the Shield. I love the Shield. Have praised them many, many times on this board since I've been here. I'm a huge Rollins fan, have been since his Tyler Black days.


Ah, I see.

I've always been of the mind that both guys contribute. Again, I was more active in here when Punk was champion last summer and fall, and I always had to point out that just because the show overall did a bad rating, it wasn't solely Punk's fault. So many people tried claiming that because Punk was champion, he had to bear the entire blame, despite his segment doing well. From then on, I adopted the approach I use now. It makes sense to say that whether its a good or bad rating, its because people tuned in to see the show as a whole, or specific segments. In either case, multiple people deserve credit for that. Now, some segments will gain, others will lose. But there's never been one show in history where the whole show drew like crap and one segment did so amazingly well that it brought the whole rating up. 

Anyway, that's how I see it. I think Punk and Bryan particularly, but also Heyman, Axel, Shield, Orton and Hunter deserve kudos for bringing in such big numbers. On the flip side, both Orton and Christian deserve criticism for their segment losing viewers.



ShowStopper '97 said:


> That's fine, I guess. I just can't see you saying the same thing if I singled out Punk in a segment.


If this feud was Punk vs Axel alone, it'd probably be doing bad numbers. Its the fact that Heyman is playing a wicked heel that holds up that other end. So Heyman and Punk are both doing their part in bringing in that great rating. I don't credit Axel as much since he's basically just the Brock substitute for now, but hey, maybe a few Axel fans tune in just to see him. You never know. However, its definitely a collaborative effort, like all feuds are. Punk is most likely bringing in the majority of the numbers, as is Bryan, but Heyman contributes as well, for sure. And in his own way, so does Axel.

I think the problem is that some people are difficult to read. The reason I don't usually get on people like WrestlingFan are because I've had a lot of interaction and when he says "CM GOAT BRINGING IN DEM RATINGS", I know he's just exaggerating because...well, that's how he always is. Others...when they say things, I can't tell if they're kidding, exaggerating or being dead serious. I find that in your case its a bit harder to read behind what you're saying. Now that you explained it, I understand what you meant. At the time I read your post that I originally quoted, I thought you were being serious in only saying Bryan brought in viewers, and so I said something. Easy to get mixed up when you're reading something and not hearing them actually speak.


----------



## markedfordeath

If Mr. Perfect were still alive, something tells me he would have taught his son how to be charismatic and interesting....it was such a shame that Mr. Perfect never was WWF champion, he was awesome! and had it all..he was...well, perfect!


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Ratings are up and it's still a warzone in here.


----------



## KO Bossy

ChickMagnet12 said:


> Ratings are up and it's still a warzone in here.


Ain't that the truth.


----------



## markedfordeath

I don't get how Monday Night Football would do better than this current storyline in wrestling right now....I mean sure if its the Patriots versus whoever then I can see it..but if its the lowly Chiefs or the Browns, no way WWE doesn't beat that.


----------



## Da Silva

markedfordeath said:


> I don't get how Monday Night Football would do better than this current storyline in wrestling right now....I mean sure if its the Patriots versus whoever then I can see it..but if its the lowly Chiefs or the Browns, no way WWE doesn't beat that.


There are plenty of people who will always choose football over wrestling. At most, those people will tune in for parts of the show, but it would unrealistic to expect them to watch the full three hours.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

markedfordeath said:


> I don't get how Monday Night Football would do better than this current storyline in wrestling right now....I mean sure if its the Patriots versus whoever then I can see it..but if its the lowly Chiefs or the Browns, no way WWE doesn't beat that.


Doesn't matter what two teams it is. NFL always destroys WWE, at least in recent years. Even in the Attitude Era, they got beat. The NFL is a ratings monster.


----------



## markedfordeath

well yeah, but the two current big segments carry Raw right now any way....so if its two shitty teams, I don't really see how they don't change the channel for those segments.


----------



## Fatcat

Thursday Night Football games, which are generally C or D level games, averaged over 7 million viewers. A shitty MNF game between the Eagles and Panthers drew over 10 million viewers. The WWE at Attitude Era levels of popularity would probably still struggle to beat even the worst NFL games. Two segments may boost the ratings, but the other 10 segments will still kill the ratings.


----------



## markedfordeath

that's unfortunate....they need to go all out this Monday, because its the last one until football, and they need to make it BIG, like really BIG to maintain interest going forward.


----------



## KO Bossy

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Doesn't matter what two teams it is. NFL always destroys WWE, at least in recent years. Even in the Attitude Era, they got beat. The NFL is a ratings monster.


This. Doesn't matter if its the two worst teams playing their C-stringers. When it comes to Monday Night ratings, NFL is a juggernaut. In this day and age, wrestling is nowhere NEAR as popular as football. Even with Punk and Bryan's respective storylines firing at 100%, they won't make a scratch in NFL ratings. Unfortunate, but true.


----------



## markedfordeath

do you think they'll scrap the ideas and try anew, or stick it out?


----------



## KO Bossy

Do you mean will they scrap the entire Heyman/Punk and Bryan/Corporation feuds? I don't know why they would. Both are going quite well right now, they're engaging and the audience really likes them. They know they can't compete with the NFL for ratings, so with that in mind, its smartest for them to just try and continue putting out quality TV and not worry about them.


----------



## markedfordeath

i hope they keep with them....or move Raw to Tuesdays.


----------



## validreasoning

comparing wwe with nfl is really silly. raw has never beat a single nfl regular season game on monday night even during the peak of the attitude era. the nfl gets billions pumped into it each year, its all over espn, newspapers, sponsors flock to it like moths to a flame whereas sponsors were running away from wwe as fast as they could during the attitude era

the nfls deal with espn for 15 games a season (no playoffs, no superbowl) is worth $2 billion a year http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/09/s...xtends-deal-with-nfl-for-15-billion.html?_r=0 

wwes deal with usa for 52 episodes of raw is worth $35 million a year


----------



## funnyfaces1

markedfordeath said:


> i hope they keep with them....or move Raw to Tuesdays.


Keep on dreaming. The star of the worst NFL team is a bigger draw than Lesnar or The Rock.


----------



## VGooBUG

The problem with raw right now in the ratings is that 1 or 2 segments draw great, and the rest draw hooorrribly. They used to be able to draw better with their undercard feuds in 2012 but the WWE pretty much tells us those feuds are meaningless. They gotta be careful because when mnf is here in about a week, it doesnt take breaks for you. And the 1 or 2 segments that usually make or break the ratings average will be down a lot because of football. in the coming weeks they will have to deal with the Eagles vs REdskins, and houston and san diego. All over raw, hope they are ready for some bad ratings


----------



## krai999

KO Bossy said:


> Ain't that the truth.


only in america


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



KO Bossy said:


> Was Bryan wrestling himself? Because I'd think that increase can be attributed to him AND all 3 Shield members. I somehow don't think the gain would have been that good if he was wrestling Khali or Fandango.


From a strictly logical standpoint I'd say you were right had it not been for those ratings gains a few weeks ago when Bryan was fighting Cesaro. Cesaro is about as over as a lead balloon and that match with Bryan did great ratings and actually kept gaining throughout the match. Could just be an anomaly but right now we don't know either way. And yes I realize the quality of the match with Cesaro played a factor and that Bryan couldn't get that good of a match out of Khali but he could out of Fandango.


----------



## validreasoning

VGooBUG said:


> The problem with raw right now in the ratings is that 1 or 2 segments draw great, and the rest draw hooorrribly.


actually you have it wrong, everything draws pretty much consistent right now, the shows draw 3.5-4 million during football season, 4-4.5 million between april and august and 4.5-5 million during mania season, its consistent outside some small spikes

nobody and i add in rock, lesnar whoever in there draws great right now and nobody is doing horribly. if you go back and look through nitro and raws numbers during the wars there were huge varations, there was still huge variations in late 2001/2002 in raw numbers from hour 1 to hour 2, hour 1 might draw a 3.5 rating while hour 2 would do a 5.5. golberg in 1998 could move a rating a full point or more back in the day every time he appeared on camera, nobody is doing that as it stands today


----------



## Happenstan

I know it's Smackdown but... dat ratings GOAT. :yes


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Happenstan said:


> I know it's Smackdown but... dat ratings GOAT. :yes


DAT BARRETT BARRAGE!

#goodnewsbarrett


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

> WWE star Daniel Bryan continues to ride a wave of drawing audiences before and after Summerslam. Bryan's steel cage main event against Wade Barrett on WWE Smackdown last Friday, August 23 scored one of the highest ratings of the past three months.


Dat GOAT. Even drawing on Friday nights..

:damn


----------



## Kenny

:bryan1 :bryan2 :yes: GOAT


----------



## THANOS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> WWE star Daniel Bryan continues to ride a wave of drawing audiences before and after Summerslam. Bryan's steel cage main event against Wade Barrett on WWE Smackdown last Friday, August 23 scored one of the highest ratings of the past three months.
> 
> 
> 
> Dat GOAT. Even drawing on Friday nights..
> 
> :damn
Click to expand...











How in the blue hell is this happening? :vince4

Has Barrett ever had segments outside of his Nexus ones with Cena that drew THAT much? If a random cage match with Bryan draws like that, is it an improper assertion to attribute it mostly to Bryan?


----------



## markedfordeath

Bryan draws, not like the WWE cares...its funny, they have him pin Cena cleanly, then have Cena pass the torch so to speak, then put Bryan in a huge storyline, and after today we find out that there was no plan to give him a championship reign......go figure!! just totally ruins it......


----------



## Londrick

The Nielsen boxes if Bryan and Henry team up to take on the Corporation:










Good to see GOAT doing so well and even owning SD.


----------



## THANOS

markedfordeath said:


> Bryan draws, not like the WWE cares...its funny, they have him pin Cena cleanly, then have Cena pass the torch so to speak, then put Bryan in a huge storyline, and after today we find out that there was no plan to give him a championship reign......go figure!! just totally ruins it......


Where did you read this? I read something on lordsofpain where they said the Bryan/Orton program is supposed to run into January, which could mean a lot of things, but I haven't seen anything saying WWE doesn't intend to give Bryan the title?


----------



## markedfordeath

i just read a report right now where it said that their feud ends at Hell in a Cell and that Orton is supposed to stay in the title picture until January and the Cena and Sheamus are coming back at the Rumble....where does Bryan fit in that scenario? a total joke!


----------



## VGooBUG

validreasoning said:


> actually you have it wrong, everything draws pretty much consistent right now, the shows draw 3.5-4 million during football season, *4-4.5 million between april and august* and 4.5-5 million during mania season, its consistent outside some small spikes
> 
> nobody and i add in rock, lesnar whoever in there draws great right now and nobody is doing horribly. if you go back and look through nitro and raws numbers during the wars there were huge varations, there was still huge variations in late 2001/2002 in raw numbers from hour 1 to hour 2, hour 1 might draw a 3.5 rating while hour 2 would do a 5.5. golberg in 1998 could move a rating a full point or more back in the day every time he appeared on camera, nobody is doing that as it stands today


um... i think you mean 3.8 to 4.2, they havent even hit 4.5 million once yet in the summer for a single raw. 

And the difference is well for they dont even hit a 3.5 for an hour anymore, just maybe for one segment. And thats the problem, its not an hour its just a segment. 

Expect lower ratings this year for football, under 3.5 million viewers because last episode drew about 4.1 million viewers. Last year on the same time frame, 4.5 million. They will drop, whether I think the product is good or not.


----------



## Choke2Death

markedfordeath said:


> i just read a report right now where it said that their feud ends at Hell in a Cell and that Orton is supposed to stay in the title picture until January and the Cena and Sheamus are coming back at the Rumble....where does Bryan fit in that scenario? a total joke!


They didn't say the feud ends at HIAC, just that it will continue up until that point at the very least.


----------



## markedfordeath

I hate reading all of these reports, they keep changing, but that one I just read sucked.....I want it to stay Orton/Bryan, not have Sheamus or Cena come back and ruin it....Sheamus? really? he has no fans.....how can he be a main eventer?


----------



## THANOS

markedfordeath said:


> i just read a report right now where it said that their feud ends at Hell in a Cell and that Orton is supposed to stay in the title picture until January and the Cena and Sheamus are coming back at the Rumble....where does Bryan fit in that scenario? a total joke!


Well Bryan could finally beat Orton at Hell in a Cell, giving Orton a nice reign to re-establish his credibility as the top heel. This also, allows for Bryan to get a hard fought victory where he finally goes over the system, and then can defend the title successfully against Orton at TLC and the Rumble. I figure Survivor Series will see them in a traditional elimination stable match, where Orton will end up as the sole survivor because one of Bryan's team members will turn heel and screw Bryan (Either The Miz or Big Show). After that, Triple H can enter the Rumble at 30 since he's the COO, and have some Corporation goons (preferably people OTHER THAN the Shield) eliminate the other people in the ring as well as themselves to give HHH the win. This sets up Bryan/HHH for the title at Mania quite nicely, and Orton can work opposite Sheamus at Mania.

I would say this is a pretty likely scenario.



Choke2Death said:


> They didn't say the feud ends at HIAC, just that it will continue up until that point at the very least.


This.


----------



## markedfordeath

i hope that this is Orton's last reign forever, because its time for the future to start breaking through, the same people winning all the time just gets old.


----------



## Choke2Death

markedfordeath said:


> i hope that this is Orton's last reign forever, because its time for the future to start breaking through, the same people winning all the time just gets old.


LOL, this is his first reign since 2010 with the WWE Championship and first championship reign in two years.


----------



## NearFall

markedfordeath said:


> i hope that this is Orton's last reign forever, because its time for the future to start breaking through, the same people winning all the time just gets old.


But this whole storyline is to bring in another major main-eventer(to Cena/Orton/Punk level of booking) in the form of Daniel Bryan.


----------



## markedfordeath

you can defend Orton not having the title since 2010 all you want, he's had it 10 times though..there's no defending that he's had his run in the company..time to put young guys over now...instead, he keeps beating everyone.


----------



## birthday_massacre

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Dat GOAT. Even drawing on Friday nights..
> 
> :damn


If this doesnt show the WWE that Daniel Bryan can be the face (or in his case the beard) then nothing will.

Not sure what more guy has to do, yet a ratings killer like Del Rio is still the WHC. IF you dont want DB as WWE champion fine but he should def at least be WHC over that loser Del Rio


----------



## markedfordeath

we'll never figure it out...if Orton, Triple H, or Vince have any beef with anyone, their career is dead no matter how over they are with the fans...DB has Cena backing him though, which helps.


----------



## THANOS

Choke2Death said:


> LOL, this is his first reign since 2010 with the WWE Championship and first championship reign in two years.


I agree with this. Orton hasn't really held the WWE title in a long time, and after Smackdown I've actually changed my stance a bit on Orton's placement as the Corporate Champ. I was thoroughly entertained by the beatdown and spray paint segment, and it reminded me of his feud with Foley which was incredible and what made me really like Orton. If he continues to turn in work like that he'll have my interest and I may even become a big fan of his again. 

:clap


----------



## markedfordeath

yeah he is a good heel. i'll give him that...but he's so favorable with management, that all he has to do is say "I like having this belt over my shoulder, so I think I'll beat Bryan and walk out the victor in this feud " and management will oblige...that's how much stroke he has....even if it hurts the storyline.


----------



## Choke2Death

markedfordeath said:


> you can defend Orton not having the title since 2010 all you want, he's had it 10 times though..there's no defending that he's had his run in the company..time to put young guys over now...instead, he keeps beating everyone.


Except he's still pretty young and has several years to go. So yeah, it makes perfect sense to have him win titles and be kept around main event level. He's also done enough to put over newer guys in the past two years and it's time they reward him by actually putting him in something relevant for a change.

And how is he gonna put anyone over if you have an issue with him winning matches? If he jobs some more, he'll become another Jericho. When he wins frequently, the person who defeats him gets put over huge. See Mark Henry in 2011.


----------



## NearFall

markedfordeath said:


> you can defend Orton not having the title since 2010 all you want, he's had it 10 times though..there's no defending that he's had his run in the company..time to put young guys over now...instead, he keeps beating everyone.


From late 2011 onwards he's been putting over lots of people. Nearly all of 2012 he was putting over people. Many of these being 100% clean/decisive (ADR/Barrett/Punk/Bryan/Ziggler/Shield are examples)


----------



## GillbergReturns

markedfordeath said:


> you can defend Orton not having the title since 2010 all you want, he's had it 10 times though..there's no defending that he's had his run in the company..time to put young guys over now...instead, he keeps beating everyone.


He's traded victories with Ziggler, Del Rio, Barrett and just put over Henry entirely. Christian is the last wrestler he went over. No, he hasn't kept beating everyone.

People need to understand how wrestling works. A victory over Jericho is worthless because that's all he does.


----------



## markedfordeath

but when you mess up in the ring against him you get fired.....Mr. Kennedy for instance....and Justin Gabriel messed up the 450 and landed on Orton once....now he's a forever jobber....i'm just saying, too much politicking....but then again its not just him its everyone.....i'm enjoying this feud....but I fear most of the storyline is based upon real life...I strongly believe that that Triple H promo on Smackdown last night was not kayfabe..he truly thinks Ziggler is too small and that Orton is what they want.


----------



## THANOS

markedfordeath said:


> but when you mess up in the ring against him you get fired.....Mr. Kennedy for instance....and Justin Gabriel messed up the 450 and landed on Orton once....now he's a forever jobber....i'm just saying, too much politicking....but then again its not just him its everyone.....i'm enjoying this feud....but I fear most of the storyline is based upon real life...I strongly believe that that Triple H promo on Smackdown last night was not kayfabe..he truly thinks Ziggler is too small and that Orton is what they want.


Well to be fair, Mr. Kennedy was extremely dangerous in the ring and injured almost every wrestler he was in the ring with so I take that more as a culmination of fuck ups leading to his release. Justin Gabriel probably wouldn't have gotten that far due to his stagnant character as well, so I don't see that as Orton getting him de-pushed. The only person that Orton really killed, momentum wise, was Kofi Kingston who was insanely over with the crowd before making one minor mistake in a match with Orton and getting his push completely stalled.


----------



## markedfordeath

Kofi couldn't have been champion though, so that one would have worked out the same way.


----------



## Choke2Death

markedfordeath said:


> but when you mess up in the ring against him you get fired.....Mr. Kennedy for instance....and Justin Gabriel messed up the 450 and landed on Orton once....now he's a forever jobber....i'm just saying, too much politicking....but then again its not just him its everyone.....i'm enjoying this feud....but I fear most of the storyline is based upon real life...*I strongly believe that that Triple H promo on Smackdown last night was not kayfabe..he truly thinks Ziggler is too small and that Orton is what they want.*


Kennedy was atrocious in the ring, so it was a good riddance. Not to mention, WWE kept giving him chance after chance and he always got injured in the peak of his push or that one time in 2007, he got suspended. He was cursed.

And really, Justin Gabriel? Because he was actually gonna amount to anything more than a jobber? LOL, stop grasping at straws.

If the bold part is true, then good. Ziggler should stay a midcarder because that's where he belongs while Orton is a true main event star.


----------



## markedfordeath

doesn't change the fact that Bryan winning the title is a good thing for the company...it'll bring people in, crowds love him, he's making the company money, he should get a fair shot too.


----------



## Choke2Death

markedfordeath said:


> doesn't change the fact that Bryan winning the title is a good thing for the company...it'll bring people in, crowds love him, he's making the company money, he should get a fair shot too.


And who said he wont? It seems like you're whining non-stop just for the hell of it. We're only two weeks into the storyline.


----------



## Jammy

markedfordeath said:


> doesn't change the fact that Bryan winning the title is a good thing for the company...it'll bring people in, crowds love him, he's making the company money, he should get a fair shot too.


Somebody's getting worked. Heel HHH is just the fucking GOAT.


----------



## markedfordeath

its a legit complaint, I know they're only two weeks into it..but the reports mentioned Orton and Bryan probably ending at Hell in a Cell..and if that feud is done and Orton is in the title picture until January, then that means either their feud doesn't end or he feuds with someone else....


----------



## Da Silva

There are obviously going to be more screwjobs, and Survivor series is likely to be a multi-man match. So it wouldn't be too difficult to keep the storyline going with Bryan as the challenger and Orton as the champion, because Orton won't be defending the championship too often - faces are fighting champions, heels do everything they can to never put on the line, and everything in their power to keep it on those occasions.


----------



## KO Bossy

Jammy said:


> Somebody's getting worked. Heel HHH is just the fucking GOAT.


That he is.


----------



## markedfordeath

if Vince really does end up turning face one of these times, that would actually be kind of funny..I mean just imagine, he can go on a mini power trip and book the Shield against Orton in a handicap match, and tells them they have to wrestle in order to keep their jobs and he out ranks Triple H so they'd have to or get fired.....and He could have Bryan be GM for a night of Raw and he can make their lives hell for a night..oh the options of this storyline. that's if Vince ever turns face.


----------



## KO Bossy

markedfordeath said:


> if Vince really does end up turning face one of these times, that would actually be kind of funny..I mean just imagine, he can go on a mini power trip and book the Shield against Orton in a handicap match, and tells them they have to wrestle in order to keep their jobs and he out ranks Triple H so they'd have to or get fired.....and He could have Bryan be GM for a night of Raw and he can make their lives hell for a night..oh the options of this storyline. that's if Vince ever turns face.


Yeah, but what sense would that make?


----------



## markedfordeath

uhhh, if he turns face and goes against the machine....i think what i said makes perfect sense.....you're just trying to start an argument.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THANOS said:


> How in the blue hell is this happening? :vince4
> 
> Has Barrett ever had segments outside of his Nexus ones with Cena that drew THAT much? If a random cage match with Bryan draws like that, is it an improper assertion to attribute it mostly to Bryan?


I honestly don't know, man. I'm an admitted Bryan (have been far before he signed with WWE), and I never saw this happening. At least not to this degree. Drawing anything better than decent on Friday night? Against a non-main eventer? 

Insane.


----------



## Jammy

Angles are bigger draws, this angle is drawing and Bryan is a part of it, a big part of it, but still, just one part of it.


----------



## KO Bossy

markedfordeath said:


> uhhh, if he turns face and goes against the machine....i think what i said makes perfect sense.....you're just trying to start an argument.


:lmao

No, it wouldn't make any sense. At all. Vince has been against Bryan since Cena chose him to compete at Summerslam. And the night after Summerslam, Vince was in the ring to congratulate Orton for being the new face of the company and Triple H for making the decision he wanted. The decision that, as Vince said, was best for business. Now you're talking about him turning face and being on Bryan's side? That is 100% a Russo swerve. Turning alignments just because, with no rhyme or reason.

But no, keep thinking that just because I'm trying to talk sense and not agreeing with your ideas that that means I'm trying to start an argument. :lol


@ShowStopper Hey man, its clearly because Wade Barrett is bringing in dem ratings. 

Clearly the fans want to see this, so they're tuning in. Good for Bryan for being a character they can get into and good for the WWE for going with what the fans want.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KO Bossy said:


> @ShowStopper Hey man, its clearly because Wade Barrett is bringing in dem ratings.
> 
> Clearly the fans want to see this, so they're tuning in. Good for Bryan for being a character they can get into and good for the WWE for going with what the fans want.


Agree, man. So far, so good. Just keep it entertaining and logical (at least for the most part logical, there are always some things here and there that don't make sense, even in the best angles), and I'll be happy. That's what matters most (that it's entertaining).


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Damn, good for Bryan. Won't give him all the credit, as this is a huge angle that practically involves the entire roster, but majority should obviously go to him, especially for that Smackdown rating. His push is working for them thus far. Going from a show-low 2.6 to what he's been pulling with the Corporation these last two weeks mostly leads me to believe that such a huge angle is the main drive between a lot of fans tuning in to see Bryan. But like I said, it's working.

I'll be going to the RAW in Toronto next Monday. Hell, even I will be :yes 'ing


----------



## markedfordeath

you do know that this whole thing is about the dissention with the McMahon's later on right? Vince is turning face! The writing is on the wall, having the roster cringe in fear, Vince is going to end up having a problem with how things are being run....it looks obvious to me.


----------



## KO Bossy

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Damn, good for Bryan. Won't give him all the credit, as this is a huge angle that practically involves the entire roster, but majority should obviously go to him, especially for that Smackdown rating. His push is working for them thus far. Going from a show-low 2.6 to what he's been pulling with the Corporation these last two weeks mostly leads me to believe that such a huge angle is the main drive between a lot of fans tuning in to see Bryan. But like I said, it's working.
> 
> I'll be going to the RAW in Toronto next Monday. Hell, even I will be :yes 'ing


How much did those tickets set you back? And are they holding it at the ACC?



markedfordeath said:


> you do know that this whole thing is about the dissention with the McMahon's later on right? Vince is turning face! The writing is on the wall, having the roster cringe in fear, Vince is going to end up having a problem with how things are being run....it looks obvious to me.


Well stupid me. Here I was thinking the whole idea of it was to elevate Bryan to be the next big time main eventer. But in reality, its about the McMahons. How didn't I see it?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Damn, good for Bryan. Won't give him all the credit, as this is a huge angle that practically involves the entire roster, but majority should obviously go to him, especially for that Smackdown rating. His push is working for them thus far. Going from a show-low 2.6 to what he's been pulling with the Corporation these last two weeks mostly leads me to believe that such a huge angle is the main drive between a lot of fans tuning in to see Bryan. But like I said, it's working.
> 
> I'll be going to the RAW in Toronto next Monday. Hell, even I will be :yes 'ing


That's awesome. You're lucky you're going to be there. I haven't been to a WWE event since No Way Out 2012 in NJ. That was the Punk/Bryan/Kane triple threat for the title. Best match of the night. unk :bryan


----------



## markedfordeath

after today I don't believe at all that they're elevating anyone but themselves....if Orton is really keeping the title until past the new year, then they're just waiting for Cena to come back....so my faith in this damn company is gone now...poor Bryan, probably has no idea.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

KO Bossy said:


> How much did those tickets set you back? And are they holding it at the ACC?


Yeah, they're holding it at the ACC. It's been a while since WWE TV has been here so I thought I might as well go. Ticketmaster I believe is all out of tickets other than the balcony seats, but there are a few good tickets left on stubhub, which is where I bought mine. Cost me about $80 for section 118. Not too bad I reckon.

@Showstopper Thanks.  I haven't been since Unforgiven in 06. That was also the last time they had a PPV here, which boggles my mind a lot of the time. But whatever, the crowd is going to be as fun as always. Probably going to make the show for me, tbh. 

I'm hoping the crowd keeps me entertained enough to sit through the whole lot of filler that happens during RAW. It's also going to be interesting seeing my girlfriend's thoughts, who's about as casual of a wrestling fan you can find.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> @Showstopper Thanks.  I haven't been since Unforgiven in 06. That was also the last time they had a PPV here, which boggles my mind a lot of the time. But whatever, the crowd is going to be as fun as always. Probably going to make the show for me, tbh.
> 
> I'm hoping the crowd keeps me entertained enough to sit through the whole lot of filler that happens during RAW. It's also going to be interesting seeing my girlfriend's thoughts, who's about as casual of a wrestling fan you can find.


Yeah, that is insane that they don't go to Toronto alot more often. Toronto has always been a great wrestling crowd. They should go alot more often. Maybe this is the start of them going to Toronto more.

Yeah, I hear you on the girlfriend thing. I went with my wife and another friend of mine and his girlfriend, to No Way Out 2012. My wife is also a casual fan at best. If she wasn't with me, she probably wouldn't care about wrestling at all. But she knows I like it (although, I'm really not into as much as I once was) and will sit with me and watch it from time to time. She enjoyed herself at No Way Out for the most part.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Yeah, that is insane that they don't go to Toronto alot more often. Toronto has always been a great wrestling crowd. They should go alot more often. Maybe this is the start of them going to Toronto more.
> 
> Yeah, I hear you on the girlfriend thing. I went with my wife and another friend of mine and his girlfriend, to No Way Out 2012. My wife is also a casual fan at best. If she wasn't with me, she probably wouldn't care about wrestling at all. But she knows I like it (although, I'm really not into as much as I once was) and will sit with me and watch it from time to time. She enjoyed herself at No Way Out for the most part.


Haha, I think the last time she watched any wrestling with me was back when Cena and Punk had their match on RAW earlier this year. Pretty sure she was on her phone most of the time. She enjoyed it still and got into a lot of the nearfalls, but she was so confused as to why I completely marked out when the piledriver happened. :lol

The shows always sell out too, so there must be something stopping them from coming here more often. Don't mind that much though, like you, I'm not as into the product as I once was obviously.


----------



## Happenstan

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I'll be going to the RAW in Toronto next Monday. Hell, even I will be :yes 'ing


If the Toronto crowd shits the bed we're blaming you. 




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> The shows always sell out too, so there must be something stopping them from coming here more often. Don't mind that much though, like you, I'm not as into the product as I once was obviously.


Hmmm. Must cost more to run a show there in some way. Maybe the building costs more to rent or something like that.


----------



## dxbender

Happenstan said:


> If the Toronto crowd shits the bed we're blaming you.


If Toronto crowd sucks...blame the suits(anyone who knows the Leafs should get that explanation)


If you're not from Toronto and want an explanation.......

Basically Leaf games are so expensive, the people who can regularly afford the lower bowl seats, are business people who work downtown. And they use those seats more for business meetings and stuff than actually watching the game. They get to games late, and don't cheer(or boo).


----------



## KO Bossy

dxbender said:


> If Toronto crowd sucks...blame the suits(anyone who knows the Leafs should get that explanation)
> 
> 
> If you're not from Toronto and want an explanation.......
> 
> Basically Leaf games are so expensive, the people who can regularly afford the lower bowl seats, are business people who work downtown. And they use those seats more for business meetings and stuff than actually watching the game. They get to games late, and don't cheer(or boo).


Or give the tickets away as part of business deals, whether it be Reds, Golds or private boxes. Its almost like its more of an indication of status than anything else. "Check out these great seats I can afford."

Then again, those seats ARE really expensive. The Leafs know that no matter how shitty the team does, we Torontonians will pay any price because we love our hockey. I myself prefer the seats higher up in the greens preferably, or maybe the purples, just because from up there, you can see a lot more of the ice and therefore, the overall action.


----------



## PGSucks

I'm expecting the RAW in Toronto to have an awesome crowd. Next week in Iowa will most likely be killed by the awful crowd fpalm


----------



## markedfordeath

yeah, why are crowds so dull? whenever I go to a sporting event I'm constantly cheering and get into it and start chants....its live tv, you'll never be on tv again, go crazy folks.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

God damn, that Toronto crowd is going to be rowdy as fuck. I hope they even give Christian some decent material on that show, doubtful, I know.


----------



## RatedR10

I am extremely jealous of anyone going to Raw in Toronto, mainly because I was on vacation when tickets went on a sale and I couldn't count on my cousin to get tickets. He wouldn't even buy 100 section tickets. I mean... it's Raw in fucking Toronto. You just buy them, regardless.


----------



## dxbender

RatedR10 said:


> I am extremely jealous of anyone going to Raw in Toronto, mainly because I was on vacation when tickets went on a sale and I couldn't count on my cousin to get tickets. He wouldn't even buy 100 section tickets. I mean... it's Raw in fucking Toronto. You just buy them, regardless.


I wanna go to it too, but the only people I know who'd be able to go, are ones who wake up at like 4am for work, so going to Raw and not getting home until like midnight, won't be the best thing.


----------



## THANOS

dxbender said:


> I wanna go to it too, but the only people I know who'd be able to go, are ones who wake up at like 4am for work, so going to Raw and not getting home until like midnight, won't be the best thing.


I'm probably going to go and will buy tickets in a couple days. It just sucks that I only found out about it a week ago, so all the available tickets are like 300 level .


----------



## PGSucks

I find WWE events fun even if my seats suck. The only good seats I've ever had were SummerSlam this year, so I'm no stranger to nosebleeds or limited view seats


----------



## THANOS

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Damn, good for Bryan. Won't give him all the credit, as this is a huge angle that practically involves the entire roster, but majority should obviously go to him, especially for that Smackdown rating. His push is working for them thus far. Going from a show-low 2.6 to what he's been pulling with the Corporation these last two weeks mostly leads me to believe that such a huge angle is the main drive between a lot of fans tuning in to see Bryan. But like I said, it's working.
> 
> I'll be going to the RAW in Toronto next Monday. Hell, even I will be :yes 'ing


Good post. :clap

Where are you sitting on the 12th? I haven't got tickets yet but was planning on getting a couple in the next few days.


----------



## RatedR10

dxbender said:


> I wanna go to it too, but the only people I know who'd be able to go, are ones who wake up at like 4am for work, so going to Raw and not getting home until like midnight, won't be the best thing.


My cousins and I were planning on making a four hour drive from Ottawa, grab a bite to eat in Toronto and then go to the show and then drive back all in the same night. He was giving up seats in the 100s for 15 minutes, refreshing ticketmaster. Then he bought ringside Smackdown tickets. I mean, ringside is cool and all, but seats in 100s for a Toronto Raw, especially in the midst of this storyline is 100000x better. Ottawa crowds suck.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Meltzer Said that the Bryan vs Seth Rollins match gained 50,000 viewers and the post match stuff gained about another million.


----------



## Starbuck

TakeMyGun said:


> Meltzer Said that the Bryan vs Seth Rollins match gained 50,000 viewers and the post match stuff gained about another million.


Well that changes things. 50,000? FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!


----------



## markedfordeath

Bryan bringing in those ratings still LOL love it!


----------



## KO Bossy

TakeMyGun said:


> Meltzer Said that the Bryan vs Seth Rollins match gained 50,000 viewers and the post match stuff gained about another million.


Got some proof? I'd love to see/hear it.

The plot most definitely thickens.


----------



## THANOS

KO Bossy said:


> Got some proof? I'd love to see/hear it.
> 
> The plot most definitely thickens.


Here you are.

http://www.putlocker.com/file/78958F24F96E3043

38:56 onward is the RAW breakdown from Meltzer and Alvarez.

And then there's this.



> *WWE star Daniel Bryan continues to ride a wave of drawing audiences before and after Summerslam. Bryan's steel cage main event against Wade Barrett on WWE Smackdown last Friday, August 23 scored one of the highest ratings of the past three months.
> 
> In the key male demographic of males 18-49, the Bryan vs. Barrett cage match in Q8 scored a 1.21 rating. It was the highest rating of the show and highest since a 1.42 rating for Randy Orton vs. Christian vs. Rob Van Dam in a three-way #1 contender match on the August 2 Smackdown.*
> 
> *Outside of the three-way #1 contender match, Bryan vs. Barrett was the highest-rated main event since we began tracking the m18-49 quarter-hour ratings in May.*
> 
> The other segment that performed well was World Hvt. champion Alberto Del Rio vs. Christian in a non-title Summerslam re-match. Del Rio vs. Christian was positioned at the top of the second hour, which generated a 1.06 rating in Q5 and 1.11 rating in Q6.
> 
> Smackdown Audience Flow Males 18-49
> 
> - Q1: Smackdown started slow with a 0.80 rating for Vickie Guerrero, Daniel Bryan, and Randy Orton setting up events later in the show.
> 
> - Q2: Smackdown was essentially flat with a 0.79 rating for backstage segments and the first-half of Curtis Axel vs. Cody Rhodes.
> 
> - Q3: Smackdown increased to a 0.86 rating for the end of Axel vs. Rhodes.
> 
> - Q4: Smackdown stayed at a 0.86 rating for Dolph Ziggler vs. Big E. Langston.
> 
> - Q5: Smackdown jumped to a 1.06 rating for the first-half of Del Rio vs. Christian. Included was peak viewership of 776,000 viewers at 9:07 p.m.
> 
> - Q6: Smackdown increased to a 1.11 rating for the finish of Del Rio vs. Christian. The segment contained several minutes at or above 700,000 viewers, reflecting a consistent audience.
> 
> - Q7: Smackdown "came down" to a 1.05 rating for Darren Young vs. Antonio Cesaro, plus two commercial breaks affecting the rating.
> *
> - Q8: Smackdown finished strong with a 1.21 rating for Bryan vs. Barrett, plus Randy Orton's post-match attack.
> 
> Included was peak viewership of the show in the final few minutes of Q8, highlighted by 900,000 m18-49 viewers at 9:58 p.m. *
> 
> source: pwtorch


I'll leave this here, so everyone can make their own assertions about it, but to my knowledge Wade Barrett hasn't done that well in random matches, and hasn't been a drawing force since his Nexus feud, but I could be wrong?


----------



## KO Bossy

So then I was right. Everyone deserved credit for making that segment. However, if its true that the actual gauntlet itself drew meagerly, but the post match stuff was what boosted the numbers up so high, it might even say that Triple H and Orton are way bigger draws in the angle than we thought.

Again, just going by what Meltzer is saying. Dunno if its the case or not.


----------



## markedfordeath

actually he gave credit to the gauntlet match gaining as well, he mainly was concerned about how Orton can't draw an audience when he wrestles..


----------



## Starbuck

When the hell did we start getting breakdowns like this for Smackdown?

And the post match is what gained a million plus? I think we all know who is responsible for that...

:HHH2


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

That Bryan stuff about 50,000 was a lie, just wanted to see how people would react and if they would attribute it all to HHH. The full breakdown hasn't been released yet.


----------



## Bryan D.

Starbuck said:


> When the hell did we start getting breakdowns like this for Smackdown?
> 
> And the post match is what gained a million plus? I think we all know who is responsible for that...
> 
> :HHH2


DAT THE GAME is a solid A+ 

:HHH2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TakeMyGun said:


> That Bryan stuff about 50,000 was a lie, just wanted to see how people would react and if they would attribute it all to HHH. The full breakdown hasn't been released yet.


:lmao


----------



## checkcola

TakeMyGun said:


> That Bryan stuff about 50,000 was a lie, just wanted to see how people would react and if they would attribute it all to HHH. The full breakdown hasn't been released yet.


:lmao


----------



## markedfordeath

i figured as much....if Bryan/Cesaro gained more than 100,000 then Bryan/Rollins would have gained about the same or even more...so the 50,000 had to be a lie.


----------



## THANOS

TakeMyGun said:


> That Bryan stuff about 50,000 was a lie, just wanted to see how people would react and if they would attribute it all to HHH. The full breakdown hasn't been released yet.


:lol Well I can't say it wasn't believable because it certainly is but I would think the Bryan/Rollins match would have gained quie a few viewers based on the ratings for Bryan's last gauntlet match. Does anyone know how much the Bryan/Rollins match went into the overrun?


----------



## krai999

KO Bossy said:


> So then I was right. Everyone deserved credit for making that segment. However, if its true that the actual gauntlet itself drew meagerly, but the post match stuff was what boosted the numbers up so high, it might even say that Triple H and *Orton* are way bigger draws in the angle than we thought.
> 
> Again, just going by what Meltzer is saying. Dunno if its the case or not.


yeaahhh about that guess you didn't listen to the podcast did you? It's the angle that draws. everybody's contributes to this


----------



## markedfordeath

a lot probably...the overrun for tomorrow night will probably be even more simply because I bet there will be someone helping this time around.


----------



## RatedR10

TakeMyGun said:


> That Bryan stuff about 50,000 was a lie, just wanted to see how people would react and if they would attribute it all to HHH. The full breakdown hasn't been released yet.


:lmao good work, man.


----------



## KO Bossy

krai999 said:


> yeaahhh about that guess you didn't listen to the podcast did you? It's the angle that draws. everybody's contributes to this


Yeah I did listen to it. And I already said its the angle that draws and that everyone contributes to it. Showstopper and I already had this talk.


----------



## Starbuck

TakeMyGun said:


> That Bryan stuff about 50,000 was a lie, just wanted to see how people would react and if they would attribute it all to HHH. The full breakdown hasn't been released yet.


:jordan


----------



## NearFall

TakeMyGun said:


> That Bryan stuff about 50,000 was a lie, just wanted to see how people would react and if they would attribute it all to HHH. The full breakdown hasn't been released yet.


----------



## NiKKi_SEGA




----------



## D.M.N.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2013/09/02/labor-day-holiday-ratings-delays-2/200344/

No Raw ratings until Wednesday due to holiday. Not expecting a high rating, and wouldn't be surprised to see sub 4m average.


----------



## The Absolute

How big of a hit do you think the ratings will take next week when Monday Night Football returns?


----------



## Happenstan

The Absolute said:


> How big of a hit do you think the ratings will take next week when Monday Night Football returns?


After tonight's "show"....wow.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The Absolute said:


> How big of a hit do you think the ratings will take next week when Monday Night Football returns?


2.0's EVERYWHERE! :HHH


----------



## markedfordeath

they really fucked over the viewers tonight....next week they'll assume the beat down will happen again and they won't tune in....and watch football instead....Cody Rhodes should have come out since he's already fired and gotten revenge for Bryan...missed opportunity.


----------



## mblonde09

We ever going to get an Observer breakdown for last week's show?


----------



## RKO 4life

Randy Orton the insurance for great ratings.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> Social media score of 276,428, disappointingly a drop of 100k on last week. There were a few more trends than pre-SummerSlam though so I'm hopeful the average will be the right side of 4 million.


260,320 last night. An interesting trend year-on-year though:

20/08 - 4,298,000 (down 180,000 y-o-y)
27/08 - 4,190,000 (down 292,000 y-o-y)

If last night's episode was down about 230,000 viewers, then expect an average of about *3,973,000* - hopefully not though.

Another note is that last year, Raw's ratings dropped every week from September 3rd to October 1st - five consecutive drops from 4,203,000 to 3,502,000. Again, hopefully that doesn't happen this year, with better storylines on the whole this morning.

Not sure how the main event will do with Big Show. When in big angles in the past, he has done unusually well.


----------



## Happenstan

RKO 4life said:


> *Lately* Randy Orton *is* the *vaccine* for great ratings.


Fixed.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: Official CHECK OUT THE RATINGS Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> 260,320 last night. An interesting trend year-on-year though:
> 
> 20/08 - 4,298,000 (down 180,000 y-o-y)
> 27/08 - 4,190,000 (down 292,000 y-o-y)
> 
> If last night's episode was down about 230,000 viewers, then expect an average of about *3,973,000* - hopefully not though.
> 
> Another note is that last year, Raw's ratings dropped every week from September 3rd to October 1st - five consecutive drops from 4,203,000 to 3,502,000. Again, hopefully that doesn't happen this year, with better storylines on the whole this morning.
> 
> Not sure how the main event will do with Big Show. When in big angles in the past, he has done unusually well.


The main event with Big Show will likely do even better than Bryan's match with Rollins did, and the overrun should do even better as well. I'm expecting Orton's match with Cody to do very well also because of the added interest stemming from Cody career being in jeopardy. I see this as WWE fixing their mistake from last week with Orton's match with Christian, since that was a random segment with no stakes, and this week Orton's match was spotlighted like the WWE Champion's match always should be. It'll be interesting to see how Punk does this week in his random promo segment by himself, but I expect he'll do ok, but maybe not as well as last week's post match beatdown segment with Heyman.


----------



## JY57

> -- Monday's WWE Raw ranked #2 in social media activity on Monday night, trailing the "Roast of James Franco" on Comedy Central.
> 
> Raw scored 260,320 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, down six percent from last week's show.
> 
> On cable TV Monday night, Raw trailed Franco's 334,100 score, but topped college football on ESPN, which scored 191,937 in third place.


via PWTorch


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Can't see the 10:00 segment from Punk doing so well this week, it was dumb to have the promo end at only 10:05. He didn't have much to work with, however he still managed to make it segment of the night. Dat GOAT.


----------



## Da Silva

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Can't see the 10:00 segment from Punk doing so well this week, it was dumb to have the promo end at only 10:05. He didn't have much to work with, however he still managed to make it segment of the night. Dat GOAT.


They don't plan the show for the benefit of quarter hours to give accurate depictions of peoples drawing power so that we can adequately use statistics in this thread. You know that right?


----------



## DOPA

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Can't see the 10:00 segment from Punk doing so well this week, it was dumb to have the promo end at only 10:05. He didn't have much to work with, however he still managed to make it segment of the night. Dat GOAT.


You're such a fucking mark and this is coming from a huge Punk fan.

Punk had a good promo but segment of the night? No. Take your head out of Punk's ass and credit other talent for once.


----------



## Da Silva

Crusade said:


> You're such a fucking mark and this is coming from a huge Punk fan.
> 
> Punk had a good promo but segment of the night? No. Take your head out of Punk's ass and credit other talent for once.


There's other talent?![/wrestlingfan35]


----------



## THANOS

Crusade said:


> You're such a fucking mark and this is coming from a huge Punk fan.
> 
> Punk had a good promo but segment of the night? No. Take your head out of Punk's ass and credit other talent for once.


Well he has the right to that opinion, but I think it would be hard pressed not to give segment of the night to either that beginning promo with HHH/Orton/Bryan or Cody Rhodes' farewell promo. Both of those were tremendous and deserve a lot of praise.


----------



## DOPA

THANOS said:


> Well he has the right to that opinion, but I think it would be hard pressed not to give segment of the night to either that beginning promo with HHH/Orton/Bryan or Cody Rhodes' farewell promo. Both of those were tremendous and deserve a lot of praise.


That's exactly my point, thank you.


----------



## Cliffy

Love how Cena's absence hasn't made a jot of difference to business.

"If Cena got injured 2moz th WWWE would go out of busines :cena3"

:ti


----------



## Jammy

Crusade said:


> You're such a fucking mark and this is coming from a huge Punk fan.
> 
> Punk had a good promo but segment of the night? No. Take your head out of Punk's ass and credit other talent for once.


Why give that dude the attention he craves?


----------



## Chrome

Cliffy Byro said:


> Love how Cena's absence hasn't made a jot of difference to business.
> 
> "If Cena got injured 2moz th WWWE would go out of busines :cena3"
> 
> :ti


Always did think Cena was a little bit overrated in the drawing department.


----------



## xD7oom

Finally people start to realize how CM Punk is *NOTHING* on the mic and the ring compared to The Rock, Stone Cold, Undertaker, etc..


----------



## Choke2Death

Da Silva said:


> CM Punk is the only wrestler in history who deserves to be labeled a "talent". [/Punkfan35]


Fixed.

I'm starting to think him and mblonde are in a battle over who can mark the hardest for their mutual god.


----------



## Da Silva

xD7oom said:


> Finally people start to realize how CM Punk is *NOTHING* on the mic and the ring compared to The Rock, Stone Cold, Undertaker, etc..


Quite an overstatement that, he did quite well with Rocky and Undertaker earlier this year.


----------



## Happenstan

Da Silva said:


> Quite an overstatement that, he did quite well with Rocky and Undertaker earlier this year.


True but neither guy is really in his prime anymore either. Attitude era Rock would have the crowd crucifying Punk. He was over more than Punk or any other current gen wrestler could hope for.


----------



## KO Bossy

xD7oom said:


> Finally people start to realize how CM Punk is *NOTHING* on the mic and the ring compared to The Rock, Stone Cold, Undertaker, etc..


Well, are we talking about Rock from 2012-2013? Because that Rock sucks ass on the mic, its all jokes, twitter shit and pandering. Punk is better than that. If its Rock from 1999...then Punk is inferior. However, Punk is definitely comparable. He wouldn't outdo them, but you can at least compare.

And wait, when did Undertaker become an all time great promo man? Did I miss a few years or something?


----------



## Eddie Ray

Choke2Death said:


> Fixed.
> 
> I'm starting to think him and mblonde are in a battle over who can mark the hardest for their mutual god.


they are trolls. kellykellyfan style trolls...

...us CM Punk fans are actually quite normal and purely just enjoy his work. I don't want to be associated with those morons.


----------



## Choke2Death

Eddie Ray said:


> they are trolls. kellykellyfan style trolls...
> 
> ...us CM Punk fans are actually quite normal and purely just enjoy his work. I don't want to be associated with those morons.


Trust me, I know. There are good CM Punk fans who I respect and they are those who can actually talk about other talent without it being constant negativity just because it happens to not be CM Punk. But they are far outweighed by the unbearable Punk marks I've come across who overrate the fuck out of him and probably think he shits gold.


----------



## KO Bossy

I as well would appreciate not being lumped in with the blind Punk marks.


----------



## DOPA

KO Bossy said:


> I as well would appreciate not being lumped in with the blind Punk marks.


This. But you already know.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Out of curiosity, for non-Punk marks (or if Punk marks want to participate as well, go ahead), who would you consider the "bad" marks and "good" marks of Punk? Curious as to if the number of bad ones as opposed to good ones is really that great, or if it just seems that way because the bad ones post more, or whatever.


----------



## Starbuck

KO Bossy said:


> I as well would appreciate not being lumped in with the blind Punk marks.


Would you prefer blind DB hater?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Crusade said:


> You're such a fucking mark and this is coming from a huge Punk fan.
> 
> Punk had a good promo but segment of the night? No. Take your head out of Punk's ass and credit other talent for once.


lol, so mad. Relax. And yeah, nothing touches his segment. Sorry I don't share the same opinion as you.

Also, Undertaker being a good mic worker? Oh man.


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> Would you prefer blind DB hater?


Nah, because I actually acknowledge when I think Bryan does something entertaining. Like last night, I thought he cut a great promo in that opening segment.

I think the only person I blindly hate is Ed Leslie. So I'm a blind Ed Leslie hater. I refuse to give that fucker credit for anything.


----------



## MaybeLock

xD7oom said:


> Finally people start to realize how CM Punk is *NOTHING* on the mic and the ring compared to The Rock, Stone Cold, *Undertaker*, etc..


Do I speak on the mic? :taker

(Yeah, I know he did as the American Badass, but still he wasn't that great on the mic).


----------



## DOPA

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> lol, so mad. Relax. And yeah, nothing touches his segment. Sorry I don't share the same opinion as you.
> 
> Also, Undertaker being a good mic worker? Oh man.


Mad? Didn't I make it clear I'm a huge fan of Punk's? Why is everyone who calls you out on your stupidity mad? Lol get a different insult.

Difference is I'm not so deluded like you that I can't see other talent. And it seems like everyone agrees with me. So sit down.


----------



## KO Bossy

MaybeLock said:


> Do I speak on the mic? :taker
> 
> (Yeah, I know he did as the American Badass, but still he wasn't that great on the mic).


Paul Bearer, on the other hand, was incredible on the stick. Thank god they paired them together.


----------



## JY57

http://adf.ly/V5O7p



> The 8/30 edition of Smackdown did 2,794,000 viewers, up nicely from last week.


up from 2,572,000 from previous week (and up from 2,400,000 the week before that)


----------



## Choke2Death

JY57 said:


> http://adf.ly/V5O7p
> 
> up from 2,572,000 from previous week (and up from 2,400,000 the week before that)


:yes

rton2 :bryan :HHH2 aaaaaaaaaaand :show (can we get a crying Show smiley?)


----------



## markedfordeath

geez, Smackdown is relevant again!


----------



## Starbuck

Smackdown almost pulling Raw Nov/Dec 2012 viewership numbers WHAT


----------



## Clique

This is what happens when you have people in charge doing what's best for business.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

How long has it been since SD viewership was that high?


----------



## Starbuck

Clique said:


> This is what happens when you have people in charge doing what's best for business.


People? Don't you mean person...

:HHH2


----------



## markedfordeath

mid April..so four and a half months..


----------



## xD7oom

Triple H's heel turn = Millions of new viewers.


----------



## JY57

The Sandrone said:


> How long has it been since SD viewership was that high?


The Rock's Return to Smackdown - 3,130,000 viewers

Rock/Punk Final Showdown for Royal Rumble - 3,030,000 viewers

Mark Henry's Return to Smackdown - 3,190,000 viewers


was the highest for Smackdowns this year. Evertyhging else was 2.5 million average (with few tapings lower than that)


----------



## Clique

Starbuck said:


> People? Don't you mean person...
> 
> :HHH2


I would like to give Ms. McMahon a bit of credit too.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

JY57 said:


> The Rock's Return to Smackdown - 3,130,000 viewers
> 
> Rock/Punk Final Showdown for Royal Rumble - 3,030,000 viewers
> 
> *Mark Henry's Return to Smackdown - 3,190,000 viewers*


:henry1 > :rock4 unk3 :HHH

I think the SD with the advertised Punk promo from July did 2.65 million, which is the only SD, if I'm not mistaken, that came within 100,000 of last week's then (though I don't have all the numbers).

Edit: My mistake. I suck at math. Well, only SD I can recall that did over 2.6 million since mid-April.


----------



## MaybeLock

JY57 said:


> The Rock's Return to Smackdown - 3,130,000 viewers
> 
> Rock/Punk Final Showdown for Royal Rumble - 3,030,000 viewers
> 
> Mark Henry's Return to Smackdown - 3,190,000 viewers
> 
> 
> was the highest for Smackdowns this year. Evertyhging else was 2.5 million average (with few tapings lower than that)


Man, I will never understand Mark Henry drawing ability, it´s freaking incredible.

:henry1


----------



## Starbuck

JY57 said:


> The Rock's Return to Smackdown - 3,130,000 viewers
> 
> Rock/Punk Final Showdown for Royal Rumble - 3,030,000 viewers
> 
> *Mark Henry's Return to Smackdown - 3,190,000 viewers*


I remember when World's Strongest Ratings was just a meme lol. 



Clique said:


> I would like to give Ms. McMahon a bit of credit too.


:lmao That face. The McMahon Helmsley's are quite the troll couple, eh? Those poor kids of theirs can probably never get a straight answer.

EDIT - And we need to get a Steph smiley added immediately.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> I remember when World's Strongest Ratings was just a meme lol.


I think WWE's scared to give Henry the WWE Title. Because ratings would go so high they'd have to declare him the GOAT and not :cena3


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> I remember when World's Strongest Ratings was just a meme lol.
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao That face. The McMahon Helmsley's are quite the troll couple, eh? Those poor kids of theirs can probably never get a straight answer.
> 
> EDIT - And we need to get a Steph smiley added immediately.


"Don't worry dad, when I find a nice boy, I'll always make sure to use protection."

"I'm not worried, honey. After they see your face, it won't even be an issue." :HHH2


----------



## markedfordeath

he just signed a three year extension..so I'm sure they promised him something.


----------



## xD7oom

I made those:


----------



## BEE

I legit LOL irl every time its proven that Henry CAN DRAW. :lmao Yet we don't actually know why he can draw. World's Strongest Phenomenon :lmao (I may have ruined the joke..)


----------



## KO Bossy

He plays dem ratings like dey was puppets.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Smackdown viewership way up from last week?

:bryan2


The feud is working guys. Plus it is good to have the WWE title program featured on Smackdown as well.


----------



## markedfordeath

how much you want a bet that this week's Smackdown ends the same way the last few shows have? lol


----------



## Loudness

Of course Henry draws. He's a Thick Man. Wide Man. Strongman.

Seems like Bryan is drawing great on SD.

Btw, a lot of people have claimed they stopped watching WWE because of Cena and it seems a portion of fans actually returned to watching WWE because he's away. Could be possible that the number of fans he draws away is bigger than the amount of fans he draws in.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Loudness said:


> Of course Henry draws. He's a Thick Man. Wide Man. Strongman.
> 
> Seems like Bryan is drawing great on SD.
> 
> Btw, a lot of people have claimed they stopped watching WWE because of Cena and it seems a portion of fans actually returned to watching WWE because he's away. Could be possible that the number of fans he draws away is bigger than the amount of fans he draws in.


This is an interesting point. Could be that Cena not being there is what's really drawing viewers back in, and the because Bryan probably has the kid-fans Cena does, they'll stick around for Bryan.


----------



## markedfordeath

every week Bryan gets beat down, it makes kids sad and think they have no chance against the bullies at school...but as soon as he gets his payback, just imagine how happy the kiddies will be that they have a chance to do the same at their schools.....it'll be epic.


----------



## MaybeLock

Loudness said:


> Btw, a lot of people have claimed they stopped watching WWE because of Cena and it seems a portion of fans actually returned to watching WWE because he's away. Could be possible that the number of fans he draws away is bigger than the amount of fans he draws in.


:vince6

This post is bad for business :HHH


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

MaybeLock said:


> :vince6
> 
> This post is bad for business :HHH


:cena5


----------



## Bryan D.

My God, Smackdown with THAT viewership. Triple H is right. This is best for business.

ALL HAIL DA KING.

:HHH2


----------



## Loudness

The Sandrone said:


> This is an interesting point. Could be that Cena not being there is what's really drawing viewers back in, and the because Bryan probably has the kid-fans Cena does, they'll stick around for Bryan.


It would be ironic if it was true, WWE has tried so hard for years to keep him with the same character "because it makes the most money". If Cenas drawing power is actually negative (more fans out than in) WWE would be smart, almost forced to turn him or create a MAJOR character overhaul because their own reasoning for keeping him stale would have been disproven. Of course, nobody can say what the actual reason for the sudden ratings increase is, but based on the ratings overview ALL Quarter Hours have increased, so the argument that one particular storyline or segment is the reason to the ratings increase appears unreasonable. Thus my conclusion was said point you quoted from my last post.


----------



## Da Silva

Loudness said:


> It would be ironic if it was true, WWE has tried so hard for years to keep him with the same character "because it makes the most money". If Cenas drawing power is actually negative (more fans out than in) WWE would be smart, almost forced to turn him or create a MAJOR character overhaul because their own reasoning for keeping him stale would have been disproven. Of course, nobody can say what the actual reason for the sudden ratings increase is, but based on the ratings overview ALL Quarter Hours have increased, so the argument that one particular storyline or segment is the reason to the ratings increase appears unreasonable. Thus my conclusion was said point you quoted from my last post.


The show has generally been much better for the last 2/3 months, so that in itself could be the simple reason for it. Most people in this thread have been saying for quite a while that the quality of the show plays as integral a part in the ratings as the star power of individuals. 

As far as John Cena goes, his segments almost always draw in good gains, so that's certainly a point in his favor. However, ratings have been a slow downward spiral for years of his reign as 'the man', so the overall viewership dropping could in part be down to his character being a repellent for so many people, especially adults who don't happen to fancy him.

It's difficult to pinpoint the exact cause of the ratings drain, and when you're making such a call, more often than not it's a combination of the factors - I mean, it's no secret that the reason for the poor quality of the show is the way in which the Cena character is written and presented to us. Firstly, he's the focal point of much of the WWE's work, often taking precedent over every other story line and at points in the last few years having the only story line going. In effect though - if the current players continue to do so well in the ratings and continue to sell out arenas, the 'cash-cow' defense for the way Cena is written becomes fallacious, and a character overhaul becomes necessary. It is after all true that out of the active roster he's the most recognizable person and biggest star, so a character change to appease those who are repelled by him would both keep those he turns away, and bring in more viewers who will be drawn in by the change in direction in the biggest name in wrestling today.

I just really hope that the football season doesn't fuck the WWE over too badly, because the last thing any of us want is them to have knee-jerk reactions to it and fuck the show quality over for us.

Personally, I think Cena coming back corporate would be fucking-fantastic. I don't know how that would play out in the ratings - but if the mantra that no one is overly special, and that by-en-large people have shared interests, it could be very good for the WWE. I mean, I don't know anyone wouldn't prefer Cena to have a heel character. That said, it's probably a good thing I'm not in charge of the WWE, because I'd just be a fanboy and have my favorites on top, for no reason other than I like them.


----------



## Londrick

lol @ if the PPV buys, and attendace sky rocket in the next few months with no Cena.


----------



## markedfordeath

since its new, I bet Battleground has amazing buys....NOC? not so much. But that would only be because people don't want to see Bryan lose, which he's obviously going to at NOC.


----------



## Da Silva

NOC should do okay. Culmination of the Punk/Heyman saga plus the huge Corporation story should be big selling points. It might seem obvious that Orton will win, but that's not the only significant thing about the PPV.

Will Battleground have any special gimmicks attached to it btw? Or is just a fancy name for a new PPV with regular matches?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Crusade said:


> Mad? Didn't I make it clear I'm a huge fan of Punk's? Why is everyone who calls you out on your stupidity mad? Lol get a different insult.
> 
> Difference is I'm not so deluded like you that I can't see other talent. And it seems like everyone agrees with me. So sit down.


How is calling you mad an insult? Calling you mad had nothing to do with you being a fan of Punk's, it had to do with your pretty damn hostile post over what? Me posting my opinion that I _exaggerated _because that's what I, among others, do in this thread constantly? My question is legitimate, what got you so mad? 

I can't see other talent? Give me an example, because I always give props when I see good talent imo. I'm more vocal about Punk because he's the guy who entertains me the most, by a pretty large margin. I love Cena, Bryan's incredible in the ring, Heyman's mic work, Triple H in this storyline, all guys I give a lot of credit to when credit is due. Now after seeing a lot of posts calling Punk's promo terrible, many unsurprisingly coming from Bryan fans, I'd call that deluded. But I'll just disagree, see the posts for what they are, and move on. Unlike you I'm not going to go to the extent to call others stupid and tell them to "sit down" because I didn't get offended on a personal note like you seemed to.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

mark henry will usher in a new era


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I know I'm not ordering NOC. I have no belief Bryan's winning the belt, and I'm not exactly dying to see Punk whoop Heyman's ass either, especially since I kinda saw it at Summerslam. The only intriguing thing that's made the idea of ordering the PPV even light up for a single second in my head, is the possibility of a new Heyman guy debuting at the PPV. But if I missed that it wouldn't bother me too much, so I'm still passing. Hell, even if they went with Show/HHH last minute to throw on the PPV, I still wouldn't buy. It would take something like a Taker, Rock, or Brock match to get me to order NOC at this rate. And it's obvious none of those are happening.

Battleground? We'll see where they go. If there's not gonna be a WWE Championship match, probably not, but that won't seal the deal on not ordering it. Although even if there is, I still don't see Bryan winning the belt until at the very least, Hell in a Cell. That PPV I'll probably be ordering unless the card ends up atrocious. Then I'll order SVS if they do a big 5-on-5 tag, maybe Punk, Bryan, Show, Ziggler, and Rhodes vs. HHH, Orton, and The Shield, or if there's a big WWE Title match (if Bryan doesn't win at HIAC, I would order as I'd think SVS is where he'd win it... or maybe Punk vs. Orton for the title if they go that route).

But yeah, I'm one of the select few who has put a lot of money into WWE through PPVs. Only PPV I've watched for free in the last couple of years (off the top of my head), was ER 2013 (I only ended up seeing it cause someone else paid for it and I got the chance to watch it). NOC would be the first PPV I don't watch since... well, I think CP 2011?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Night of Champions is the definition of a filler PPV.


----------



## markedfordeath

Orton is obviously winning, this screams long term storyline and I think even the casuals notice that.....so there really is no reason to order it at all....and i'm sure they're not expecting tons of buys.


----------



## THANOS

KO Bossy said:


> Nah, because I actually acknowledge when I think Bryan does something entertaining. Like last night, I thought he cut a great promo in that opening segment.
> 
> I think the only person I blindly hate is Ed Leslie. So I'm a blind Ed Leslie hater. I refuse to give that fucker credit for anything.


You certainly do and I'll always white knight for you when it comes to Bryan, because you truly do give credit when it's due.

I agree on Brutus, he's a true asshole in every sense of that amazing yet misused insult.


----------



## markedfordeath

what did Beefcake do?


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

WWE isn't gonna whip out their best ish for this PPV when they have quite a bit more PPV's to get through before MANIA.

They just pulled one of the biggest triggers for Summer Slam.


----------



## DOPA

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> *How is calling you mad an insult?* Calling you mad had nothing to do with you being a fan of Punk's, it had to do with your pretty damn hostile post over what? Me posting my opinion that I _exaggerated _because that's what I, among others, do in this thread constantly? *My question is legitimate*, what got you so mad?
> 
> I can't see other talent? Give me an example, because I always give props when I see good talent imo. I'm more vocal about Punk because he's the guy who entertains me the most, by a pretty large margin.* I love Cena, Bryan's incredible in the ring, Heyman's mic work, Triple H in this storyline, all guys I give a lot of credit to when credit is due.* Now after seeing a lot of posts calling Punk's promo terrible, many unsurprisingly coming from Bryan fans, I'd call that deluded. But I'll just disagree, see the posts for what they are, and move on. Unlike you I'm not going to go to the extent to call others stupid and tell them to "sit down" because *I didn't get offended on a personal note like you seemed to.*


:lol the ONLY person I've seen you credit other than Punk is Heyman, who has been either with or against Punk for the past year, how surprising .

Legitimate question :lol. Okay then, whatever you say. Because mad obviously is NEVER used in a high percentage of arguments in this forum as a way of trying to act superior . Clearly isn't true but I'll let it slide since it would demote into a stupid argument, which you are most known for.

The funniest is you suggesting I got offended on a personal note. :lmao so me calling you out for your blind marking = me personally offended now? Okay, whatever you say, you CLEARLY know me better than myself.

Hilarious.

The fact that everyone agrees with me INCLUDING Punk fans tells the entire story. Nothing more needed to be said.


----------



## Weltschmertz

The expected audience for RAW this week is *4,047,000*. That's a fall on last week's audience.


----------



## Emberdon

Don't think they can draw over 4m. I predict something closer to 3.6m viewers.


----------



## LovelyElle890

markedfordeath said:


> Orton is obviously winning, this screams long term storyline and I think even the casuals notice that.....so there really is no reason to order it at all....and i'm sure they're not expecting tons of buys.


But still, don't be surprised if they use the PPV buys, while Cena is gone, as an excuse to claim that Punk and Bryan are just fads.

I think that it is a mistake for Punk and Bryan fans to sit this PPV out. With them being in the top 2 storylines, who do you think they are going to blame when the PPV flops? You know it won't be Orton.


----------



## Emberdon

LovelyElle890 said:


> But still, *don't be surprised if they use the PPV buys*, while Cena is gone, as an excuse to claim that Punk and Bryan are just fads.


Not the NOC PPV buys(they know its a filler), but Summerslam '13 buys where they gave bryan the main event opportunity and a clean win over Cena. Summerslam buys would determine the fate of Bryan's main event career, just like summerslam 2011 did for Punk. 

I reckon if it drops, Cena will end up becoming the top face to take down the corporation instead of bryan which would suck so bad. If the ppv does well(domestic needs to be above 230,000 buys atleast), Bryan should be safe.


----------



## JY57

http://adf.ly/V7s0R



> TOTAL DIVAS AUDIENCE RISES
> 
> By Dave Scherer on 2013-09-04 11:42:21
> 
> The 9/1 edition of Total Divas did 1,527,000 viewers, up from last week.


----------



## Bryan D.

^ That's higher than Impact Wrestling, brother.


----------



## JY57

^ is it really? Yikes

if true than at least TNA is on par with Main Event (ratings for that show is awful, but understandable since its on ION)


----------



## Happenstan

Bryan D. said:


> ^ That's higher than Impact Wrestling, brother.


That's just embarrassing. There have to be quite a few guys in TNA hanging their heads in shame at this point. Too bad Dixie, Bitchoff and Huckster isn't 3 of them.


----------



## VGooBUG

I need really thought tis but total divas could be affected big time by football, it's entire audience is made up adult males(btw that's weird lol) and its on at Sunday nights


----------



## Emberdon

That's not news, Total divas has outdrawn TNA every single week. But you can't compare sunday night show with Thursday night impact.


----------



## Kratosx23

LovelyElle890 said:


> But still, don't be surprised if they use the PPV buys, while Cena is gone, as an excuse to claim that Punk and Bryan are just fads.
> 
> I think that it is a mistake for Punk and Bryan fans to sit this PPV out. With them being in the top 2 storylines, who do you think they are going to blame when the PPV flops? You know it won't be Orton.


So you also know it won't be Punk and Bryan that get the credit if it does well, either.


----------



## Waffelz

Why are they so slow with last weeks breakdown?


----------



## Emberdon

Bryan would definitely get the credit for NOC '13 if the show does well, but that's not going to happen. Its a filler show at best.


----------



## superuser1

Tyrion Lannister said:


> So you also know it won't be Punk and Bryan that get the credit if it does well, either.


If it does well all three guys should get the credit if it doesnt do well all three guys should get the blame....But knowing the IWC the marks gonna blame the other and give their guy all the credit.


----------



## D.M.N.

Numbers should be out in the next hour or two I imagine...


----------



## JY57

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-for-the-week-ending-september-1-2013/200528/

Top 25 RATED Cable Shows Last Week

RAW was # 7 (9-10 PM), # 10 (10-11 PM), & # 11 (8-9 PM)

again the top two are Duck Dynasty (9,997,00 viewers) and Rizzoli & Isles (5,997,000 viewers; again my girl Angie Harmon doing work)


----------



## TheWFEffect

People are tuning into smackdown hoping Bryan will get the upper hand that's what I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for.


----------



## Weltschmertz

Should be out within the next three hours.

There's been a decent upswing in ratings lately, so it will be interesting to see how this week does. Important to note that a week-on-week fall doesn't matter that much - audience tends to fall week-by-week after a PPV. What matters is the performance relative to the expectation. When I say 'expected audience', I'm not just pulling a number out of thin air, the model I'm using captures trends such as:

- A momentum effect in the audience - e.g. after a PPV the audience stays higher than its long-run level for a couple of shows.
- Post-PPV bounce - usually the audience is 6-8% higher after a PPV.
- Smackdown momentum - if the previous Smackdown audience rises, the RAW audience will tend to be higher.
- Seasonal trends - audience tends to be higher in winter months.

At the moment, the audiences are higher than the model predictions, suggesting another factor is driving audiences (likely the quality of the shows).


----------



## markedfordeath

i'm hoping the end of this past Raw being the same ending doesn't affect next week's show.


----------



## Jof

Weltschmertz said:


> Should be out within the next three hours.
> 
> There's been a decent upswing in ratings lately, so it will be interesting to see how this week does. Important to note that a week-on-week fall doesn't matter that much - audience tends to fall week-by-week after a PPV. What matters is the performance relative to the expectation. When I say 'expected audience', I'm not just pulling a number out of thin air, the model I'm using captures trends such as:
> 
> - A momentum effect in the audience - e.g. after a PPV the audience stays higher than its long-run level for a couple of shows.
> - Post-PPV bounce - usually the audience is 6-8% higher after a PPV.
> - Smackdown momentum - if the previous Smackdown audience rises, the RAW audience will tend to be higher.
> - Seasonal trends - audience tends to be higher in winter months.
> 
> *At the moment, the audiences are higher than the model predictions, suggesting another factor is driving audiences (likely the quality of the shows).*


Good to hear that. (Y)


----------



## VGooBUG

Weltschmertz said:


> Should be out within the next three hours.
> 
> There's been a decent upswing in ratings lately, so it will be interesting to see how this week does. Important to note that a week-on-week fall doesn't matter that much - audience tends to fall week-by-week after a PPV. What matters is the performance relative to the expectation. When I say 'expected audience', I'm not just pulling a number out of thin air, the model I'm using captures trends such as:
> 
> - A momentum effect in the audience - e.g. after a PPV the audience stays higher than its long-run level for a couple of shows.
> - Post-PPV bounce - usually the audience is 6-8% higher after a PPV.
> - Smackdown momentum - if the previous Smackdown audience rises, the RAW audience will tend to be higher.
> - Seasonal trends - audience tends to be higher in winter months.
> 
> At the moment, the audiences are higher than the model predictions, suggesting another factor is driving audiences (likely the quality of the shows).


your predictions are just that predictions, and it means nothing if its below or above it. The viewership has been down this year compared to last years post summer slam Raws it's not doing great


----------



## Weltschmertz

VGooBUG said:


> your predictions are just that predictions, and it means nothing if its below or above it. The viewership has been down this year compared to last years post summer slam Raws it's not doing great


Nope - all the factors I listed are statistically significant. Model explains majority of change in the audience week-by-week (and correctly predicted whether the audience would rise or fall 12/13 times). You're right that on a week-by-week basis, that whether the audience is below or above the prediction t doesn't mean much - because its 50/50 on average whether it is or not. But if the audience is *consistently* above/below the model's prediction then this suggests that a hidden factor is having an effect - which is likely the quality of the product.


----------



## markedfordeath

so you're saying the viewers should be more this week?


----------



## TN Punk

Comparing ratings to a year ago is stupid.

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Jammy

TN Punk said:


> Comparing ratings to a year ago is stupid.
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Why? It's a decent gauge of understanding interest in the product.


----------



## Weltschmertz

markedfordeath said:


> so you're saying the viewers should be more this week?


No - will likely fall. But if it falls by less than expected (as it has done in the past few weeks) then this is a good sign because it suggests they are retaining more viewers than they usually do after the post-PPV bump.


----------



## D.M.N.

TN Punk said:


> Comparing ratings to a year ago is stupid.
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App





Jammy said:


> Why? It's a decent gauge of understanding interest in the product.


Have to agree with Jammy here. Year-on-year also helps identify whether the trend has been similar, or if the trend bucks at any point.


----------



## TN Punk

Different shows on, less people watching tv overall, more people downloading, torrent sites, different avenues to watch. WWE isn't like regular TV shows so it not the same to compare a season premiere this year to last year. Got to look at other factors if you want to see if people are paying attention....like social networking...actual stuff not WWE stats.


But that's just my opinion.

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Weltschmertz

D.M.N. said:


> Have to agree with Jammy here. Year-on-year also helps identify whether the trend has been similar, or if the trend bucks at any point.


Depends on how big the difference is. If the difference is between plus/minus 125,000 viewers then the audience is basically the same because those viewers are just noise. Incidentally, that's one of the big problems with the rating breakdowns on this thread. If a segment draws +100,000 viewers then that does not mean the wrestlers in the segment have drawing power ! It's probably just random - people switching between channels. It only means something if the same wrestlers keep drawing positive numbers - but even then, it isn't certain - what if wrestlers tend to appear in certain time intervals which tend to have a higher TV audience? E.g. more people are watching TV at 9pm than 8pm.


----------



## JY57

> In the segment-by-segment, Fandango vs. Cody Rhodes stayed even. Miz & Rhodes vs. Damien Sandow & Fandango lost about 275,000 viewers. C.M. Punk vs. Curtis Axel at 9 p.m. gained about 683,000 viewers to a 3.4 quarter, which is excellent. Brie Bella vs. Natalya with the A.J. Lee promo lost 545,000 viewers, which is pretty bad. Alberto Del Rio vs. Rob Van Dam gained about 140,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Christian lost 140,000 which is a terrible showing for a top of the hour at 10 p.m., doing a 3.0. Daniel Bryan doing the promo where he tagged Orton’s car and then HHH, Brad Maddox and Orton being mad about it stayed even. Jack Swagger vs. Titus O’Neil lost 135,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan’s Gauntlet against The Shield and his being laid out gained 1,092,000 viewers to a 3.7 quarter, which was an excellent showing.


for last week (15 minute span breakdown via Observer)


----------



## Weltschmertz

So in the example above, for example, this does not conclusively show that Punk has drawing power - because the audience will nearly always rise at the 9pm interval, irrespective of which wrestler is in that segment.


----------



## dxbender

Weltschmertz said:


> Depends on how big the difference is. If the difference is between plus/minus 125,000 viewers then the audience is basically the same because those viewers are just noise. Incidentally, that's one of the big problems with the rating breakdowns on this thread. If a segment draws +100,000 viewers then that does not mean the wrestlers in the segment have drawing power ! It's probably just random - people switching between channels. It only means something if the same wrestlers keep drawing positive numbers - but even then, it isn't certain - what if wrestlers tend to appear in certain time intervals which tend to have a higher TV audience? E.g. more people are watching TV at 9pm than 8pm.


I've been saying that for years.

People always be like "___ sucks cause ratings are down when they're champ"...that means nothing cause that person is on tv for like 20 mins a show in a 2-3hr show,it means nothing.

And the Nielsen tv ratings aren't most reliable thing out there, but it's the only thing out there though. Each Nielsen box in USA equals about 2000 americans. So if ratings drop by 100,000, that really only means that 50 Nielsen boxes weren't tuned to Raw.

Can just imagine how diff TV would be if every tv box was monitored.Not just WWE, but all shows in general. For all we know, if every single house in USA was counted towards tv ratings, some shows might be bigger than they are, and others might tank(compared to what they used to be)


----------



## D.M.N.

"Brie Bella vs. Natalya with the A.J. Lee promo lost 545,000 viewers, which is pretty bad."

One of the many reasons why the Observer's breakdown is frankly, garbage. As we know, the above is not actually two because the quarter was one of two halves.


----------



## TN Punk

D.M.N. said:


> "Brie Bella vs. Natalya with the A.J. Lee promo lost 545,000 viewers, which is pretty bad."
> 
> One of the many reasons why the Observer's breakdown is frankly, garbage. As we know, the above is not actually two because the quarter was one of two halves.


The segment lost viewers yet AJ was trending on Twitter which is something gong on live and accurate. Lol...


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> "Brie Bella vs. Natalya with the A.J. Lee promo lost 545,000 viewers, which is pretty bad."
> 
> One of the many reasons why the Observer's breakdown is frankly, garbage. As we know, the above is not actually two because the quarter was one of two halves.


I was about to say this. It's interesting to see the Torch minute by minute stuff compared to the Observer 15 minute breakdown. We know from the latter than Punk/Axel before 9pm didn't do well but that at 9pm it did extremely well for the tease of Punk/Heyman. Similarly, we know that AJ's promo did extremely well in that quarter hour but you wouldn't know it from looking at the Observer breakdown. A tale of two cities these Torch and Observer breakdowns are. One of them paints a minute by minute picture of 1 demo while the other paints a broader picture of all demos. Even still, the way the Observer phrases things is horribly wrong considering that AJ Lee's promo didn't lose any viewers at all but actually had one of the highest numbers of the night. That's terribly misleading and outright false information more than anything else.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Twitter means nothing when it comes to ratings. Don't buy the hype.


----------



## RatedR10

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Twitter means nothing when it comes to ratings. Don't buy the hype.


There's actually a plan to implement social media activity (Twitter) in calculating ratings. It's all live, after all. It's a very accurate way to figure out who's watching at a certain time with activity going up or down.


----------



## Jof

Weltschmertz said:


> So in the example above, for example, this does not conclusively show that Punk has drawing power - because the audience will nearly always rise at the 9pm interval, irrespective of which wrestler is in that segment.


Gotta agree. Dolph Ziggler gained over 560,000 viewers the week before at 9pm, and he's doing nothing but jobbs every week.


----------



## markedfordeath

the rating is in 2.85...ouch!


----------



## JY57

> WWE Raw on Labor Day Monday, September 2 dropped to a 2.85 rating, down 7 percent from last week's 3.07 rating.
> 
> Raw was tied with the July 1 episode for the lowest rating of the past two months.
> 
> - Raw fell below four million viewers for the first time since July, averaging 3.936 million viewers, down six percent from last week.
> 
> Hourly Break Down: Poor start of 3.690 million first hour viewers, 4.146 million second hour viewers, and 3.974 million third hour viewers.
> 
> - Raw took a hit from Week 1 of the college football season on ESPN and a one-time Comedy Central roast of James Franco.
> 
> Overall on cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #2 in overall viewers behind football and #2 in the key male demos behind the Comedy Central roast.
> 
> Similar to TNA Impact being affected by Week 1 of college football last Thursday, it appears Raw's older demo outside of the males 18-49 window checked out, contributing to the ratings decline.
> 
> - One year ago this week, Raw drew a nearly-identical 2.83 rating on Labor Day Monday against Week 1 of college football. The demos were slightly lower this year compared to last year.


via PWTorch


----------



## Jof

3.9m average sounds about right considering Labor day.


----------



## markedfordeath

not a bad rating...but it did take a hit...but it was only down 7 percent..wonder if that's huge or not....or still a good sign.


----------



## Starbuck

So it begins lol.


----------



## markedfordeath

i think thats pretty good for a Labor Day though....


----------



## Starbuck

Well they're set for 2.0's for the rest of the year now, hopefully the higher end if you're Vince McMahon. They aren't going to magically start pulling miracle ratings but if they can stay around the 2.8 mark with an average of 4 million viewers I think they'll be happy considering the competition.


----------



## Biast

It's gonna keep going down until maybe RR or Cena's return. :lol


----------



## Jof

They need to do something major Post NOC PPV.


----------



## KO Bossy

ZOMG DANIEL BRYAN CAN'T DRAW AGAIN FUTBALZ, ALL MY BELIEFZ ABOUT NOT BEING A BIG FAN ARE SUDDENLY JUSTIFYED! :HHH2


----------



## markedfordeath

huh? how does that mean Bryan can't draw? how does that rating mean Bryan can't draw? it actually had a higher rating than last Labor Day....and they were number 2 in demos which is good......and they were barely below the 4 million mark...geez, you'll say anything to put Bryan down.


----------



## Jof

Relax, it was probably meant a joke.


----------



## KO Bossy

markedfordeath said:


> huh? how does that mean Bryan can't draw? how does that rating mean Bryan can't draw? it actually had a higher rating than last Labor Day....and they were number 2 in demos which is good......and they were barely below the 4 million mark...geez, you'll say anything to put Bryan down.


Apparently someone can't detect sarcasm.


----------



## TN Punk

Make Daniel Bryan a jobber. How the hell did he not out draw the Florida State Seminoles and that hack John Franco?


----------



## superuser1

Damn bryan cant draw for nothing lol just joking calm down


----------



## xD7oom

Damn, bad rating.


----------



## DOPA

KO Bossy said:


> ZOMG DANIEL BRYAN CAN'T DRAW AGAIN FUTBALZ, ALL MY BELIEFZ ABOUT NOT BEING A BIG FAN ARE SUDDENLY JUSTIFYED! :HHH2


:lmao I love you.


----------



## checkcola

The show was built around Big Show crying, so he deserves credit/blame depending on your point of view


----------



## MaybeLock

KO Bossy said:


> ZOMG DANIEL BRYAN CAN'T DRAW AGAIN FUTBALZ, ALL MY BELIEFZ ABOUT NOT BEING A BIG FAN ARE SUDDENLY JUSTIFYED! :HHH2


:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


The best of all is that markedfordeath fell for it :lol

PS: Cena SAVE US :cena Draw these motherfuckers back in!


----------



## Lazyking

Football is king. The ratings have little to nothing to do with the product. it'll bounce back when football is over.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

On the breakdown from last week: Best 9PM segment in almost 6 months (one of the best of the year). 10PM's the worst in about 3 months (one of the worst of the year). Overrun was the best in 6 months (and again, one of the best of the year).

On Raw ratings from this week: Looks like the string of overruns going up a tenth of a rating has ended. Started July 22nd with a 3.2, to a 3.3 the 29th, to a 3.4 the 5th, 3.5 the 12th, 3.6 the 19th and a 3.7 the 26th. Should be interesting to see what it gets.

And well... at least one hour got above 4 million.


----------



## Marv95

Lazyking said:


> Football is king. The ratings have little to nothing to do with the product. it'll bounce back when football is over.


What football? Season starts tomorrow.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Crusade said:


> :lol the ONLY person I've seen you credit other than Punk is Heyman, who has been either with or against Punk for the past year, how surprising .
> 
> Legitimate question :lol. Okay then, whatever you say. Because mad obviously is NEVER used in a high percentage of arguments in this forum as a way of trying to act superior . Clearly isn't true but I'll let it slide since it would demote into a stupid argument, which you are most known for.
> 
> The funniest is you suggesting I got offended on a personal note. :lmao so me calling you out for your blind marking = me personally offended now? Okay, whatever you say, you CLEARLY know me better than myself.
> 
> Hilarious.
> 
> The fact that everyone agrees with me INCLUDING Punk fans tells the entire story. Nothing more needed to be said.


I don't care what posts you've seen of mine, I have credited others. You don't need to believe it, I truly don't give a damn. Like I said, I'm more vocal about Punk because he's really the only one that entertains me consistently. So sorry.

And using a shit ton of emoticons doesn't help you come across as calm. Relax, buddy. It's the ratings thread. Get a gripe, take the posts as what they are, and move on with your day. So, back to it...

Best 9PM in 6 months?

unk


----------



## JY57

compared to the last few Labor Days:

2007 - 3.64 rating

2008 - 2.93 rating

2009 - 5.48 million viewers 3.83 rating (with Bob Barker as Guest Host)

2010 - 3.00 rating

2011 - 2.99 rating

2012 - 4.19 million viewers with 2.83 rating

2013 - 3.94 million viewers with 2.85 rating


----------



## Starbuck

BOB BARKER >>>>>>>>>>


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

HAITCH gonne be hitting them 2.6's soon.

Thats not good for BUSINESS.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Bob Barker the GOAT


----------



## JY57

Starbuck said:


> BOB BARKER >>>>>>>>>>


5.5 million viewers that show did pretty impressive. Centered around Orton vs Cena for Breaking Point

And the 2007 show was centered around Cena vs Orton (when Orton beat up Cena's dad and all that hoopla)


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

JY57 said:


> 5.5 million viewers that show did pretty impressive. Centered around Orton vs Cena vs Hunter for NOC
> 
> And the 2007 show was centered around Cena vs Orton (when Orton beat up Cena's dad and all that hoopla)


Um, 2009 Labor Day? Pretty sure that was part of the build toward Breaking Point, which was Cena/Orton, Taker/Punk (though that was probably exclusive to SD as the brand-split meant a little more back then), and DX/Legacy. 

NOC that year was in June or July.


----------



## Choke2Death

ORTON VS CENA IS WHAT'S BEST FOR BUSINESS! :HHH2

Your Wrestlemania XXX main event... rton vs :cena3


----------



## JY57

The Sandrone said:


> Um, 2009 Labor Day? Pretty sure that was part of the build toward Breaking Point, which was Cena/Orton, Taker/Punk (though that was probably exclusive to SD as the brand-split meant a little more back then), and DX/Legacy.


forgot about that. And Punk/Taker was Main-Event right?. Got history messed up I guess


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

God, no wonder 2009 was horrible. Orton/Cena was boring, Legacy/DX buried that team, and Punk/Taker in 2009 was a massive disappointment after that great Punk/Hardy feud.


----------



## markedfordeath

I noticed that Legacy is the only faction Triple H has gone against.....man if he had been healthy during those invasion days, he could have been even bigger...he would have totally kicked ass back then as they invaded the WWF....it could have been him and Austin raising hell...but then he got injured, that could have made him even bigger.


----------



## roadkill_

Is Orton vs Cena what they're currently pushing? As some type of big angle? I only ask because I can't bare to watch the WWE Universe. But I can picture the scene:

Heel boreton, dead heat, vs face Cena, X-Pac heat. On the commentary is the worst play by play in the history of professional wrestling, Michael Cole, yelling CONNECTS! with a visibly uninterested and tired Lawler innocuously agreeing with Cole's shitcan 'analysis' every 90 seconds or so. At the front row are some 30 somethings trying to keep the 6 year olds in Cena shirts awake. What ensues is a family friendly brawl somewhat resembling a wrestling match.

Super Cena prevails.

You couldn't _pay_ me to watch that vomit. My only interest in WWE these days is infinite hatred of its decline. I'll tell you something else, it ain't going to get any better when VKM departs. The real test is how WWE's post VKM regime handles its first five years.


----------



## Jammy

roadkill_ said:


> You couldn't _pay_ me to watch that vomit. *My only interest in WWE these days is infinite hatred of its decline.* I'll tell you something else, it ain't going to get any better when VKM departs. The real test is how WWE's post VKM regime handles its first five years.


What does that even mean? 

Oh and WWE is not declining, not even close.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Remember when Orton and Cena had that staredown at Royal Rumble 2011 that led to utter apathy?


----------



## xdoomsayerx

funnyfaces1 said:


> Remember when Orton and Cena had that staredown at Royal Rumble 2011 that led to utter apathy?




Lmao yes, that was kind of sad.


----------



## Amuroray

expect this cena comes back or when its time for the RR.

Whatever come first


----------



## wb1899

A18-49 viewership:
8:00: 1,784,000 (1.41 rtg)
9:00: 1,973,000 (1.55)
10:00-11:05: 1,938,000 (1.53)


----------



## mblonde09

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I don't care what posts you've seen of mine, I have credited others. You don't need to believe it, I truly don't give a damn. Like I said, *I'm more vocal about Punk because he's really the only one that entertains me consistently.* So sorry.
> 
> And using a shit ton of emoticons doesn't help you come across as calm. Relax, buddy. It's the ratings thread. Get a gripe, take the posts as what they are, and move on with your day. So, back to it...
> 
> Best 9PM in 6 months?
> 
> unk


Same here, but apparently that makes you a "kellykellyfan-type troll". Since when was there a guage for how much you can be a fan of someone, anyway? It shouldn't really matter to anyone else how much someone likes a certain wrestler. My views on Punk are not going to change, and if that makes me a "bad/annoying/blind Punk mark", then so be it, I don't really care. I don't believe I say anything outrageous or "fantasist" when it comes to Punk, anyway... I feel it's mostly within the realms of fact, and there is a litany of proof to back up what I say in my posts - most of which are centred around his on-screen, performances.



funnyfaces1 said:


> Remember when Orton and Cena had that staredown at Royal Rumble 2011 that led to utter apathy?


Because they have fuck-all chemistry - either in the ring or outside of it.


----------



## Banjo

With the NFL season here, I admit I won't be watching RAW live as much as I used to. But that's why I got Hulu Plus! RAW on Hulu is awesome


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> August 26th, 2013
> - 3.07 rating (-0.17 on last week)
> - 3.028 million households
> - 4.190 million viewers (-108,000)
> - an average of 1.39 viewers per household that watches Raw
> 
> - 1.50 Adults 18-49 rating (-0.07)
> - 1.900 million viewers in Adults 18-49 demographic (-86,000)
> 
> - 2.290 million viewers fall outside of Adults 18-49 demographic (-22,000)


September 2nd, 2013
- 2.85 rating (-0.23 on last week)
- 2.811 million households (-217,000)
- 3.937 million viewers (-253,000)
- an average of 1.40 viewers per household that watches Raw (+0.01)

- 1.50 Adults 18-49 rating (+/- 0.00)
- 1.900 million viewers in Adults 18-49 demographic (+/- 0.00)

- 2.037 million viewers fall outside of Adults 18-49 demographic (-253,000)

Interesting stuff. As the Adults 18-49 did not drop an inch, it means that the Males 18-49 breakdown will not really reflect the overall drop, which is probably worth noting. It will still have the usual trends though which will be noticeable in the less accurate quarter hour breakdown.

Unfortunately, year-on-year, the ratings overall dropped 267,000 viewers. If the trend is the same as last year, hypothetically, the 'E could be averaging 3.2 million viewers for the September 30th Raw.


----------



## tonsgrams

Jammy said:


> What does that even mean?
> 
> Oh and WWE is not declining, not even close.


It was declining, 2012 and 2011 are one of the worst years in wwe history.


----------



## Jammy

tonsgrams said:


> It was declining, 2012 and 2011 are one of the worst years in wwe history.


Any sources to back that up? Did you go through financial statements?


----------



## James1o1o

tonsgrams said:


> It was declining, 2012 and 2011 are one of the worst years in wwe history.


2013 is probably going to overtake it. Ratings are hitting 2.85 now? Just wait till NFL season starts. :lol



Jammy said:


> Any sources to back that up? Did you go through financial statements?



He was talking in terms of ratings.


----------



## JY57

For 15 minute Spans (not minute by minute from PWTorch):



> Stephanie/Big Show segment gained about 400,000
> 
> Rhodes/Orton did really good (no word on gain)
> 
> Punk's promo lost about 300,000 viewers
> 
> RVD/Sandow & Divas Triple Threat Bombed (400,000 lost for women + another few hundred thousand for RVD/Sandow)
> 
> Big Show/Bryan did about 3.3 (no word on gain, but judging previous segments guessing the gain was big)


via Dave Metzler on Wrestler Observer Radio


----------



## JY57

For 15 minute Spans (not minute by minute from PWTorch):



> Stephanie/Big Show segment gained about 400,000
> 
> Rhodes/Orton did really good (no word on gain)
> 
> Punk's promo lost about 300,000 viewers
> 
> RVD/Sandow & Divas Triple Threat Bombed (400,000 lost for women + another few hundred thousand for RVD/Sandow)
> 
> Big Show/Bryan did about 3.3 (no word on gain, but judging previous segments guessing the gain was big)


via Dave Metzler on Wrestler Observer Radio


----------



## JY57

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._Recent_WWE_Attendance_Main_Event_Rating.html



> - The August 28th episode of WWE Main Event did a 0.8 cable rating with 1.2 million viewers.


----------



## D.M.N.

The rest is okay, but:

- "Punk's promo lost about 300,000 viewers" --> remember it lasted about 5 minutes of Q9, so no doubt it dropped _after_ his promo ended
- "RVD/Sandow & Divas Triple Threat Bombed (400,000 lost for women + another few hundred thousand for RVD/Sandow)" --> can't remember the match lengths, but I strongly doubt the women's match really lost that much.

Sorry to keep pointing that out, but thought I'd do it before Punk gets annihilated in this thread.


----------



## Jammy

Matches that have consequences and meaning always do well, no surprise that Rhodes/Orton and Big Show/Bryan did well. They had meaning, and were promoted like a big deal


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Rhodes/Orton, Bryan/Big Show BRINGING IN DEM RATINGS!

:cody2 rton2 :show :bryan


----------



## Jof

D.M.N. said:


> The rest is okay, but:
> 
> - "Punk's promo lost about 300,000 viewers" --> *remember it lasted about 5 minutes of Q9,* so no doubt it dropped _after_ his promo ended
> - "RVD/Sandow & Divas Triple Threat Bombed (400,000 lost for women + another few hundred thousand for RVD/Sandow)" --> can't remember the match lengths, but I strongly doubt the women's match really lost that much.
> 
> Sorry to keep pointing that out, but thought I'd do it before Punk gets annihilated in this thread.


Punk's promo lasted solid 10 minutes including entrance and 3min recap/video-package bro!


----------



## Jof

Big show tears usually means big ratings, couple that with heel HHH, Bryan, Orton? Yeah home run.


----------



## D.M.N.

Jof said:


> Punk's promo lasted solid 10 minutes including entrance and 3min recap/video-package bro!


I just checked in the discussion thread. They went to the recap at 22:05, came back at 22:08 and Punk was in the ring for one minute or so before leaving.

In reality, the promo was over before the recap began. Remember that the recap had already been shown earlier in the night, too.

When we see the Males 18-49 breakdown, I imagine we will see a dip when the recap started. So no, the promo did not last a solid 10 minutes.

Edit - in fact, Punk's music started playing before the recap, which is normally a sign that the segment has ended.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Yeah, Punk's promo ended 5 minutes into the quarter. No doubt the quarter didn't do well. We'll have to get a look at the minute to minute breakdown to see how Punk performed.


----------



## superuser1

No surprise Orton and Rhodes did well it was actually a good/important match. People shitted on him last week because his segment bombed when he had a random match with nothing to gain or lose with Christian. And Punk needs Heyman or Lesnar to draw in them ratings I guess we have to wait till the full breakdown.


----------



## Happenstan

And so the spinning begins. IS it really so hard to just say my guy didn't perform like he was supposed to? Is that *REALLY* so hard?


----------



## Jof

D.M.N. said:


> I just checked in the discussion thread. They went to the recap at 22:05, came back at 22:08 and Punk was in the ring for one minute or so before leaving.
> 
> In reality, the promo was over before the recap began. Remember that the recap had already been shown earlier in the night, too.
> 
> When we see the Males 18-49 breakdown, I imagine we will see a dip when the recap started. So no, the promo did not last a solid 10 minutes.
> 
> Edit - in fact, Punk's music started playing before the recap, which is normally a sign that the segment has ended.


You're right recap would lose viewers, no doubt. Anyways, I have the RAW show downloaded so just checked the exact timeline of the segment..

Punk's promo, from entrance to music before recap, was exactly 7 mins and 42secs. Recap was 2 mins and 37secs, Punk stayed in the ring for only half a minute(31secs) with his music playing in the background, before they cut to match graphic.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Happenstan said:


> And so the spinning begins. IS it really so hard to just say my guy didn't perform like he was supposed to? Is that *REALLY* so hard?


Except we don't even know how well Punk did. Read.


----------



## THANOS

Jof said:


> You're right recap would lose viewers, no doubt. Anyways, I have the RAW show downloaded so just checked the exact timeline of the segment..
> 
> Punk's promo, from entrance to music before recap, was exactly 7 mins and 42secs. Recap was 2 mins and 37secs, Punk stayed in the ring for only half a minute(31secs) with his music playing in the background, before they cut to match graphic.


But when did Punk first walk to the ring? Was it before the top of the hour quarter even began?


----------



## superuser1

Happenstan said:


> And so the spinning begins. IS it really so hard to just say my guy didn't perform like he was supposed to? Is that *REALLY* so hard?


This. Lol if it was Daniel Bryan,Orton or Cena those same people would have a field day with that


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

THANOS said:


> But when did Punk first walk to the ring? Was it before the top of the hour quarter even began?


Looking at the discussion thread, his entrance was at 9:58. His promo ended at 10:05, then the recap happened. The rest of the quarter was a commercial and other bullshit. Even I changed the channel then. This happens all the time, segments that end half way into the 10 quarter don't perform well.


----------



## Happenstan

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Except we don't even know how well Punk did. Read.


We know the segment he was in at least half of lost 300,000 viewers. We know the excuses are already flying. "It was 5 minutes, no it was 10 minutes, no it was that darned video package what did it." ENOUGH!!! All you have to say is..."Punk's segment lost viewers. Too bad. Maybe he will do better next week." And scene. Again is that really so hard?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

But, again, we don't know how Punk's segment did. Why do you have so much trouble trying to understand. Wait until the minute to minute breakdown at least before you start your trolling.


----------



## Jof

THANOS said:


> But when did Punk first walk to the ring? Was it before the top of the hour quarter even began?


Seems like he actually entered after the quarter began, Cole/Jbl were shown discussing following a commercial when his music hit.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Jof said:


> Seems like he actually entered after the quarter began, Cole/Jbl were shown discussing following a commercial when his music hit.


He entered before the quarter.


----------



## Happenstan

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> But, again, we don't know how Punk's segment did. Why do you have so much trouble trying to understand. Wait until the minute to minute breakdown at least before you start your trolling.


fpalm

You're never gonna be anything more than a personal cheerleader, are you? Too sad.

It doesn't matter if Punk's part gained ratings or not. The segment as a whole was down and you can't even admit that. WTF man? Honestly?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Happenstan said:


> fpalm
> 
> You're never gonna be anything more than a personal cheerleader, are you? Too sad.


Dude, this has nothing to do with that. :lol I'm trying to tell you facts because you don't understand them apparently. Stop taking everything as "marks being marks." Which is funny coming from you. The segment Punk was in, lost 300k viewers. Punk himself was only in half of that segment, so to see how well he did specifically, we need the Torch to post the minute breakdown. Fuck, is it so hard to understand?



> It doesn't matter if Punk's part gained ratings or not.


:lmao 

So it's his doing if the commercial and whatever happens afterwards, that doesn't involve him, does poorly. Okay.


----------



## Happenstan

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Dude, this has nothing to do with that. :lol I'm trying to tell you facts because you don't understand them apparently. Stop taking everything as "marks being marks." Which is funny coming from you. *The segment Punk was in, lost 300k viewers.* Punk himself was only in half of that segment, so to see how well he did specifically, we need the Torch to post the minute breakdown. Fuck, is it so hard to understand?


:clap:clap:clap:clap:clap:clap

Finally. You did it. You admitted a segment Punk was a part of lost viewers. I'm proud of you. Baby steps. You may yet find your way out of Phil's asshole after all. Good job.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I never even argued that though.

:lol Was I talking to a wall that entire time?


----------



## D.M.N.

Happenstan said:


> We know the segment he was in at least half of lost 300,000 viewers. We know the excuses are already flying. "It was 5 minutes, no it was 10 minutes, no it was that darned video package what did it." ENOUGH!!! All you have to say is..."Punk's segment lost viewers. Too bad. Maybe he will do better next week." And scene. Again is that really so hard?


I'm not sure you understand how ratings work, so I'm not sure this is an debate worth entering. The loss of 300,000 viewers *covers 22:00 to 22:15*. Punk was in that segment for 5 minutes.

Based on past history, I expect that breaks down as:

22:00 to 22:05 - +200k <-- Punk's bit
22:05 to 22:15 - -550k <-- rest of quarter hour *with filler*
22:00 to 22:15 - -300k

Is there something hard to understand there?


----------



## Biast

D.M.N. said:


> I'm not sure you understand how ratings work, so I'm not sure this is an debate worth entering. The loss of 300,000 viewers *covers 22:00 to 22:15*. Punk was in that segment for 5 minutes.
> 
> Based on past history, I expect that breaks down as:
> 
> 22:00 to 22:05 - +200k <-- Punk's bit
> 22:05 to 22:15 - -550k <-- rest of quarter hour *with filler*
> 22:00 to 22:15 - -300k
> 
> Is there something hard to understand there?



:clap


----------



## Happenstan

D.M.N. said:


> Happenstan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *We know the segment he was in at least half of lost 300,000 viewers.* We know the excuses are already flying. "It was 5 minutes, no it was 10 minutes, no it was that darned video package what did it." ENOUGH!!! All you have to say is..."Punk's segment lost viewers. Too bad. Maybe he will do better next week." And scene. Again is that really so hard?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure you understand how ratings work, so I'm not sure this is an debate worth entering. The loss of 300,000 viewers *covers 22:00 to 22:15*. Punk was in that segment for 5 minutes.
> 
> Based on past history, I expect that breaks down as:
> 
> 22:00 to 22:05 - +200k <-- Punk's bit
> 22:05 to 22:15 - -550k <-- rest of quarter hour *with filler*
> 22:00 to 22:15 - -300k
> 
> Is there something hard to understand there?
Click to expand...


I'm not sure you understand how to read. 22:00 - 22:15 is one segment, or quarter hour. That quarter hour had a net loss of 300,000 viewers. Punk was in that segment. How long he was out there doesn't matter. He was a part of a segment or quarter hour that ended in a net loss. Which is exactly what I said in the quote above. _Is there something hard to understand there?_




Biast said:


> :clap


Now you. I know you spout off without knowing what you are talking about. Why am I not surprised you don't learn from your mistakes either?


----------



## Biast

Happenstan said:


> I'm not sure you understand how to read. 22:00 - 22:15 is one segment, or quarter hour. That quarter hour had a net loss of 300,000 viewers. Punk was in that segment. How long he was out there doesn't matter. He was a part of a segment or quarter hour that ended in a net loss. Which is exactly what I said in the quote above. _Is there something hard to understand there?_


:lol Of course it's going to lose viewers when the quarter hour is filled with fillers... Is there anything hard to understand here?

You need the minute breakdown from Torch to say if Punk himself lost the viewers (no way in hell) or the filler that followed him.


----------



## Happenstan

Biast said:


> :lol Of course it's going to lose viewers when the quarter hour is filled with fillers... Is there anything hard to understand here?
> 
> You need the minute breakdown from Torch to say if Punk himself lost the viewers (no way in hell) or the filler that followed him.


Once again you run your mouth without knowing what you are talking about. I wasn't saying Punk himself lost ratings. I was criticizing those who were making excuses the second the quarter hour with Punk in it was found to have lost ratings. Try to keep up with the adults please.


----------



## Amuroray

punk lost viewers?

lol big surprise. The man simply isnt a draw. 

His whole push has been for nothing.


----------



## Jammy

D.M.N. said:


> I'm not sure you understand how ratings work, so I'm not sure this is an debate worth entering. The loss of 300,000 viewers *covers 22:00 to 22:15*. Punk was in that segment for 5 minutes.
> 
> Based on past history, I expect that breaks down as:
> 
> 22:00 to 22:05 - +200k <-- Punk's bit
> 22:05 to 22:15 - -550k <-- rest of quarter hour *with filler*
> 22:00 to 22:15 - -300k
> 
> Is there something hard to understand there?


The only problem with that is that the segment was structured like this

Punk promo
Recap with Heyman and Punk
Big Show and Bryan backstage
AJ Lee entrance 

Now to spin this around that Punk is a draw and everything else lost 550k viewers is not really fair, if everything post the promo lost viewers that means that the Heyman-Punk video package lost a ton of viewers, which is still not good. But I doubt this is very accurate, since that angle did well last week. I dont think Big Show and Bryan backstage lost a ton of viewers since their match did so well, and if AJ Lee's entrance was hardly a minute and I dont think 500k people switched the channel at that instant, I just think that this quarter on the whole bled viewers.


----------



## D.M.N.

Jammy said:


> The only problem with that is that the segment was structured like this
> 
> Punk promo
> Recap with Heyman and Punk
> Big Show and Bryan backstage
> AJ Lee entrance
> 
> Now to spin this around that Punk is a draw and everything else lost 550k viewers is not really fair, if everything post the promo lost viewers that means that the Heyman-Punk video package lost a ton of viewers, which is still not good. But I doubt this is very accurate, since that angle did well last week. I dont think Big Show and Bryan backstage lost a ton of viewers since their match did so well, and if AJ Lee's entrance was hardly a minute and I dont think 500k people switched the channel at that instant, I just think that this quarter on the whole bled viewers.


I still think that the Punk promo was even, with it dropping afterwards. We've yet to see how Orton and Rhodes did in the previous quarter, but I definitely don't think Punk lost the entire 300,000 viewers as the breakdown and some posters are attempting to make out.


----------



## Ham and Egger

I love the squabbling of people who put value on a wrestler on how much a segment gained or lost viewers. This has become my new favorite thread.


----------



## Jammy

D.M.N. said:


> I still think that the Punk promo was even, with it dropping afterwards. We've yet to see how Orton and Rhodes did in the previous quarter, but I definitely don't think Punk lost the entire 300,000 viewers as the breakdown and some posters are attempting to make out.


Regardless, this week his segment did not do as well as it should have. He delivered a great and impassioned promo, which definitely did not deserve a significant drop in viewership. But this happens, without Heyman out there and Brock out of the picture it's not a big surprise that it didn't do as well as say last week.

Oh and Orton and Rhodes did extremely well, the post match had HHH out there, so I'm positive that did not lose viewers. The loss in viewership came after the Rhodes/Orton match, this included Punk's promo and the Divas Match.

Oh and even if viewership stayed even for Punk's promo, that's not the best result, since that timeslot has to gain.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wait, so people are blaming Punk for a 300,000 loss in a quarter that he was in for maybe a third of?

:lmao


----------



## Jammy

The Sandrone said:


> Wait, so people are blaming Punk for a 300,000 loss in a quarter that he was in for maybe a third of?
> 
> :lmao


If a Quarter is 15 minutes, Punk was in it in one form or the other for 10 minutes out of 15.

Oh and blame Meltzer then, since that was his direct quote. I like how majority of this thread is centered around the Observers breakdowns, and when it doesnt suit you, you call it bullshit.


----------



## Choke2Death

Good to hear Orton/Rhodes did well. That's what happens when they put something at stake. It wasn't even put in a reliable spot, but around 9:30 which is pretty random. (Y) 

This thread is funny. Orton is at the 10PM slot and loses viewers "LOL THAT DAMN ORTON KILLS RATINGS!!!", same happens with Punk "It wasn't his fault, it was that video package/commercial break that lost viewers". :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Jammy said:


> If a Quarter is 15 minutes, Punk was in it in one form or the other for 10 minutes out of 15.


I remember the promo ending at 10:05, he was in it for 5 out of 15, not counting video packages which almost always lose, and the. Some other crap, not to mention a commercial in between.

That wasn't Punk's quarter or anywhere close. It was a quarter Punk was a part of.

Orton/Christian took up the whole quarter so in that case, all the blame goes on them.


----------



## Jof

A18-49 rating peaked in the second hour of the show, so I think either Stephanie/show or Orton/Rhodes did really well or both.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Jammy said:


> If a Quarter is 15 minutes, Punk was in it in one form or the other for 10 minutes out of 15.
> 
> Oh and blame Meltzer then, since that was his direct quote. I like how majority of this thread is centered around the Observers breakdowns, and when it doesnt suit you, you call it bullshit.


Yep. You know if Bryan or Orton were in that same situation, they would get blamed for that QH, as well.


----------



## Jammy

The Sandrone said:


> I remember the promo ending at 10:05, he was in it for 5 out of 15, not counting video packages which almost always lose, and the. Some other crap, not to mention a commercial in between.
> 
> That wasn't Punk's quarter or anywhere close. It was a quarter Punk was a part of.
> 
> Orton/Christian took up the whole quarter so in that case, all the blame goes on them.


Watch it again, Punk was still there in the ring after the video package. The video recap was of Punk and Heyman anyway, which did tremendous last week. So to insinuate that Punk speaking on the mic gained a fuckton of viewers and then a recap of _him and Heyman_ lost a fuckton of viewers while he was still in the ring after it, makes no sense. 

This quarter, as a whole, tanked. Punk was a part of it, people love to blame one person or credit one person. But that is never the case. He was a significant part of a quarter that tanked, period.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Yep. You know if *Bryan* or Orton were in that same situation, they would get blamed for that QH, as well.


:lmao

Good one.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Sandrone said:


> :lmao
> 
> Good one.


It's also true. I guess laughter covers up the tears.

DOSE TEARS.

unk3


----------



## Choke2Death

Jammy said:


> Watch it again, Punk was still there in the ring after the video package. The video recap was of Punk and Heyman anyway, which did tremendous last week. So to insinuate that Punk speaking on the mic gained a fuckton of viewers and then a recap of _him and Heyman_ lost a fuckton of viewers while he was still in the ring after it, makes no sense.
> 
> This quarter, as a whole, tanked. Punk was a part of it, people love to blame one person or credit one person. But that is never the case. He was a significant part of a quarter that tanked, period.


Well put. If that quarter had gained a bunch of viewers, you know damn well they'd give all the credit to Punk and none of this "but he was only there for 5 minutes" shit would even be brought up.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

ShowStopper '97 said:


> It's also true. I guess laughter covers up the tears.
> 
> DOSE TEARS.
> 
> unk3


Nope, you believe people would blame Bryan? On here? You'd he doing the same thing I am. Trying to ring reason into this.

Punk was not a major part of the quarter, he wS standing there for less than a minute after the video ended. People were tuned out by that point. Why is that so hard to understand? A 5 minute promo is not a major part.


----------



## KO Bossy

Punk, you got some 'splaining to do for that Quarter Hour...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Sandrone said:


> Nope, you believe people would blame Bryan? On here? You'd he doing the same thing I am. Trying to ring reason into this.
> 
> Punk was not a major part of the quarter, he wS standing there for less than a minute after the video ended. People were tuned out by that point. Why is that so hard to understand? A 5 minute promo is not a major part.


Ok, I'll amend that statement. The Punk mark/Bryan haters (not that they necessarily hate Bryan, but for lack of a better term, people who are bigger Punk marks than Bryan marks) would absolutely blame/get on Bryan at least to a certain degree. No doubt in my mind.


----------



## Jammy

The Sandrone said:


> Nope, you believe people would blame Bryan? On here? You'd he doing the same thing I am. Trying to ring reason into this.
> 
> Punk was not a major part of the quarter, he wS standing there for less than a minute after the video ended. People were tuned out by that point. Why is that so hard to understand? A 5 minute promo is not a major part.


Bryan segments with Kane have lost viewers in the past, and nobody argued with that. The Hug it Out segment lost viewers, I was disappointed by that one especially, but hey, what can you do. 

What is your point anyway? Did Punk on the mic for 5 minutes gain or lose or stay steady? Answer that question. 

10pm slot, usually a big gainer, this time 10pm onwards they did not put on an important enough segment for it to draw and Punk was a part of that. He delivered a quality promo, and that's all we should care about. This doesn't change a single thing, they will continue to push him as a top talent.


----------



## Choke2Death

This reminds me of last year. Ryback had a squash match that lasted about 5 minutes at most in the 9PM quarter and when the breakdown came out for the whole quarter, it had lost viewers. I remember all the "Ryback is a failure, stop pushing him" comments pretty well.


----------



## superuser1

Orton segment at 10 o clock tanks Orton sucks,Orton is a ratings killer,Blandy Boreton sucks.....CM Punk segment at 10 o clock tanks Punk wasnt ready yet,Punk music lasted to long,there were to many commercials


----------



## D.M.N.

Jammy said:


> Regardless, this week his segment did not do as well as it should have.


Believe it or not, a 15 minute segment (last week) is more likely to do better than a 5 minute segment (this week).



Jammy said:


> Watch it again, Punk was still there in the ring after the video package.


The point is that the video package was already shown. Punk's music played before the package, signifying that the segment was over. If I was a viewer watching, it would have been pretty evident that there was the cue to turn over and find something else to watch. And I'm not sure why I'd want to rewatch a video package that I had already seen earlier in the show, Punk or no Punk.

In any case, the Males 18-49 breakdown will show the full picture, unfortunately I think we'll have to wait until early next week for that due to Labor Day.

Edit - Comparisons to Orton last week are largely invalid as that _did_ last the entire quarter, although did have commercials.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Jammy said:


> Bryan segments with Kane have lost viewers in the past, and nobody argued with that. The Hug it Out segment lost viewers, I was disappointed by that one especially, but hey, what can you do.
> 
> What is your point anyway? Did Punk on the mic for 5 minutes gain or lose or stay steady? Answer that question.
> 
> 10pm slot, usually a big gainer, this time 10pm onwards they did not put on an important enough segment for it to draw and Punk was a part of that. He delivered a quality promo, and that's all we should care about. This doesn't change a single thing, they will continue to push him as a top talent.


1) Did that hug it out or any of the other segments that last viewership take up the majority of the segment?

2) I don't know how Punk did because we don't hav that detailed info yet.

DMN telling DAT TROOF!


----------



## Jammy

D.M.N. said:


> Believe it or not, a 15 minute segment (last week) is more likely to do better than a 5 minute segment (this week).
> 
> 
> 
> The point is that the video package was already shown. Punk's music played before the package, signifying that the segment was over. If I was a viewer watching, it would have been pretty evident that there was the cue to turn over and find something else to watch. And I'm not sure why I'd want to rewatch a video package that I had already seen earlier in the show, Punk or no Punk.
> 
> In any case, the Males 18-49 breakdown will show the full picture, unfortunately I think we'll have to wait until early next week for that due to Labor Day.
> 
> Edit - Comparisons to Orton last week are largely invalid as that _did_ last the entire quarter, although did have commercials.


I'm still struggling to understand what your point is. Are you saying that when Punk was on the mic viewership rose, and then they recapped Heyman/Punk which was a tremendous segment, and the video was great, are you saying that lost more than what Punk gained? So Punk speaking on the mic is a big, big draw, but a video package lasting less than 2 minutes with Heyman and Punk, is a big killer? He still held court in the juicy 10pm slot, which should gain big, but it didnt. You know that. the 10 pm gain should offset any losses that 5 minutes of the quarter which was just Bryan and Show backstage and AJ's entrance. But it didnt, it was a net loss, and hence a poor quarter.

I prefaced this whole thing by saying that I don't attribute even 1 percent of the blame solely on Punk, he was just part of a quarter that did not do well. Why don't we ban Meltzer's breakdowns if they are so unreliable?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I think we can all agree the 10PM did very poorly, maybe even the worst of the year. Let's leave it at that.


----------



## D.M.N.

Jammy said:


> Why don't we ban Meltzer's breakdowns if they are so unreliable?


I don't think they should be banned per se, just that there needs to be caution, as time and time again it says X lost Y which is simply inaccurate when there were also A, B and C other things in that quarter.

To be fair, I do agree in saying that the 10pm quarter did do poor. Is that all Punk's fault? Not really, as is being made out above. Again, we'll get a clearer picture with the minute-by-minute M18-49 breakdown.


----------



## markedfordeath

ha ha Orton needs to have a match of importance to do well AFTER being around since 2003....that's just sad.....he's been around 10 years, he should be drawing on his own right now......


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Going backup a discussion from a few weeks ago, we have another piece of evidence in how important it is to make a match mean something, as that is what will draw people in. I don't know how much it gained, but considering the quarter it was in, any gain would be a success.


----------



## markedfordeath

but isn't a gain of any kind a good thing? I mean its better than losing viewers...even if you gain only 3,000 viewers, at least you gained and didn't lose.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

markedfordeath said:


> but isn't a gain of any kind a good thing? I mean its better than losing viewers...even if you gain only 3,000 viewers, at least you gained and didn't lose.


It also depends on the quarter rating, what happened before it, etc but in the 9, 10, and especially the overrun, a big gain is expected due to it being the turn of an hour. A 3,000 gain in the overrun is generally awful unless say, Q12 gained a million to a 4.0 rating and there wasn't really much, if any room for gain.


----------



## markedfordeath

all the overruns lately have been exceptional.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

God forbid they ever release second by second breakdowns.


----------



## Starbuck

:lmao


----------



## #1Peep4ever

This thread never disappoints


----------



## Amuroray

Cm punk needs a massive depush.

Clearly doest n have the drawing power required to lead a roster.

No wonder he never mains ppvs.


----------



## markedfordeath

no one on the roster has HUGE drawing power just yet....but with the right writing, it'll come..


----------



## Amuroray

markedfordeath said:


> no one on the roster has HUGE drawing power just yet....but with the right writing, it'll come..


cena does.

The man is insanely consistent.


----------



## markedfordeath

but the whole point is to elevate someone else..you really think they'll go into the new era with Cena again?


----------



## Londrick

ChickMagnet12 said:


> God forbid they ever release second by second breakdowns.


"They panned to the crowd during those 3 seconds so it's not Punk's fault the viewers dropped, it's the crowds"


----------



## Chicago Warrior

So far it has been more calm in here than I expected. I re-call more blood and tears when the Rock marks and Punk marks were going at it.


----------



## Happenstan

Dunmer said:


> "They panned to the crowd during those 3 seconds so it's not Punk's fault the viewers dropped, it's the crowds"


I could totally see that. "It's the fat guy in the front row. He didn't mean mug hard enough. You're killing da ratingz!!" :lol


----------



## markedfordeath

if the Corporation angle gets the best ratings moving forward compared to the rest of the segments, then I see Raw just basically revolving around it even more..and less random matches. and less filler...


----------



## Choke2Death

Dunmer said:


> "They panned to the crowd during those 3 seconds so it's not Punk's fault the viewers dropped, it's the crowds"


:lmao


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Dunmer said:


> "They panned to the crowd during those 3 seconds so it's not Punk's fault the viewers dropped, it's the crowds"


:lmao


----------



## BEE

Mark Henry needs to kill some Shield and then ratings will skyrocket. :mark:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Fable said:


> Mark Henry needs to kill some Shield and then ratings will skyrocket. :mark:


Didn't Mark Henry get injured? So it looks like he'll be taking time off, and he'll be taking RATINGS with him. It's got nothing to do with MNF obviously.


----------



## Bryan D.

The Sandrone said:


> Didn't Mark Henry get injured? So it looks like he'll be taking time off, and he'll be taking RATINGS with him. It's got nothing to do with MNF obviously.


Henry > MNF


----------



## BEE

The Sandrone said:


> Didn't Mark Henry get injured? So it looks like he'll be taking time off, and he'll be taking RATINGS with him. It's got nothing to do with MNF obviously.


Last I remember its not a very serious injury and he's only gone for a couple of weeks. Of course I'm sure I'm very wrong..

Mark Henry > MNF. Mark Henry w/ WWE title > Austin vs McMahons. :mark:

:lmao


----------



## Happenstan

I'm starting to wonder if we track Henry's injuries with football season if we might not see an interesting pattern start to form.


----------



## Falkono

Ouch at the Punk numbers. Would not surprise me to see him start bitching again soon as he has been on a losing streak for sometime now. Only one once at a ppv since Survivor series in November 2012. Can imagine he doesn't like being in the Curtis feud when you see what Bryan is doing.


----------



## Choke2Death

rton2 :bryan :HHH2 will make up for the lack of Mizark to the best of their abilities. But unfortunately, with MNF coming up, ratings will suffer with the lack of RATINGZ!



Spoiler: ratings

















The Sandrone said:


> :lmao


Y U COPY MY POST?!?!???!!???!!!! :cussin:


----------



## BEE

More Henry and VINCE = RATINGZZ :lmao


----------



## Amuroray

when will the ratings hit 2.2 guys?

I predict middle October at the latest.

With cm punk on the roster you never know how low it can go.


----------



## Choke2Death

Amuroray said:


> when will the ratings hit 2.2 guys?
> 
> I predict middle October at the latest.
> 
> With cm punk on the roster you never know how low it can go.


Since he doesn't have a segment minimum every hour now, I think the numbers are safe.


----------



## Amuroray

Choke2Death said:


> Since he doesn't have a segment minimum every hour now, I think the numbers are safe.


The ratings will never be safe while punks around.

He only needs 5 minutes to lose 300k+ viewers.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Ouch Punk. Taking the numbers at face value, this is not very good for a Punk promo and a weak "performance". Next week, they have to do something involving action and physical behavior instead of just another promo from Punk to sell the match. Punk is the best talker in the business today, but even that really does this feud no good. Instead of telling us how you're going to crush Heyman, SHOW us.


----------



## Sonnen Says

Amuroray said:


> Cm punk needs a massive depush.
> 
> Clearly doest n have the drawing power required to lead a roster.
> 
> No wonder he never mains ppvs.


I posted as soon as I saw your work of art and I will do that every time you post. Your'e too smart to not be recognized. No dude Punk needs to get his ass fired because if he doesn't draw that means he sucks and has *Zero* talent. Now where is the toilet...



Amuroray said:


> The ratings will never be safe while punks around.
> 
> He only needs 5 minutes to lose 300k+ viewers.


Of course because if Punk isn't in the roster ratings will sky rocket didn't you see the ratings when Punk wasn't even there it was so high that I cant even lift my legs as high anymore.


----------



## WWE

Don't worry.










He's coming to save us all.









​


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Cycloneon said:


> Don't worry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's coming to save us all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​


Jericho's coming back? Awesome!

:jericho


----------



## MaybeLock

Lol, some haterz here would love to see WWE out of business so they could blame it all on Punk :lmao

If the minute breakdown confirms that his actual segment (5 mins out of 15) lost all those viewers would really be something to worry about. I said that I didnt really expect big numbers for him this week, but losing 300k viewers is too much.


----------



## Amuroray

Sonnen Says said:


> I posted as soon as I saw your work of art and I will do that every time you post. Your'e too smart to not be recognized. No dude Punk needs to get his ass fired because if he doesn't draw that means he sucks and has *Zero* talent. Now where is the toilet...
> 
> 
> 
> Of course because if Punk isn't in the roster ratings will sky rocket didn't you see the ratings when Punk wasn't even there it was so high that I cant even lift my legs as high anymore.


dont be mad cos your boy cant draw.

There simply aren't enough 2edgy4u hipster ******* like you around to get his quarters up.

Dont be mad bro


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> :bryan :HHH2 will make up for the lack of Mizark to the best of their abilities. But unfortunately, with MNF coming up, ratings will suffer with the lack of RATINGZ!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: ratings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Y U COPY MY POST?!?!???!!???!!!! :cussin:


Cuz...

Oh, and I fixed your post for you  ... well sort of. Even :rock4, :hogan, :austin, :taker, :brock, and :HHH2 on the roster combined can't make up for :henry1.


----------



## Soulrollins

D.M.N. said:


> I'm not sure you understand how ratings work, so I'm not sure this is an debate worth entering. The loss of 300,000 viewers *covers 22:00 to 22:15*. Punk was in that segment for 5 minutes.
> 
> Based on past history, I expect that breaks down as:
> 
> 22:00 to 22:05 - +200k <-- Punk's bit
> 22:05 to 22:15 - -550k <-- rest of quarter hour *with filler*
> 22:00 to 22:15 - -300k
> 
> Is there something hard to understand there?


I'm missing something?


----------



## markedfordeath

man can you imagine if Punk and Bryan both got injured or something? WWE would be in deep shit..having to watch Miz and Kofi try to carry shit lol


----------



## BEE

To be fair Punk's segment had ZERO material to work with. Hell, I'm a massive Punk mark and even I tuned out on his segment this week. It kind of dragged.


----------



## RKOAJ

Raw rating this week will be low because of the holiday The current storyline will be good for the adults to watch since there kids will be going back to School no more bitching about bullying and other crap about WWE sending out bad messages to the childrens.


----------



## markedfordeath

yeah seriously, those kids will be in bed..so they can have the awesome bullying overrun going on without them knowing about it.


----------



## joeycalz

Almost positive Punk was just in a segment last week that gained over 600,000 viewers, so the only thing going on in this thread is brain cells being lost.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Amuroray said:


> dont be mad cos your boy cant draw.
> 
> There simply aren't enough 2edgy4u hipster ******* like you around to get his quarters up.
> 
> Dont be mad bro


Hawksea never gives up, no matter how many accounts he makes.


----------



## mblonde09

It's not Hawksea... Amuroray has been 'Amuroraying' (aka posting rubbish) since March '12.


----------



## Happenstan

joeycalz said:


> Almost positive Punk was just in a segment last week that gained over 600,000 viewers, so the only thing going on in this thread is brain cells being lost.


True but Heyman was out there beating Punk's ass so an argument could be made that Paul Heyman = Da Ratingz!!!


----------



## Soulrollins

Happenstan said:


> True but Heyman was out there beating Punk's ass so an argument could be made that Paul Heyman = Da Ratingz!!!


Plis.. That hasn't nothing to do with Heyman...


Curtis Axel = Da Ratingz.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

So how did AJ's epic pipebomb do?


----------



## Jof

It lost 500,000 viewers, it was a fail as per Meltzer.


----------



## JY57

The Boy Wonder said:


> So how did AJ's epic pipebomb do?


the 15 minute quarter she was in wasn't good. but minute by minute breakdown she gained viewers once she came out and did the 'pipebombshell'


----------



## chucky101

*Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*

first night of football, not 1 but 2 games

last weeks raw was down from previous, which is already a bad sign, and now 2 nfl games on monday

rather shocking they never atleast made a big match or tease anything at all

cant wait to see the daniel bryan fans with the excuses once the rating bombs, come on lets here them


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*

They don't need to, and plus it's the go home show before a PPV edition of Raw so it's mostly will be build up towards the PPV anyway. Why give a big match away on free in order to counter Monday Night Football. It's a totally difference audience. It would be a waste of time, and besides what big match on Raw would you see that we already haven't seen before anyway?


----------



## VGooBUG

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*



bigdog40 said:


> They don't need to, and plus it's the go home show before a PPV edition of Raw so it's mostly will be build up towards the PPV anyway. Why give a big match away on free in order to counter Monday Night Football. *It's a totally difference audience*. It would be a waste of time, and besides what big match on Raw would you see that we already haven't seen before anyway?


lol no it isnt, their viewers drop massively when football comes on, next weeks ratings/viewership is going to be bad


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*

because its important to give big match on free tv, thats a big part of the late 90s boom

every week there was a chance a big ppv caliber match was on tv, now its mostly all filler with very little great matches

not saying give away big title changes every week, but a element of whats missing on todays raw is a lack of really big matches like we saw in the late 90s

once in a while giving away a big ppv main event on raw, even if its surprise faction should happen once in a while like kane/austin night after KOTR


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*



VGooBUG said:


> lol no it isnt, their viewers drop massively when football comes on, next weeks ratings/viewership is going to be bad






Football is one of America's most popular sports, and it's only 16 weeks out of 52 Raw's they do every year. One's a legit sport with real stats with real outcomes. The other is just a stage act where you can follow it, dvr it, watch the clip on youtube 2 hours after Raw aired so it's not like Raw isn't accessible. Im watching Monday Night Football this week because my team is involved. It more depends on the fanbase of the team and the game they show. If it's a big game with two big teams, people are going to watch. If it's a shitty game where there is no playoff indication, not that many people will give a shit. It's usually the games at the end of the year.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*

Poor planning, as always. Why have the last 6 shows ended in the exact same way? WWE has a bad habit or resting on its laurels. They got a great storyline and ratings are up so they freeze everything in place for fear of fucking the whole thing up....and that of course leads to everything getting fucked up. I got this bad feeling that come January we are gonna be right where we are now with Orton as Champ and looking back at 5 months of faces getting beat down so John SeenIt can save us all.

Football is about to take a big bite out of WWE's ass though.


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*



bigdog40 said:


> Football is one of America's most popular sports, and it's only 16 weeks out of 52 Raw's they do every year. One's a legit sport with real stats with real outcomes. The other is just a stage act where you can follow it, dvr it, watch the clip on youtube 2 hours after Raw aired so it's not like Raw isn't accessible. Im watching Monday Night Football this week because my team is involved. It more depends on the fanbase of the team and the game they show. If it's a big game with two big teams, people are going to watch. If it's a shitty game where there is no playoff indication, not that many people will give a shit. It's usually the games at the end of the year.


lol another out of touch internet fan, you probably think daniel bryan is bigger than hulk hogan as well dont you

it will effect the rating, it will be bad, they can barely get over a 3.0 as it is

amazing how so many fans are so out of touch and not here in reality

its like truth doesnt matter to you, you believe whatever you want and spin it like its fact


----------



## Illumination

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*

In the Michael Cole & HHH interview, Trips said he was going to have a "town hall" type meeting with all the superstars to allow them without punishment to ask anything they like. It will probably be the main event that will carry the storyline into the PPV.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*



chucky101 said:


> lol another out of touch internet fan, you probably think daniel bryan is bigger than hulk hogan as well dont you


He's not? Which Hulk Hogan are we talking about? 80's Hulk...no. Today's Hulk...Santino Marella would give that poor bastard a run for his money.


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*

hopefully they get record low ratings, maybe vince will wake up

this whole storyline will end up with cena saving the day anyways, so who cares

go nfl


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*



Happenstan said:


> He's not? Which Hulk Hogan are we talking about? 80's Hulk...no. Today's Hulk...Santino Marella would give that poor bastard a run for his money.


my point was that the IWC hypes certain guys up, guys like william regal are rockstars, but only to the small number of nerdy wrestling fans, the mainstream doesnt care

i like bryan but he will not take this company the way austin or hogan or rock took it to great heights


----------



## donalder

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*

What big match wwe can make?


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*

Cause there's no need to announce a main event match before a show, when that show is already(or close to being) sold out.

They can just announce main event during the show, to see the (unpredictable) crowds reaction to it, then it could give them an idea of how they should end the match given the crowds reaction.


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*



chucky101 said:


> lol another out of touch internet fan, you probably think daniel bryan is bigger than hulk hogan as well dont you
> 
> it will effect the rating, it will be bad, they can barely get over a 3.0 as it is
> 
> amazing how so many fans are so out of touch and not here in reality
> 
> its like truth doesnt matter to you, you believe whatever you want and spin it like its fact




No I don't think Bryan is bigger than Hulk Hogan, but It's not going to matter if they take a hit. WWE has no control over Monday Night Football. This isn't the monday night war here. Geez some of you marks are so dumb. "Oh the WWE needs to make a big match to compete with Eagles/Redskins" Ok, a ten match is going to stop people from watch a 3 hour football game. Who cares if Raw takes a hit, they were going to take a hit regardless.


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*

lol you same fans that are saying dont announce anything will be the first ones with excuses once the rating bombs

you just follow whatever vince spills out, you defend anything, fanboys

it will be a beatdown on monday and everybody knows it


----------



## chucky101

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*

wait a minute, i thought daniel bryan was so great

so if hes so great, shouldnt the ratings be going up, they havent changed, in fact they went down last week

can someone explain this to me, whats the excuse this time


----------



## Sarcasm1

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*



chucky101 said:


> my point was that the IWC hypes certain guys up, guys like william regal are rockstars, but only to the small number of nerdy wrestling fans, the mainstream doesnt care
> 
> i like bryan but he will not take this company the way austin or hogan or rock took it to great heights


I don't think anyone expects DB to have the effect of those three, he's the Kurt Angle of the attitude era.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*

Because you don't give away huge main events for free?

And because it's not best for business.

:trips


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*



Sarcasm1 said:


> I don't think anyone expects DB to have the effect of those three, he's the Kurt Angle of the attitude era.





Anything Daniel Bryan does, it will be on the WWE app and on youtube right after the game is over. This isn't 1997 TV anymore where we would have to wait til they appear on Raw or if we miss Raw, we had to wait til the Saturday and Sunday recaps to find out what happened on Raw this past monday.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*



chucky101 said:


> hopefully they get record low ratings, maybe vince will wake up
> 
> this whole storyline will end up with cena saving the day anyways, so who cares
> 
> go nfl


wake up to what exactly, wwe are locked into long term tv deals and now have more prime time programming than anytime in their history and getting paid more for tv than anytime in their history, vince is sitting pretty knowing he will make 10 times more from domestic tv revenue in 2013 than he did in 1999

one week means fuck all in the grand scheme of things, 2 months means fuck all either, if raw is above the networks prime time average (roughly 2-2.2 million viewers) then everyone is happy, wwe still get paid the same money if raw does 6 million or 3 million

bryans not the champion either so not sure why you brought him up, back in 1997 with austin getting superhot raw did a 2.17 rating up against the first match of nfl season.. i do find it funny though that you think bryan danielson should be drawing big numbers against the fucking nfl that espn are paying $2 billion a year for 15 games


----------



## roamell

I just love how when Punk was champion he took almost all of the blame for ratings but now that Orton is all the blame is still on Punk and Bryan.


----------



## legendkiller316

Can somebody please reassure me that WWE do take it into account when the NFL season starts/finishes and how it affects their ratings. As in, they naturally expect lower ratings when the football is on.

I'd like to think they do consider it and Bryan/Orton aren't taking the blame for decreased ratings.

I know Orton has the title but Bryan is the main focus of the storyline. If WWE think he is the reason people aren't watching (ludicrous given his crowd reactions) then the poor guy is screwed.


----------



## markedfordeath

hes not screwed at all...they'll still be making money and they are expecting the ratings hit....the storyline is continuing regardless, once football season is over they go back up.


----------



## NearFall

So Punk's promo/segment tanked. Guess people wanted more than just a generic promise promo (I didn't find it too fantastic to be honest). Hopefully he does better next week. 



Amuroray said:


> His whole push has been for nothing.


Not at all, it has given some of the best parts of this thread.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

NearFall said:


> So Punk's promo/segment tanked. Guess people wanted more than just a generic promise promo (I didn't find it too fantastic to be honest). Hopefully he does better next week.


Have you been following? I mean, do people even bother reading the thread or do you just check out what Meltzer says and take it as that?

The quarter tanked, however we don't know how Punk's promo did yet until some time next week. It could end up being exactly how AJ's promo went. The quarter tanked with a 500k loss, but her promo was a big success iirc.


----------



## NearFall

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Have you been following? I mean, do people even bother reading the thread or do you just check out what Meltzer says and take it as that?
> 
> The quarter tanked, however we don't know how Punk's promo did yet until some time next week. It could end up being exactly how AJ's promo went. The quarter tanked with a 500k loss, but her promo was a big success iirc.


I only quoted numbers which are from Observer to be fair, so I wouldn't put it down as absolute fact until the in-depth numbers from Torch come in. But I was meaning in a general sense the segment he was involved in at least did poorly, and he was in that segment for a large amount of time. I don't see being that much better anyway with new numbers because it was a good time slot.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

To be fair, being in a 15 minute segment for 5 minutes isn't a large amount of time. But you have a point that because the segment tanked, something in there dropped a shit ton of viewers. We just don't know it was Punk's promo (highly unlikely) that did it, and we won't until the Torch numbers come in.

You'd be surprised by how many people just can't seem to understand that.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Because you don't give away huge main events for free?
> 
> And because it's not best for business.
> 
> :trips


Something WCW never quite seemed to understand.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Why Didn't WWE Make a Big Match for This Monday?*



KO Bossy said:


> Something WCW never quite seemed to understand.


Heh, ain't that the truth. Goldberg vs. Hogan for the title, for the first time ever? Perfect match for Nitro! 

But hey, at least we got to hear Tony Schiavone proclaim, "Welcome fans, to the biggest night in the history of our sport!" every. single. week. :lmao

EDIT- We need a Tony Schiavone smiley.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

So apparently Orton is a draw and Punk isn't? FYI, Orton lost 150,000 viewers in the 10 O'clock segment last Monday. Face facts marks, they are both inconsistent as fuck.

And deal with this fact, Daniel Bryan is a bigger draw than both of them combined currently. While Orton and Punk have consistently shown mediocrity, Daniel Bryan is climbing that ratings ladder.

Face it, :bryan and :HHH2 are carrying this angle. Orton is below the both of them.


----------



## Jammy

The angle (or storyline or whatever) is drawing, and Bryan is a big part of it, no more no less. 

Angles draw, not individual wrestlers in non advertised nothing matches. Over wrestlers are put in angles, or matches that matter and they draw. Then, they get over further and so it goes on.


----------



## Happenstan

Jammy said:


> The angle (or storyline or whatever) is drawing, and Bryan is a big part of it, no more no less.
> 
> Angles draw, not individual wrestlers in non advertised nothing matches. Over wrestlers are put in angles, or matches that matter and they draw. Then, they get over further and so it goes on.


And how do you explain Bryan/Cesaro from a little over a month ago doing big ratings after Bryan had just wrestled Swagger for 10 minutes before it? TakeMyGun is right. Bryan is drawing his ass off right now....on Raw and Smackdown. Whether it will continue or not remains to be seen.


----------



## markedfordeath

even if it drops off a bit, the fact that he's proven he can draw is a HUGE thing for them and makes his future even more brighter down the road....


----------



## mblonde09

So we're still none the wiser, as to whether Punk's five minute odd promo - you know, the part of the quarter he can actually be held accountable for, did lose all those viewers.


----------



## Jammy

Happenstan said:


> And how do you explain Bryan/Cesaro from a little over a month ago doing big ratings after Bryan had just wrestled Swagger for 10 minutes before it? TakeMyGun is right. Bryan is drawing his ass off right now....on Raw and Smackdown. Whether it will continue or not remains to be seen.


Bryan/Cesaro was part of a bigger story, and it was a fucking great match, it wasn't a 'nothing' match at all, it was the first Gauntlet match of this year.

I agree the audiences are interested in him, but if you suddenly put him in a match that doesn't matter, I dont think it will do as well. Bryan/Kane match before Summerslam lost viewers iirc.


----------



## D.M.N.

Jammy said:


> Bryan/Kane match before Summerslam lost viewers iirc.


Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that was on the taped show, where not much actually happened.


----------



## validreasoning

D.M.N. said:


> Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that was on the taped show, where not much actually happened.


you are correct it was the taped show and bryan and kane gained viewers, not alot but they gained

"Daniel Bryan vs. Kane at 10 p.m. gained 60,000 viewers"


----------



## Jammy

D.M.N. said:


> Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that was on the taped show, where not much actually happened.





validreasoning said:


> you are correct it was the taped show and bryan and kane gained viewers, not alot but they gained
> 
> "Daniel Bryan vs. Kane at 10 p.m. gained 60,000 viewers"


Damn, maybe I should just give in and say 'Bryan is a draw', I'm wary of making proclamations like that since they can bite you in the ass


----------



## Happenstan

Jammy said:


> Damn, maybe I should just give in and say 'Bryan is a draw', I'm wary of making proclamations like that since they can bite you in the ass


No worries. He's drawing *right now*. That doesn't mean it will last forever. It doesn't mean it will last the month but currently since breaking from Hell No and ascending to main event status he has been connecting with casuals and drawing in people wanting to watch him. Personally I think this is going to be the new norm popularity wise for Bryan barring some really shitty booking in his future but that is a total guess at this point. As with everything we wait and see.


----------



## NearFall

The thing that will be interesting with Bryan regards ratings success (long term here, at least until this major angle ends), is to see how someone fairs nowadays after growing slowly and "organically" in terms of popularity. Bryan has had a steady run upwards in terms of popularity since 2012. Punk who was the newest majorly pushed talent throughout 2011-2012 came somewhat out of nowhere due to the pipebomb promo, before going along this path over a shorter period of time (he became champion 1 month after a single promo where he was jobber-to-the-stars heel).


----------



## MaybeLock

Well, people are supporting Bryan and he´s clearly drawing, if they don't let him or the Corporation storyline get stale I see no reason for this to change. I mean, if all we are going to get every week is Big Show crying while Bryan gets crushed by The Shield and Orton, obviously viewers will go, but if they stop making the very same ending for every show and keep the storyline fresh, the ratings won't drop.


----------



## markedfordeath

just read the Torch today....it started to be just Wade Keller who believed that Triple H was burying Bryan on purpose, but now out of nowhere the rest of the guys like Radican and Mitchell as well are now thinking that Triple H and Vince are trying to bury Bryan......so now all of the insiders are thinking that's what they're trying to do, but the fans haven't left Bryan's side......so they're in a pickle...if its true, that they're trying to do it on purpose, what business sense does that make?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I sure hope that's true. Bryan's an upper-mid card talent, at his absolute best. Let him stay there.


----------



## Oliver-94

markedfordeath said:


> just read the Torch today....it started to be just Wade Keller who believed that Triple H was burying Bryan on purpose, but now out of nowhere the rest of the guys like Radican and Mitchell as well are now thinking that Triple H and Vince are trying to bury Bryan......so now all of the insiders are thinking that's what they're trying to do, but the fans haven't left Bryan's side......so they're in a pickle...if its true, that they're trying to do it on purpose, what business sense does that make?


 I highly doubt that is true. Why bury your most over wrestler and best talent? Makes no sense. Bryan is getting his main event push. Like it or not :rock


----------



## Jammy

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I sure hope that's true. Bryan's an upper-mid card talent, at his absolute best. Let him stay there.


Only an imbecile will think that this storyline is designed to keep Bryan in the so called 'upper midcard'. Bryan has been Main-Eventing RAW and SD! over Orton, this is clearly a mega-push.

This is a star making storyline, you don't give somebody a clean win over Cena to keep them in the upper-midcard. Your bias is surely affecting your intellect.

Bruce Mitchell is a smarky, annoying knob who likes to be as pessimistic as possible, and none of them really like HHH.


----------



## NearFall

Yeah, they're going to abandon ship and bury Bryan by giving him a 100% clean win over Cena at SummerSlam. :vince


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Jammy said:


> This is a star making storyline, you don't give somebody a clean win over Cena to keep them in the upper-midcard. Your bias is surely affecting your intellect.


Never said it was happening, smart one. Clearly they're giving Bryan this huge push because they're serious about him for some reason. All I said was I hope they send him back down once his heat/storyline dies, since it might actually get me entertained by the product again, instead of just one storyline.


----------



## Jammy

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Never said it was happening, smart one. Clearly they're giving Bryan this huge push because they're serious about him for some reason. All I said was I hope they send him back down once his heat/storyline dies, since it might actually get me entertained by the product again, instead of just one storyline.


Why should it matter? You only watch RAW for Punk anyway.

The worst marks are people who continue watching every week despite the 'product' not being entertaining to them, and then discussing the lack of entertainment on forums. Top lel.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Jammy said:


> Why should it matter? You only watch RAW for Punk anyway.
> 
> The worst marks are people who continue watching every week despite the 'product' not being entertaining to them, and then discussing the lack of entertainment on forums. Top lel.


As if there's anything else.  They only put enough effort into two storylines. And now with Cena gone, Punk and Heyman are the only things to give a shit about. Sorry for having a different opinion, or actually, saying something that doesn't praise Bryan.


----------



## Oliver-94

Yeah it must be fun watching Punk feuding with Axel. 

Each to their own.


----------



## James1o1o

MaybeLock said:


> Well, people are supporting Bryan and he´s clearly drawing


No, he isn't. That's the point. :lol

No one is drawing. The WWE has the same general amount of viewers. This Monday coming, we should see another sharp decline due to NFL. The rating we get on Monday, will probably be the same rating give or take a .1 or .2 week in/out until NFL ends. Wait till December and I bet the average rating for the year will be the same as last or lower. Wrestling is a dying business. WWE aren't going to magic in millions of extra viewers. WWE has been putting on some of the best wrestling and story lines I have seen in years recently. They are clearly heading in a good direction for the current viewer base.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Never said it was happening, smart one. Clearly they're giving Bryan this huge push because they're serious about him for some reason. All I said was I hope they send him back down once his heat/storyline dies, since it might actually get me entertained by the product again, instead of just one storyline.


You're only interested in Punk's storylines so what does it matter what anybody else does? I'm not even being funny or trying to start something when I say that either. It just seems to me from what I've seen you post, that you only care about Punk's storylines so of course you aren't going to be entertained by the entire WWE product when he's only on TV a maximum of around 15-20 minutes out of a possible 5 hours every week. The same goes for if he was the main event storyline right now too. He'd still only be be on for around 25-35 mins a week if that was the case. Fact is, if you're only watching for one guy then the WWE product as a whole will never be entertaining to you for obvious reasons.


----------



## #Mark

They're intention may be to make Bryan a top guy but I really don't think that will be the end result. Call me crazy, but I don't think Bryan will ever be as strong or credible as he was when he beat Cena clean.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Oliver-94 said:


> Yeah it must be fun watching Punk feuding with Axel.
> 
> Each to their own.


He's feuding with Axel?



Starbuck said:


> You're only interested in Punk's storylines so what does it matter what anybody else does? I'm not even being funny or trying to start something when I say that either. It just seems to me from what I've seen you post, that you only care about Punk's storylines so of course you aren't going to be entertained by the entire WWE product when he's only on TV a maximum of around 15-20 minutes out of a possible 5 hours every week. The same goes for if he was the main event storyline right now too. He'd still only be be on for around 25-35 mins a week if that was the case. Fact is, if you're only watching for one guy then the WWE product as a whole will never be entertaining to you for obvious reasons.


Not necessarily. There obviously was a time when the entire product entertained me. It just has to do with the talent. And right now, there isn't much talent, and I mean real talent, to keep me entertained. When the Shield was hot and delivering good shit every week, I loved that. Now, they're practically directionless. I'll love whatever work Cena does, but he's gone. RVD is always fun to watch, but I don't give a shit about Del Rio.

What I'm getting at is, I'm entertained by talent, and what creative does with talent. But creative can't put in enough thought into more than two storylines. Everyone in the main storyline right now other than Triple H GOATing as a heel, sucks. Just terrible. That's my opinion. And everybody that I find entertaining is just lost in the shuffle or gone for the time being. That leaves Punk and Heyman. And because Punk's the guy I find to be the most entertaining, I'll be most vocal about him. Makes sense, no?

And I only watch RAW. Well, some of it.


----------



## markedfordeath

with all due respect though, Bryan and Punk together were highly respected in the indies and were always comparable to one another and they had the same reputation as being the guy you want to face in the indies..so when you say Bryan is an upper mid card talent at best and he should stay there, you can say the same thing about Punk as well....they're highly comparable on many levels.....


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

markedfordeath said:


> with all due respect though, Bryan and Punk together were highly respected in the indies and were always comparable to one another and they had the same reputation as being the guy you want to face in the indies..so when you say Bryan is an upper mid card talent at best and he should stay there, you can say the same thing about Punk as well....they're highly comparable on many levels.....


You can't really compare them since Punk's got it all and Bryan's got, well, he can wrestle.


----------



## markedfordeath

I know..i just mean on indies...they were both "the guy" there....along with Aries, but Aries was always on the back burner when it came to those two...and Punk's been given more opportunities at the top then Bryan, we'll see how it shakes out.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I think WWE has done a tremndous job recently of putting the talent in storylines they should be in. Bryan should be the top face right now. He is clearly the most over and has drawn viewers even on SMACKDOWN. I think people who want Bryan to get demoted are going to be extremely disappointed. One thing WWE has proven is that if you can attract viewers they will continue to go with you. Not only that, but this storyline is clearly here for the long haul. They've done a tremendous job recently. Everyone is where they SHOULD be, clearly.

I will say outside of this top storyline, I don't really care about much on the show. This, to me, is the only watchable angle on the show right now.


----------



## markedfordeath

but also WWE has proven that they'll bypass business sense and keep a guy at the top that they just like...Michaels and Bret Hart never drew ratings, and look how long they were both at the top.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

ShowStopper '97 said:


> I think WWE has done a tremndous job recently of putting the talent in storylines they should be in. Bryan should be the top face right now. He is clearly the most over and has drawn viewers even on SMACKDOWN. I think people who want Bryan to get demoted are going to be extremely disappointed. One thing WWE has proven is that if you can attract viewers they will continue to go with you. Not only that, but this storyline is clearly here for the long haul. They've done a tremendous job recently. Everyone is where they SHOULD be, clearly.
> 
> *I will say outside of this top storyline, I don't really care about much on the show. This, to me, is the only watchable angle on the show right now.*


But we already knew that. :adr


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Not necessarily. There obviously was a time when the entire product entertained me. It just has to do with the talent. And right now, there isn't much talent, and I mean real talent, to keep me entertained. When the Shield was hot and delivering good shit every week, I loved that. Now, they're practically directionless. I'll love whatever work Cena does, but he's gone. RVD is always fun to watch, but I don't give a shit about Del Rio.
> 
> What I'm getting at is, I'm entertained by talent, and what creative does with talent. But creative can't put in enough thought into more than two storylines. Everyone in the main storyline right now other than Triple H GOATing as a heel, sucks. Just terrible. That's my opinion. And everybody that I find entertaining is just lost in the shuffle or gone for the time being. That leaves Punk and Heyman. And because Punk's the guy I find to be the most entertaining, I'll be most vocal about him. Makes sense, no?
> 
> And I only watch RAW. Well, some of it.


I got no problem with opinions. But the only opinion I've ever seen you give on here is about Punk being great and everybody else being shit which is why I correctly assumed that you're only watching for him. Nobody can tell you who to like but like I said before, if you're only watching even just Raw for CM Punk, given his current storyline, of course you aren't going to find it an entertaining product when you don't like anything else that's going on.

Personally, I'm enjoying a lot of stuff in current WWE and that's driven by the main angle filtering down into other characters outside the main ones. Even the Divas have my interest at the minute which is saying something. I have no real complaints which isn't something I could have said a few months ago.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

markedfordeath said:


> but also WWE has proven that they'll bypass business sense and keep a guy at the top that they just like...Michaels and Bret Hart never drew ratings, and look how long they were both at the top.


They were on top because they were clearly the two most talented guys in the company those years. Who else should have been on top those years? Also, Cena's last title reign wasn't exactly drawing on Raw since he won it at WM 29. We shall see, I guess.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

:lmao @ Keller & the "insiders" backtracking all of a sudden. This is why "wrestling journalists" today blow so hard.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Sandrone said:


> But we already knew that. :adr


I'm not someone who says that and is happy about it, though. The more quality storylines, the better.


----------



## markedfordeath

yeah, they have no choice but to have Bryan, Punk and Cena on top....i don't see any Rhodes shirts or Swagger shirts or Sandow shirts in the crowd..those guys have a long ways to go......so the current three on top are staying there for the time being. they have no choice.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> I got no problem with opinions. But the only opinion I've ever seen you give on here is about Punk being great and everybody else being shit which is why I correctly assumed that you're only watching for him. Nobody can tell you who to like but like I said before, if you're only watching even just Raw for CM Punk, given his current storyline, of course you aren't going to find it an entertaining product when you don't like anything else that's going on.


It's not about Punk necessarily, it's about who's good enough for me to personally find entertaining. I don't find Bryan or Orton entertaining, therefore I don't care for the storyline. Which leaves only one main angle, and that's Punk's. No shit I'm not going to find the things that I don't like entertaining. If the product had more things that I could like, I would find those things entertaining.


----------



## #Mark

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> You can't really compare them since Punk's got it all and Bryan's got, well, he can wrestle.


But Bryan has the drawing power.. Can't say the same for Punk.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

ShowStopper '97 said:


> I'm not someone who says that and is happy about it, though. The more quality storylines, the better.


I'm with you though on the last point. It's why I loved the build to Summerslam. You had Punk/Lesnar, Cena/Bryan, Sandow/Rhodes, and Henry and Co./Shield as some very entertaining storylines. 

Things have slowed down a bit, but I'm still loving the Punk/Heyman stuff (despite Axel) in addition to the Bryan/HHH and Corporation stuff...

... but you already knew that. :adr


----------



## funnyfaces1

Nobody has the drawing power except for :henry1


----------



## Oliver-94

The Sandrone said:


> ... but you already knew that. :adr


 It's funny how all of ADL's title feuds (during his recent heel run) have been shit :lol


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

#Mark said:


> But Bryan has the drawing power.. Can't say the same for Punk.


Bryan has drawing power? :lmao

He's been pushed for about two months, and is involved as the lead in a storyline that involves the Corporation, plus the entire roster. He's obviously going to draw some big numbers. Before the storyline started at SS, he was getting show low 2.6's. Meanwhile Punk being with just Heyman and Axel has been getting very high numbers as well.

Before you jump to such blind conclusions, we'd have to see how Bryan fares when he's paired up with somebody beneath him, without a huge storyline like this one. That hasn't happened yet. And before anybody calls that hating because you just know somebody will, that's honestly just being realistic.


----------



## Starbuck

BIG E WINNING said:


> :lmao @ Keller & the "insiders" backtracking all of a sudden. This is why "wrestling journalists" today blow so hard.


Read either Keller or Meltzer's twitter timelines from the past week or so if you want a good chuckle. Meltzer responding to fans calling him out and getting himself all worked up while Keller's getting into arguments with Sean Waltman over HHH and his 'abuse of power' lol. It made me :lol. 



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> It's not about Punk necessarily, it's about who's good enough for me to personally find entertaining. I don't find Bryan or Orton entertaining, therefore I don't care for the storyline. Which leaves only one main angle, and that's Punk's. No shit I'm not going to find the things that I don't like entertaining. If the product had more things that I could like, I would find those things entertaining.


.....I know? You don't find anything entertaining outside Punk therefore the quality of the show sucks for you. We're both saying the same thing here.


----------



## Jammy

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> You can't really compare them since Punk's got it all and Bryan's got, well, he can wrestle.


Bullshit, even in the indies Bryan was the top dog for more than just wrestling, he had something about him that made people love him. That innate charisma, that's something not even you can take away from him. 

I was somebody who used to think of him as a boring vanilla midget, and if I can find him entertaining, anybody can. Clearly, my opinion are reflected by a vast majority of wrestling fans who were entertained by him for the past year and a half. 

So saying shit like, Bryan can only wrestle, doesn't help with your credibility. Watch his shit on Saturday Morning Slam,or the JBL and Cole show or his entire heel run with the WHC where he picked up his game and was massively entertaining. He got over because he was entertaining, period.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Meltzer and Keller are just as much of marks as the kids who wear Cena shirts. They just use the jounalist bravado to make them seem like them and their opinions are highly above ours and should be the gospel when I bet people ACTUALLY in the business just laugh their asses off that they're getting just as worked as the casuals are.

Quite funny, really.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> .....I know? You don't find anything entertaining _*right now*_ outside Punk therefore the quality of the show sucks for you. We're both saying the same thing here.


Okay then. Glad you caught up.


----------



## Starbuck

BIG E WINNING said:


> Meltzer and Keller are just as much of marks as the kids who wear Cena shirts. They just use the jounalist bravado to make them seem like them and their opinions are highly above ours and should be the gospel when I bet people ACTUALLY in the business just laugh their asses off that they're getting just as worked as the casuals are.
> 
> Quite funny, really.


There's a really funny Cody Rhodes ownage of Keller on twitter. Damn I'll try to go find it. He basically told him to stop crying after Keller took the huff after Cody said wrestling journalists don't exist or something. :lmao



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Okay then. Glad you caught up.


I'm not seeing the difference. We both said the exact same thing but if you feel the need to somehow clarify that you find things other than CM Punk entertaining then you go right ahead...


----------



## NearFall

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> You can't really compare them since Punk's got it all and Bryan's got, well, he can wrestle.


Do you not see anything else at all in Bryan, out of interest. Because everyone has different opinions (and you're perfectly entitled to yours about Bryan) but I always thought that Bryan had a certain innate charm/charisma going for him. Everyone I know enjoys Bryan and fans as a whole seem to have embraced him. Sure, I see his lack of mic. skills but he isn't terrible.


----------



## markedfordeath

I'd hate to see what happens if CM Punk retires one day or gets injured...he might not watch at all.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

PLEASE find that tweet.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> I'm not seeing the difference. We both said the exact same thing but if you feel the need to somehow clarify that you find things other than CM Punk entertaining then you go right ahead...


I didn't need to clarify that I find things other than Punk entertaining, I was telling you _why_ I find only Punk right now entertaining, because you brought it up. It's mainly because Cena's gone and guys such as the Shield or lost. So instead of being mostly entertained by Punk and having other things on the show entertain me too like a month to a few months ago, _right now_ it's Punk entertaining me and that's it.



> Do you not see anything else at all in Bryan, out of interest. Because everyone has different opinions (and you're perfectly entitled to yours about Bryan) but I always thought that Bryan had a certain innate charm/charisma going for him. Everyone I know enjoys Bryan and fans as a whole seem to have embraced him. Sure, I see his lack of mic. skills but he isn't terrible.


I don't see what's so likable about him. I find that he carries himself very poorly, like he doesn't know what to do now that he's actually in the main event. Painful listening to him talk because he's so dull, and I can't take him seriously looking at him. Also the "Yes" thing annoys the shit out of me when he does it outside of his entrance. Is it really necessary?

So yeah, wrestling skills are all I see in Bryan.


----------



## Starbuck

BIG E WINNING said:


> PLEASE find that tweet.


EDIT - C2D I'm going to steal your link because tinypic is fucking up on me here. 

https://twitter.com/CodyRhodesWWE/status/373599635647901696

:lmao



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I didn't need to clarify that I find things other than Punk entertaining, I was saying _why_ I find only Punk right now entertaining. It's mainly because Cena's gone and guys such as the Shield or lost. So instead of being mostly entertained by Punk and having other things on the show entertain me too like a month to a few months ago, _right now_ it's Punk entertaining me and that's it.


I know!


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

:lmao What a fucking douche. That first tweet had me rolling!


----------



## Starbuck

BIG E WINNING said:


> :lmao What a fucking douche. That first tweet had me rolling!


Twitter is a blessing and a curse for the entire wrestling BIZ if you ask me. Too much opportunity for stupid shit. I don't have one but I love to go on there and read around on the topics of the day. As you can see, you find some good stuff lol.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

LOL "RHODEZ MADE MEH MAD BECUZ I HAZ 25 YEARZ OFF EXPIERENCE OF GEEVIN WRAZZLIN OPINIONZ LYKE ERRYBODIE ELZE! GRRRR RAWR 111"

:ti Man, log off Keller.


----------



## markedfordeath

when does the quarterly breakdown of Raw come out?


----------



## Choke2Death

Here's the link to the whole tweet. https://twitter.com/CodyRhodesWWE/status/373599635647901696

Also find it funny how Cody took it upon himself to randomly respond to that first tweet which wasn't even talking to him. :lol


----------



## Happenstan

Oliver-94 said:


> Yeah it must be fun watching Punk feuding with Axel.
> 
> Each to their own.


Hey some of us had to deal with Punk on top for 434 days. If you can't last a month and a half....I pity you.




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> You can't really compare them since Punk's got it all and Bryan's got, well, he can wrestle.


Bryan's also got the credibility and popularity in 2 months in the main event that it took Punk 2 years to attain. Punk should be ashamed of that. 2 years to do what it took Bryan 2 months to do. :lol


----------



## Cliffy

BIG E WINNING said:


> Meltzer and Keller are just as much of marks as the kids who wear Cena shirts. They just use the jounalist bravado to make them seem like them and their opinions are highly above ours and should be the gospel when I bet people ACTUALLY in the business just laugh their asses off that they're getting just as worked as the casuals are.
> 
> Quite funny, really.


Wrong on so many levels.

I dislike wade especially but this is totally ignorant. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Nah, not really. They overrate themselves on how they really are in the retrospect of the business.


----------



## Starbuck

Keller is big time pissed over the current storyline. I haven't listened to the latest live cast yet but I'm looking forward to the bitching no doubt. He's basing his entire opinion off the fact that he was in attendance at SD this week, that HHH made jokes and that Bryan didn't get a Rock/Austin level pop. 

DAT KELLER


----------



## checkcola

So, this thread has become more Punk/Bryan markwars and a bit of wrestling journalists being pissed at Triple H. 

Nothing ever changes.


----------



## #Mark

I do agree that Keller is overreacting, he still seems to be butthurt over the grantland article.. But I think Meltzer and Bryan Alvarez are spot on. Hunter's performance has been great but that still doesn't excuse the damage being done. He needs to stop making comments that completely undermine the babyfaces on the roster, that is counterproductive and only serves to get him over. The stuff he says sometimes is baffling to me. They don't need need to verbally bury the guys in order to get heat on Hunter.. Hunter's a great heel, he can do without that. 

While we're on the subject of Meltzer and Keller, I really hate the attitude in the wrestling business towards anyone who tries to cover the industry. You don't see that in any other medium of art, why does that exist in wrestling? Because it's fake? So is every other entertainment genre. Why can't knowledgable guys like Meltzer and Keller give their opinion on the product without being criticized?


----------



## markedfordeath

I especially loved it when Triple H called the whole roster "little people" when he said Bryan had an ego lol


----------



## markedfordeath

And Bryan doesn't get a Rock pop every single night, but in some cities he totally does, he still gets cheered no matter where he goes though, the crowds in every city aren't the greatest but he gets the most cheers in every city regardless of how loud.


----------



## KO Bossy

Oh hey look, Bryan marks and Punk marks are fighting again. What was it, 10 minutes you weren't at each other's throats?


----------



## funnyfaces1

This is the second stupidest mark war ever. Only thing stupider was when Rock and Austin marks were arguing over whether their favorite got a decibel higher pop than the other among other things. I guess this is what happens when the main event scene is filled with talented individuals. Without Cena, we don't have a scapegoat.

COME BACK CENA :cena2


----------



## markedfordeath

when Cena comes back the decibel meter will be at 0.


----------



## Green Light

Holy cow just took a gander at the Wade Keller twitter stuff and it's legitimately like trying to read another language. I couldn't understand who was saying what and talking to who. Seemed like Keller was arguing with some geeks, X-Pac got involved and then Big Dave Meltzer himself made a run-in. Fuuuark.


----------



## N-destroy

Keller and Meltzer bitching about the angle, who would have thought?  These people always bitch about any angle that involves Nash, HHH and Hogan. Meltzer more so than Keller. This shit isn't new, they have been doing this for years. 

Generally addressing those who have an issue with this angle.... If you share the same opinion as these two, that's fine but its important to understand HHH's role here. There are always specific roles certain characters are built for, without it they have no purpose. Think about the booking guys like Brock Lesnar, Mark Henry, Ryback or Goldberg had, basically squashing the undercard to build them up. Because thats what their role was/is, to be the powerhouse heavyweights dominating everyone. If you're not going to give 'em that booking, then there is no reason in having these talents on the show. Same way Triple H as a heel character has a role to play, he's the evil boss that controls everyone on the roster. If you're not giving him that, then turning him heel was an utterly stupid move and a complete waste. WWE absolutely needs to hammer it home with their fans that Triple H is the guy bullying their favorites who are powerless against him. The more frustrated the fans are, the bigger the comeuppance at the end of it all, is. When you look at some of the greatest movies like Apocalypse now, or some of the best TV shows of the past, the story building throughout matters the most, even more than the finish. Thats when movies leaves you with a "wow, that was awesome" feeling. Pro-wrestling is no different, its essential to build a strong story before getting to the ultimate finish. Its only been three weeks with this corporate angle, instead of nit-picking and looking for reasons to complain, why not let things play out and try to enjoy it? Yes, I do realize Triple H's reputation in the IWC is bad, he's the guy that puts himself over all the time but in reality that's not the case. This is not Eric bischoff/nWo we're talking here, Vince/HHH have always known the importance of heels getting their comeuppance. In the past 13 years, HHH himself has been involved in some of the biggest babyface moments, like Backlash 00, WM 20, WM 21 etc. He certainly understands what's best for business(no pun intended).

Despite Wade keller's "HHH and Mcmahons be power tripping!!!!" non-sense, I think any intelligent fan would understand that is not the case. As a talent, Triple H doesn't hold anymore backstage power/authority that he didn't back in 2003. Its idiotic to believe even a decade later HHH still would find the need to show everyone how powerful he is. A smart fan would know Mcmahons/Triple H truly care about WWE. They want WWE to remain successful, they want to make new stars that can be successful as top guys. This is why Punk held the title for 434 days, this is why Bryan beat Cena clean, and this is why indy talents like Moxley, Claudio, hero, Tyler have all been signed and are a big part of WWE now. There is no power tripping here, just stupid writers looking to criticize as usual, because that is all they ever do and can do. And quite honestly, this has become their full time job.


----------



## markedfordeath

Its Sunday and still no Raw Breakdown? wow!


----------



## #Mark

N-destroy said:


> Keller and Meltzer bitching about the angle, who would have thought?  These people always bitch about any angle that involves Nash, HHH and Hogan. Meltzer more so than Keller. This shit isn't new, they have been doing this for years.
> 
> Generally addressing those who have an issue with this angle.... If you share the same opinion as these two, that's fine but its important to understand HHH's role here. There are always specific roles certain characters are built for, without it they have no purpose. Think about the booking guys like Brock Lesnar, Mark Henry, Ryback or Goldberg had, basically squashing the undercard to build them up. Because thats what their role was/is, to be the powerhouse heavyweights dominating everyone. If you're not going to give 'em that booking, then there is no reason in having these talents on the show. Same way Triple H as a heel character has a role to play, he's the evil boss that controls everyone on the roster. If you're not giving him that, then turning him heel was an utterly stupid move and a complete waste. WWE absolutely needs to hammer it home with their fans that Triple H is the guy bullying their favorites who are powerless against him. The more frustrated the fans are, the bigger the comeuppance at the end of it all, is. When you look at some of the greatest movies like Apocalypse now, or some of the best TV shows of the past, the story building throughout matters the most, even more than the finish. Thats when movies leaves you with a "wow, that was awesome" feeling. Pro-wrestling is no different, its essential to build a strong story before getting to the ultimate finish. Its only been three weeks with this corporate angle, instead of nit-picking and looking for reasons to complain, why not let things play out and try to enjoy it? Yes, I do realize Triple H's reputation in the IWC is bad, he's the guy that puts himself over all the time but in reality that's not the case. This is not Eric bischoff/nWo we're talking here, Vince/HHH have always known the importance of heels getting their comeuppance. In the past 13 years, HHH himself has been involved in some of the biggest babyface moments, like Backlash 00, WM 20, WM 21 etc. He certainly understands what's best for business(no pun intended).
> 
> Despite Wade keller's "HHH and Mcmahons be power tripping!!!!" non-sense, I think any intelligent fan would understand that is not the case. As a talent, Triple H doesn't hold anymore backstage power/authority that he didn't back in 2003. Its idiotic to believe even a decade later HHH still would find the need to show everyone how powerful he is. A smart fan would know Mcmahons/Triple H truly care about WWE. They want WWE to remain successful, they want to make new stars that can be successful as top guys. This is why Punk held the title for 434 days, this is why Bryan beat Cena clean, and this is why indy talents like Moxley, Claudio, hero, Tyler have all been signed and are a big part of WWE now. There is no power tripping here, just stupid writers looking to criticize as usual, because that is all they ever do and can do. And quite honestly, this has become their full time job.


The role isn't needed though. The evil boss has been done to death in pro wrestling and when it was done at it's best (Vince in the late 90's) the entire roster wasn't getting belittled to get Vince over. It doesn't make sense to see Hunter demean the entire roster just to get him heat. Hunter just doesn't understand the concept of building up guys he's feuding with.


----------



## markedfordeath

which is why I bet Vince will take control of the creative writing from this point forward, he already has a problem with the direction its going as it is.


----------



## KO Bossy

It seems some people will find fault no matter what you do.

I still don't get what was so horrible about the Doink the Clown comment. It was meant to be insulting. And Hunter is right, how would it have looked if Doink won the title? Its just a myth that clowns exist in wrestling, but that would have been literal, and he'd have been the #1 guy. Not that greatest image. And let's face it, lots of people have had their careers halted or derailed because of preferential treatment shown to someone else (like the boss' nephew or something). He's aiming to be a snide jerk who fucked over Bryan, and he's calling him a joke.

Why is this so offensive, but Vince coming out every week and calling Bryan an ugly little troll with no muscle and a beard that smelled like decaying vegetation is alright? I was way more perplexed by the latter, since Vince was basically yelling to the audience DON'T TAKE THIS GUY SERIOUSLY. But one comment about Doink and people lose their shit?


----------



## markedfordeath

yeah, i dont get it..why do they keep insulting Bryan so damn much? Can't they get heat a different way..? he's being insulted all the time by them....Trying to make him look bad to the public...its like they're going out of their way...that's a little too far...the Doink comment didn't bother me.


----------



## #Mark

KO Bossy said:


> It seems some people will find fault no matter what you do.
> 
> I still don't get what was so horrible about the Doink the Clown comment. It was meant to be insulting. And Hunter is right, how would it have looked if Doink won the title? Its just a myth that clowns exist in wrestling, but that would have been literal, and he'd have been the #1 guy. Not that greatest image. And let's face it, lots of people have had their careers halted or derailed because of preferential treatment shown to someone else (like the boss' nephew or something). He's aiming to be a snide jerk who fucked over Bryan, and he's calling him a joke.
> 
> Why is this so offensive, but Vince coming out every week and calling Bryan an ugly little troll with no muscle and a beard that smelled like decaying vegetation is alright? I was way more perplexed by the latter, since Vince was basically yelling to the audience DON'T TAKE THIS GUY SERIOUSLY. But one comment about Doink and people lose their shit?


The problem wasn't him comparing Bryan to Doink, the problem was him saying Doink never became champion because he couldn't draw rather than Doink not becoming champion because he wasn't good enough to be champion. It was one of those blatant 'wrestling is fake' lines.


----------



## markedfordeath

this is the type of thing that can cause dissension behind the scenes...with him calling Ziggler small, calling Bryan a troll, calling the whole roster "the little people"....i mean Triple H is actually looking like a jerk but it goes beyond the storyline....its complete bullshit how he keeps going out of his way to put others down...its overkill at this point.


----------



## KO Bossy

#Mark said:


> The problem wasn't him comparing Bryan to Doink, the problem was him saying Doink never became champion because he couldn't draw rather than Doink not becoming champion because he wasn't good enough to be champion. It was one of those blatant 'wrestling is fake' lines.


I dunno, I don't think its that serious. I wasn't offended, at least.


----------



## Alo0oy

What exactly makes Meltzer & Keller any more credible than any poster here or any other "wrestling journalist"? the only thing they have is pre-existing credibility, which is the reason why they're still in business after the "smarks boom".


----------



## #Mark

Alo0oy said:


> What exactly makes Meltzer & Keller any more credible than any poster here or any other "wrestling journalist"? the only thing they have is pre-existing credibility, which is the reason why they're still in business after the "smarks boom".


You can say the same thing about any TV blogger or critic who discusses shows like Breaking Bad. How are they any different than the average intellectual person with an opinion on the show? I don't think it's fair for people to scoff at wrestling like it isn't a real medium of art.


----------



## Alo0oy

#Mark said:


> You can say the same thing about any TV blogger or critic who discusses shows like Breaking Bad. How are they any different than the average intellectual person with an opinion on the show? I don't think it's fair for people to scoff at wrestling like it isn't a real medium of art.


But they're supposed to be objective, which is supposed to be the difference between them & the average fan, but it seems like they're legitimately getting worked & putting it out there as "poor booking", which is something I expect from marks on WF (including me), not the so-called "wrestling journalists".

If you read a film review & the critic keeps bringing up his hate towards the director/producer & makes the review look very emotionally-driven, would you take that critic seriously?


----------



## markedfordeath

all I know, is that if Cena comes back and saves the day and they put Bryan in the mid card after this...then WWE deserves all the criticism it can muster for wasting our time.


----------



## superuser1

how come the segment by segment breakdown never came out?


----------



## roadkill_

lol the WWE Universe ain't ready for HHHeel.


----------



## D.M.N.

It's that time of the week again! http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_73240.shtml



> WWE put together a high-stakes match between WWE champion Randy Orton and Cody Rhodes on the September 2 Raw episode and the match delivered.
> 
> Orton vs. Rhodes was the highest-rated segment of the three-hour portion of Raw (prior to the over-run) in the males 18-49 demographic.
> 
> The match, which included Rhodes's "firing" after losing to Orton, scored a 2.50 rating in m18-49. This topped the next highest-rated segment of a 2.36 in Q12 at the end of Raw.
> 
> The Q12 segment featured Daniel Bryan vs. Big Show after the show-long build-up of whether Show would fight Bryan against his wishes. This was followed by a 2.61 rating for the over-run segment of Triple H forcing Big Show to (a) cry and (b) punch out Bryan.
> 
> Top Rated Segments: 2.61 over-run, 2.50 rating for Orton vs. Rhodes, 2.36 rating for Bryan vs. Big Show.
> 
> 9/2 WWE Raw TV Ratings Flow in m18-49
> 
> - OVERALL SHOW: 2.17 rating / 1.368 million viewers
> 
> Q1: Raw opened with a 2.10 rating, setting the tone for a below-average first hour. The uninterrupted 15 minutes included a back-and-forth between Triple H & Randy Orton and Daniel Bryan.
> 
> Q2: Raw stayed at a 2.09 rating for Hunter & Orton backstage with Cody Rhodes, the first few minutes of Fandango vs. The Miz and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> Q3: Raw dropped to a show-low 1.94 rating for the end of Miz vs. Fandango, one commercial, and backstage segments.
> 
> Q4: Raw increased slightly to a 2.00 rating for The Shield attacking Dolph Ziggler, Ziggler vs. Ryback, and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> Q5: Raw increased to a 2.16 rating at the top of the second hour for Stephanie McMahon talking to Big Show in the ring, then one commercial and the first-half of Prime Time Players vs. 3MB. This was the lowest-rated Q5 segment since July 29.
> 
> Q6: Raw dipped slightly to a 2.11 rating for the end of the tag match, one commercial, and backstage segments.
> 
> Q7: Raw increased slightly to a 2.15 rating for the first-half of Randy Orton vs. Cody Rhodes and one commercial.
> 
> Q8: Raw jumped 16 percent to a 2.50 rating for the end of Orton-Rhodes and Hunter's post-match "firing" of Rhodes. It was by far the highest-rated Q8 segment since we began tracking the m18-49 quarter-hours in May. This felt like the end of "Act II." ...
> 
> Q9: Raw dropped to a 2.25 rating at the top of the third hour for a C.M. Punk promo, one commercial, and backstage segments. This was positioned as the start of "Act III," and there was no physicality.
> 
> Q10: Raw dropped to a 1.97 rating for a "Total Divas" segment, the start of Rob Van Dam vs. Damien Sandow, and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> Q11: Raw increased slightly to a 2.02 rating for the end of RVD vs. Sandow, one commercial, and backstage segments.
> 
> Q12: Raw jumped to a 2.36 rating for the main event of Daniel Bryan vs. Big Show, plus one commercial.
> 
> Over-Run: Raw increased to a 2.61 rating for Triple H and Stephanie forcing Show to punch out Daniel Bryan. It was the highest-rated segment of the show, but the lowest-rated over-run in one month dating back to August 5.


----------



## Starbuck

DING DING! 

MAY THE BEST MARKS WIN...........GO!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Looking at that breakdown, although it still doesn't show how Punk did himself, it does explain why the 10PM lost viewers. The Rhodes/Orton match with Rhodes career on the line, losing, and then Rhodes getting fired by HHH really brought in those extra viewers that it ate up whatever the 10PM would've gained and then some. So when the 10PM comes, it levels out. Assuming Orton/Rhodes didn't happen in that quarter and it was just filler, and then they went into the Punk promo, it would've been at the least, a decent gain. 

But a great quarter number for Orton/Rhodes, and a good overrun number, although the 9 and 10PM's failed a bit.


----------



## Starbuck

:trips bringing da ratingz double time this week. DA GAME is best for business.


----------



## Jammy

Numbers dropped immediately after Rhodes/Orton, 10 pm was atrocious. 

Too bad, Punk delivered a solid promo, a tad boring though, especially without Heyman.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand there it is. :lmao

unk3


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> :trips bringing da ratingz double time this week. DA GAME is best for business.


Did you expect anything less from the heel GOAT nose?

Oh and since I'm fair, Punk was out there solo for that segment. Any viewers he lost...that's all on him. I guess it proves that Heyman is really a big draw in this angle.

Yet...it could just be someone else bringing in dem ratings...:axel


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Q12: Raw jumped to a 2.36 rating for the main event of Daniel Bryan vs. Big Show, plus one commercial.

:yes


----------



## Mqwar

Wow when was the last time Q8 actually outdrew the 10pm quarter? Even with Punk's promo in there. Damn!


----------



## Starbuck

The wording of the Observer could mean 2 things before everybody goes nuts over this Punk stuff again because the Torch hasn't given out any minute by minute numbers:

1) Punk promo flat out lost viewers
2) Punk promo lost viewers from the Orton/Rhodes match beforehand

Either way though, please continue the madness because it's highly entertaining

unk


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> September 2nd, 2013
> - 2.85 rating (-0.23 on last week)
> - 2.811 million households (-217,000)
> - 3.937 million viewers (-253,000)
> - an average of 1.40 viewers per household that watches Raw (+0.01)
> 
> - 1.50 Adults 18-49 rating (+/- 0.00)
> - 1.900 million viewers in Adults 18-49 demographic (+/- 0.00)
> 
> *- 2.17 Males 18-49 rating (-0.03)
> - 1.368 million viewers in Males 18-49 demographic (-8,000)
> 
> - 0.83 Womens 18-49 rating (+0.01)
> - 0.532 million viewers in Womens 18-49 demographic (+4,000)*
> 
> - 2.037 million viewers fall outside of Adults 18-49 demographic (-253,000)
> 
> Interesting stuff. As the Adults 18-49 did not drop an inch, it means that the Males 18-49 breakdown will not really reflect the overall drop, which is probably worth noting. It will still have the usual trends though which will be noticeable in the less accurate quarter hour breakdown.
> 
> Unfortunately, year-on-year, the ratings overall dropped 267,000 viewers. If the trend is the same as last year, hypothetically, the 'E could be averaging 3.2 million viewers for the September 30th Raw.


*Males 18-49 Breakdown - September 2nd, 2013*
*Q1 - 2.10 rating / 1.322 million (-0.06 / -38,000)*
*Q2 - 2.09 rating / 1.315 million (-0.10 / -63,000)*
*Q3 - 1.94 rating / 1.221 million (-0.03 / -19,000)*
*Q4 - 2.00 rating / 1.259 million (+0.03 / +19,000)*
*Q5 - 2.16 rating / 1.360 million (-0.23 / -144,000)*
*Q6 - 2.11 rating / 1.328 million (-0.05 / -32,000)*
*Q7 - 2.15 rating / 1.353 million (+0.02 / +12,000)*
*Q8 - 2.50 rating / 1.574 million (+0.45 / +284,000)*
*Q9 - 2.25 rating / 1.416 million (+0.21 / +132,000)*
*Q10 - 1.97 rating / 1.240 million (-0.13 / -82,000)*
*Q11 - 2.02 rating / 1.271 million (-0.05 / -32,000)*
*Q12 - 2.36 rating / 1.485 million (-0.02 / -13,000)*
*OR - 2.61 rating / 1.643 million (-0.22 / -138,000)*

I think it is fair to say that the Orton and Rhodes angle saved the show from being an entire red wash. As thus:

Positives
- Orton vs Rhodes
- CM Punk's promo
-









Negatives
- closing angle with Big Show
- Stephanie McMahon and Big Show segment

Sorry Big Show... you're not liked. Seriously, one question. Did Orton vs Rhodes take place during one of the college football breaks?


----------



## Loudness

Pretty standard rating increases/decreases IMHO except Cody Rhodes/Orton, I'd consider it an experimental success because it proves that even midcarders can draw if you can give fans a match stipulation to tune in. While I am no Rhodes fan the rating clearly indicates that he does have some upside potential in the future. Due to the sick rating increase between Orton/Rhodes I wouldn't say the Punk promo decrease is all that dramatic, it was still one of the better rated QHs overall.

It's also nice to see how well Bryan has drawn in this storyline, of course most of it is due to writing and Triple H but I'm feeling he's doing his fair share aswell considering that in the recent few weeks people have tuned into his segments even without Triple H/Steph.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> *Males 18-49 Breakdown - September 2nd, 2013*
> *Q1 - 2.10 rating / 1.322 million (-0.06 / -38,000)*
> *Q2 - 2.09 rating / 1.315 million (-0.10 / -63,000)*
> *Q3 - 1.94 rating / 1.221 million (-0.03 / -19,000)*
> *Q4 - 2.00 rating / 1.259 million (+0.03 / +19,000)*
> *Q5 - 2.16 rating / 1.360 million (-0.23 / -144,000)*
> *Q6 - 2.11 rating / 1.328 million (-0.05 / -32,000)*
> *Q7 - 2.15 rating / 1.353 million (+0.02 / +12,000)*
> *Q8 - 2.50 rating / 1.574 million (+0.45 / +284,000)*
> *Q9 - 2.25 rating / 1.416 million (+0.21 / +132,000)*
> *Q10 - 1.97 rating / 1.240 million (-0.13 / -82,000)*
> *Q11 - 2.02 rating / 1.271 million (-0.05 / -32,000)*
> *Q12 - 2.36 rating / 1.485 million (-0.02 / -13,000)*
> *OR - 2.61 rating / 1.643 million (-0.22 / -138,000)*
> 
> I think it is fair to say that the Orton and Rhodes angle saved the show from being an entire red wash. As thus:
> 
> Positives
> - Orton vs Rhodes
> - CM Punk's promo
> 
> *Negatives
> - closing angle with Big Show
> - Stephanie McMahon and Big Show segment
> *
> Sorry Big Show... you're not liked. Seriously, one question. Did Orton vs Rhodes take place during one of the college football breaks?


The Big Show segments got the 2nd highest rated QH on the entire show (after Orton/Rhodes). I think that is pretty good, and shows that people did care. And I don't know on what planet the Punk promo was a positive. Because it wasn't.


----------



## Mqwar

The show was against football + Labour day. Obviously they took a hit throughout compared to the week before with excellent quarters, except for Orton/Christian at 10 that lost 150k which is also the reason Q9 with punk's promo appears to be positive, despite losing big.


----------



## Jammy

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



D.M.N. said:


> *
> Q8 - 2.50 rating / 1.574 million (+0.45 / +284,000)
> Q9 - 2.25 rating / 1.416 million (+0.21 / +132,000)
> *


*

Just curious, Q8>Q9 shows a drop of 158k Viewers according to what's posted, how does that translate to a +0.21 gain?

I have no real idea how anything works, but all other figures are consistent apart from this one (drop in viewers = drop in rating)*


----------



## lil_miss_erica

BIG E WINNING said:


> LOL "RHODEZ MADE MEH MAD BECUZ I HAZ 25 YEARZ OFF EXPIERENCE OF GEEVIN WRAZZLIN OPINIONZ LYKE ERRYBODIE ELZE! GRRRR RAWR 111"
> 
> :ti Man, log off Keller.


uhm.. if you bothered to read the entire twitter conservation about it, you would see that was not what Wade Keller was saying.. Wade Keller was actually making a joke based off of what Cody Rhodes said.. 


log off yourself


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I do wonder D.M.N, how do you figure the Punk promo was a positive? I mean, did we miss the minute by minute stuff where most of those minutes of the Punk promo were actually really strong? Because I don't see that. And that the Bryan/Show pre-overrun was a negative? How does that work? Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. What are those numbers+gains/losses compared to?


----------



## Mqwar

+0.21 Comparing to the week before. 

*WWE Raw Quarter-Hour Ratings Trends 8/26*



> Raw Ratings Flow in M18-49 Demo
> 
> - OVERALL: 2.19 rating / 1.376 million viewers
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened with a 2.16 rating for 15 minutes of an uninterrupted promo segment involving Triple H, Daniel Bryan, and Randy Orton.
> 
> - Q2: Raw increased to a first-hour-high 2.19 rating for a five-minute conclusion to the promo segment, one commercial, Cody Rhodes vs. Fandango, and half of a commercial.
> 
> The increase came from the five-minute promo conclusion. Within Q1 and Q2, Raw increased from 1.2 million to 1.3 million to 1.4 million to 1.5 million to 1.6 million in Q1, then finished with 1.7 million at 8:18 p.m. EST when the segment concluded.
> 
> When the segment concluded at 8:21 p.m., a big chunk of viewers bailed to "American Pickers" on History. During the first hour, "Pickers" drew the most viewers away from Raw, followed by a "Duck Dynasty" re-run on A&E.
> 
> - Q3: On the other side of the break, Raw dipped to a show-low 1.97 rating for Rhodes & Miz vs. Fandango & Damien Sandow, backstage segments, and one-and-a-half commercials.
> 
> - Q4: Raw stayed at a show-low 1.97 rating for the first-half of C.M. Punk vs. Curtis Axel and two full commercial breaks. During the last break, another chunk of viewers bailed to "American Pickers."
> 
> - Q5: Raw jumped 21.3 percent to a 2.39 rating at the top of the second hour for the teaser of Punk getting his hands on Paul Heyman, the extended beat down on Punk that went until 9:12 p.m. EST, and one commercial at the end of the segment.
> 
> Peak viewership was 1.692 million viewers at 9:07 p.m. The segment then concluded with 1.690 million viewers at 9:10 p.m.
> 
> At the top of the hour, Raw got chunks of viewers from Duck Dynasty, American Pickers, and Real Housewives of OC once those shows concluded.
> 
> - Q6: Raw began sliding with a 2.16 rating for Brie Bella vs. Natalya, A.J. Lee's post-match "worked shoot" promo on the "Total Divas" show, and one commercial.
> 
> However, within the segment, A.J.'s promo popped to 1.731 million viewers at 9:23 p.m., then 1.770 million viewers at 9:24 p.m.
> 
> - Q7: Raw dipped again to a 2.13 rating for another round of Alberto Del Rio vs. Rob Van Dam, plus one commercial.
> 
> Notable in Q7 was a significant chunk of viewers (96,000) coming over from "Lizard Lick Towing"
> at 9:31 p.m. This contributed to TruTV being the second-largest contributor of viewers to Raw during the second hour.
> 
> - Q8: Raw dipped to a second-hour-low 2.05 rating for backstage interview segments and two full commercial breaks, "bringing the crowd down" from the second hour action.
> 
> There was one minute where Raw popped to 1.717 million viewers for Heyman and Curtis Axel's backstage interview before getting in their car and leaving.
> 
> *- Q9: At the top of the third hour, Raw actually declined again to a 2.04 rating for WWE champion Randy Orton vs. Christian.
> *
> Compared to the Top of the Second Hour, Raw did not draw in a significant number of new viewers in the Top of the Third Hour. The top source was 17,000 viewers from "General Hospital."
> 
> - Q10: Raw stopped the ratings slide with a 2.10 rating for the final few minutes of Orton-Christian, Daniel Bryan's post-match paint-job backstage, one commercial, and Triple H & Orton surveying the paint-job after the break.
> 
> The final few minutes of Orton-Christian redeemed the meat of the match in Q8, as the finish of the match popped to 1.632 million viewers, which easily topped the Q9 segment and anything else in Q10.
> 
> - Q11: Raw dipped to a 2.07 rating for Titus O'Neil vs. Jack Swagger, a Wyatts vignette, and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> The only notable movement of the third hour was 48,000 viewers bailing to "Baseball Tonight" on ESPN from 10:42 to 10:43 p.m. during the second commercial break of the hour.
> 
> - Q12: Raw jumped 15 percent to 2.38 rating for Bryan vs. Seth Rollins and one mid-match commercial.
> 
> - Over-Run: Raw jumped 18.9 percent to a 2.83 over-run rating for the end of Bryan-Rollins, Shield jumping Bryan to cancel out the rest of the gauntlet, and the show-closing angle with Triple H holding back the roster from helping Bryan.
> 
> Included were the most-watched minutes of the show with 1.790 million viewers at 11:03 p.m., then 1.877 million viewers at 11:04 p.m., and 1.788 million viewers at 11:05 p.m. when Raw signed off.
> 
> At the start of the over-run, Raw gained 37,000 viewers from "Basketball Wives," then a steady trickle of viewers tuned in from other shows during the remainder of the over-run.




*RAW Sep 2 *-



> 9/2 WWE Raw TV Ratings Flow in m18-49
> 
> - OVERALL SHOW: 2.17 rating / 1.368 million viewers
> 
> Q1: Raw opened with a 2.10 rating, setting the tone for a below-average first hour. The uninterrupted 15 minutes included a back-and-forth between Triple H & Randy Orton and Daniel Bryan.
> 
> Q2: Raw stayed at a 2.09 rating for Hunter & Orton backstage with Cody Rhodes, the first few minutes of Fandango vs. The Miz and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> Q3: Raw dropped to a show-low 1.94 rating for the end of Miz vs. Fandango, one commercial, and backstage segments.
> 
> Q4: Raw increased slightly to a 2.00 rating for The Shield attacking Dolph Ziggler, Ziggler vs. Ryback, and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> Q5: Raw increased to a 2.16 rating at the top of the second hour for Stephanie McMahon talking to Big Show in the ring, then one commercial and the first-half of Prime Time Players vs. 3MB. This was the lowest-rated Q5 segment since July 29.
> 
> Q6: Raw dipped slightly to a 2.11 rating for the end of the tag match, one commercial, and backstage segments.
> 
> Q7: Raw increased slightly to a 2.15 rating for the first-half of Randy Orton vs. Cody Rhodes and one commercial.
> 
> Q8: Raw jumped 16 percent to a 2.50 rating for the end of Orton-Rhodes and Hunter's post-match "firing" of Rhodes. It was by far the highest-rated Q8 segment since we began tracking the m18-49 quarter-hours in May. This felt like the end of "Act II." ...
> 
> *Q9: Raw dropped to a 2.25 rating at the top of the third hour for a C.M. Punk promo, one commercial, and backstage segments. This was positioned as the start of "Act III," and there was no physicality.*
> 
> Q10: Raw dropped to a 1.97 rating for a "Total Divas" segment, the start of Rob Van Dam vs. Damien Sandow, and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> Q11: Raw increased slightly to a 2.02 rating for the end of RVD vs. Sandow, one commercial, and backstage segments.
> 
> Q12: Raw jumped to a 2.36 rating for the main event of Daniel Bryan vs. Big Show, plus one commercial.
> 
> Over-Run: Raw increased to a 2.61 rating for Triple H and Stephanie forcing Show to punch out Daniel Bryan. It was the highest-rated segment of the show, but the lowest-rated over-run in one month dating back to August 5.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

^Ah, thanks for clearing that up. 

Still would like to hear some explaining regarding the other stuff I mentioned.


----------



## Mqwar

Also very impressive to see Ambrose/Ziggler/The Big guy match outdrawing Punk vs Axel match at Q4.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

From QH10 to the Overrun, the viewers and rating went up each QH


Q10 - 1.97 rating / 1.240 million 
Q11 - 2.02 rating / 1.271 million 
Q12 - 2.36 rating / 1.485 million 
OR - 2.61 rating / 1.643 million 

The overrun was the highest rated part of the show. And QH12 was the 2nd highest rated QH of the night after the Rhodes/Orton match.


----------



## Mqwar

The Sandrone said:


> ^Ah, thanks for clearing that up.
> 
> Still would like to hear some explaining regarding the other stuff I mentioned.


Yeah, Like I said Last week's show took a hit being labor day and going head to head with football. Thats why negative.


----------



## Jammy

Mqwar said:


> +0.21 Comparing to the week before.


I don't know how 0.21 from last week is a positive, last week was atrocious. 

Oh well, we all see what we want to see. None of it really matters. I, for one, am happy if Punk does well. He's a top star, he has to do well, it reflects on the product as a whole.


----------



## Starbuck

DMN's numbers are week on week M18-49 where everything obviously dropped apart from the things mentioned. This week the overrun was the highest of the night but it was still down from last week so he's marking it as a loss week on week. 10pm this week is marked as a positive because last week did so poorly despite the fact that it was outperformed by the quarter before it.


----------



## D.M.N.

The Sandrone said:


> I do wonder D.M.N, how do you figure the Punk promo was a positive? I mean, did we miss the minute by minute stuff where most of those minutes of the Punk promo were actually really strong? Because I don't see that. And that the Bryan/Show pre-overrun was a negative? How does that work? Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. What are those numbers+gains/losses compared to?


The gains and losses are compared to the previous week. I think what is unusual in the breakdown is that the big angle arguably did not happen at the top of the hour from a viewers stand point.

Orton versus Rhodes clearly hooked on viewers meaning that it would be impossible for whatever followed on from it to gain quarter-on-quarter. If Q8 ended up just having filler, Q9 would have gained overall. Unfortunately PWTorch haven't done a minute-by-minute summary this week, but I suspect Punk's bit in Q9 averaged ~2.35 rating with the rest about ~2.10 rating, hence the ~2.25 rating for that whole quarter.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It's in comparison to last week. So, it doesn't really matter. These numbers stand on their own. Plus, it was a holiday and a football game. Either way, that QH didn't do well just like alot of us thought.


----------



## Mqwar

Jammy said:


> I don't know how 0.21 from last week is a positive, last week was atrocious.


I guess, the 10pm quarter of August 26th RAW was bad, last week was _less_ bad in comparison.


----------



## Choke2Death

> Q7: Raw increased slightly to a 2.15 rating for the first-half of Randy Orton vs. Cody Rhodes and one commercial.
> 
> Q8: Raw jumped 16 percent to a 2.50 rating for the end of Orton-Rhodes and Hunter's post-match "firing" of Rhodes. It was by far the highest-rated Q8 segment since we began tracking the m18-49 quarter-hours in May. This felt like the end of "Act II." ...
> 
> Q9: Raw dropped to a 2.25 rating at the top of the third hour for a C.M. Punk promo, one commercial, and backstage segments. This was positioned as the start of "Act III," and there was no physicality.


:yes :mark:


----------



## DoubleDeckerBar

Choke2Death said:


> :yes :mark:


Nothing to do with Orton being a draw and Punk not, hell, look at Orton's match with Christian last week.

Viewers were gripped by the storyline going into the match as they probably expected Rhodes to win via shenanigans with Bryan and didn't want to miss it.

Just cause Punk lost viewers doesn't make it a bad number.


----------



## JY57

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...tscenter-pardon-the-interruption-more/201529/



> WWE Friday Night Smackdown was Friday's highest rated cable original with a 0.7 adults 18-49 rating, down from last week's 0.8 adults 18-49 rating. NFL Live was second with a 0.5 adults 18-49 rating.


2.467 million viewership (down from last week, which was 2.794 million).


----------



## Choke2Death

DoubleDeckerBar said:


> Nothing to do with Orton being a draw and Punk not, hell, look at Orton's match with Christian last week.
> 
> Viewers were gripped by the storyline going into the match as they probably expected Rhodes to win via shenanigans with Bryan and didn't want to miss it.
> 
> Just cause Punk lost viewers doesn't make it a bad number.


Where did I say _anything_ about draws? I'm just happy about the numbers.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

JY57 said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...tscenter-pardon-the-interruption-more/201529/
> 
> 
> 
> 2.467 million viewership (down from last week, which was 2.794 million).


Hm... who main evented SD last week with Bryan? Rollins. 

Who main evented SD the week prior with Bryan (which got 2.794 million viewers, the highest in a long time)?










Edit:



> Where did I say anything about draws? I'm just happy about the numbers.


Dude, just stop trying to compare Punk and Orton's drawing ability without comparing them. IT'S ANNOYING! unk3


----------



## Mqwar

The Big guy. That is all.


----------



## Starbuck

So SD beat NFL in the 18-49 demo on Friday Night? That's interesting. I guess Friday night isn't exactly the best night to get a read on the 18-49's though with it being Friday and all. Raw is definitely getting pummelled tonight. DAT 2.6.


----------



## DoubleDeckerBar

Choke2Death said:


> Where did I say _anything_ about draws? I'm just happy about the numbers.


Fair enough, just assumed you were trying to take a shot at Punk.


----------



## JY57

The Sandrone said:


> Hm... who main evented SD last week with Bryan? Rollins.
> 
> Who main evented SD the week prior with Bryan (which got 2.794 million viewers)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> 
> 
> Dude, stop trying to compare Punk and Orton's drawing ability without comparing them and just :mark: for the numbers. IT'S ANNOYING! unk3


lol

anyways outside the usual its Friday Night common sense (back & fourth ratings). People might be tired of the same crap with Bryan/Hunter/Orton/The Shield over & over again, especially since the main storyline is on both shows and with the same exact storytelling.

as the great Owen hart would say (RIP) "Enough is Enough And It's Time For A Change"


----------



## Weltschmertz

Predicted audience tonight is *3,877,000* - roughly flat compared with last week's RAW.

For people talking about the effect of the NFL season, it is true that the NFL season _corresponds_ with lower audiences (around 6.4% lower), but this effect is insignificant once you account for a downwards seasonal trend - the RAW audience tends to peak at the start of the year and fall thereafter until December. So I don't think we'll see a sudden fall in the TV audience starting from tonight - more like a steady decline until the end of the year.

*EDIT:*

Also - here's where we are heading (as of now) with the TV audiences for the next four weeks:

09/09/2013 - *3,877,000*
09/16/2013 - *4,055,000*
09/23/2013 - *3,850,000*
09/30/2013 - *3,790,000*


----------



## Choke2Death

The Sandrone said:


> Dude, just stop trying to compare Punk and Orton's drawing ability without comparing them. IT'S ANNOYING! unk3


One doesn't have to be related to the other.


----------



## superuser1

Punk marks always quick to his rescue


----------



## Falkono

" stayed at a show-low 1.97 rating for the first-half of C.M. Punk vs. Curtis Axel"
"Raw dropped to a 2.25 rating at the top of the third hour for a C.M. Punk promo"

unk


----------



## markedfordeath

ratings aren't as bad as I thought they'd be for Labor Day.....Basically the corporation angle is the one that wins in every show.....it seems like.highest rated in the first hour and highest rated in the third hour.


----------



## RKO 4life

DoubleDeckerBar said:


> Nothing to do with Orton being a draw and Punk not, hell, look at Orton's match with Christian last week.
> 
> Viewers were gripped by the storyline going into the match as they probably expected Rhodes to win via shenanigans with Bryan and didn't want to miss it.
> 
> Just cause Punk lost viewers doesn't make it a bad number.


Oh what ever. Orton came on at 9:30 a bad time slot and still out drew Punk.

For the love of god. Shit. Orton can draw.


----------



## D17

RKO 4life said:


> Oh what ever. Orton came on at 9:30 a bad time slot and still out drew Punk.
> 
> For the love of god. Shit. Orton can draw.


Or simply cause, Punk struggles to draw big.


----------



## JY57

> -- Monday's WWE Raw continued a steady decline in social media activity since Summerslam.
> 
> Up against two Monday Night Football games, Raw scored 248,289 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, down five percent from last week's Raw.
> 
> Raw ranked #3 on cable TV behind the two football games. Overall, Raw continued a monthly pattern of peaking the night after the PPV, then declining each week until the next PPV:
> 
> 8/19 Raw - 337k post-SSlam
> 8/26 Raw - 276k
> 9/2 Raw - 260k
> 9/9 Raw - 248k


via PWTorch


----------



## JY57

http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-stories/96-wwe/33056-total-divas-number-takes-a-big-hit



> Total Divas number takes a big hit.
> 
> Total Divas on Sunday did 1.09 million viewers, a drop of 29% from the previous week.
> 
> The drop was caused by a combination of no longer having a first-run episode of Keeping Up With the Kardashians as its lead-in, plus going against NFL Sunday Night Football.


my boy :romo2 FTW


----------



## Starbuck

MNF DRAWING DIMES

:trips


----------



## VGooBUG

well you cant say that Tna Total Divas joke anymore

Tna 1.31 million viewers against NFls debut
Total Divas 1.09 million viewers against sunday night football

TNA with dat AJ Styles Push O.O


----------



## D.M.N.

3.801m, 3.903m and 3.953m.


----------



## JY57

Hour 1 - 3.801 million
Hour 2 - 3.903 million
Hour 3 - 3.953 million


----------



## CM BORK

My boy Punk bringing in dem ratings.


unk2


----------



## Choke2Death

Hour 1 is up from last week, hour 2 is down and hour 3 is about the same. Not bad, specially with MNF started now. (Y)


----------



## Da Silva

So about 60k above the what it's expected to get? That's alright, nothing overly spectacular though.


----------



## D.M.N.

I guess it is an okay rating, but versus the same week last year they are still down 250,000 viewers.


----------



## Happenstan

Choke2Death said:


> Hour 1 is up from last week, *hour 2 is down* and hour 3 is about the same. Not bad, specially with MNF started now. (Y)





CM BORK said:


> My boy Punk bringing in dem ratings.


And so it begins again...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

DAT :bryan vs :ambrose match.


----------



## markedfordeath

hour 1 is up from last week? ha ha wow...not even that bad of a rating.


----------



## Choke2Death

Happenstan said:


> And so it begins again...


To be fair, it was bound to drop since last week rton2 :cody2 and :HHH2 really brought it in a completely random spot!


----------



## validreasoning

D.M.N. said:


> I guess it is an okay rating, but versus the same week last year they are still down 250,000 viewers.


last year had jerry lawlers heartattack though which is why hours 2 and 3 grew alot, nfl game this year was alot stronger too up 60%


----------



## markedfordeath

the viewership grew and it hung just under 4 million all night.....I think that's somewhat of a success.


----------



## markedfordeath

*bad timing to see drawing*

Right now with Cena out, now is the time to find out who gets the people to come to the arenas and who could be that guy...but there's a problem..Football. How can the WWE possibly see who brings in the most business if the ratings are going to be low for the next four months? Since Football is going to kill them each week, how can they possibly decide who is the future of the company?


----------



## RyanPelley

*Re: bad timing to see drawing*

Cena will return right as football season is ending, giving them a boost in ratings. All the credit will go to Cena. Yay.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: bad timing to see drawing*

yeah, its just really bad timing for him to go out with an injury, unless he strategically did that to see how they'd do without him, but I doubt it...something tells me that Foootball is going to fuck over everyone else on the roster and when Cena gets back no one will be in the main event but him. All because people prefer Football.


----------



## Starbuck

Pretty darn steady numbers from where I'm sitting. They were a hair's throw away from 4 mill and stayed even for basically the entire show. Not bad at all.


----------



## markedfordeath

yep, that's a very good sign...i'm sure they're pleased. But to be honest, if it had been lower, they have only themselves to blame, maybe a lot of people were turned off due to the beatdowns. but now that they know he got a little bit of revenge they might tune in next week, plus its fresh off a PPV


----------



## Mountain Rushmore

*Re: bad timing to see drawing*

Are you really suggesting that Cena planned his injury? fpalm

And anyway, business will be low, but Bryan can either make it better or much worse, that's his test. I don't think anyone expects him to draw huge numbers/ratings but as long as he doesn't tank it all, he should be alright.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Good numbers, for sure. Especially with back to back MNF games on.


----------



## markedfordeath

*Re: bad timing to see drawing*

well so far he's not tanking at all...but lately he hasn't been the centerpiece....Triple H, Orton, Big Show have been involved too, so they're also up to the test.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

It's what to expect. Down from last year's as DMN pointed out, but hey, we all knew this was coming. How far down they go though... well that hopefully won't be too bad.


----------



## 11Shareef

*Re: bad timing to see drawing*

Actually, it's the excellent time to see who's drawing. "Anyone" (I'm using that loosely) can draw without competition. Let's see who can draw when they're not the only thing on tv.


----------



## Bryan D.

I was expecting a bigger drop so, that's nice. Good numbers.


----------



## Old_John

*Re: bad timing to see drawing*

I don't think WWE is THAT stupid! They'll probably just compare the viewership to the numbers from the football season last year, and hopefully 2013/14 looks similar (or better).


----------



## DOPA

Steady numbers with a steady increase throughout the show close to 4 million. Not bad numbers (Y).


----------



## Weltschmertz

3,886,000 actual vs 3,877,000 expected. 

Not sure if I favour comparing with last year - surely we only care about progress in the past few months rather than year-on-year?


----------



## markedfordeath

so what is your prediction for next week's viewership? and the reason why there wasn't a big drop this week was because they planned the segments and timed them out perfectly....left most of the boring stuff for before halftime of the game and during halftime all the action was taking place, the stuff people care about.


----------



## Weltschmertz

With the information I have now: 4,055,000 viewers. Will revise this once I have the Smackdown audience number next Monday.


----------



## markedfordeath

wow, so it might end up growing eh? see, that's not bad at all.


----------



## #Mark

It's only down from last year because of Lawler's heart attack.


----------



## Weltschmertz

Weltschmertz said:


> 3,886,000 actual vs 3,877,000 expected.
> 
> Not sure if I favour comparing with last year - surely we only care about progress in the past few months rather than year-on-year?





markedfordeath said:


> wow, so it might end up growing eh? see, that's not bad at all.


Will likely rise next week because of the post-PPV bump but fall thereafter - so best not to read too much into that rise! In fact, people should expect the audience to fall until December because that's what usually happens with the WWE audience (a seasonal trend).


----------



## markedfordeath

just makes it harder to determine who ultimately will take Cena's spot one day if nobody ever watches consistently.


----------



## Waffelz

Imagine if Cena and Henry were on the show...


----------



## Bryan D.

Waffelz said:


> Imagine if Cena and Henry were on the show...


Henry would likely kill dem MNF ratings.


----------



## krai999

JY57 said:


> http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-stories/96-wwe/33056-total-divas-number-takes-a-big-hit
> 
> 
> 
> my boy :romo2 FTW


that's what yeah get when you don't have bryan on the show :bryan

Beard = ratings!


----------



## markedfordeath

good point, Bryan wasn't on.


----------



## BrokenWater

:dazzler 

The American DRAWGON


----------



## THANOS

markedfordeath said:


> so what is your prediction for next week's viewership? and the reason why there wasn't a big drop this week was because they planned the segments and timed them out perfectly....left most of the boring stuff for before halftime of the game and during halftime all the action was taking place, the stuff people care about.


I think it partly depends on what happens at NOC. If Bryan wins but is stripped the Monday after by HHH, and someone much better than Axel debuts to help Heyman and continue Punk's feud, then we can expect either an increase in the ratings or for it to hold it's ground. If neither of these happens and Bryan simply loses clean or in a screwy fashion at NOC and Punk simply wins and continues feuding with Axel going forward then it should dip again next week.


----------



## markedfordeath

well a new heyman guy is debuting apparently and also, Bryan won't win. that would kill the momentum of the angle.


----------



## Tryon

Arcade said:


> Wrestling is fake and gay. That's why ratings are low.


dont be such a tool. why do you watch wrestling if you feel that way? personally i feel wwe is doin a dam good job as of late.


----------



## KO Bossy

Uh Arcade was joking, I'm pretty sure...


----------



## checkcola

I like how he dug out a post way back from page 1 of this thread, but I do agree with him that the product has been good as of late.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

markedfordeath said:


> well a new heyman guy is debuting apparently and also, Bryan won't win. that would kill the momentum of the angle.


How does it kill the momentum if Bryan loses on Sunday, which he most likely will? Everyone knows that but the question is HOW will he lose. Bryan winning the WWE title shouldn't be done yet or else the Orton/Bryan feud is over and essentially HHH/Bryan will be rushed just like the Summer of Punk 2011.


----------



## THANOS

BIG E WINNING said:


> How does it kill the momentum if Bryan loses on Sunday, which he most likely will? Everyone knows that but the question is HOW will he lose. Bryan winning the WWE title shouldn't be done yet or else the Orton/Bryan feud is over and essentially HHH/Bryan will be rushed just like the Summer of Punk 2011.


I agree with this but I don't think he was saying that? I think he was saying if bryan WINS at NOC then it would kill the momentum of the storyline so he was agreeing with you. I think Bryan losing will probably cause a drop in the ratings BUT I think if it is handled well and creatively then the ratings may be able to hold ground next week against MNF. I was thinking they may consider giving Bryan the win followed by another screw job and revert the title back to Orton, and still think this is possible, but the Smackdown tapings this week seemingly guarantee that Bryan won't leave NOC as the champion.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

It's very possible that Big Show is turning on Sunday to cost Bryan the title. Something BIG and SCREWY is going to make Orton retain the belt that sets up a possible Team Orton vs. Team Bryan at Battleground (Should be at SSeries but that's a long wait.) All I know is a new Corporation member is coming probably at NOC.


----------



## THANOS

BIG E WINNING said:


> It's very possible that Big Show is turning on Sunday to cost Bryan the title. Something BIG and SCREWY is going to make Orton retain the belt that sets up a possible Team Orton vs. Team Bryan at Battleground (Should be at SSeries but that's a long wait.) All I know is a new Corporation member is coming probably at NOC.


I hope you're right. If this Big Show storyline is actually happening just for him to turn heel and have at the fans for "booing [him] for trying to keep [his] job" then it could work, but wouldn't that mean Bryan would have to have a match with Big Show at Battleground and overcome him to get back at Orton. I think having Bryan feud with new corporation members like Big Show/Nash?/etc. could be nice small picture feuds for Bryan to have to overcome while feuding with Orton and HHH as the big encompassing picture. This way they could keep the feud fresh without constantly beating down Bryan every week.


----------



## mblonde09

RKO 4life said:


> Oh what ever. *Orton came on at 9:30 a bad time slot and still out drew Punk.*
> 
> For the love of god. Shit. Orton can draw.


No he didn't - not to begin with. The match started at a 2.15, and viewership only jumped at the end, 'cos people wanted to see what was going to happen with Rhodes - not necessarily anything to do with Orton being a draw. I'd wager that without the 'Rhodes getting fired stipulation', to hook viewers, the match would've stayed even.


----------



## wb1899

A18-49 viewership:
8:00: 1,615,000 (-169,000)
9:00: 1,685,000 (-288,000)
10:00-11:09: 1,830,000 (-108,000)
Average: 1,710,000 (-188,333)


----------



## D.M.N.

*September 9th, 2013*
- 2.91 rating (+0.06 on last week)
- 2.871 million households (+60,000)
- 3.886 million viewers (-51,000)
- an average of 1.35 viewers per household that watches Raw (-0.05)

- 1.35 Adults 18-49 rating (-0.15)
- 1.710 million viewers in Adults 18-49 demographic (-180,000)

- 2.176 million viewers fall outside of Adults 18-49 demographic (+139,000)

Interesting, some demographics improved week-on-week. Would be interesting to see which demographics they were, clearly under 18's or above 49's.


----------



## JY57

final rating - 2.91


----------



## James1o1o

JY57 said:


> final rating - 2.9


Extremely surprising considering football started back. Good on WWE. Starting to capture viewers with recently storylines.


----------



## Mqwar

> WWE Raw on Monday, September 9 scored a 2.91 rating, up slightly from a 2.85 rating last week despite going against Week 1 of Monday Night Football on ESPN.
> 
> Raw ranked #2 behind football in all key male demos. The third hour scored highest of the three-hour show.
> 
> - Raw averaged 3.886 million viewers, down one percent from last week's average of 3.936 million viewers.
> 
> Hourly Break Down: 3.801 million first hour viewers, 3.903 million second hour viewers, and 3.953 million third hour viewers.
> 
> No hour topped four million viewers for the first time since July 29.
> 
> - One year ago this week, Raw vs. Week 1 of the NFL scored a 2.88 rating and averaged 4.136 million, placing this week's show in the middle of last year's metrics.


Torch. 


There was drop in A18-49 viewership as wb1899 and DMN posted but overall viewership held up.


----------



## markedfordeath

man, guess Football isn't going to hurt it afterall..good on them!


----------



## validreasoning

markedfordeath said:


> man, guess Football isn't going to hurt it afterall..good on them!


it will hurt them no question some weeks. really strong game in 2 weeks which will be a test but packers vs bears on november 4th, cowboys vs bears on december 9th as well as nights the new york teams play will bring down viewership alot..unless of course wwe promote something for a week ahead of time like they did this week


----------



## markedfordeath

well yeah, just look at WWE.com..they're constantly promoting things...no announcement for next week's Raw but its off a PPV so the rating will be high due to interest from who won what match. what they need to keep doing is having returns from part timers until it happens..like have Batista or someone on that level join the Regime for a short while to drive viewership up.


----------



## TheWFEffect

DAT rating fucking AJ Lee and Naomi's ass.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

good for wwe but its a long nfl season


----------



## RKO 4life

Champion Orton says bring it football!

I bring in the well ya know!!! Crazy numbers!!!


----------



## JY57

> In the segment-by-segment, The Miz vs. Fandango match lost 275,000 viewers and did a 2.6 quarter, the lowest in a long time. Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler gained about 140,000 viewers. The in-ring with Stephanie McMahon and Big Show gained 415,000 viewers to a 3.0 at 9 p.m., which is a strong gain for that time slot. Prime Time Players vs. Heath Slater & Jinder Mahal lost 140,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Cody Rhodes in the firing stipulation gained 553,000 viewers, which is tremendous for a non top of the house segment, so that says that viewers were at least intrigued by that stipulation considering that Orton vs. Christian last week in a similar length match did so poorly. The C.M. Punk interview at 10 p.m. lost 280,000 viewers to a 3.0. That’s almost unheard of to be losing viewers at the top of the hour. Natalya vs. Brie Bella vs. Naomi lost about 400,000 viewers. Rob Van Dam vs. Damien Sandow stayed even. Big Show vs. Daniel Bryan gained 550,000 viewers to a 3.3, which is a normal level overrun gain.


last week


----------



## THANOS

JY57 said:


> last week


Interesting. That's exactly how I would analyze Orton's match with Cody.


----------



## Waffelz

Punk


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Kinda what I thought. Orton/Rhodes gained what the 10PM would've and then some since Punk's promo was only 5 minutes long. 

What about the breakdown for this week's?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

> The C.M. Punk interview at 10 p.m. lost 280,000 viewers to a 3.0. That’s almost unheard of to be losing viewers at the top of the hour.


To be fair, it was thought that perhaps the Punk promo lost 500,000 viewers. It lost 280,000. Either way, terrible, but not quite as bad.


----------



## THANOS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> To be fair, it was thought that perhaps the Punk promo lost 500,000 viewers. It lost 280,000. Either way, terrible, but not quite as bad.


Did the Torch ever release their minute breakdown of that week?


----------



## Bryan D.

Orton/Rhodes did excellent.


----------



## JY57

^^

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_73240.shtml


----------



## THANOS

JY57 said:


> ^^
> 
> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_73240.shtml


So they didn't break it down by the minute then? They only did a quarter hour breakdown for that week?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Still no minute to minute breakdown for last week? We won't know how Punk did until that's released.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Every report thus far has said it lost viewers, whether it be 500,000 or 280,000. I think the 280,000 is more accurate.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Again, those have all been quarter hour breakdowns.

DMN, where you at? Do you know when the minute breakdown's released?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

This quote from JY57's 7:31 AM post:



> The C.M. Punk interview at 10 p.m. lost 280,000 viewers to a 3.0


singles the Punk promo out by itself. That's the first time I've seen it singled out.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Yeah, but the Observer always does that. Haven't you read their breakdowns before? They don't group everything that happened in the quarter together, they just single out the main thing that happened in the quarter. That's why you always have to take the Observer's breakdowns with a grain of salt. Their breakdown is still a quarter hour breakdown.

Torch is the only one I've seen that releases minute breakdowns.


----------



## D.M.N.

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Again, those have all been quarter hour breakdowns.
> 
> DMN, where you at? Do you know when the minute breakdown's released?


PWTorch would have had access to it, but didn't analyse it in detail for whatever reason (probably because they were a few days late in reporting it).


----------



## WWE

> The C.M. Punk interview at 10 p.m. lost 280,000 viewers to a 3.0.


----------



## hazuki

Bad drop but thats okay he'll bounce back next week


----------



## #Mark

Last week the Observer said AJ lost viewers but in actuality her segment gained. We won't know the extent of how well Punk's segment did untill the torch releases the minute by minute breakdown.


----------



## Starbuck

:lol At this Punk stuff still going on. Before the Torch gave us minute by minute stuff, when the Observer said a segment lost viewers, everybody just accepted it and moved on. Now we got this whole silly debate running on over the 4 or 5 minutes of the 15 Punk wasn't part of. Holy sensitive Punk marks. Does it really matter? 2 weeks ago he got a 3.6 and this week he lost viewers. Big deal. Get over it.


----------



## THANOS

Starbuck said:


> :lol At this Punk stuff still going on. Before the Torch gave us minute by minute stuff, when the Observer said a segment lost viewers, everybody just accepted it and moved on. Now we got this whole silly debate running on over the 4 or 5 minutes of the 15 Punk wasn't part of. Holy sensitive Punk marks. Does it really matter? 2 weeks ago he got a 3.6 and this week he lost viewers. Big deal. Get over it.


While this is true, the biggest thing the Torch's minute-by-minute breakdowns have taught us, is that Dave Meltzer's Observer produces their ratings breakdowns with either huge biases, or a real lack of effort. This was only a rumor until the Torch's breakdown's came out. This is why, or at least I hope it's why, people are putting more stake in the Torch's breakdowns rather than Meltzer. Of course I could be wrong and it could just be "marking".


----------



## Falkono

Think it is safe to say Punk is going back to the midcard after his last three week ratings.


----------



## #Mark

Falkono said:


> Think it is safe to say Punk is going back to the midcard after his last three week ratings.


Lol wut? This is the first week Punk's segment lost viewers in quite some time.


----------



## doinktheclowns

Falkono said:


> Think it is safe to say Punk is going back to the midcard after his last three week ratings.


Why is that?

One swallow doesn't make a summer.

A low rating in this instance is an indication that Heyman Vs Punk needs to end.

Im a massive fan of CM Punk but ill even admit i've been totally bored of his direction since the end of his feud with Lesnar and before then if I'm honest.

Why on earth would anyone be interested in watching Curtis Axel. Arguably the most boring, generic and bland guy on the roster. CM Punk is effectively carrying a lump of wood in this feud. We can only watch Heyman and Punk be angry with each other for so long before people get bored.


----------



## Choke2Death

LOL @ Punk marks who just refuse to accept that their guy didn't do well for one week. "There's no minute by minute breakdown so we can't say he failed". It was still in the 10 PM spot, five minutes or not, if his promo had done well enough in gaining, no matter how many people changed the channel during the video package, there wouldn't have been such a huge loss in viewers for the quarter breakdown.

I'm an Orton fan and have no problem admitting that the Christian match a few weeks ago failed ratings wise. It's okay to admit flaws about your favorites.


----------



## THANOS

#Mark said:


> Lol wut? This is the first week Punk's segment lost viewers in quite some time.


Well there are extreme Punk fans and extreme Punk haters, and either groups are difficult to seriously when it comes to topics on the man. From everything I've seen on here, Falkono lies in one of those classes.


----------



## Sonnen Says

Falkono said:


> Think it is safe to say Punk is going back to the midcard after his last three week ratings.


Let me guess you think that's where he belongs. It's really sad that some people will like or hate a wrestler because of ratings. Punk will never be a midcarder because he doesn't belong there just get used to that.


----------



## Falkono

#Mark said:


> Lol wut? This is the first week Punk's segment lost viewers in quite some time.


Last two week segments

"stayed at a show-low 1.97 rating for the first-half of C.M. Punk vs. Curtis Axel"
"Raw dropped to a 2.25 rating at the top of the third hour for a C.M. Punk promo"

Then add the above numbers


----------



## THANOS

Choke2Death said:


> LOL @ Punk marks who just refuse to accept that their guy didn't do well for one week. "There's no minute by minute breakdown so we can't say he failed". It was still in the 10 PM spot, five minutes or not, if his promo had done well enough in gaining, no matter how many people changed the channel during the video package, there wouldn't have been such a huge loss in viewers for the quarter breakdown.
> 
> I'm an Orton fan and have no problem admitting that the Christian match a few weeks ago failed ratings wise. It's okay to admit flaws about your favorites.


You are most likely correct and that's a good assertion to make about this particular week. I think Punk's segment, any way you look at it didn't do that good. I think it's reasonable to believe that, at best, Punk's portion gained 50000-100000 viewers followed by, what would have to be, a massive turnout for the commercial and video package. So even if Punk's portion produced a gain, it's likely to still be minimal and under the weekly average for that slot. I will admit if I'm wrong here.


----------



## doinktheclowns

Choke2Death said:


> LOL @ Punk marks who just refuse to accept that their guy didn't do well for one week. "There's no minute by minute breakdown so we can't say he failed". It was still in the 10 PM spot, five minutes or not, if his promo had done well enough in gaining, no matter how many people changed the channel during the video package, there wouldn't have been such a huge loss in viewers for the quarter breakdown.
> 
> I'm an Orton fan and have no problem admitting that the Christian match a few weeks ago failed ratings wise. It's okay to admit flaws about your favorites.


I will accept that it did badly and I'm not surprised.

One swallow doesn't make a summer and for me it is an indication that no one is interested in seeing this feud anymore.


----------



## Falkono

Sonnen Says said:


> Let me guess you think that's where he belongs. It's really sad that some people will like or hate a wrestler because of ratings. Punk will never be a midcarder because he doesn't belong there just get used to that.


To be honest with you right now based on what he has done in the last few months he 100% deserves to be there. His promos have been garbage. " I came to fight!" "I will punch him in the face!" etc. Pretty boring to me. Punk has huge potential but so do many other guys. You are only as good as your current material and I find it hard to believe anyone right now thinks he is on top of his game.

Plus look at his record. At ppv's in the last year he has pretty much won only one match. He is on a bad run and needs something to ignite interest in him. Sure he will find something but people should be judged on what they are currently doing and right now he is way down in terms of excitement. The only thing keeping his angle from total failure is Heyman who in my opinion is by far the best promo guy on RAW right now.


----------



## Starbuck

THANOS said:


> While this is true, the biggest thing the Torch's minute-by-minute breakdowns have taught us, is that Dave Meltzer's Observer produces their ratings breakdowns with either huge biases, or a real lack of effort. This was only a rumor until the Torch's breakdown's came out. This is why, or at least I hope it's why, people are putting more stake in the Torch's breakdowns rather than Meltzer. Of course I could be wrong and it could just be "marking".


The Observer breakdowns cover 15 minute time spans. Of course they aren't going to be as accurate as minute by minute breakdowns. Meltzer is misleading more than anything else since he doesn't paint the full picture. But when the full picture isn't available, you just have to take the info you have and apply a bit of common sense to the situation. The fact that this convo is still going on is just making me lol. The Torch aren't putting out minute by minute numbers this week for whatever reason. We're left with 2 sets of 15 minute breakdowns instead.


----------



## doinktheclowns

Falkono said:


> To be honest with you right now based on what he has done in the last few months he 100% deserves to be there. His promos have been garbage. " I came to fight!" "I will punch him in the face!" etc. Pretty boring to me. Punk has huge potential but so do many other guys. You are only as good as your current material and I find it hard to believe anyone right now thinks he is on top of his game.
> 
> Plus look at his record. At ppv's in the last year he has pretty much won only one match. He is on a bad run and needs something to ignite interest in him. Sure he will find something but people should be judged on what they are currently doing and right now he is way down in terms of excitement. The only thing keeping his angle from total failure is Heyman who in my opinion is by far the best promo guy on RAW right now.


Two Word Answer.

Curtis Axel.


The man has no charisma at all. Punk is clearly trying to carry him and Axel hasn't stepped it up once.


----------



## Falkono

doinktheclowns said:


> Two Word Answer.
> 
> Curtis Axel.
> 
> 
> The man has no charisma at all. Punk is clearly trying to carry him and Axel hasn't stepped it up once.


See I don't think it is Punk, I think it is Heyman who is doing the carrying. Heyman has been the mouth piece for many guys including Punk.
But sadly I think even the genius of Heyman cannot get Curtis over. Some people no matter how hard you polish will still be a turd. 

p.s Love the Macho man sig


----------



## doinktheclowns

Falkono said:


> See I don't think it is Punk, I think it is Heyman who is doing the carrying. Heyman has been the mouth piece for many guys including Punk.
> But sadly I think even the genius of Heyman cannot get Curtis over. Some people no matter how hard you polish will still be a turd.
> 
> p.s Love the Macho man sig


I agree in part. I think only Punk and Heyman would have been able to carry this feud on for as long as they have but it clear to everyone including his marks that this feud has run its cause. CM Punk has done some great promos in this feud and proved he can cut a great promo when given pretty much nothing.

The both of them are no feeding on scraps and scraping through each week trying to make it to that last PPV before they can go there separate ways. Its difficult to eek out what could be said in one night over four weeks.

I definitely agree with you on the Axel thing. Axel isn't trying to make himself he's trying to let Heyman make him and as much of a genius Heyman is, it would take a miracle worker to get Axel over. generic look, terrible voice, poor acting, generic name poor in ring ability. 


Just because he was a good training buddy for The Rock doesn't mean to say he should be this far up the card.


----------



## markedfordeath

wow, Bryan was involved in two of the high rated segments on Raw...thats just crazy! even though all segments were lowly rated, the main storyline is getting all the ratings again....crazy!


----------



## Evil Peter

doinktheclowns said:


> I will accept that it did badly and I'm not surprised.
> 
> One swallow doesn't make a summer and for me it is an indication that no one is interested in seeing this feud anymore.


If no one is interested, shouldn't the drop be larger and draw some of the lowest ratings on the show? Losing viewers isn't positive but some perspective needs to be maintained.


----------



## JY57

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_73323.shtml#.UjI2cRb3CL0



> A second week of a Rhodes Family member in a career-threatening match delivered WWE Raw's highest-rated quarter-hour of the show.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Goldust positioned at the top of the third hour of the September 9 Raw scored a 2.07 rating in the males 18-49 demo. This was the highest-rated segment until the over-run. This was the same result last week for Cody Rhodes vs. Orton.
> 
> Included was the finish of Orton-Goldust containing the most-watched minute of the show. The match concluded with a show-high 1.658 million viewers at 10:17 p.m. By comparison, the over-run topped out with 1.630 million viewers at 11:07 p.m.
> 
> - Overall, Raw was pushed down from recent levels due to Week 1 of the NFL Monday Night Football competition on ESPN. Only three out of 12 quarter-hours topped the 2.0-mark, whereas 10 out of 12 reached a 2.0 last week.
> 
> - Top-Rated Segments in m18-49 demo: 2.07 rating for Orton vs. Goldust in Q9, 2.03 rating in Q12 for Daniel Bryan vs. The Shield, and 2.01 rating in Q5 for Paul Heyman's "wellness exam."
> 
> Then, Raw scored a 2.46 over-run for the final PPV hype centered on Bryan vs. Orton and Big Show-Triple H. By comparison, last week's pre-NFL over-run was a 2.61 rating for a similar angle.
> 
> Raw Quarter-Hour Flow in m18-49 demo
> 
> Overall Show: 1.89 rating and 1.170 million viewers.
> 
> Q1: Raw started slow with a 1.77 rating for the Cutting Edge, Triple H's involvement, and Daniel Bryan-Randy Orton hype versus the NFL. This was the lowest-rated Q1 since July 29.
> 
> Q2: Raw increased to a 1.85 rating for the end of the Hunter-Edge exchange, which boosted the Q2 rating, plus IC champion Curtis Axel vs. Kofi Kingston and one commercial.
> 
> Q3: Raw dropped to a 1.71 rating for various video packages and backstage segments, plus two full commercials.
> 
> Q4: Raw dropped off again to a show-low 1.59 rating for Dolph Ziggler vs. Bray Wyatt and two full commercials again. The two commercials are a factor, but this was not a good endorsement of Ziggler and the Wyatts act.
> 
> Q5: Raw jumped 26 percent at the top of the second hour to a 2.01 rating for Paul Heyman's "exam" and C.M. Punk's interruption. There was one commercial at the end.
> 
> Q6: Raw dropped again to a 1.67 rating for a Total Divas six-Divas tag match, one commercial, and the first-half of Alberto Del Rio vs. R-Truth. Both matches drew equally low viewership.
> 
> Q7: Raw increased slightly to a 1.73 rating for the second-half of Del Rio vs. Truth, Santino's return vs. Antonio Cesaro, and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> Q8: Raw declined to a 1.68 rating for The Miz vs. Damien Sandow and one commercial leading to the top of the hour.
> 
> Q9: Raw increased 23 percent to a show-high 2.07 rating for Orton vs. Goldust, plus one mid-match commercial.
> 
> Q10: Raw dropped off to a 1.94 rating. Raw hit its peak for the entire show for the finish of Orton-Goldust at 10:17 p.m., then the audience tuned out during the post-match commercial.
> 
> Q11: Raw dropped off to a 1.66 rating for Rob Van Dam vs. Ryback and two full commercial breaks, which affected the rating, as big chunks of viewers bailed to ESPN during both breaks.
> 
> Q12: Raw rebounded to a 2.03 rating for Daniel Bryan vs. The Shield and one commercial.
> 
> Over-Run: Raw finished with a 2.46 rating for the show-closing angle centered on the McMahons, Orton, Bryan, and Big Show leading into the PPV.
> 
> Follow-up: We'll have a break-down of the Raw and NFL channel-flipping in a report next week.


]

this by quarter hour for 18-49 Male Demo (not minute by minute) for this week from PWTorch


----------



## markedfordeath

Orton and Bryan are carrying the show every week...lol everyone else is just having low rated segments...People are only interested in Orton's matches because of the stipulations.


----------



## Choke2Death

Orton vs Goldust doing show-high numbers. :mark:


----------



## markedfordeath

I know, Orton and Bryan are carrying the show...even when its lowly rated, theirs are the highest rated segments LOL and no one cares about the Miz or Ziggler lol


----------



## doinktheclowns

Evil Peter said:


> If no one is interested, shouldn't the drop be larger and draw some of the lowest ratings on the show? Losing viewers isn't positive but some perspective needs to be maintained.


No. Your always going to receive a baseline of viewers regardless. it wasn't unwatchable but it was extremely overplayed. It didn't drop because people don't like CM Punk, or because he isn't talented or interesting. They dropped because this feud is stale and boring as fuck.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

:lol People are so fucking stupid sometimes. "Punk marks are just being sensitive." No, that's not it, it's that we still don't know how well Punk did. It's so simple to understand, yet the fact that some people don't boggles me. It's not the same as Orton/Christian because that took up the entire 15 minutes, so the fault does lie completely on that. Punk's promo could have stayed even, with the commercial and backstage stuff losing 500k, but we don't know that with the information given to us. So coming to the "Oh Punk did bad" conclusion doesn't necessarily work. But, since it looks like we won't be getting the minute breakdown for last, we'll have to just end it there.

It's a new week anyway. Time for some fresh mark wars.


----------



## JY57

markedfordeath said:


> I know, Orton and Bryan are carrying the show...even when its lowly rated, theirs are the highest rated segments LOL and no one cares about the Miz or Ziggler lol


I am no Ziggler fan by any means but he was doing good with his Langston/AJ Lee feud in the rating department. Looks like once people realized he is going down the drain and getting buried, after that handicap match with The Shield, is when people got the memo to tune out for him.


----------



## Starbuck

Clearly they need to bring back Goldust. Goldust + Henry + Cena = $$$


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Those are some good numbers for Bryan/Shield, Orton/Goldie and Punk/Heyman.

Fuck, no mark wars this week.


----------



## markedfordeath

this just goes to show you that as soon as the Rhodes Family in general gets involved in this storyline, the ratings are going to be through the roof..they've proved that the last two weeks....this angle is getting people tons of interested.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Firing angles always do very, very well. It's why Orton/Cody failed until the aftermath last week.

Remember Big Show getting fired and crying? GOAT numbers.


----------



## markedfordeath

this might be very messed up...but remember Triple H said Edge never drew? a 1.77 opening for Cutting Edge...just saying ! LOL okay that was bad. lol


----------



## JY57

markedfordeath said:


> this might be very messed up...but remember Triple H said Edge never drew? a 1.77 opening for Cutting Edge...just saying ! LOL okay that was bad. lol


not really opening segments have bombed a lot lately except Post-SummerSlam RAW. Blaming it on Edge is beyond stupid (especially they didn't know he was opening till 7:59 PM ET).


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

> Q1: Raw started slow with a 1.77 rating for the Cutting Edge, Triple H's involvement, and Daniel Bryan-Randy Orton hype versus the NFL. This was the lowest-rated Q1 since July 29.


:lmao Didn't even see that. Edge, Orton, Bryan and Triple H, way to go.

Should have put Goldust in that segment to save the numbers.


----------



## markedfordeath

i didnt mean it..i was taking a dig lol thought the comment and the conclusion was funny lol I love Edge.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Daniel Bryan in dat 2nd highest rated QH of the night (behind Orton/Goldust).

And the highest if you count the overrun.

:bryan


----------



## markedfordeath

wasnt really Bryan's fault, he spoke for two minutes....the rest was all Edge and Triple H, and the majority of people tuned in toward the end, simply becaause the game was on..so you can't really use the opening segment to start a mark war.


----------



## Starbuck

This week I was watching Raw and a goat was flying outside my window. It was so distracting that I accidentally leaned on the remote control and it changed the channel as soon as CM Punk came on the TV. The week before I was watching Raw and just when I heard CM Punk's music, my friend called and told me to change the channel because he was on the news so I missed the whole thing. Next week I'm going to watch Raw and something will happen where I have to change the channel when CM Punk is on my TV. You see. It isn't ever Punk's fault. Fantastical things happen when it comes to CM Punk. He couldn't possibly lose viewers in a TV segment I mean dear God. The Rock, John Cena, Triple H and Brock Lesnar have all lost viewers in a TV segment and it was all their fault but never CM Punk. He's just amazing. At everything. Even when he loses viewers he doesn't actually lose viewers. Wow. I'm so amazed. Because it's so amazing. CaMazing Punk.


----------



## markedfordeath

ha ha gold..just gold....


----------



## markedfordeath

by the looks of things for the past month, Bryan was a great choice for the top role! A lot of people might find him annoying but he's drawing.....just wait until Punk gets involved, then it'll elevate everyone even more. Punk should just be Bryan's mouthpiece...let Bryan do all the outstanding wrestling lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:lmao Jesus... this Punk argument still going on from last week.

I love how things are constantly taken out of context and the reactions of those defending Punk are greatly exaggerated by others. The quarter Punk happened to be a small part of didn't do well. We know the quarter didn't do well. We don't know how Punk himself did. I mean, Punk's promo could've done really poorly, and then only after it was finished was when people tuned in to make the loss not as much. Or it could be the opposite. Why is that so hard to understand? That Punk's impact on the quarter is unknown? His promo wasn't even half of it. That's why anyone using a bit of logic won't say "PUNK DID POORLY!", they'll say "The quarter Punk was in did poorly" (which I've seen people do, but it seems some are still either being trolls or morons). And while, yes, we used to only have the Observer to take things into account, we've been shown through the minute-by-minute stuff that it's not always as it seems, which is why now it's being brought up and wasn't at large before. That should be simple to understand as well.

Oh well.

Edit: And on the 18-49 breakdown for this week, 9PM jumped up quite a bit, 10PM did really well, and the overrun... it looks like the weakest in awhile, but it's still the peak of the show, so it's all good.


----------



## Evil Peter

doinktheclowns said:


> No. Your always going to receive a baseline of viewers regardless. it wasn't unwatchable but it was extremely overplayed. It didn't drop because people don't like CM Punk, or because he isn't talented or interesting. They dropped because this feud is stale and boring as fuck.


But it didn't get nearly the lowest ratings on the show, which means more people were interested in that than much of the other stuff. I'm just saying that "no one wants to see it" is a bit too strong.


----------



## markedfordeath

tne one no one wants to see is the Divas and the Miz.


----------



## Starbuck

The Sandrone said:


> :lmao Jesus... this Punk argument still going on from last week.
> 
> I love how things are constantly taken out of context and the reactions of those defending Punk are greatly exaggerated by others.


If everybody is saying it then it's hardly an exaggeration and we do it because the reaction is lol. 

PUNK DEFENCE LEAGUE IN FULL EFFECT. DEY SED PUNK LOSTED DA VIEWERS EVARYBADY RETALIATE NOW SO WE CUN PROVEZ DAT DA PUNK IS DA BIGGEST DRAW EVA CM PUNK CP MUNK PHIL PHIL PHIL BEST IN DA HOLE WURLD


----------



## checkcola

It wasn't even a good promo, so it's not like it deserved to do good


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> If everybody is saying it then it's hardly an exaggeration and we do it because the reaction is lol.
> 
> PUNK DEFENCE LEAGUE IN FULL EFFECT. DEY SED PUNK LOSTED DA VIEWERS EVARYBADY RETALIATE NOW SO WE CUN PROVEZ DAT DA PUNK IS DA BIGGEST DRAW EVA CM PUNK CP MUNK PHIL PHIL PHIL BEST IN DA HOLE WURLD


:lmao

That's the stuff!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

So, looks like Starbuck completely missed the point, once again. Is it even worth trying to explain things to you, at this point? Or does every post translate to "LOL PUNK IS GRATE HE DOS NO BAD"?

I've even said Punk's segment did poor. That's never what was even argued, which is the funny part. The reason we say we don't know how well he did, is because we truly, actually don't. I know, it's tough to understand. DMN tried to explain it, but even then it just flew over peoples' heads. Oh well.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> So, looks like Starbuck completely missed the point, once again. Is it even worth trying to explain things to you, at this point? Or does every post translate to "LOL PUNK IS GRATE HE DOS NO BAD"?
> 
> I've even said Punk's segment did poor. That's never what was even argued, which is the funny part. The reason we say we don't know how well he did, is because we truly, actually don't. I know, it's tough to understand. DMN tried to explain it, but even then it just flew over peoples' heads. Oh well.


:vince2

Tbh, if you posted something other than LOL PUNK IS GRATE HE DOS NO BAD every now and then maybe it wouldn't look like all your posts say LOL PUNK IS GRATE HE DOS NO BAD. Just saying.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

markedfordeath said:


> *wasnt really Bryan's fault, he spoke for two minutes*....the rest was all Edge and Triple H, and the majority of people tuned in toward the end, simply becaause the game was on..so you can't really use the opening segment to start a mark war.


Wait wut?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

So Sandrone's post looked like that too? As did DMN's, I assume? As well as every other post that had some sense in it, that wasn't just "LOL PUNK LOST VIEWERZ AGEN DONT MATTER IF IT WAS FVE MINUYT"

Starbuck, the ultimate ratings thread troll striking again.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Since some Punk fans were adamant that you could only hold Punk accountable for 5 minutes of a quarter that featured him and a video recap of his feud last week, then,surely,in the name of consistency, he is only responsible for 4 minutes of his quarter this week. Heyman and his physical woes appeared for almost half the quarter. Punk appeared at roughly the 7 minute mark and was gone by 11 minutes after. Dat Heyman drawing dem ratingz.


----------



## NearFall

So I had to buy a new laptop and move into college again etc. Good to see this thread is the one thing that hasn't changed this past week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Best4Bidness said:


> Since some Punk fans were adamant that you could only hold Punk accountable for 5 minutes of a quarter that featured him and a video recap of his feud last week, then,surely,in the name of consistency, he is only responsible for 4 minutes of his quarter this week. Heyman and his physical woes appeared for almost half the quarter. Punk appeared at roughly the 7 minute mark and was gone by 11 minutes after. Dat Heyman drawing dem ratingz.


The difference is people were expecting Punk that whole time BUT... Heyman does deserve the majority of the credit, yes.



> So I had to buy a new laptop and move into college again etc. Good to see this thread is the one thing that hasn't changed this past week.


The thread hasn't changed in two years, what were you expecting? :lol


----------



## Happenstan

Choke2Death said:


> I'm an Orton fan and have no problem admitting that the Christian match a few weeks ago failed ratings wise. *It's okay to admit flaws about your favorites*.



You'd think so. You'd think it would be honorable. Apparently not. Ski EM Punker makes no mistakes evar!!!!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Sandrone said:


> The difference is people were expecting Punk that whole time BUT... Heyman does deserve the majority of the credit, yes.



Honestly, the anticipation of Punk does deserve some credit for the quarter. I was just mocking the people who live by the minute to minute breakdowns. If the quarter does well, be happy for it; if it tanks, its not the end of the world. It's okay if your favorite has an off week in the ratings.


----------



## CM BORK

Stop making this thread about CM Punk's drawing every week. It's absolutely moronic, considering even the most HARDCORE Punk marks have no interest in this storyline involving the worst guy on the roster.

Use dat logic people.


----------



## Londrick

Might as well drop Bryan and replace him with Goldust since it's what's best for business.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

This thread is still hilarious.

:lmao


----------



## D.M.N.

D.M.N. said:


> *September 9th, 2013*
> - 2.91 rating (+0.06 on last week)
> - 2.871 million households (+60,000)
> - 3.886 million viewers (-51,000)
> - an average of 1.35 viewers per household that watches Raw (-0.05)
> 
> - 1.35 Adults 18-49 rating (-0.15)
> - 1.710 million viewers in Adults 18-49 demographic (-190,000)
> 
> *- 1.89 Males 18-49 rating (-0.28)
> - 1.170 million viewers in Males 18-49 demographic (-198,000)
> 
> - 0.84 Womens 18-49 rating (+0.01)
> - 0.540 million viewers in Womens 18-49 demographic (+8,000)*
> 
> - 2.176 million viewers fall outside of Adults 18-49 demographic (+139,000)
> 
> Interesting, some demographics improved week-on-week. Would be interesting to see which demographics they were, clearly under 18's or above 49's.


The Womens 18-49 _increased_ for the second week in a row, albeit marginally. Onto the Males 18-49 breakdown now...

*Males 18-49 Breakdown - September 9th, 2013*
*Q1 - 1.77 rating / 1.114 million (-0.33 / -208,000)*
*Q2 - 1.85 rating / 1.164 million (-0.24 / -151,000)*
*Q3 - 1.71 rating / 1.076 million (-0.23 / -145,000)*
*Q4 - 1.59 rating / 1.001 million (-0.41 / -258,000)*
*Q5 - 2.01 rating / 1.265 million (-0.15 / -95,000)*
*Q6 - 1.67 rating / 1.051 million (-0.44 / -277,000)*
*Q7 - 1.73 rating / 1.089 million (-0.42 / -264,000)*
*Q8 - 1.68 rating / 1.057 million (-0.82 / -517,000)*
*Q9 - 2.07 rating / 1.303 million (-0.18 / -113,000)*
*Q10 - 1.94 rating / 1.221 million (-0.03 / -19,000)*
--> 22:17 - 2.63 rating / 1.658 million (peak - +0.04 / +26,000 versus two weeks ago)
*Q11 - 1.66 rating / 1.045 million (-0.36 / -226,000)*
*Q12 - 2.03 rating / 1.278 million (-0.33 / -207,000)*
*OR - 2.46 rating / 1.548 million (-0.15 / -95,000)*
--> 23:07 - 2.59 rating / 1.630 million (peak - -0.39 / -247,000 versus two weeks ago)

Positives
- Orton vs Goldust
- Heyman "injury" angle
- closing angle

Negatives
- Ziggler vs Wyatt
- most of hour two


----------



## Mqwar

Even though it won't matter much in the ratings, they need to open the show with Punk/heyman angle a few times. The corporation stuff is getting repetitive with opening promos involving the same three guys over and over. Mix it up a bit.


----------



## Happenstan

D.M.N. said:


> Positives
> - Orton vs Goldust
> - *Heyman "injury" angle*
> - closing angle


Heyman = da ratingz bro!!! :cheer


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

:heyman2, all by himself, (injury angle) bringing in em dem ratings!


----------



## Choke2Death

Walrus DAT RATINGZ MACHINE! (Heyman's face in this pic always makes me laugh :lol)


----------



## JY57

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_73339.shtml#.UjOYQRb3CL0



> WWE Smackdown last Friday, September 6 followed the ideal TV wrestling show pattern by building an audience throughout the two-hour show.
> 
> In the key demographic of males 18-49, Smackdown started with 0.88 rating for the show-opening Town Hall Meeting hosted by Triple H and finished with a 1.26 rating for Daniel Bryan vs. Seth Rollins in Q8.
> 
> Overall, Smackdown flowed from a 0.88 rating to a 1.00 rating at the end of the first hour to a 1.03 rating at the top of the second hour to a 1.11 rating in Q6 to a 1.17 rating in Q7 to the show-closing 1.26 rating.
> 
> Smackdown Ratings Flow
> 
> Q1: Smackdown started typically slow with a 0.88 rating for the Town Hall Meeting and one commercial.
> 
> Q2: Smackdown stayed at a 0.88 rating for the first-half of WWE champion Randy Orton vs. Rob Van Dam and a mid-match commercial.
> 
> Q3: Smackdown increased to a 1.00 rating for the end of RVD vs. Orton, two commercials, and a backstage Divas segment. The ending of the match drew a strong audience, then the two-minute Divas segment drew an equally strong audience.
> 
> Q4: Smackdown stayed at a 1.00 rating for Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler and one commercial.
> 
> Q5: Smackdown increased to a 1.03 rating at the top of the second hour for Curtis Axel vs. Kofi Kingston and one commercial.
> 
> Q6: Smackdown increased to a 1.11 rating for Paul Heyman backstage, one commercial, and a quick Brie Bella vs. Naomi match.
> 
> Q7: Smackdown increased to a 1.17 rating for The Usos vs. The Real Americans, one commercial, and Big Show vs. 3MB in a handicap match.
> 
> Q8: Smackdown increased to a show-high 1.26 rating for Bryan vs. Rollins, one commercial, and a post-match angle involving Randy Orton.


quarter hour ratings for last weeks Smackdown (September 6, 2013)


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Bryan has been closing every show for a month now, dude deserves a raise.


----------



## markedfordeath

ha ha Bryan's was the only high scoring one...love it!


----------



## THANOS

JY57 said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_73339.shtml#.UjOYQRb3CL0
> 
> 
> 
> quarter hour ratings for last weeks Smackdown (September 6, 2013)


I think it's about time to admit that this storyline has transformed Bryan into quite a capable draw. If a match with Seth Rollins does THAT well on smackdown and bests everything else by a wide margin, then it's fair to say Bryan is getting a lot of interest out of the viewers.


----------



## markedfordeath

Yeah I think so too..but I also just read their financial report that the WWE came out with today...they think without Cena, they'll lose money...I happen to think the opposite.....I think in the long run they'll get more money without him..they need to stop hanging on to the past....


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Interesting SD rating. The HHH Townhall meeting does poorly, which surprised me a bit as even though it was the first segment and SD generally gains viewers as time goes on, I still wouldn't have expected it to be the worst number of the night (or tied with worst number anyway...). I guess it does hammer home though how consistent Smackdown is with simply gaining viewers as the show goes on as opposed to what happens with Raw, with only certain things gaining a lot (right now usually stuff involving the two main angles of Bryan/HHH/Orton and Punk/Heyman/Axel).


----------



## markedfordeath

i'm pissed off that they think they have to bring Cena back next month and keep there weekly in order to get ratings up..they weren't up when he was there, so how would that help? once again they're going to make him the center of things because they can't trust the other talent...Fuck WWE! since Cena can't wrestle, they'll just have him come out and do promos and take up someone elses' airtime again.


----------



## Happenstan

> In the key demographic of males 18-49, Smackdown started with 0.88 rating for the show-opening Town Hall Meeting hosted by Triple H and finished with a 1.26 rating for Daniel Bryan vs. Seth Rollins in Q8.


:bryan *>* :HHH

Come on. I gotta wake Starbuck up from that nap. 




THANOS said:


> I think it's about time to admit that this storyline has transformed Bryan into quite a capable draw. If a match with Seth Rollins does THAT well on smackdown and bests everything else by a wide margin, then it's fair to say Bryan is getting a lot of interest out of the viewers.


Quoted for truth.


----------



## markedfordeath

it probably started off Poorly because people noticed Bryan wasn't there to exact revenge so they tuned out.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

THANOS said:


> I think it's about time to admit that this storyline has transformed Bryan into quite a capable draw. If a match with Seth Rollins does THAT well on smackdown and bests everything else by a wide margin, then it's fair to say Bryan is getting a lot of interest out of the viewers.


I definitely wouldn't say that yet. This is his first big storyline, and it's a *big *storyline. Not trying to slam Bryan here, so don't cry Happenstan. But I feel like we'd have to see how well Bryan performs in an angle where he's the star, so we don't really know what he's capable of solo. For example, something like Punk/Ryback.


----------



## markedfordeath

Bryan's matches solo have gained viewers, what are you talking about? he's done alright by himself with no stipulations.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Have you not seen what angle he's involved in? I'm saying once this giant angle is over, it would then be Bryan's true test. It doesn't matter if Triple H isn't showing up every single Bryan match, Bryan's still a part of this angle, and this angle has been dominating the numbers.


----------



## markedfordeath

he will....he will do alright, because if this ends how I think it will end, then he'll totally become well respected by everyone... Just be proud that him and Punk are finally in the position to carry the company, which is awesome in itself  I just hate the fact that they're bringing Cena back in a non wrestling role next month...what a buzzkill


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I think he'll do alright too. This angle is perfect to build Bryan up. All I was saying is it's way too soon to be calling him a draw capable of carrying the show and whatnot, when he hasn't proved he can carry a storyline. He'll have his chances obviously, once this corporation angle is over. And that's when we find out.

Also, Cena's coming back next month already?

:cena


----------



## markedfordeath

yeah apparently to promote Breast Cancer Awareness...but can't they just have Punk and Bryan dress up in pink shirts and come out and cut a promo? i don't understand why Cena has to continue to do the promotions when we're supposed to make new stars here.


----------



## THANOS

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I definitely wouldn't say that yet. This is his first big storyline, and it's a *big *storyline. Not trying to slam Bryan here, so don't cry Happenstan. But I feel like we'd have to see how well Bryan performs in an angle where he's the star, so we don't really know what he's capable of solo. For example, something like Punk/Ryback.


This is a good point but we do have some measurable proof of that already. Remember Bryan/Ryback from earlier in the year? I may be mistaken but I think that pulled a pretty great gain and overall number. However, I agree he's not a show carrying draw by himself, that's for certain but, like you mentioned, this angle could get him there.


----------



## markedfordeath

the only time recently that Bryan has lost viewers was due to the Swagger/Bryan match on the 22nd of July that started off the Gauntlet....the reason why it didn't have good viewership in that 7 minute match, was because the match previously with RVD lost an incredible amount of viewership and no one watched it so they tuned in late..that has to be the cause because the Cesaro/Bryan match, match 2 of the gauntlet gained a considerable amount....


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THANOS said:


> This is a good point but we do have some measurable proof of that already. Remember Bryan/Ryback from earlier in the year? I may be mistaken but I think that pulled a pretty great gain and overall number. However, I agree he's not a show carrying draw by himself, that's for certain but, like you mentioned, this angle could get him there.


Also, didn't he also have a match with Cesaro for no reason whatsoever that gained viewers and drew a good rating? Pretty sure he did. It was earlier this year, before the Corporation angle started. And truth be told, he's been good at gaining viewers for the most part since his WHC run. Not saying he was great back then, but that is the time period when we first started to see Bryan get legit over with the fans and start to gain viewers on a consistent basis.


----------



## THANOS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Also, didn't he also have a match with Cesaro for no reason whatsoever that gained viewers and drew a good rating? Pretty sure he did. It was earlier this year, before the Corporation angle started. And truth be told, he's been good at gaining viewers for the most part since his WHC run. Not saying he was great back then, but that is the time period when we first started to see Bryan get legit over with the fans and start to gain viewers on a consistent basis.


Good point but I didn't want to include that match since it was just after Cena named Bryan as his challenger and #1 contender to the WWE Title, and the gauntlet was made by Vince McMahon through Brad Maddox as part of spotlighting Bryan. The Ryback match from earlier in the year was when Bryan was doing his weak-link storyline and not the major facet of the show, like he has been since after MITB.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

> The Ryback match from earlier in the year was when Bryan was doing his weak-link storyline and not the major facet of the show, like he has been since after MITB.


That's a legit point. I thought you meant the Ryback match that was a part of the gauntlet, which would still fall under this Bryan vs. Corporation storyline, even if it was Vince and not Haitch at that time. 

But the fact still remains, we haven't seen Bryan really put to the test yet. But he also hasn't hit that point of stardom yet, which is what this current storyline is looking to accomplish once it's over.


----------



## THANOS

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> That's a legit point. I thought you meant the Ryback match that was a part of the gauntlet, which would still fall under this Bryan vs. Corporation storyline, even if it was Vince and not Haitch at that time.
> 
> But the fact still remains, we haven't seen Bryan really put to the test yet. But he also hasn't hit that point of stardom yet, which is what this current storyline is looking to accomplish once it's over.


Precisely my friend. I think both him and Punk are well on their way to becoming steady draws, and if Cena's injury has proved anything, it's that the viewers did not leave with him, and are instead holding steady, or, in some cases, increasing.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THANOS said:


> Good point but I didn't want to include that match since it was just after Cena named Bryan as his challenger and #1 contender to the WWE Title, and the gauntlet was made by Vince McMahon through Brad Maddox as part of spotlighting Bryan. The Ryback match from earlier in the year was when Bryan was doing his weak-link storyline and not the major facet of the show, like he has been since after MITB.


Yep. The Cesaro match gaining viewers always stuck out to me. Don't get me wrong, I very much like Cesaro. But WWE hasn't done shit with him in quite awhile. I definitely thought that match would either lose viewers, or have a very small gain, if that. But the fact that that match gained viewers always impressed me, personally. The Ryback one is also very impressive.


----------



## markedfordeath

Yep...I hope Bryan and Punk stick around for another 5 years at least....They won't beat out Cena's forced 8 years of dominance, but it'll be a nice 4-5 years more hopefully. I don't think Punk should retire like he was rumored to.....THey have gold here with Punk and Bryan, and Bryan might hit megastardom after this hopefully, no one comes close on the roster to the popularity of those two...so they have to hit it big with those two.


----------



## Happenstan

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Also, didn't he also have a match with Cesaro for no reason whatsoever that gained viewers and drew a good rating? Pretty sure he did. It was earlier this year, before the Corporation angle started. And truth be told, he's been good at gaining viewers for the most part since his WHC run. Not saying he was great back then, but that is the time period when we first started to see Bryan get legit over with the fans and start to gain viewers on a consistent basis.


Even better. It was a gauntlet match that started with Swagger, went to Cesaro, then Ryback. Bryan wrestled for the last 40 minutes of the show straight and consistently gained viewers the whole time. Very few people could pull that off. There were many shocked by those turn of events.




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I definitely wouldn't say that yet. This is his first big storyline, and it's a *big *storyline. Not trying to slam Bryan here, so don't cry Happenstan.


Funny. No worries. I'll just sit back and let you bury yourself. You've developed quite a talent at it.


----------



## THANOS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Yep. The Cesaro match gaining viewers always stuck out to me. Don't get me wrong, I very much like Cesaro. But WWE hasn't done shit with him in quite awhile. I definitely thought that match would either lose viewers, or have a very small gain, if that. But the fact that that match gained viewers always impressed me, personally. The Ryback one is also very impressive.


This is a good point for sure, Cesaro, who is definitely one of my big favourites, always seems to lose A LOT of viewers in every one of his matches, for some reason I can't figure out, yet when he worked Bryan they gained a ton in an odd quarter, I believe.


----------



## Oliver-94

Happenstan said:


> Funny. No worries. I'll just sit back and let you bury yourself. You've developed quite a talent at it.


 :lol

:HHH2


----------



## Biast

So does anyone have the ratings from last Monday Night RAW? I've searched through the last 5 pages and all I see is wall of text in every fucking post plus some Paul Heyman pictures... I guess Punk and Paul did good once again, but haven't seen anything on the rest of the show as of yet.


----------



## D.M.N.

I'm sure some will find this comment from Daniel Bryan interesting: http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_73315.shtml



> Asked what the harshest criticism of his persona is, Bryan replied, "The casual viewer, who doesn't care how good a wrestler I am, and doesn't care how entertaining I am, they're just flipping through the channels, and they'll stop here or there. Those more casual viewers aren't interested in someone like me. That's one of those things that I don't know how to change."


----------



## CM BORK

D.M.N. said:


> I'm sure some will find this comment from Daniel Bryan interesting: http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_73315.shtml


NO ONE flips through channels and goes ''OMG this guy is 7ft tall, 500lbs. I MUST now watch his entire match/segment''

It's 2013. 

As long as Bryan KEEPS his beard/hair, he'll draw and be popular. If he shaves, his character's done.


----------



## Happenstan

D.M.N. said:


> I'm sure some will find this comment from Daniel Bryan interesting: http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_73315.shtml



:lmao That's hilarious. How old is that? Has no one at WWE told Bryan he's in the highest rated and most watched segments each week on BOTH RAW and Smackdown?




CM BORK said:


> As long as Bryan KEEPS his beard/hair, he'll draw and be popular. *If he shaves, his character's done.*


You're joking, right? If so well played, if not....uh....:damn


----------



## markedfordeath

his character can never be done.....he'll always be over....i truly believe that! its not going away no matter how badly the WWE tries to bury him in the future or shoves him down the card once Cena comes back...the fanbase will always be there.


----------



## THANOS

Happenstan said:


> :lmao That's hilarious. How old is that? Has no one at WWE told Bryan he's in the highest rated and most watched segments each week on BOTH RAW and Smackdown?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're joking, right? If so well played, if not....uh....:damn


Well Bryan's really humble so even if he knows that he would never admit it. He's got a reverse-HHH ego.


----------



## Happenstan

THANOS said:


> Well Bryan's really humble so even if he knows that he would never admit it. He's got a reverse-HHH ego.


Wait. HHH has an ego?

:HHH2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Happenstan said:


> Wait. HHH has an ego?
> 
> :HHH2


Nah, that would be bad for business.

:HHH2


----------



## krai999

The Sandrone said:


> Nah, that would be bad for business.
> 
> :HHH2


not it's actually best for business 

:HHH2


----------



## JY57

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...hat-not-to-wear-fast-n-loud-more-more/202782/



> WWE Friday Night Smackdown was Friday's highest rated cable original with a 0.9 adults 18-49 rating, upn from last week's 0.7 adults 18-49 rating. hr premiere of Book 2 of Legend of Korra was second with a 0.8 adults 18-49 rating.
> 
> total viewership - 2.827 Million


up from 2.467 million from the week before

(Haven - Edge's ScyFy Hit Series; Season Premiere got 1.548 million viewers)


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

2.8 million?

DAYUM! :bryan :edge


----------



## markedfordeath

it's a godsend having Bryan on Smackdown


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Daniel Bryan pulling double duty. The guy is a draw right now.


----------



## birthday_massacre

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Daniel Bryan pulling double duty. The guy is a draw right now.


He should replace Cena as the face of the company


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Dat D-Bry getting those stellar Smackdown ratings:


----------



## markedfordeath

he's proving to be a draw...he's becoming a megastar, did you see him with the kid post match last night?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

As soon as i saw him with the kid, I knew he was going to make it to the end of the ppv with the title. WWE gave him a Cena-like moment celebrating with the fans.


----------



## Jof

What kid?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This one:


----------



## Jof

Nice.


----------



## markedfordeath

him celebrating with the kid proves how far they're willing to go with him...Cena might have to take a backseat now, by the looks of things.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Even if Cena comes back and "claims" the top spot, hell even if Cena gets his booking back once he returns, the landscape has definitely changed and there are others to get behind fully instead of solely Cena.


----------



## markedfordeath

i think Cena is in trouble, I really do...none of the fans are missing him that much..minus the small here and there sections that are tarped off which is a small 5% of arenas....the majority get into it and no one seems to miss him all that much..i noticed his shirts are slowly disappearing from the crowd too.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

I doubt Cena is in that much trouble. He's a brand within the WWE umbrella and will always have his presence, marketing, and sales out there. That said, his time in WWE as the sole top guy after 8 years of doing so is coming to it's final stages, I believe. Punk is even more over NOW than he was a year ago, if that's even possible. Daniel Bryan is a main event player now and once this storyline concludes, he's made for life. If they do this angle right, Cody Rhodes (when he returns) is going to be a major future player for years to come as well. Then you got the Shield as well as three future top guys for the WWE as well.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

I'm sure Cena can ease right back in with ease. People still forget how un matched this dude's star power is. When people think WWE they think Cena, when non WWE fans think WWE, they think Cena. Or even Punk.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Thankfully, Cena's last title run didn't do all that well in the ratings. His star power is extremely over-rated. He is this generations' Hogan, Austin, Rock, etc. Yet, he is nowhere near the star any of those 3 guys are.


----------



## markedfordeath

i think the front office is slowly starting to realize its someone elses' turn now....


----------



## Marrakesh

markedfordeath said:


> i think Cena is in trouble, I really do...none of the fans are missing him that much..minus the small here and there sections that are tarped off which is a small 5% of arenas....the majority get into it and no one seems to miss him all that much..i noticed his shirts are slowly disappearing from the crowd too.


There really was nothing to miss. Rehashed long babbling promos, all the same schtick of the past 6 years and anytime he isn't facing Bryan or Punk we get treated to lazy snore fest matches. I'm sure half the kids in the crowd were only supporting him out of habit at this point.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

By the way, that NOC poll about the greatest WWE champion ever was telling. Hogan (which was the right answer) got more percentage than the other four (Cena/Austin/Punk/HHH) combined. Cena was third with 13% with Punk having 12%. I would have thought Cena would be bigger on that end but it just tells me that his "starpower" is dwindling and has been for years now, despite what WWE wants you to think.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Thankfully, Cena's last title run didn't do all that well in the ratings. His star power is extremely over-rated. He is this generations' Hogan, Austin, Rock, etc. Yet, he is nowhere near the star any of those 3 guys are.


Well, it did stretch from like 05 to now. LOL using a poll to judge one's star power, come on now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

swagger_ROCKS said:


> Well, it did stretch from like 05 to now.


That's what happens when WWE doesn't want to make any new stars for a good 5 years and just continually push the one guy. It'd be impossible for him to not be at least somewhat of a star if you are the only guy they are making look good week in and week out. Thankfully, that mindset has finally changed, though.


----------



## checkcola

Cena's star power is one thing, but being a true babyface? Daniel Bryan has that market cornered.


----------



## markedfordeath

something tells me it'll be Bryan and Rhodes running the show for awhile now.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> That's what happens when WWE doesn't want to make any new stars for a good 5 years and just continually push the one guy. It'd be impossible for him to not be at least somewhat of a star if you are the only guy they are making look good week in and week out. Thankfully, that mindset has finally changed, though.


I fully agree. WWE was really looking for a new mega star, a poster boy, and they have him in Cena. But the fact that they shunned practically everyone else is what put them in the bad spot that they're in right now in terms of the roster's star power. Luckily we have guys like Punk and DB that the WWE is finally taking notice of, but Cena's star power will always be un matched regardless. WWE lost Rock, Austin, Brock, and Batista, so Cena was that dude.


----------



## markedfordeath

at the end there..i bet all the guys in the ring with Bryan and Triple H and everyone in the back was like, "holy fuck, look at that pop!"


----------



## Happenstan

swagger_ROCKS said:


> I fully agree. WWE was really looking for a new mega star, a poster boy, and they have him in Cena. But the fact that they shunned practically everyone else is what put them in the bad spot that they're in right now in terms of the roster's star power. Luckily we have guys like Punk and DB that the WWE is finally taking notice of, *but Cena's star power will always be un matched regardless*. WWE lost Rock, Austin, Brock, and Batista, so Cena was that dude.


I'm not so sure anymore. His last run with the title was subpar ratings wise. At some point the law of diminishing returns kicks in......or rather *HAS ALREADY* kicked in.




markedfordeath said:


> at the end there..i bet all the guys in the ring with Bryan and Triple H and everyone in the back was like, "holy fuck, look at that pop!"


You could read some of their faces almost as if there were thought bubbles above their heads. "So this is what it's like to get a reaction."


----------



## markedfordeath

that pop there at the end where everyone was Yes-ing..that has to tell management something..that was the exact reaction they were looking for and they keep getting it with Bryan....Orton only gets nuclear heat when he touches Bryan...Bryan will surpass Cena.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Happenstan said:


> I'm not so sure anymore. His last run with the title was subpar ratings wise. At some point the law of diminishing returns kicks in......or rather *HAS ALREADY* kicked in.


that was like, during the Ryback deal?


----------



## funnyfaces1

It truly is scary. Only guys in the past ten years that are getting comparable pops to Bryan right now are Jeff Hardy in 2008-2009 and CM Punk in 2011. Batista and Matt Hardy also were close to that level in 2005, but I would say that Bryan is definitely more over than both of them. Heck, Bryan is on pace to surpass both Jeff's 2008-2009 and Punk's 2011 run. You know the dude is special when you have a younger sibling like myself whose first favorite wrestler is Bryan himself, and has already established an emotional connection with said wrestler.


----------



## Happenstan

swagger_ROCKS said:


> that was like, during the Ryback deal?


Ryback and Henry. They tried once again to book Cena as an underdog champion and it just didn't remotely work this time.


----------



## markedfordeath

i know some people dont like Bryan, but you have to admit, its obvious that the WWE sees something in him and i think its official, after Cena is gone he's the guy..but it won't be like the Cena era, Bryan won't mind if guys shine with him..he always puts guys over in interviews....I'm willing to bet that the guys in the locker room look at Bryan's success and they smile because he's small yet he's doing it, and guys like Gabriel, Kofi, and Rhodes can look at him and know that they're not necessarily guaranteed to only the midcard due to their size alone anymore..with hard work and a reaction from the crowd you can be the top guy..Bryan is seriously becoming almost too invaluable at this point. its awesome.


----------



## #Mark

funnyfaces1 said:


> It truly is scary. Only guys in the past ten years that are getting comparable pops to Bryan right now are Jeff Hardy in 2008-2009 and CM Punk in 2011. Batista and Matt Hardy also were close to that level in 2005, but I would say that Bryan is definitely more over than both of them. Heck, Bryan is on pace to surpass both Jeff's 2008-2009 and Punk's 2011 run. You know the dude is special when you have a younger sibling like myself whose first favorite wrestler is Bryan himself, and has already established an emotional connection with said wrestler.


I don't think Matt Hardy was ever that over. It was more sympathy than anything, I don't think people wanted him main eventing PPVs or winning world titles.


----------



## CM BORK

lol @ people saying Cena will take a backseat. When the Golden Boy comes back he'll leech off Bryan's popularity as usual by having him save him, tag team with him, comedy kits, segments etc.
Bryan's popularity will wither down once we get Bryan & Cena teaming up. It's obvious who the WWE will always favour. They've been doing this for 8 years now with every babyface who comes close to touching him.


----------



## Waffelz

The biggest lol goes to people saying Cena isn't that much of a draw. He can't help it when other segments do shit.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Waffelz said:


> The biggest lol goes to people saying Cena isn't that much of a draw. He can't help it when other segments do shit.


Um dude, this Bryan/Corporation storylines has gained viewers consistently. Cena's last title reign did not.


----------



## JY57

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Um dude, this Bryan/Corporation storylines has gained viewers consistently. Cena's last title reign did not.


Cena actually did gaine consistently throughout Ryback series and Mark Henry feud. I went back and he gain good amount of viewers for each segment, and never lost viewers for any segment either.

only thing he didn't do that this story did is gain 1+ million viewers in the over-run.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JY57 said:


> Cena actually did gaine consistently throughout Ryback series and Mark Henry feud. I went back and he gain good amount of viewers for each segment, and never lost viewers for any segment either.
> 
> only thing he didn't do that this story did is gain 1+ million viewers in the over-run.


Should have phrased it that his previous title reigns did significantly better in previous years. WWE hasn't missed a beat since Cena has been gone, like some people predicted they would.


----------



## Waffelz

If Cena was still here and involved in a different storyline, the ratings the past few weeks would have been over 3.0.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Waffelz said:


> If Cena was still here and involved in a different storyline, the ratings the past few weeks would have been over 3.0.


That's a nice, completely unproveable assumption to make. They've done much better without Cena than anyone could have ever imagined. And considering they were at a 2.91 last week, getting them to a 3 isn't saying all that much. Get over it. Cena is not the be all and end all with this company anymore.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Thankfully, Cena's last title run didn't do all that well in the ratings. His star power is extremely over-rated. He is this generations' Hogan, Austin, Rock, etc. Yet, he is nowhere near the star any of those 3 guys are.


There aren't nearly as many people watching wrestling these days compared to those days. Back then it wasn't easy to watch a show that just happened the day after by looking for it online. It was basically you either watch it or you miss it. Cena definitely draws a good amount of viewers.

What's odd is that they've never really had someone go over Cena like this. I mean you have Daniel Bryan, a guy who won the world title once before taking it from Cena, he is over like crazy right now. And he beat Cena clean at Summerslam. That has had to have garnered a lot of interest from fans of Cena onto Bryan. I mean who else has ever beaten Cena cleanly while not already being a long time established star?


----------



## JY57

> Total Divas Mid-Season Finale - 1.036 million viewers (down 1.09 million from last week)
> 
> TD After Party - 975,000 viewers


should just started earlier in the Summer and kept it Exclusively in the SummerTime, where they did good. As proof last two weeks they are getting murdered without Khardasian show for the lead in and Sunday Night Footbal (and other better drama shows on Sunday Night). They are going tog et OWNED and DESTROYED in November


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TheGMofGods said:


> There aren't nearly as many people watching wrestling these days compared to those days. Back then it wasn't easy to watch a show that just happened the day after by looking for it online. It was basically you either watch it or you miss it. *Cena definitely draws a good amount of viewers.*
> 
> What's odd is that they've never really had someone go over Cena like this. I mean you have Daniel Bryan, a guy who won the world title once before taking it from Cena, he is over like crazy right now. And he beat Cena clean at Summerslam. That has had to have garnered a lot of interest from fans of Cena onto Bryan. I mean who else has ever beaten Cena cleanly while not already being a long time established star?


He used to. And he used to be a bigger draw. People finally got tired of the same old shit during his last title reign. And it doesn't help him that they've been in good standing since he left.


----------



## THANOS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> He used to. And he used to be a bigger draw. People finally got tired of the same old shit during his last title reign. And it doesn't help him that they've been in good standing since he left.


I can't remember which poster here first mentioned it, but they made a really interesting assertion about Cena's drawing power. To paraphrase what was said, "we all talk about how many viewers Cena brings in every segment he's a part of, but what about how many viewers he has repelled from the company, since he's been a top guy?" I think this is definitely an intriguing point that the amount of viewers Cena pulls is outweighed by the amount of viewers he turns away, but I have no clue how we could possibly trace the truth in that and figure out a concrete way to attribute it to Cena.

If someone could figure this out statistically, then it would truly be interesting to see.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THANOS said:


> I can't remember which poster here first mentioned it, but they made a really interesting assertion about Cena's drawing power. To paraphrase what was said, "we all talk about how many viewers Cena brings in every segment he's a part of, but what about how many viewers he has repelled from the company, since he's been a top guy?" I think this is definitely an intriguing point that the amount of viewers Cena pulls is outweighed by the amount of viewers he turns away, but I have no clue how we could possibly trace the truth in that and figure out a concrete way to attribute it to Cena.
> 
> If someone could figure this out statistically, then it would truly be interesting to see.


Yeah, that would be a very interesting stat to see, if it was something that could be measured. And not just for Cena, but it would be interesting to see for everyone of the top guys over the years, how many viewers tuned out because of them.


----------



## markedfordeath

i'm going on record, Bryan is surpassing him...that's just the truth, face it!


----------



## JY57

> Monday's WWE Raw following Night of Champions increased 9.5 percent in Social Media Activity compared to the pre-PPV episode. The post-PPV bump was down considerably from recent post-PPV Raws.
> 
> The bump post-Payback in June was 56.5 percent, post-MITB in July was 24.5 percent, and post-Summerslam in August was 44.9 percent.
> 
> Overall, Night of Champions scored 271,819 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, which was nearly the lowest score for a post-PPV Raw this year.
> 
> It was the first Raw of 2013 facing Monday Night Football competition, but the NFL game did not generate much buzz, as Raw topped Steelers-Bengals's 244,054 in social activity to rank #1 on cable TV. The NFL game typically generates over 1.0 million in social activity.
> 
> Post-PPV Raw Break Down
> 
> - Jan. 28 post-Rumble Raw - 389,815 social activity (+86.5 percent vs. previous week)
> 
> - Feb. 18 post-Chamber Raw - 286,986 social activity (+7.0 percent vs. previous week)
> 
> - Apr. 8 post-WM29 Raw - 518,787 social activity (+69.2 percent vs. previous week)
> 
> - May 20 post-E. Rules Raw - 267,714 social activity (+18.3 percent vs. previous week)
> 
> - June 17 post-Payback Raw - 323,847 social activity (+56.5 percent vs. previous week)
> 
> - July 15 post-MITB Raw - 355,138 social activity (+24.5 percent vs. previous week)
> 
> - Aug. 19 post-SSlam Raw - 377,874 social activity (+44.9 percent vs. previous week)
> 
> - Sept. 16 post-NOC Raw - 271,819 social activity (+9.5 percent vs. previous week)


via PWTorch


----------



## markedfordeath

at least there was an increase and a shitty pay per view deserves a shitty small increase.


----------



## Jof

This social media score is so misleading though. There was enormous buzz on twitter at the start of the show when Triple H stripped Bryan off the title. Didn't think they could top that for the rest of the show, but as it turned out it exploded when Heyman kissed Ryback just before commercial. That may be a reason why Raw topped NFL. At the end Social media score is really just a speculation based on viewer's interest, but not always right. Yeah Heyman-Ryback kiss bumped the twitter score, but this hardly translates to a larger viewership.


----------



## JY57

> WWE Raw on Monday, September 16 scored a 2.96 rating following Night of Champions, up slightly from a 2.91 rating leading into Night of Champions.
> 
> Raw eeked out four million viewers, averaging 4.013 million viewers over the course of three hours. Raw was up three percent from last week's average of 3.886 million viewers.
> 
> Hourly Break Down: First Hour - a show-low 3.865 million viewers for the immediate PPV fall-out, Second Hour - show-high 4.162 million viewers for Dusty-Stephanie and chaos, Third Hour - 4.012 million viewers.
> 
> On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #2 behind Monday Night Football in total viewers and in the key demos. ESPN's Monday Night Football averaged 14.3 million viewers, a decline of two million viewers from the Eagles-Redskins prime time game last week, which averaged 16.5 million viewers.
> 
> Despite the drop-off for football, Raw only gained about 130,000 viewers compared to last week for the post-PPV episode.
> 
> In the week-to-week demographics, Raw was up and down one-tenth of a rating in the key demos of males 18-49 and males 18-34, respectively.
> 
> The biggest change was Raw losing younger viewers. The unpredictable males 12-17 demo dropped to a four-month low and the males 12-34 demo dropped to a two-month low.


via PWTorch


----------



## WWE

CM BORK said:


> lol @ people saying Cena will take a backseat. When the Golden Boy comes back he'll leech off Bryan's popularity


That's what everybody said in the beginning of the Bryan/cena feud and look what happened 
:side:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Up from last week, and managed to pull in over 4 million viewers even with football on. Not bad at all.


----------



## markedfordeath

not bad? this is amazing..they're doing well...averaging 2.8-3.0 without Cena....they're losing younger viewers because they're changing the era, its no longer PG


----------



## JY57

markedfordeath said:


> not bad? this is amazing..they're doing well...averaging 2.8-3.0 without Cena....they're losing younger viewers because they're changing the era, its no longer PG


PG is not going anywhere. It is rated PG and wills tay PG for a very very long time.


----------



## CM BORK

> The biggest change was Raw losing younger viewers. The unpredictable males 12-17 demo dropped to a four-month low and the males 12-34 demo dropped to a two-month low.


WWE care more about the younger viewers than the older ones. They let Bryan and the face jobbers stand tall this week, expect the figures to reverse once Superman returns.


----------



## markedfordeath

yeah but look at all the changes..Stephanie even said "bastard" last night...and they have Orton trying to break guy's necks.....its growing adult themed.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So look at that, right in line with last year (4.111 mil for 8, 4.119 mill for 9, and 3.925 mil for 10). Good for the time.


----------



## markedfordeath

yep. the rating went up, thats the important thing..it went up from last week and it went up from last year's NoC....the reason why it wasn't above a 3.0 post PPV was because the PPV wasn't the greatest and they made it obvious that DB, everyone's hero, was going to get screwed and they treated the PPV like an episode of Raw, if they don't care about the ppv, why should the fans? that's why they're probably going all out for Battleground.


----------



## Bryan D.

Oh, look at that. That's great numbers.

GOTTA CHECK OUT DEM RATINGS, HUNTER.

:trips


----------



## Oliver-94

DAT BRYAN :mark:


----------



## markedfordeath

its just simply amazing..that was without Cena and without Punk too.....the job squad and Bryan getting it done..can't wait to see the overrun number.....and Smackdown has been the number one on Fridays without Sheamus too.


----------



## Waffelz

I agree its getting slightly more edgy. A lot more swear words for sure, and there have been both kendo sticks and chair's to the head in the last week.


----------



## markedfordeath

for a product that doesn't want to do chair shots to the head to avoid concussions and such a concussion protective business the WWE has become....letting Orton knee guys in the head with a chair around their head means they're moving on from their old senses...why else would they allow that? its like a version of the punt.


----------



## Apex Rattlesnake

Daniel "Ratings" Bryan strikes again :bryan


----------



## markedfordeath

are any of you shocked how consistent they've been even with football?


----------



## Starbuck

Gotta round that up to a 3.0 :vince3

Steph/Dusty at 9pm has a good shot of topping the night based on the hourlies. It's one of the top 5 segments this year imo. Fantastic segment in an overall pretty darn great show. Well deserved number.


----------



## THANOS

Starbuck said:


> Gotta round that up to a 3.0 :vince3
> 
> Steph/Dusty at 9pm has a good shot of topping the night based on the hourlies. It's one of the top 5 segments this year imo. Fantastic segment in an overall pretty darn great show. Well deserved number.


Agreed. Last night's show was excellent all around. I know I said before that stripping the title wasn't the way to go, but the way it was handled with the heavy focus on the referee and the possibility of HHH being "in on" the screwjob (or so it seemed by Hunter constantly cutting off Armstrong as he was trying to speak after the termination), I think this was definitely the right way to go.

Not putting the title on Orton immediately was a good way of keeping the interest as well. Instead of pissing off fans into thinking that HHH will always give the title back to his guy if Bryan manages to win, they are making it seem like HHH knows Bryan had him beat before the screwjob, so he's not giving the title to either man yet.


----------



## markedfordeath

I think the set up for Battleground the next three Raws is going to be awesome....they're going to go all out.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

If I am to follow the form of many a post on this thread, all I have to say is DAT GOAT BRINGIN' DOSE RATINGZ!!!


----------



## markedfordeath

the WWE would have to be seriously stupid to keep Cena soley at the top..Bryan is doing all he can and is exceeding expectations so far as being the top guy...he deserves to share it even when Cena gets back.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

DANIEL BRYAN continues to DELIVER DEM RATINGS!

:dazzler


----------



## markedfordeath

has he had a bad rating lately? its probably been a couple months if he's had one at all.


----------



## CM BORK

My boy Punk will bring dem 4.0's from Chicago next week.

unk5


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

CM BORK said:


> My boy Punk will bring dem 4.0's from Chicago next week.
> 
> unk5


No, he won't. WWE doesn't get 4.0 ratings anymore. And if you mean 4 million viewers, well, they just did that last night when he wasn't on the show, so that ain't saying much.


----------



## markedfordeath

i fully expect the GOAT to bring in a shit load of ppv buys for battleground after last night.


----------



## FITZ

markedfordeath said:


> yep. the rating went up, thats the important thing..it went up from last week and it went up from last year's NoC....the reason why it wasn't above a 3.0 post PPV was because the PPV wasn't the greatest and they made it obvious that DB, everyone's hero, was going to get screwed and they treated the PPV like an episode of Raw, if they don't care about the ppv, why should the fans? that's why they're probably going all out for Battleground.


I don't think this is the best analysis. I know I've never ordered a PPV and not watched Raw for free the next night. I feel like the people that buy the PPVs (or even watch them illegally) are the ones more likely to watch the show every week.


----------



## markedfordeath

not if it wasn't put together well. the build up was weak for all the matches.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

DAT DAZZLER DRAWS DEM DEMOS!!!


----------



## markedfordeath

he's holding them steady during football season..hell yeah! I wonder how much money they've made off of him already.


----------



## dxbender

Vacant = Ratings


----------



## wb1899

A18-49 viewership:
8:00: 1,664,000 (+49,000)
9:00: 1,842,000 (+157,000)
10:00-11:05: 1,956,000 (+126,000)
Average: 1,820,667 (+110,667)


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

There you go. Hour 3 had the best demo rating. As the Nature Boy used to say, "What's causing all of this?" 




Classic question with a new answer: *DAT BOY D-BRY!!!*


----------



## markedfordeath

i'd like to look up Cena's overruns and hour 3's but that's a lot of work..would love to compare.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

markedfordeath said:


> i fully expect the GOAT to bring in a shit load of ppv buys for battleground after last night.


You mean the GOAT face or the GOAT Heel?


----------



## Farnham the Drunk

Not taking anything away from Bryan, but this just shows you that if the WWE would choose to run with things that the fans are invested in MORE, they would obviously do better ratings. I personally think they care less about ratings then most of the posters on this site sometimes, at least their actions depict it. When the fans are truly invested in a gimmick, or a fad, or a wrestler, or a chant - run with the shit until it dies. But don't give them the satisfaction of an immediate payoff, it's not that hard. Which is why this storyline with Bryan/HHH/Orton & the rest of the guys involved is great, but it's like "What took you so long?"

Best example is how they rushed Punk back last year after MitB in 2011, you gotta give the audience something to tune into. The main story arcs on Raw have been slow brewing, steady & they always give you something to leave you hanging on for the next time. Also they have been continuing it over onto Smackdown, about damn time they really started doing that. So all in all the product is 10x better then it has been in a while just cause they've been pretty consistent, the feeling of not wanting to miss a show is there. Many times throughout 2012 you could miss every Raw between the PPV & not really miss out on anything, hasn't been that way in a few months.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Farnham the Drunk said:


> Best example is how they rushed Punk back last year after MitB in 2011, *you gotta give the audience something to tune into.* The main story arcs on Raw have been slow brewing, steady & they always give you something to leave you hanging on for the next time. .


There was a reason Stone Cold's run in the late 90's was so popular.Every week I tuned into see what he would doing.It was unpredictable and entertaining.I would say it's almost the same in the last few weeks.I am eagerly waiting to see what HHH will do and how Bryan can overcome those obstacles.Raw has become must-watch again.


----------



## Farnham the Drunk

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> There was a reason Stone Cold's run in the late 90's was so popular.Every week I tuned into see what he would doing.It was unpredictable and entertaining.I would say it's almost the same in the last few weeks.I am eagerly waiting to see what HHH will do and how Bryan can overcome those obstacles.Raw has become must-watch again.


Austin will always be the GOAT when it comes to making you tune in on a weekly basis. :austin

HHH & Stephanie are coming as close to Vince like as possible, I gotta give them credit. I've always found Stephanie annoying as sin - it's annoying watching those two play face. But as heels, it's easy to despise them in general so it works great.

I just really hope they don't tone it down because of the backlash they've been getting from some "fans". You know those idiots who think the shit is real so don't want Stephanie speaking at their schools because she's a "bully" on TV. fpalm


----------



## dxbender




----------



## The Buryer

^ most of those excuses are used by TNA fans though.


----------



## bjnelson19705

Farnham the Drunk said:


> Austin will always be the GOAT when it comes to making you tune in on a weekly basis. :austin
> 
> HHH & Stephanie are coming as close to Vince like as possible, I gotta give them credit. I've always found Stephanie annoying as sin - it's annoying watching those two play face. But as heels, it's easy to despise them in general so it works great.
> 
> I just really hope they don't tone it down because of the backlash they've been getting from some "fans". You know those idiots who think the shit is real so don't want Stephanie speaking at their schools because she's a "bully" on TV. fpalm


This.


----------



## Biast

I don't understand why are you people so interested in ratings though? It doesnt matter if it's 1.5 or 2.5 or 3.5. I mean, it would matter if you actually worked for the company and got paid like a percentage or something of the views, but having a thread with 500 pages about the ratings of a wrestling show is kinda _'meh'_ to me. :lol


----------



## wb1899

Torch:


> For the third consecutive week, the Rhodes Family in conflict with the McMahons drew a solid audience in the individual Raw TV quarter-hour TV ratings. And, Daniel Bryan continues to score well in TV main events.
> 
> Dusty Rhodes's confrontation with Stephanie McMahon was the top-rated quarter-hour among males 18-49 until the final segment of the show, which featured Daniel Bryan vs. Roman Reigns and the over-run.
> 
> Dusty-Stephanie scored a 2.30 rating in Q5 at the top of the second hour, Bryan vs. Reigns scored a show-high 2.32 rating in Q12, and the five-minute over-run jumped to a 2.65 rating.
> 
> Also of note, Raw started right at the overall show average with a 2.00 rating for the immediate Night of Champions fall-out. It was an ordinary quarter-hour rating compared to the past two months.
> 
> Raw Quarter-Hour TV Ratings m18-49 demo
> 
> All numbers cited below are for the m18-49 demo.
> 
> - Overall: 2.00 rating / 1.256 million viewers.
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened with a 2.00 rating and averaged 1.261 million viewers for Daniel Bryan's brief celebration, Triple H stripping Bryan of the WWE Title, and set-up for the rest of the show.
> 
> - Q2: Raw dropped to a 1.74 rating for two commercials and the first-half of Dean Ambrose vs. Dolph Ziggler. Included was the first hour's peak viewership of 1.480 million viewers at 8:15 p.m. for the end of the Bryan-Hunter segment.
> 
> From there, viewers bailed from Raw to other programming, specifically Monday Night Countdown prior to the NFL game on ESPN.
> 
> - Q3: Raw increased to a 1.86 rating for the end of Ziggler vs. Ambrose, which built from 1.160 million viewers at 8:30 p.m. to 1.423 million viewers for the finish. There were also one-and-a-half commercials.
> 
> - Q4: Raw dropped way off to a show-low 1.60 rating for Fandango vs. R-Truth, plus one-and-a-half commercials.
> 
> Raw lost a tremendous number of viewers to Monday Night Football before the top of the hour, specifically 82,000 viewers at 8:53 p.m. when Raw cut to commercial following Fandango-Truth.
> 
> - Q5: Raw jumped to a 2.30 rating for an uninterrupted Dusty Rhodes-Stephanie McMahon segment also involving Big Show and The Shield.
> 
> The segment built from 1.354 million viewers at 9:00 p.m. to a peak audience of 1.616 million viewers at 9:11 p.m. Raw benefited from 48,000 viewers coming over from football at 9:10 p.m. setting up peak viewership.
> 
> - Q6: Raw dropped to a 1.79 rating for a Divas tag match, plus two full commercial breaks. The segment was hurt by one of the biggest audience switches from Raw to NFL during the show.
> 
> From 9:11 to 9:15 p.m., Raw lost a total of 215,000 viewers to football leading into Q6.
> 
> - Q7: Raw rebounded to a 1.91 rating for Rob Van Dam vs. Damien Sandow, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q8: Raw increased to a 1.94 rating for the Randy Orton vs. The Miz match/ fight/scrap/brawl/attack. Included was one of the most-watched portions of the show from 9:51 to 9:54 p.m.
> 
> - Q9: Raw actually declined to a 1.88 rating at the top of the third hour. Included was Paul Heyman and Ryback explaining their new association on-stage, one commercial, and the first-half of a three-team #1 contender tag match.
> 
> The first-half of the segment fared okay for Heyman & Ryback, then viewers bailed to football again. During the commercial before the tag match, Raw lost 266,000 viewers to ESPN.
> 
> - Q10: Raw increased slightly to a 1.92 rating for the finish of the tag match and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> - Q11: Raw increased to a 2.03 rating for a Wyatt Family vignette, backstage segments, one commercial, and the first few minutes of Daniel Bryan vs. Roman Reigns. The segment benefited from viewers not bailing from Raw in droves.
> 
> - Q12: Raw jumped to a 2.32 rating for Bryan vs. Reigns and one mid-match commercial.
> 
> Raw benefited from 202,000 viewers coming over from the football game between 10:51 and 10:55 p.m. leading to the finish of the match.
> 
> - Over-Run: Raw jumped to a 2.65 final rating for the post-match activity involving babyfaces making the save for Daniel Bryan.
> 
> At the top of the hour, Raw gained 26,000 viewers from football, as well as viewers from other shows that ended at the top of the hour. Then, as soon as Raw started to wrap up, 135,000 viewers switched back to football.


----------



## validreasoning

^^^

that breakdown should put an end to the myth that football doesn't have an effect on raw ratings.. raw has such a strong 18-49 male demo unlike impact whose audience is 50+

meltzers quarter hour breakdowns for last weeks show, i think couple of things are starting to becoming clear punk+heyman together, people are interested, punk and heyman cutting promos on their own...not so much. the rhodes angle is a big success. bryan is going to be maineventing raw for a while yet, will be interesting to see what bryan/reigns does overall because that match had zero build



> An update regarding last week’s Raw on 9/9. The show did a 2.91 rating and 3.88 million viewers, which has to be considered good considering the NFL game competition.
> 
> Curtis Axel vs. Kofi Kingston gained 43,000 viewers. Bray Wyatt vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 247,000 viewers. *The C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman interview segment with the knee injury angle gained 863,000 viewers.* I guess that means more Canadian health care promos. Natalya & Naomi & Brie Bella vs. Alicia Fox & Aksana & Layla along with Alberto Del Rio vs. R-Truth lost 699,000 viewers, which says something about a new audience from Total Divas adding to Raw viewership. The return of Santino Marella, against Antonio Cesaro, gained 123,000 viewers. The Miz vs. Damien Sandow lost 183,000 viewers. *Randy Orton vs. Goldust gained 801,000 viewers which is a huge success for that part of the show.* The match with Cody Rhodes also did a big gain. Rob Van Dam vs. Ryback lost 575,000 viewers, and the *Daniel Bryan vs. Dean Ambrose main event gained 760,000 viewers.*


----------



## THANOS

Dear lord at both those weeks' gains. Daniel Bryan, Rhodes Family, and Punk/Heyman, the ratings Gods could not be more proud, especially for Bryan who continues to dominate the ratings, even in matches with little hype and little importance, like the one's against the Shield members who Bryan has been working with for months.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

validreasoning said:


> ^^^
> 
> that breakdown should put an end to the myth that football doesn't have an effect on raw ratings.. raw has such a strong 18-49 male demo unlike impact whose audience is 50+
> 
> meltzers quarter hour breakdowns for last weeks show, *i think couple of things are starting to becoming clear punk+heyman together, people are interested, punk and heyman cutting promos on their own...not so much. * the rhodes angle is a big success. bryan is going to be maineventing raw for a while yet, will be interesting to see what bryan/reigns does overall because that match had zero build


@The Bold part, not necessarily. What it shows is if you only put the main promo of the quarter on for less than half of it, the quarter is still doomed to fail. I'm certain people won't be jumping on Heyman's case like they did Punk's a couple of weeks ago (and they shouldn't at all for either), but when they give them the full quarter, they get a massive gain like on Raw last week, and it ended up being the biggest gain of the night. Of course it was mostly Heyman, but people had to have known it was leading to Punk coming down, which it did. Plus it went on most of the quarter, so again, most people stay tuned throughout probably until the finish.

Rhodes Family stuff has been doing very very very well, which is a good thing for Cody as his star/dawing power is higher than it's ever been. And Bryan has been doing consistently well not just in the overrun from the looks of it, but also Quarter 12 (although Meltzer's did combine the overrun and Q12 so it's hard to tell from his, but the PWTorch one gives us a better idea of how well it did), and that's amazing.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BRYAN and DEM QH's.

Anyone know why Punk wasn't on Raw this week?


----------



## JY57

ShowStopper '97 said:


> BRYAN and DEM QH's.
> 
> Anyone know why Punk wasn't on Raw this week?


^ battling many legit injuries and selling for Ryback. So he attended a AFI Concert in Cleveland the same day since he was not booked


----------



## Waffelz

I hate them breakdowns. WE WANT THE PROPER ONE DAMMIT.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JY57 said:


> ^ battling many legit injuries and selling for Ryback. So he attended a AFI Concert in Cleveland the same day since he was not booked


Thanks.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

What happened to the rating breakdowns? they haven't been available in weeks. the last one I saw was the one that said that AJ's pipebomb losing 600,000 viewers.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

The Punk/Heyman thing last week gained 863k viewers?

Holy shit.


----------



## JY57

The Boy Wonder said:


> What happened to the rating breakdowns? they haven't been available in weeks. the last one I saw was the one that said that AJ's pipebomb losing 600,000 viewers.


previous page. there are two quarter breakdowns one from PWTorch (for 18-49 males) and one from F4WOnline. Its different as seen and sometimes PWTORCH does minute to minute breakdowns (example: AJ Lee's Pipebomb gained viewers by minute to minute breakdown but 15 minute quarter she was in wasn't that good)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

> Dusty Rhodes's confrontation with Stephanie McMahon* was the top-rated quarter-hour among males 18-49 until the final segment of the show, which featured Daniel Bryan vs. Roman Reigns and the over-run*.


Daniel Bryan continuing to draw in matches with guys who AREN'T main eventers, or anywhere close for that matter.

DAT DRAW.

:bryan


----------



## THANOS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Daniel Bryan continuing to draw in matches with guys who AREN'T main eventers, or anywhere close for that matter.
> 
> DAT DRAW.
> 
> :bryan


That's the most defining point about all of this. The entire roster and HHH weren't even on the stage this time, so they can't get some of the credit for making the match feel "bigger", especially considering there were no implications coming out of this match's decision.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THANOS said:


> That's the most defining point about all of this. The entire roster and HHH weren't even on the stage this time, so they can't get some of the credit for making the match feel "bigger", especially considering there were no implications coming out of this match's decision.


Yep, you can't distribute the "credit" for that QH between a bunch of different guys. Going to be some ANGER about that, I'm sure.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Yep, you can't distribute the "credit" for that QH between a bunch of different guys. Going to be some ANGER about that, I'm sure.


But...But... So many people on this board said Bryan couldn't draw. What sorcery is this?

IT'S DAT YES MAGIC, BABY!!!! Bryan vs Reigns even helped the quarter with the Wyatts draw. FOLLOW DOSE RATINGS!!!


----------



## Waffelz

JY57 said:


> previous page. there are two quarter breakdowns one from PWTorch (for 18-49 males) and one from F4WOnline. Its different as seen and sometimes PWTORCH does minute to minute breakdowns (example: AJ Lee's Pipebomb gained viewers by minute to minute breakdown but 15 minute quarter she was in wasn't that good)


There is no normal breakdown for this week, though.


----------



## Londrick

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Daniel Bryan continuing to draw in matches with guys who AREN'T main eventers, or anywhere close for that matter.
> 
> DAT DRAW.
> 
> :bryan


:dazzler doesn't need the likes of Rock, Brock, Taker, Heyman, etc to draw. Seems like there's a new #1 vanilla midget in town.


----------



## THANOS

I hope HHH forces Bryan to face Henry on Monday, since he's rumored to return then, and we can have the highest ratings since Mania season! :


----------



## Londrick

Will the Nielsen boxes even be able to handle so many people watching at once?


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Roman Ratings.


----------



## Quietus

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Daniel Bryan continuing to draw in matches with guys who AREN'T main eventers, or anywhere close for that matter.
> 
> DAT DRAW.
> 
> :bryan





THANOS said:


> That's the most defining point about all of this. The entire roster and HHH weren't even on the stage this time, so they can't get some of the credit for making the match feel "bigger", especially considering there were no implications coming out of this match's decision.


Bryan's part of the biggest angle they have done in years. Its not so much Daniel Bryan(or his opponents for that matter), as it is the success of this angle in generating that level of interest from viewers. Before this storyline, when was the last time Bryan even came close 800K gain without Cena involved? Last time his match with Orton in the main event+OR drew a 145K gain, second lowest of the year. Suffices to say the angle is working in molding Bryan into a star, as it rightfully should, because that's the end game. Hopefully they won't drop the ball with this one, as they done numerous times before.


----------



## Biast

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> The Punk/Heyman thing last week gained 863k viewers?
> 
> Holy shit.


Are you for real? THE FUCK?! :bron


----------



## markedfordeath

once again Bryan has the highest rated segment of the first hour and then in the last hour...they don't put him in the second hour on purpose I think....he's never in the second hour ever since he's been the guy....man oh man, if he was to wrestle a three hour match, I wonder what the numbers would be...just have him wrestle a gauntlet match against every superstar in the back including the divas.


----------



## Biast

markedfordeath said:


> once again Bryan has the highest rated segment of the first hour and then in the last hour...they don't put him in the second hour on purpose I think....he's never in the second hour ever since he's been the guy....man oh man, if he was to wrestle a three hour match, I wonder what the numbers would be...just have him wrestle a gauntlet match against every superstar in the back including the divas.


That's actually not that hard. People usually tune in to see the beginning and ending of the show. At least that's what I actually do. :lol Meanwhile in the end of the first hour and the entire second one, I watch football.


----------



## markedfordeath

point is, they like watching him wrestling, even when there aren't any stakes......no was no stipulations at all for this match, just Triple H briefly telling Maddox about it backstage, that was it. I think management is more than happy at this point, he's already exceeded expectations probably.


----------



## Biast

markedfordeath said:


> point is, they like watching him wrestling, even when there aren't any stakes......no was no stipulations at all for this match, just Triple H briefly telling Maddox about it backstage, that was it. I think management is more than happy at this point, he's already exceeded expectations probably.


Of course he did exceed expectation, but they kinda make sure he did by putting him in such a big angle instead of just small 1vs1 feud against Orton.

Off topic: I really need to put the 863k viewers gained by Punk in my sig just to piss [user]AthenaMark[/user] and [user]cablegeddon[/user] off. 

''But, but, but... Punk can't drawzzzz!!'' :lmao

I don't really want to part away with my Ellie sig though. :argh: Such a hard choise!


----------



## markedfordeath

wheres the proof of Punk drawing that number?


----------



## Biast

markedfordeath said:


> wheres the proof of Punk drawing that number?


It was posted 3 or 4 pages ago.



> An update regarding last week’s Raw on 9/9. The show did a 2.91 rating and 3.88 million viewers, which has to be considered good considering the NFL game competition.
> 
> Curtis Axel vs. Kofi Kingston gained 43,000 viewers. Bray Wyatt vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 247,000 viewers. The C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman interview segment with the knee injury angle gained 863,000 viewers. I guess that means more Canadian health care promos. Natalya & Naomi & Brie Bella vs. Alicia Fox & Aksana & Layla along with Alberto Del Rio vs. R-Truth lost 699,000 viewers, which says something about a new audience from Total Divas adding to Raw viewership. The return of Santino Marella, against Antonio Cesaro, gained 123,000 viewers. The Miz vs. Damien Sandow lost 183,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Goldust gained 801,000 viewers which is a huge success for that part of the show. The match with Cody Rhodes also did a big gain. Rob Van Dam vs. Ryback lost 575,000 viewers, and the Daniel Bryan vs. Dean Ambrose main event gained 760,000 viewers


----------



## markedfordeath

doesn't it make you want to cry how Bryan and Punk carry this show? lol totally awesome!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Nope. Bryan gaining viewers in matches with Reigns, Cesaro, and Ryback show that he can gain viewers without facing a big name opponent. Time for some to accept this.


----------



## markedfordeath

and the fact that they might make Battleground an iron man match for the title...that would make Battleground a legend over night...imagine the move set in that match with an hour time limit.....i'm thinking 500,000 buys for that one...holy fuck! iron man matches with an awesome wrestler in them is money!


----------



## THANOS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Nope. Bryan gaining viewers in matches with Reigns, Cesaro, and Ryback show that he can gain viewers without facing a big name opponent. Time for some to accept this.


Preach!









Especially since most of those (possibly all?) have happened in Q11/Q12, and gained in Q11/Q12 which usually don't perform that well. These are discounting the overruns which are almost guaranteed to gain something (obviously there are exceptions).


----------



## markedfordeath

has anyone noticed that RVD continues to bore people? nobody watches his matches, they all have huge losses.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Biast said:


> It was posted 3 or 4 pages ago.


 Well, to be fair, Punk only appeared in 4 minutes of that entire quarter. A couple of weeks ago, Punk marks said we need the minute to minute breakdown because Punk was only on for 5 minutes. Time for some consistency. Heyman was out there for 7 minutes. Sure, maybe anticipation of Punk appearing might have helped draw that rating, but how do you quantify anticipation? Until the breakdown proves otherwise, this was a Paul Heyman segment.


----------



## markedfordeath

i'm just happy that Bryan can carry a show without the other big guys there.....its just awesome.


----------



## Biast

markedfordeath said:


> and the fact that they might make Battleground an iron man match for the title...that would make *Battleground* a legend over night...imagine the move set in that match with an hour time limit.....i'm thinking *500,000 buys for that one*...holy fuck! iron man matches with an awesome wrestler in them is money!


----------



## JY57

markedfordeath said:


> and the fact that they might make Battleground an iron man match for the title...that would make Battleground a legend over night...imagine the move set in that match with an hour time limit.....i'm thinking *500,000 buys* for that one...holy fuck! iron man matches with an awesome wrestler in them is money!


----------



## markedfordeath

its a fucking iron man match, there hasn't been one in years..it could happen.


----------



## Vyer

I think WWE sees something special in The Shield too. They keep putting them in big angles and in in my opinion they are doing well.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Biast said:


>


 MarkedforDeath is independently wealthy and will personally order the show 400,000 times.


----------



## markedfordeath

why not all 500,000 times lol it would only cost over 22 million lol


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Battleground won't reach over 200k, don't be straight up delusional now.



Quietus said:


> Bryan's part of the biggest angle they have done in years. Its not so much Daniel Bryan(or his opponents for that matter), as it is the success of this angle in generating that level of interest from viewers. Before this storyline, when was the last time Bryan even came close 800K gain without Cena involved? Last time his match with Orton in the main event+OR drew a 145K gain, second lowest of the year. Suffices to say the angle is working in molding Bryan into a star, as it rightfully should, because that's the end game. Hopefully they won't drop the ball with this one, as they done numerous times before.


Exactly right. This is what people don't understand. Not trying to discredit Bryan, because I know so many of his fans are going to want to believe that's what I'm doing, but putting all the credit on Bryan when he has this huge storyline backing him up, doesn't work. The credit falls on the storyline, that's why these Rhodes segments are drawing huge as well. It's a big, big storyline. Possibly the biggest in years. Bryan may be facing guys like Reigns and doing well, but it's because he's the center of it all, and it's because of this hot storyline that it brings in these viewers. 

I said it before, Bryan's true test isn't now. It's when he's in a storyline that he's responsible for carrying. Until we see how the numbers play out then, we'll be able to get a sense of how well Bryan can carry a show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Best4Bidness said:


> But...But... So many people on this board said Bryan couldn't draw. What sorcery is this?
> 
> IT'S DAT YES MAGIC, BABY!!!! Bryan vs Reigns even helped the quarter with the Wyatts draw. FOLLOW DOSE RATINGS!!!


B-B-B-But Bryan shouldn't get credit. Even though he's the top babyface in the top storyline in the company. I guess all top babyfaces don't get credit if they are in big storylines. That's a new one.

:lmao


----------



## e1987p

JY57 said:


> previous page. there are two quarter breakdowns one from PWTorch (for 18-49 males) and one from F4WOnline. Its different as seen and sometimes PWTORCH does minute to minute breakdowns (example: AJ Lee's Pipebomb gained viewers by minute to minute breakdown but 15 minute quarter she was in wasn't that good)


"AJ Lee's Pipebomb" or simply the diva match was over. Try to make something a big deal.
And by the way all the quarter with her after that keep losing viewers.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Remember Hall, Nash, and Hogan? They sure as hell were lucky that the NWO angle came along.


----------



## markedfordeath

last night it wasn't even the storyline, it was the match that rated well....Triple barely set it up in the backstage area in a clip probably no one was watching any way because it was a filler spot coming back from commercial...Bryan's wrestling gets viewers, how is that so hard to understand? give the guy credit, sure he's in a storyline, but he's also a bad ass wrestler and people are into him, but some on here just don't ever give the dude credit for shit. and maybe its not his ultimate test because he's not alone yet, but with good writing, a star is born...and this is doing its job..he'll probably be involved in another awesome storyline in the future, no matter what wrestler get involved in storylines.....its the writing that makes it interesting, and the character has to come alive and make it work, which is what he does as well.....


----------



## Oliver-94

ShowStopper '97 said:


> B-B-B-But Bryan shouldn't get credit. Even though he's the top babyface in the top storyline in the company. I guess all top babyfaces don't get credit if they are in big storylines. That's a new one.
> 
> :lmao


 Next thing people will say is that he is only over because of this storyline. :lol


----------



## JY57

e1987p said:


> "AJ Lee's Pipebomb" or simply the diva match was over. Try to make something a big deal.
> *And by the way all the quarter with her after that keep losing viewers.*


I know its the divas nobody is surprised, regardless who it is. just saying that particular minute when she started that speech or whatever you want to call it she actually gained viewers and not lost viewers. just an example I gave of minute to minute breakdown thats all. hell I didn't even watch the segment or haven't since either.

Only true women IMO that were legimate draws were Trish, Lita, & Stephanie. They were fortunate enough to be in good time of ratings too so that helped them alot as well.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Bryan is the top face now. Of course they want him to succeed. It's why they fashioned the top storyline.He and HHH are primarily responsible to carry their respective end's of the story. The Corporate storyline should increase Bryan's overness but it also depends on his popularity. They need someone who the audience will completely rally behind, who can create massive sympathy with the audience and help put heel heat enough to cement Orton's turn. The storyline is succeeding and it should help Cody, Show, the Shield and some of the lesser faces to get more over. Everybody wins.


----------



## Choke2Death

I know Bryan is the main topic here but glad to see that Orton destroying The Mike did good numbers!


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

D-Draw Doing what he does best. 

:bryan


----------



## markedfordeath

do you think business is improving or going down with Cena gone?


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

markedfordeath said:


> do you think business is improving or going down with Cena gone?


John Cena leaving has forced WWE to turn heel their biggest draw(outside of Rock/Lesnar) and also going all out to establish the next top guy

So Cena leaving has been a blessing in disguise


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Battleground won't reach over 200k, don't be straight up delusional now.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly right. This is what people don't understand. Not trying to discredit Bryan, because I know so many of his fans are going to want to believe that's what I'm doing, but putting all the credit on Bryan when he has this huge storyline backing him up, doesn't work. The credit falls on the storyline, that's why these Rhodes segments are drawing huge as well. It's a big, big storyline. Possibly the biggest in years. Bryan may be facing guys like Reigns and doing well, but it's because he's the center of it all, and it's because of this hot storyline that it brings in these viewers.
> 
> I said it before, Bryan's true test isn't now. It's when he's in a storyline that he's responsible for carrying. Until we see how the numbers play out then, we'll be able to get a sense of how well Bryan can carry a show.


But Punk in his "big" summer of Punk angle bombed. So yes, let's give Bryan all the credit he deserves, because if you put someone like Punk in that angle, he wouldn't draw shit. 

Punk fans trying to make it seem like anybody could be and do what Bryan is doing right now is absolutely laughable. And being called delusional by a Punk fan is insulting to people's intelligence.


----------



## markedfordeath

its a fantastic angle....Shawn Michaels, CM Punk, a bunch of others are going to get involved, and Vince will run to the bank smiling.


----------



## THANOS

After seeing now how Bryan has done in 1-on-1 matches with the Shield members, Ryback, and Cesaro, I've seen enough to call Bryan, "The American Drawing" Daniel Bryan from this point forward! :


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

markedfordeath said:


> do you think business is improving or going down with Cena gone?


We'll have to wait and see how this angle goes and how things go without Cena. They're going into a period of the year that generally does the worst of the year. Right now things are holding steady and right in line with last year, which isn't exactly "great", but it's working. Once we get into January, we'll see. Considering WWE are doing without their three biggest draws right now (Rock, Brock, and Taker) and their biggest full-time guy is out, they're doing as well as we should expect.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Billion Dollar Man said:


> But Punk in his "big" summer of Punk angle bombed. So yes, let's give Bryan all the credit he deserves, because if you put someone like Punk in that angle, he wouldn't draw shit.
> 
> Punk fans trying to make it seem like anybody could be and do what Bryan is doing right now is absolutely laughable. And being called delusional by a Punk fan is insulting to people's intelligence.


:lmao

You're so ignorant it's impossible to take your posts seriously, but since you brought up Punk because you just can't help talk about him, I'll use him as an example. An example of Punk being involved in an angle where he has to be the star of, Ryback/Punk, did very well. We haven't seen that with Bryan, so being so quick to say Bryan draws before he's even proved himself, doesn't add up. Until he's involved in an angle where he's the star, we won't know how well he does.

This isn't directed at you, since I know what your next post is and it'll be the same garbage you always post, but I'm just making my point and since you brought up Punk, I used him as an example.


----------



## Farnham the Drunk

Biast said:


> I don't understand why are you people so interested in ratings though? It doesnt matter if it's 1.5 or 2.5 or 3.5. I mean, it would matter if you actually worked for the company and got paid like a percentage or something of the views, but having a thread with 500 pages about the ratings of a wrestling show is kinda _'meh'_ to me. :lol


I understand that sentiment, that's kind of how I feel - but TV ratings have been used as a measuring stick for wrestling fans for a while now, it isn't gonna change anytime soon.

The one gripe I have about ratings is that they reflect too much what the average person in society thinks & not what the "wrestling" fan thinks. There's a reason why I think Punk can pretty much get the biggest reaction (save Bryan nowadays) but TV ratings don't favor him. It's not that he's not good, it's just he doesn't appeal to the typical person watching at home. Let's face it, the average WWE fan is not a fan of the art of pro wrestling, they're WWE fans.

I've also never understood how a small section of society being responsible for ratings can somehow = whether someone is a draw or not. It's just like those stupid commercials where they say "7 out of 10 people choose our product" ... most of the time they've literally asked 10 people that question. So when people making claims like "Ziggler isn't a draw" or whatever, it's like - to who? The 300 people who watch wrestling & that somehow equals my opinion? Nobody asked me or surveyed me, so the hell does it all even mean to me.

Not much, I go by the audience reaction & investment more then anything - to me that's the only way to truly measure the audiences investment in a wrestler. Which is why anybody whoever tells me the crowd doesn't give a shit about the "vanilla midgets" needs to go somewhere. :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THANOS said:


> After seeing now how Bryan has done in 1-on-1 matches with the Shield members, Ryback, and Cesaro, I've seen enough to call Bryan, "The American Drawing" Daniel Bryan from this point forward! :


:yes

There's a reason why he was chosen to be a big part of this storyline. And he's drawing in matches with the guys you mentioned. He's also the highest rated part of Smackdown most of the time and has increased the viewers on that show. He's a draw. Period.


----------



## THANOS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> :yes
> 
> There's a reason why he was chosen to be a big art of this storyline. And he's drawing in matches with the guys you mentioned. He's also the highest rated part of Smackdown most of the time and has increased the viewers on that show. He's a draw. Period.


Yeah remember when he had that match with Barrett, who has basically been jobbed out for years now and has no star power as a result, and it drew the best on the entire show? Bryan is certainly a draw at this point !


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Not only has Bryan been drawing but he is the main event. Since and including Summerslam, he has headlined every Raw and Smackdown as well as NOC. It's a great time if you are a fan of his.


----------



## markedfordeath

and business is holding steady in the worst time of the year for the WWE apparently...everything after Summerslam never does well usually....so the fact that ratings aren't going down and nothing seems to be having a big drop off, that's a good sign..either way, he has exceeded expectations.


----------



## NO!

Billion Dollar Man said:


> But Punk in his "big" summer of Punk angle bombed. So yes, let's give Bryan all the credit he deserves, because if you put someone like Punk in that angle, he wouldn't draw shit.
> 
> Punk fans trying to make it seem like anybody could be and do what Bryan is doing right now is absolutely laughable. And being called delusional by a Punk fan is insulting to people's intelligence.


What do ratings mean to you? I thought what Punk did from his pipebomb promo to his Summerslam match is some of the best stuff I've ever seen. If a multitude of fans around the world decided to miss out on it, then I only see it as their loss. I'll never understand this idea that ratings determine who is better at something. I can understand why a fan would be delighted to see one of their favorites bringing in ratings, because it gives them a really good chance of staying where they are. But there is still such a thing as forming your own opinions...


----------



## markedfordeath

ratings do not matter as much as ppv buys and live attendance....the USA Network deal makes sure the WWE gets a profit no matter what the ratings score is....and the Nielsen system is outdated which everyone knows..they go by DVR views now too. I think they should cut down on the PPV's though, ones like Night of Champions serve no purpose at all....they should just have 6 good ones each year.


----------



## birthday_massacre

markedfordeath said:


> i'm just happy that Bryan can carry a show without the other big guys there.....its just awesome.


Yeah its good to see a "vanilla midget" defy the WWE odds and actually become the face of the company (well one of them).

And Db did it all on his own, it was done organically and not like how they try to get Del Rio or Sheamus over by shoving them down our throats.

DB paid his dues.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THANOS said:


> Yeah remember when he had that match with Barrett, who has basically been jobbed out for years now and has no star power as a result, and it drew the best on the entire show? Bryan is certainly a draw at this point !


Whoa. Actually, I completely forgot about the Barrett match. Even more evidence.


----------



## markedfordeath

i'm rewatching the Raw match with Reigns....and Reigns is super green and very slow, and he was in there with Bryan who is the best, and if you look closely during certain spots, Bryan allowed Reigns to call the match...that's fucking putting someone over in a huge way....They wanted to showcase Reigns to management and Bryan let him dictate certain spots...that's awesome..Cena would never do that shit!


----------



## birthday_massacre

markedfordeath said:


> i'm rewatching the Raw match with Reigns....and Reigns is super green and very slow, and he was in there with Bryan who is the best, and if you look closely during certain spots, Bryan allowed Reigns to call the match...that's fucking putting someone over in a huge way....They wanted to showcase Reigns to management and Bryan let him dictate certain spots...that's awesome..Cena would never do that shit!


Daniel Bryans way of thinking is, if the other guy looks good in his match they both look good. Where as Cena only cares about looking good and strong all the time.

DB knows the match can be on another level if both wrestlers are into the match and come out looking good.

I would take 10 workers like Daniel Bryan any day over 10 like Cena.


----------



## birthday_massacre

Billion Dollar Man said:


> But Punk in his "big" summer of Punk angle bombed. So yes, let's give Bryan all the credit he deserves, because if you put someone like Punk in that angle, he wouldn't draw shit.
> 
> Punk fans trying to make it seem like anybody could be and do what Bryan is doing right now is absolutely laughable. And being called delusional by a Punk fan is insulting to people's intelligence.


The reason is "bombed" is because the WWE rushed it and something that should have lasted months, lasted weeks.

When Punk "left" with the WWE title, the WWE should have let him wrestle ROH shows with the title and even have run its from WWE stars, and they could have even have someone there taping it with a camera phone to show on RAW. 

The WWE botched that angle big time. It could have been huge, plus it didnt help that Punk jobbed to HHH and never got his win back during that whole angle.


----------



## markedfordeath

maybe that's why they have him work with the Shield every week, he's the only one on the roster that can make you look like a star...when Zayn, Tyler Breeze and all of those guys come up from NXT, who do you think they'll get paired with in the ring? i'll give you one guess! Bryan is like the only one on the roster who can make you look great, maybe Christian, maybe Ziggler, but Bryan is on another level.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

THANOS said:


> Preach!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Especially since most of those (possibly all?) have happened in Q11/Q12, and gained in Q11/Q12 which usually don't perform that well. These are discounting the overruns which are almost guaranteed to gain something (obviously there are exceptions).


I might have to give you credit, you predicted Bryan's rise. He will be big, but I still say he doesn't reach Megastar status. He might catch Cena tho.


----------



## markedfordeath

Cena isn't considered a mega star?


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

markedfordeath said:


> Cena isn't considered a mega star?


TBH, Cena is hard to classify. Truth is if we consider Cena a Megastar, then we need to find something completely different to call a Hogan, Austin, Rock.

He's in the same boat as Michaels IMO as far as being a draw and carrying a company, but not really transcending.

P.S., I'm not trying to say Cena is in Michaels league as far as talent.


----------



## Happenstan

Billion Dollar Man said:


> I might have to give you credit, you predicted Bryan's rise. He will be big, but I still say he doesn't reach Megastar status. He might catch Cena tho.


What am I, chopped liver?  Thanos and I know talent and those super human drawing abilities when we see them.


----------



## RKO 4life

Randy Orton doing everything he can to keep the ratings high. 9:40 time sloot and draws the best mark of the show. If they want even bigger numbers then he should main event raw. 

Now back to you guys, I got better things to do then read dave's dumb breakdown.


----------



## Happenstan

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> :lmao
> 
> You're so ignorant it's impossible to take your posts seriously, but since you brought up Punk because you just can't help talk about him, I'll use him as an example. An example of Punk being involved in an angle where he has to be the star of, Ryback/Punk, did very well. We haven't seen that with Bryan, so being so quick to say Bryan draws before he's even proved himself, doesn't add up. Until he's involved in an angle where he's the star, we won't know how well he does.
> 
> This isn't directed at you, since I know what your next post is and it'll be the same garbage you always post, but I'm just making my point and since you brought up Punk, I used him as an example.


I know you Punk fans will never admit it but last year Punk DID NOT DRAW against names below his. If Punk was the biggest name in the angle (And he was getting a mega push so he was the big name in most of what he did last year) it didn't draw as well as one would have thought. Every person who isn't a reality denying Punk fan has said this from newbies who had just registered to our moderator Starbuck. Punk didn't start getting taken seriously until he feuded with Rock and Taker and they legitimized him and made him credible. Everyone gets this but you guys. Wake up. This Heyman angle is the first time he's drawn where he was the big name. And deep down you know this....it's why you guys have an orgasm every time Punk's segments draw anything IN THIS VERY THREAD. Granted we Bryan marks do the same but for different reasons. We're impressed how he's done it on his own so fast and while only really working main events with Orton and Cena. Bryan is 2 months into his main event push and he is light years ahead of where Punk was 2 months into the Summer of Punk in 2011 (I know some will credit the Corp but is the Corp storyline really that much bigger than Summer of Punk? No!). That's just a reality you Punk fans are gonna have to accept at some point. Bryan draws and is just as over as Punk currently is (maybe a little bit more) and he has only feuded with those 2 guys. It took Punk going over the entire roster AND feuding with part timers like Lesnar and Rock to get to this point. *Bryan has multiple FRESH paths before him with multiple fresh feuds to entertain us with...Punk simply does not have this option anymore thanks to last year's 434 days of failure.* 434 days blowing through everyone for nothing the Rock and Taker couldn't do in a matter of months. Make Punk credible.




NO! said:


> What do ratings mean to you? I thought what Punk did from his pipebomb promo to his Summerslam match is some of the best stuff I've ever seen. If a multitude of fans around the world decided to miss out on it, then I only see it as their loss. *I'll never understand this idea that ratings determine who is better at something.* I can understand why a fan would be delighted to see one of their favorites bringing in ratings, because it gives them a really good chance of staying where they are. But there is still such a thing as forming your own opinions...


But to WWE that is exactly what it means. WWE is a business and want to make money. They make money by pushing people they think fans want to see. The only way to judge that is through merch sales and tv ratings. That is why they matter. If Punk dropped a pipebomb per night yet every time he came out viewership dropped by a million viewers do you really think he'd have a prayer doing anything but curtain jerking? Just an example above, I'm not saying Punk lost a million viewers.


----------



## THANOS

Billion Dollar Man said:


> I might have to give you credit, you predicted Bryan's rise. He will be big, but I still say he doesn't reach Megastar status. He might catch Cena tho.


Thank you, but it still might be a bit too early for us to paint his picture of success. He's certainly a draw now and there's plenty of evidence to prove that dating back to the beginning of his weak-link storyline, but it will definitely be interesting to see how big he could be in, say, 5 years from now if WWE is still firmly behind him like they were for Cena.


----------



## Happenstan

THANOS said:


> Thank you, but it still might be a bit too early for us to paint his picture of success. He's certainly a draw now and there's plenty of evidence to prove that dating back to the beginning of his weak-link storyline, but it will definitely be interesting to see how big he could be in, say, 5 years from now if WWE is still firmly behind him like they were for Cena.


If WWE spends the next 5 years pushing ANYBODY the way they spent the last 5 years pushing Cena that person will be over....probably half hated (like Cena) because of how sick we'll be of seeing them but over in some way. You prop someone up that much and eventually even the biggest piece of garbage floats.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

markedfordeath said:


> Cena isn't considered a mega star?


If John Cena isn't a megastar;HHH,Shawn,Taker,Warrior and Bret shouldn't be considered megastars either


----------



## NO!

Happenstan said:


> But to WWE that is exactly what it means. WWE is a business and want to make money. They make money by pushing people they think fans want to see. The only way to judge that is through merch sales and tv ratings. That is why they matter. If Punk dropped a pipebomb per night yet every time he came out viewership dropped by a million viewers do you really think he'd have a prayer doing anything but curtain jerking? Just an example above, I'm not saying Punk lost a million viewers.


Are you making that money? It shouldn't matter as much to fans but clearly it does.


----------



## Happenstan

NO! said:


> Are you making that money? It shouldn't matter as much to fans but clearly it does.


Are you a sports fan? Do you follow the win/loss records of teams other than your favs? Why? Because you are keeping an eye on the competiton of the team you are backing. Same principle here. We follow ratings to see how well our favs are doing and how well those around them are doing to try to figure out who is making the most money for WWE and who will be pushed (and who won't) in the process.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> If John Cena isn't a megastar;HHH,Shawn,Taker,Warrior and Bret shouldn't be considered megastars either


The only guys I consider to be true megastars in North American wrestling are Hogan, The Rock and (to a lesser extent) Austin.

I'd put Cena and Taker on the Super Superstars level right below, Cena because he's been the face of the company for so long but hasn't quite managed to truly transcend the sport and become a pop cultural icon, and while Takers gimmick ensured he'd come really really close to being as widely well known as the Big 3, it also ensured that he would never be "THE Guy" to carry the company.

HHH/Shawn/Bret/Warrior would be the next level down at the mere Superstar level.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> The only guys I consider to be true megastars in North American wrestling are Hogan, The Rock and *(to a lesser extent) Austin *
> l.


To a lesser extent?


----------



## validreasoning

thing with bryan is he is so fresh that the sky is the limit with him, potentially you have a dozen new possible mainevent storylines for him between now and say mania 32

something as simple as sheamus returning to aid bryan but turning on him to bryan wrestling taker, lesnar, the rock, hbk, to cena returning to aid bryan but turning heel on him to bryan turning heel himself and shaving his head/beard


----------



## superuser1

wb1899 said:


> - Q8: Raw increased to a 1.94 rating for the Randy Orton vs. The Miz match/ fight/scrap/brawl/attack. Included was one of the most-watched portions of the show from 9:51 to 9:54 p.m.


Damn I guess its true what they say Orton does draw better as a heel I wonder why.


----------



## Mqwar

So Meltzer basically admits his breakdowns aren't all that reliable. 



> An update regarding last week’s Raw on 9/9. The show did a 2.91 rating and 3.88 million viewers, which has to be considered good considering the NFL game competition.
> 
> *What was notable is that there were extreme variations. We don’t have exact segment-by-segment numbers, but do have numbers that are approximate based on metered markets (as opposed to national numbers)*. Curtis Axel vs. Kofi Kingston gained 43,000 viewers. Bray Wyatt vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 247,000 viewers. The C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman interview segment with the knee injury angle gained 863,000 viewers. I guess that means more Canadian health care promos. Natalya & Naomi & Brie Bella vs. Alicia Fox & Aksana & Layla along with Alberto Del Rio vs. R-Truth lost 699,000 viewers, which says something about a new audience from Total Divas adding to Raw viewership. The return of Santino Marella, against Antonio Cesaro, gained 123,000 viewers. The Miz vs. Damien Sandow lost 183,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Goldust gained 801,000 viewers which is a huge success for that show. The match with Cody Rhodes also did a big gain. Rob Van Dam vs. Ryback lost 575,000 viewers, and the Daniel Bryan vs. Dean Ambrose main event gained 760,000 viewers.


All these 800,000 gains seem weird as fuck to say the least.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> To a lesser extent?


Austin doesn't have the longevity of Hogan or Rocky. Hogan was the #1 draw in wrestling from the mid 80's until Austin caught fire, and The Rock was a megastar during the same time Austin was, but his WM work for the last 3 years edges him past Austin a little bit. Plus he was the #1 babyface in the company when the 'E had their most successful year ever in 2000 (although Triple H's brilliant heel work has to get credit for that as well.) Austin is without doubt a megastar, just to a lesser degree than Hogan or Rocky.

I'm trying to be objective here, because personally Austin is my favorite wrestler of all time and I can't fucking stand the Rock or Hogan.


----------



## checkcola

Uh oh. I hope this doesn't turn into a crazy side show over Rock vs Austin, which have nothing to do with the current ratings. Just saying.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> Austin doesn't have the longevity of Hogan or Rocky. Hogan was the #1 draw in wrestling from the mid 80's until Austin caught fire, and The Rock was a megastar during the same time Austin was, but his WM work for the last 3 years edges him past Austin a little bit. Plus he was the #1 babyface in the company when the 'E had their most successful year ever in 2000 (although Triple H's brilliant heel work has to get credit for that as well.) Austin is without doubt a megastar, just to a lesser degree than Hogan or Rocky.
> .


I don't agree with your opinion.But I don't want to turn this into a GOAT thread or an Austin vs Rock debate.


----------



## Biast

Summerslam Buyrate - Lowest Since 1997



> 186,000 domestic (U.S., Canada and Puerto Rico)
> 112,000 international
> For a comparison, in the domestic market, SummerSlam was in the same ballpark as Jose Aldo vs. The Korean Zombie two weeks earlier. It is not the lowest historically for the show in North America.


http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-t...am-ppv-numbers

298,000 buys in total. 2012 did 358,000 with Lesnar/HHH and Cena/Punk/Show, and 2011 did 311,000 with Cena/Punk. Going by Observer statistics on past buyrates, this would be the least bought Summerslam since 1997.

I told you guys that Brock/Punk should've mainevented the show. I guess people didn't bought Bryan as a legitimate threat to Cena and his title. :lol The main attraction WAS Bryan/Cena, they were the ones on the poster, their match had the biggest build on the entire card and also had HHH as a referee. Plus they main evented.

:bryan isn't good for business I guess? HHH isn't good either. :lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Biast said:


> Summerslam Buyrate - Lowest Since 1997
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-t...am-ppv-numbers
> 
> 298,000 buys in total. 2012 did 358,000 with Lesnar/HHH and Cena/Punk/Show, and 2011 did 311,000 with Cena/Punk. Going by Observer statistics on past buyrates, this would be the least bought Summerslam since 1997.
> 
> I told you guys that Brock/Punk should've mainevented the show. I guess people didn't bought Bryan as a legitimate threat to Cena and his title. :lol
> 
> :bryan Not good for business I guess? HHH as well. :lmao


WWE PPVs have been pretty meh at best this year. I don't blame people at all for not buying it. Only so many times you can see Cena in a main event, and Brock/Punk? Eh. The match was very good, but I didn't think it would draw alot of buys, no matter how "great" the supposed build was. So much for that.

Nevermind past SummerSlam's. The real question is how it did in comparison to other PPVs this year.


----------



## THANOS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> WWE PPVs have been pretty meh at best this year. I don't blame people at all for not buying it. Only so many times you can see Cena in a main event, and Brock/Punk? Eh. The match was very good, but I didn't think it would draw alot of buys, no matter how "great" the supposed build was. So much for that.


Not to mention that Brock/Punk WAS a mainevent, and whether it closed the show or not wouldn't make a lick of difference to the buys that came in, seeing as people would have already paid at that point. What kind of dumb logic was that Biast? Come on dude.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THANOS said:


> Not to mention that Brock/Punk WAS a mainevent, and whether it closed the show or not wouldn't make a lick of difference to the buys that came in, seeing as people would have already paid at that point. What kind of dumb logic was that Biast? Come on dude.


Not only that, but I thought Brock was such a great PPV draw? I guess as long he's not working with Punk, going by that logic..


----------



## markedfordeath

That isn't the exact total just yet....it's the prelims...and it's Bryan's first main event and the whole time the McMahons made him out to be a joke and not worthy of the title..I agree with Caldwell's assessment.


----------



## Londrick

Looks like the Daniel Bryan experiment failed. Time to send him back to the midcard.


----------



## Biast

Sorry, but I dont agree. The main attraction WAS *Bryan/Cena*, they were the ones on the poster, their match had the biggest build on the card (with the entire fucking Macmahons family!) and they even had HHH as the freaking referee. And of top of all that, they were in the main evented. There were rumours about Orton cashing in/Bryan making Cena tap/Cena winning clean, etc. It was much more hyped and waaaaay bigger than Punk/Brock, at least they built it that way.

GG, Bryan isn't good for business! HHH isn't good either!

I will laugh my ass off when NOC statistics come out. I predict just 50000 buys because of Orton and Bryan. People even wanted refunds after the finish! :lmao


----------



## markedfordeath

you do realize its Bryan's first main event right? and Punk got bad numbers in 2011 yet still became champ


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Biast said:


> Sorry, but I dont agree. The main attraction WAS *Bryan/Cena*, they were the ones on the poster, their match had the biggest build on the card (with the entire fucking Macmahons family!) and they even had HHH as the freaking referee. And of top of all that, they were in the main evented. There were rumours about Orton cashing in/Bryan making Cena tap/Cena winning clean, etc. It was much more hyped and waaaaay bigger than Punk/Brock, at least they built it that way.
> 
> GG, Bryan isn't good for business! HHH isn't good either!
> 
> I will laugh my ass off when NOC statistics come out. I predict just 50000 buys because of Orton and Bryan. People even wanted refunds after the finish! :lmao


You can laugh your ass off all you want. But just know that Bryan is the chosen one by WWE going forward and the ONLY guy Brock can't draw with on PPV thus far, is CM Punk. Now, that's pathetic.


----------



## JY57

Serious question: did anyone really expect Cena/Bryan and Punk/Brock to do better than Brock/ Hunter last year(which turned out to be 392,000 up from 358,000 original call)?

And buys increase when the finals come to which will at least likely surpass 2011's 311,000 buys


----------



## markedfordeath

yeah seriously, give Bryan time, its his first fucking main event...and that was before this awesome angle came out....i mean geez..and NoC had Mayweather that weekend..just fucking wait.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JY57 said:


> Serious question: did anyone really expect Cena/Bryan and Punk/Brock to do better than Brock/ Hunter last year(*which turned out to be 392,000 up from 358,000 original call*)?
> 
> And buys increase when the finals come to which will at least likely surpass 2011's 311,000 buys


Damn, if a jump from the prelims to the final number can be as much as 34,000 buys, then this is premature.


----------



## JY57

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Damn, if a jump from the prelims to the final number can be as much as 34,000 buys, then this is premature.


Yeah Elimination Chamber this year was originally 213,000 and final was 241,000 (the Extreme Rules final still not yet too). Sand with Royal Rumble it was like low 500,000 and reached 569,000 in the end


----------



## markedfordeath

its an estimate based upon their average sales in the third quarter which are always low....the final numbers don't come out until November....I bet its well into the 300,000 range. its the worst time to test Bryan's potential because these upcoming PPV's never do well...not until Wrestlemania and Royal Rumble will he be able to show off his awesomeness.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JY57 said:


> Yeah Elimination Chamber this year was originally 213,000 and final was 241,000 (the Extreme Rules final still not yet too). Sand with *Royal Rumble it was like low 500,000 and reached 569,000 in the end*



And that's a 69,000 buy difference. :damn

I've always been more interested in the Raw (and in the past, Nitro) TV ratings. You guys will have to excuse my ignorance on the PPV buy thing. Didn't know there can be that big of a difference from prelim numbers to the final number.


----------



## Biast

ShowStopper '97 said:


> You can laugh your ass off all you want. But just know that *Bryan is the chosen one by WWE* going forward and the ONLY guy Brock can't draw with on PPV thus far, is CM Punk. Now, that's pathetic.


Hahahahahahahahahahaah OK. We will talk in 5 months time again for this! I like your history also! Every 3rd post bashing CM Punk, so I guess I should take you seriously?

And of course Brock didn't draw much. They put him second on the card. They put him second on the card last year too, but the difference is that last year they had the power machines called Punk and Show in the main event which didn't failed to draw like this year's one!


----------



## Starbuck

JY57 said:


> Serious question: did anyone really expect Cena/Bryan and Punk/Brock to do better than Brock/ Hunter last year(which turned out to be 392,000 up from 358,000 original call)?
> 
> And buys increase when the finals come to which will at least likely surpass 2011's 311,000 buys


I initially thought it would match the original 2012 number at 358k or at least come in just under it, maybe around the 330k mark because the build this year was great and we had two very fresh programs with two very hot faces. When they released the updated figure of 392k however I knew they didn't stand a chance. I didn't see them doing this low though so yeah, I'm kind of surprised by this. When the final numbers come in I think 2013 will beat 2011 but that isn't saying much. It's disappointing to say the least because it only suggests to WWE that when you put effort into your shows and produce some quality programs, it still isn't always enough to move the radar in some cases.


----------



## markedfordeath

no worries...either way Bryan will be fine...theyr'e going all in on him.


----------



## JY57

^^^ Brock vs Hunter closed SummerSlam over Cena/Punk/ Big Show


----------



## markedfordeath

just look at the ratings and everything once the corporation gets squashed.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Biast said:


> Hahahahahahahahahahaah OK. We will talk in 5 months time again for this! I like your history also! Every 3rd post bashing CM Punk, so I guess I should take you seriously?
> 
> And of course Brock didn't draw much. They put him second on the card. They put him second on the card last year too, but the difference is that last year they had the power machines called Punk and Show in the main event which didn't failed to draw like this year's one!


You're basing this on prelim numbers, that's a huge fail in and of itself. Going last or second to last matters not at all. Same match and same build whether you're on last or 2nd to last. 

The fact remains that Brock Lesnar draws great PPV numbers with EVERY oppponent he has faced since he came back, EXCEPT one. unk2


----------



## markedfordeath

we're still hung up on these ppv numbers....? geez!!


----------



## Biast

ShowStopper '97 said:


> You're basing this on prelim numbers, that's a huge fail in and of itself. Going last or second to last matters not at all. Same match and same build whether you're on last or 2nd to last.
> 
> The fact remains that Brock Lesnar draws great PPV numbers with EVERY oppponent he has faced since he came back, EXCEPT one. unk2


Hmmm, your are getting this wrong! It means that Brock draws big numbers with everyone incluiding Punk while Cena/Bryan wth Trips, the almighty main event, drawed shit!


----------



## JY57

Starbuck said:


> I initially thought it would match the original 2012 number at 358k or at least come in just under it, maybe around the 330k mark because the build this year was great and we had two very fresh programs with two very hot faces. When they released the updated figure of 392k however I knew they didn't stand a chance. I didn't see them doing this low though so yeah, I'm kind of surprised by this. When the final numbers come in I think 2013 will beat 2011 but that isn't saying much. It's disappointing to say the least because it only suggests to WWE that when you put effort into your shows and produce some quality programs, it still isn't always enough to move the radar in some cases.


Given the jump in PPV buys so far this year ( Rumble & EC) it has good chance of being fine in the end


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Biast said:


> Hmmm, your are getting this wrong! It means that Brock draws big numbers with everyone incluiding Punk while Cena/Bryan and Trips, the almighty main event, drawed shit!


Wow. They were on the same show. They either both drew, or didn't. It can't be one or the other. Terrible job at trolling.


----------



## Biast

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Wow. They were on the same show. They either both drew, or didn't. It can't be one or the other. Terrible job at trolling.


Ahhh no! The big PPVs up until this one drew big numbers! And now, when they decided to switch it up put Bryan in the main event, the PPV didn't draw enough. Hmmm, I wonder what could have caused this!


----------



## JY57

Biast said:


> Ahhh no. The PPV up until this one drew big numbers! And now, when they decide to put Bryan in the main event, the PPV didn't draw enough. Do you see it now?


I am no Bryan fan but every PPV except Rumble, EC, and MITB has been lower than last year. Hell Payback even did worst than No Way Out last year


----------



## Starbuck

JY57 said:


> Given the jump in PPV buys so far this year ( Rumble & EC) it has good chance of being fine in the end


Yeah, I think it will jump up a bit and ultimately be fine. I'm thinking a final number of 330-340k is reasonable if they get a 40k+ jump I guess. A number like that would be right where you would expect it to be. But if it stays at a similar number to 2011 then it's got to be highly disappointing for them. 

Biast you need to step up your game. You're too obvious.


----------



## Biast

JY57 said:


> I am no Bryan fan but every PPV except Rumble, EC, and MITB has been lower than last year. Hell Payback even did worst than No Way Out last year


Didn't you see the word ''big'' in my post? All of the big PPVs drew what they had to except Mania due to the Twice in a Lifetime rematch. :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Biast said:


> Ahhh no! The big PPVs up until this one drew big numbers! And now, when they decided to switch it up put Bryan in the main event, the PPV didn't draw enough. Hmmm, I wonder what could have caused this!


The big PPVs being WM, and what, Royal Rumble? :lol they do good every year, basically. And again, come back when we have the FINAL numbers, not prelims. And pretty much every PPV this year has done worse than last year. Sorry, I can't take someone seriously who just said one match on the PPV drew, and the other didn't. That makes zero sense.


----------



## Biast

ShowStopper '97 said:


> The big PPVs being WM, and what, Royal Rumble? :lol they do good every year, basically. And again, come back when we have the FINAL numbers, not prelims. And pretty much every PPV this year has done worse than last year. Sorry, I can't take someone seriously who just said one match on the PPV drew, and the other didn't. That makes zero sense.


Don't worry bro! Even if the PPV gets like 20000 post buys and equals by some godly miracle the last year's one, it will still be because of :brock. It won't be because of Punk, and especially it won't be because of Bryan! :lol

One :brock to rule them all vanilla midgets!

And remember, at NOC BORK wasn't there. Punk wasn't in the main event, furthermore he had a match with captain anti-charisma that no one gives a single shit about!

So when the horrific Night of Champions buys come out, we will talk again. And trust me they will be really bad, people even wanted refunds due to the finish. :lol Then, all that weight will be on your Orton/Bryan main event. There won't be excuses!


----------



## Starbuck

Better.


----------



## markedfordeath

ha ha at the people that think the angle will be nixed and Bryan will leave the main event...its one event, its gotten better since then..you guys crack me up


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Biast said:


> Don't worry bro! Even if the PPV gets like 20000 post buys and equals by some godly miracle the last year's one, it will still be because of :brock. It won't be because of Punk, and especially it won't be because of Bryan! :lol
> 
> One :brock to rule them all vanilla midgets!
> 
> And remember, at NOC BORK wasn't there. Punk wasn't in the main event, furthermore he had a match with captain anti-charisma that no one gives a single shit about!
> 
> So when the horrific Night of Champions buys come out we will talk again. And trust me they will be really bad, people even wanted refunds due to the finish :lol. Then all that weight will be on your Orton/Bryan main event. There won't be excuses!



Too late, bruv. By claiming in your earlier posts that Bryan/Cena was the main event, you already assinged credit to them, once the final numbers came out. That's why you should have kept your mouth shut until then. Once the final numbers come out, THEN you troll your little heart out (if the numbers allow you to). By trolling based on the prelim numbers, you've already shot your load, but I'm sure you already knew that. :delrio


----------



## markedfordeath

the numbers are going to be fine...the prelims are already higher than Punk's were two years ago...that's already a win......and they'll get higher because the finals aren't out yet....its just on PPV lol can't blame it one guy, the most popular guy in the damn WWE I might add..it was one fucking event.


----------



## Starbuck

This thread is going to get hilarious pretty darn soon. It's always fun to watch people lose their shit.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Nice try, dude. But it's NOC. No one ever gives a shit about that PPV. Going into it, everyone knew there was going to be some screwy shit going down.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

^^
Agreed.


----------



## markedfordeath

i still dont' get where the complaints are coming from....did you guys think that maybe summerslam is lowered as well due to the fact that there was a report out about people having trouble ordering? that could be another reasoning.


----------



## Choke2Death

lol @ Biast (Biased is more like it) embarrassing himself by openly stating that if the numbers are good it's because of Brock and if they are bad it's because of Bryan. If that is not a troll statement, I don't know what is.


----------



## Biast

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Nice try, dude. But it's NOC. No one ever gives a shit about that PPV. Going into it, everyone knew there was going to be some screwy shit going down.


- So now we are downplaying PPVs? :lol How desperate can you be? Where are dem arguments at? :ti

Bryan will be another 5 months at best in the main event. Then Brock, Taker, Rocky, Cena and probably Punk will take their spots when RR comes and Bryan can go feud for the tag titles, smile at little children, chant YES! and hug Kane.

Edit @Choke4Cock also known by some as Choke2Death: And now, about Summerslam. I actually said the PPV buys were bad because only Brock/Punk drew, mostly Brock but whatever. Which means all the 250k buys were for Brock, I will give 50k for Bryan and Trips out of pity. So now *IF* this PPV is going to equal the last year it will need at least another 50 or 60k buys. Let's split them between the two matches... Final results Brock/Punk 275k buys, Bryan and all of his monkeys 100k at best. NO! Let's not split them, let's give Bryan all the post buys 'cause he is a bitch, so let's help him out a bit. Still with all the post buys going to him, Brock/Punk 250k and the almighty main event 150k. GG NO RE! :adr Either way, my statement still stands and yours is kinda ''meh'' or B+ whatever you like more.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Biast said:


> So now we are downplaying PPVs? :lol How desperate can you be? Where are dem arguments at? :kayne
> 
> Bryan will be another 5 months at best in the main event. Then Brock, Taker, Rocky, Cena and probably Punk will take their spots when RR comes and Bryan can go feud for the tag titles, smile at little children, chant YES! and hug Kane.


Sorry, didn't read shit post from guy who says, "The PPV drew because of Brock, but not because of Bryan/Cena."

Do better, son.


----------



## markedfordeath

a variety of factors...i think the best one is because of the fact that Orton kept threatening to cash in, and they just figured "shit, of course Orton wins the title" because everyone wanted someone new...nothing against Orton or Cena, but people wanted something new...and they shouldn't have had Orton threatening to cash in every Raw until Summerslam, would have added buys with the mystery.


----------



## Biast

Starbuck said:


> This thread is going to get hilarious pretty darn soon. It's always fun to watch people lose their shit.


Triple H looks so weird in your sig! The photoshop in it's is subpar! His arms are really small compared to the rest of his body. If you have a little imagination you can see that his torso looks like a fucking elephant. His nipples are the eyes, his abdominals the thrump and his belly button, it's aperture! You should change it with one of his big nose! That shit is natural at least! :lol

And no, the thread has kinda died out. It's a shame really.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Biast said:


> -
> 
> Edit @Choke4Cock also known by some as Choke2Death: And now, about Summerslam. I actually said the PPV buys were bad because only Brock/Punk drew, mostly Brock but whatever. Which means all the 250k buys were for Brock, I will give 50k for Bryan and Trips out of pity. So now *IF* this PPV is going to equal the last year it will need at least another 50 or 60k buys. Let's split them between the two matches... Final results Brock/Punk 275k buys, Bryan and all of his monkeys 100k at best. NO! Let's not split them, let's give Bryan all the post buys 'cause he is a bitch, so let's help him out a bit. Still with all the post buys going to him, Brock/Punk 250k and the almighty main event 150k. GG NO RE! :adr Either way, my statement still stands and yours is kinda ''meh'' or B+ whatever you like more.


:lmao :lmao :lmao

So, now you're assigning who drew what? As if, what you assign to each match actually matters? Go home, son. You have no clue what you're talking about and your trolling needs some fine tuning.


----------



## markedfordeath

I hope Bryan reads this and kicks him in the fucking head. calling him a bitch? he's tougher than you, you go through a match in Japan with tough ass japanese wrestlers and have them beat you to almost death and see how tough you are afterward


----------



## Starbuck

Biast said:


> Triple H looks so weird in your sig! The photoshop in it's is subpar! His arms are really small compared to the rest of his body. If you have a little imagination you can see that his torso looks like a fucking elephant. His nipples are the eyes, his abdominals the thrump and his belly button, it's aperture! You should change it with one of his big nose! That shit is natural at least! :lol
> 
> And no, the thread has kinda died out. It's a shame really.


With amazing posts like yours I can't begin to imagine why. You just keep looking at Hunter's nipples and thinking of phallic elephant trunk imagery.


----------



## Biast

ShowStopper '97 said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> So, now you're assigning who drew what? As if, what you assign to each match actually matters? Go home, son. You have no clue what you're talking about and your trolling needs some fine tuning.


No, I'm not assigning anything :lol. You said that my argument didn't make sense so I explained it to you. It's my point of view! No one can confirm which main event drew what FOR NOW! that's why I told you that we will judge at Night of Champions because it's entire weight is upon Bryan and Ortons shoulders! Me, you and everyone else knows the buys will be horrific, so you started downplaying the PPV because of your lack of arguments! So please stop trollin and leave this thread in peace.


----------



## Choke2Death

"I will give 50k for Bryan and Trips out of pity" :lmao

So now you decide the amount of buys for each person? LOL. So if Lesnar was not on the card, the buyrates would have been 50,000? No wonder you're now talking about Triple H's nipples and navel.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Biast said:


> No, I'm not assigning anything :lol. You said that my argument didn't make sense so I explained it to you. It's my point of vie! No one can confirm which main event drew what FOR NOW! that's why I told you that we will judge at Night of Champions because it's entire weight is upon Bryan and Ortons shoulders! Me, you and everyone else knows the buys will be horrific, so you started downplaying the PPV because of your lack of arguments! So please stop trollin and leave this thread in peace.


Except that after you "explain" your argument, it gets even worse. You still can't even comprehend that if a PPV drew, there really isn't a way to measure who purchased the PPV based on what match. There's no way to know who bought this PPV because of Bryan/Cena or Punk/Lesnar. The fact that you're trying to assign what each match drew is hilarious, though. Please continue.


----------



## markedfordeath

yeah this is ridiculous! typical trolling....its one fucking event....and boxing, UFC, they all had events around the same time....and the Raw ratings haven't been hurting, so the angle is popular..there is tons of reasons why it was below last year, stop blaming Bryan and Orton...and Night of Champions was going to be shitty anyway so fuck off


----------



## RatedR10

What the fuck happened to this thread? :lmao We have someone actually ASSIGNING who drew what for a PPV?


----------



## Happenstan

I just want to thank Biast for sending me a PM and personally inviting me to his public shaming. Thanks bro. I would have missed all this entertainment without you.




markedfordeath said:


> I hope Bryan reads this and kicks him in the fucking head. calling him a bitch? he's tougher than you, you go through a match in Japan with tough ass japanese wrestlers and have them beat you to almost death and see how tough you are afterward


Just curious but how old are you? Some times you make good points and other times....wow. Are you sharing this account with someone else?


----------



## markedfordeath

for all we know, Bryan could have brought all the 186,000 domestic buys on his own and the Punk match could have been the 112,000 so its all assumptions.


----------



## Biast

markedfordeath said:


> I hope Bryan reads this and kicks him in the fucking head. calling him a bitch? he's tougher than you, you go through a match in Japan with tough ass japanese wrestlers and have them beat you to almost death and see how tough you are afterward


Kid, you joined a month ago and have a thousand posts. Shut the fuck up and go outside! Stop writing shit and use proper punctuation. Get a life weirdo, Bryan is too busy showering himself with dollar bills and banging Brie Bella to even read these forum. Your mom on the other hand wouldn't like what you write on here and you attitude towards grown ups. So please, change it or I will call her (she gave me her number the other night :vince) and she will ground you.


----------



## Biast

markedfordeath said:


> for all we know, Bryan could have brought all the 186,000 domestic buys on his own and the Punk match could have been the 112,000 so its all assumptions.


No shit it's all assumptions! That's what I said after I predicted which match drew what! That is my assumption which, as I said earlier, will probably be confirmed after NOC horrific buys! Easier to understand now? Do you need a graphical image, a chart, a diagram or do you get it?


----------



## markedfordeath

youre kidding right? you're going by Night of Champions buys? you do know that is a throwaway and one of the least important PPV's right? you're delusional if you are going by the numbers for that one as to who draws or not..how much do you draw by the way? how many dimes have you paid Vince?


----------



## Biast

markedfordeath said:


> youre kidding right? you're going by Night of Champions buys? you do know that is a throwaway and one of the least important PPV's right? you're delusional if you are going by the numbers for that one as to who draws or not..how much do you draw by the way? how many dimes have you paid Vince?


Ok, now you are using punctuation, good! Next lesson, after a dot we use capital letters. Try it out! 

And to answer your question, I only draw women, not ratings... Sorry I'm not as good as you. I mean you clearly draw ''posts'', given the fact that you have a thousand of them in a month.


----------



## Quietus

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

Just Posted in PPV thread, Summerslam numbers last three years -

Summerslam 2011 - CM Punk vs John Cena - 180,000 North American; 313,000 Total
Summerslam 2012 - Triple H vs Brock Lesnar - 298,000 North American; 399,000 Total
Summerslam 2013 - CM Punk vs Brock Lesnar - 186,000 North American; 298,000 Total.

This is Lowest overall number since 1997(which drew 250,000), but lowest domestic since 97 was 2011 Summerslam headlined by Punk and Cena during summer of punk angle.





Now that the buyrate is out, Some of the relevant posts from the past few pages in this thread. Not to criticize anyone, but to discuss their opinions... 

It seems Biast is trolling Bryan fans - 



Biast said:


> Anyone thinking that the buys for Summerslam will be coming from Bryan/Cena is mildly retarded. Take :brock out of the equation and the PPV will have less buys than Payback. :lmao


http://www.wrestlingforum.com/22562393-post4232.html

You posted this yourself, Biast. 



The Sandrone said:


> As you can see, Taker/HHH was out-performing Rock/Cena in quarter ratings. Does that make it a bigger match? No. Does that mean it sold WM28? Fuck no. Actually Rock/Cena this year out-did what they did last year, but does that make the rematch bigger than the original? Hell fucking no! It's true that Bryan/Cena has out-performed Punk/Lesnar in the ratings, but the match that has the biggest star of the bunch, Lesnar, is what's selling the PPV and the biggest match on the card.





KO Bossy said:


> Objectively, yeah, I'd agree. But the biggest feud by far? That I don't agree on. Punk/Lesnar has been exclusively about that, while Bryan vs Cena has been muddled by a lot of overlapping and external feuds that kind of downplay the actual feud. If anything, I'd say they're about equal in terms of emphasis, with maybe a slight edge to Punk/Lesnar.





GillbergReturns said:


> The final segment of Punk Lesnar actually did better than last year's closer with HHH v Lesnar (3.5 to 3.44). If Summerslam 13 comes anywhere close to last years numbers we can officially call it a night that Punk can't draw.



I'll say this about Punk/Lesnar though, it never had a big fight feel as the matches did with Cena and HHH did. Plus they went with Punk vs Heyman direction making Brock the third wheel. Big Mistake. Lot of Punk fans thought it was the greatest thing ever, but clearly PPV buyers didn't think so. Suffices to say they wasted Brock on Punk. No way this PPV is profitable, Brock takes a big pay cut as well.

As for Bryan, I don't think it's fair to judge his PPV value off summerslam buys, because the whole feud was so random and lacked a clear cut direction mixed with Mcmahon stuff in it. They didn't even let him win MITB, instead they beat him and put it on Randy Orton. The next week Cena randomly makes the pick for his summerslam opponent. Not a good way to build a feud.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Welp, it already beat Punk/Cena 2011 (domestic numbers), and these are just the prelim numbers for 2013. Just saying.


----------



## Biast

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Quietus said:


> It seems Biast is trolling Bryan fans.


You don't say! unk2

I had my laugh with this Bryan mark wishing death upon me while I'm getting my ass kicked by some japanese wrestlers! :lmao Serously Bryan fans should just chill the fuck out!



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Welp, it already beat Punk/Cena 2011 (domestic numbers), and these are just the prelim numbers for 2013. Just saying.


Domestic numbers? That doesn't matter. It's like you having 10 dollars in your pocket while your older brother has 10000 in the bank and none is his pocket. And then you walk up to him and say: ''I have more money than you!''... :lol The sum of all the buys is what matters.


----------



## markedfordeath

you're the one making us mad..why can't you chill out? you're egging us on


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Biast said:


> You don't say! unk2
> 
> I had my laugh with this Bryan mark wishing death upon me while I'm getting my ass kicked by some japanese wrestlers! :lmao Serously Bryan fans should just chill the fuck out!
> 
> 
> 
> Domestic numbers? That doesn't matter. It's like you having 10 dollars in your pocket while your older brother has 10000 in the bank and none is his pocket. And then you walk up to him and say: ''I have more money than you!''... :lol The sum of all the buys is what matters.


Except this is the PRELIM domestic numbers beating the FINAL domestic numbers for SS 2011.

Now, that is :lmao worthy.


----------



## markedfordeath

forget it Showstopper, they can't comprehend...its ridiculous! THESE AREN"T THE FINAL FUCKING NUMBERS! how is that so difficult to understand for people?


----------



## RatedR10

Biast said:


> Sorry, but I dont agree. The main attraction WAS *Bryan/Cena*, they were the ones on the poster, their match had the biggest build on the card (with the entire fucking Macmahons family!) and they even had HHH as the freaking referee. And of top of all that, they were in the main evented. There were rumours about Orton cashing in/Bryan making Cena tap/Cena winning clean, etc. It was much more hyped and waaaaay bigger than Punk/Brock, at least they built it that way.
> 
> GG, Bryan isn't good for business! HHH isn't good either!
> 
> I will laugh my ass off when NOC statistics come out. I predict just 50000 buys because of Orton and Bryan. People even wanted refunds after the finish! :lmao


They wanted refunds after the storyline fall out on Raw. 

Also, your other posts argue Lesnar is a big draw with anyone and that reason Summerslam numbers weren't big were because of Bryan, despite Lesnar still being on the card and having a high profile match. That makes no sense whatsoever.

BTW, it's just prelims. The number will surely go up about 20,000, probably more when the final number comes out.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Except this is the PRELIM domestic numbers beating the FINAL domestic numbers for SS 2011.
> 
> Now, that is :lmao worthy.


I'll go ahead and give a Funaki sized "Indeed" to that.




Biast said:


> I had my laugh with this Bryan mark wishing death upon me while I'm getting my ass kicked by some japanese wrestlers! :lmao Serously Bryan fans should just chill the fuck out!


Except you're talking about 1 person who went over the line. A far cry from the usual cast of CM Lovers who defend their wrestling Messiah.


----------



## Biast

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Except this is the PRELIM domestic numbers beating the FINAL domestic numbers for SS 2011.
> 
> Now, that is :lmao worthy.


I guess you didn't read the part where it said ''the sum of it all is what matters''. I understand that you didn't get the example I posted as well. Oh well...



markedfordeath said:


> you're the one making us mad..why can't you chill out? you're egging us on


I'm making you mad? How? By making up some random numbers out of my ass and saying that Bryan can't draw? :lol Ok, then you clearly have an anger management issue. I usually come in this place from time to time when something important happens (like the Summerslam buys being released for example) and troll some of the butthurt marks who ''live'' in this thread until they start wishing death upon me , logg off and stuff like that. :lol 

I remember the last time I started trolling in this thread was when Bryan and Kane were hugging every show in the middle of the ring. So I, with my infinite wisdom, came here and say that is homophobic and hurts the ratings. You can't imagine the shitstorm that happened in like 20 minutes. :lmao Buthurt smarks!

Either way, you gave me a nice laugh! You should put in use those punctuation tips I gave you though! They are pretty handy when it comes to understanding the crap that comes out of your mouth everytime you post.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Biast said:


> I guess you didn't read the part where it said ''the sum of it all is what matters''. I understand that you didn't get the example I posted as well. Oh well...


Oh, I got it quite well. But being that you're comparing the PRELIM numbers to the Final numbers for 2011, maybe you should take your own advice and wait until the FINAL numbers for 2013 come out? The FINAL numbers for 2013 will be the final "sum" for the event.


----------



## checkcola

Ehhh... I hate to say it, Brock may be done after Triple H beat him at Mania. Maybe having him be another notch in the Streak is for the best at this point.


----------



## Starbuck

Ok, I take it back. (Y) Biast. Excellent work. :lol


----------



## markedfordeath

if they want to move on from Cena, they have to be patient and build guys....no one is going to get a significant awesome buyrate right away when they've barely been in the main event that long...you need to be patient and build the character, build a storyline....the veterans that draw like Lesnar and Rock, it didn't take overnight to become a star.


----------



## Biast

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Oh, I got it quite well. But being that you're comparing the PRELIM numbers to the Final numbers for 2011, maybe you should take your own advice and wait until the FINAL numbers for 2013 come out? The FINAL numbers for 2013 will be the final "sum" for the event.


It would be pointless. The final numbers will proobably be superior to the 2011 ones so I won't have anything to troll with. You need to take your chances while you can! :cool2



Starbuck said:


> Ok, I take it back. (Y) Biast. Excellent work. :lol


unk5 

Given the fact that my attempt was running dry, I'm flattered! But when I invented those PPV draw numbers... Ohhh it was so worth it! The hate! The red rep! This guy wishing that some japanese wrestlers kick my ass... I even got Happenstan to leave GTA for a minute and come to post here. :lol


----------



## Quietus

checkcola said:


> Ehhh... I hate to say it, Brock may be done after Triple H beat him at Mania.


Not really. Brock won that feud 2-1 and HHH gave him super dominant win at summerslam with a tap out finish. Even the Mania match was heavily structured to protect Brock with HHH low-blowing him like a heel, Shawn taking the F5(which was probably the only reason he was present during the match) and pedigree on the stairs for pinfall. Brock is still the megastar, he has been since his return. He just needs someone with star value to draw money. Punk's not that guy.



> Maybe having him be another notch in the Streak is for the best at this point.


You really thought it was going to be any different, regardless of Brock's PPV value?


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Biast said:


> I'm making you mad? How? By making up some random numbers out of my ass and saying that Bryan can't draw? :lol Ok, then you clearly have an anger management issue.


That's funny cause when I said Punk couldn't draw with Axel and that was why his fans wanted him in Bryan's place in the Corp story line on September 4th you not only red repped me you wrote this touching little comment about how I deserved daily neg rep for the rest of my life for not understanding how awesome Punk was. You seemed mad then. Did you need anger management?


----------



## markedfordeath

Once Shawn Michaels, The Rhodes family and CM Punk are all involved in the main angle, ratings and everything will improve..right now its just a slow build.


----------



## Biast

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> That's funny cause when I said Punk couldn't draw with Axel and that was why his fans wanted him in Bryan's place in the Corp story line on September 4th you not only red repped me you wrote this touching little comment about how I deserved daily neg rep for the rest of my life for not understanding how awesome Punk was. You seemed mad then. Did you need anger management?


The daily negg rep was just a way to get myself noticed. And I wrote the Punk stuff 'cause you clearly dislike him. So if I got you into thinking than I'm his biggest fan, you would automatically hate me. I mean, it's pretty simple actually!

Edit: 

These are some of the results of my latest trolling:


















I love the Choke2Death one. He got mad because I said Bryan/Cena were responsible for the lack of PPV buys due to them being on the poster of SummerSlam. :lol

And you could ask yourself: ''How does this guy have green rep when he is trolling all the time?''. Well by making threads like this (people seem to enjoy it):










AJ's ass threads can make wonders for someones rep. :lmao


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The last few pages of this thread, in particular the work of a couple of posters, shows us the need to RISE ABOVE IDIOCY! :cena5


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Biast said:


> The daily negg rep was just a way to get myself noticed. And I wrote the Punk stuff 'cause you clearly dislike him. So if I got you into thinking than I'm his biggest fan, you would automatically hate me. I mean, it's pretty simple actually!


So you're saying even you would rather troll than be an actual Punk fan. I totally get it. :


----------



## markedfordeath

will anyone be punished for Summerslam not beating last year, or what do you think will happen?


----------



## Biast

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Happenstan said:


> So you're saying even you would rather troll than be an actual Punk fan. I totally get it. :


I'm not a fan of any wrestler except Taker. That being said, I'm a fan of whatever (in my opinion) is good at any particular point of time. And now the only thing that spikes my interest is The Corp storyline. I loved Punk/Heyman feud up until SummerSlam where it should have ended. Everything beyond that point seems worthless to me because clearly the creative team has no idea what to do with Punk.

So yes, at this day you can consider me a Bryan/HHH/Orton fan because it's the only thing I actually enjoy. This will probably change in like a month or two when (hopefully) creative comes up with some new and fresh stories for Punk, Wyatts, Del Rio, RVD, etc! But I kinda doubt that last part. :lol


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*



Biast said:


> These are some of the results of my latest trolling:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love the Choke2Death one. He got mad because I said Bryan/Cena were responsible for the lack of PPV buys due to them being on the poster of SummerSlam. :lol


Mad? LOL, you're the one who repped me first with a lengthy sentence. I couldn't give a fuck less if Cena/Bryan was a flop since I'm not a mark for either guy. And I was legitimately wondering about which poster you're talking about because the only poster I can find is the stupid rollercoaster one where Bryan, Kane, Punk and Ziggler are there with a group of divas.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

markedfordeath said:


> will anyone be punished for Summerslam not beating last year, or what do you think will happen?


Nothing will happen. I believe last years buy rate is a testament to how over Brock was and his feud with HHH. Brock's drawing power may be diminishing with each subsequent appearance, but wwe will ride him until he collapses. I certainly cant credit Big Show,being included in Cena/Punk, as a big reason for the 2012 buy rate. Looking back at SS 2012, the best moment was HHH trying in vain to get that crowd pop at the end. Punk actually accomplished that at Summerslam this year which I found incredibly amusing given HHH's failed effort.


----------



## markedfordeath

so you dont think Bryan will be yelled at for this? can't see it being his fault at all....


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Wait for the final numbers to come out. Even then, how do you assign "blame" for a lower buyrate. If Bryan wasnt viewed as a credible enough threat, then WWE should have booked him stronger sooner than they did. Instead of beating Swagger, Cesaro, and Ryback in the gauntlet (which I thought was great) He could have gone over Henry, Big E, and Big Show. They could have presented him riding this unstoppable momentum fueled by this incredible crowd frenzy. Would that have helped the buyrate? Who knows, all anyone can do is speculate.

You need to stop worrying about if WWE trusts Bryan. He has been hand-picked to be the face in the biggest angle of the year. They trust him to open and finish almost every show now. You'll know if he loses favor when you dont see him so prominently anymore. I have faith he is going to make it. Look at it this way. Since June, he has gone over Orton twice, Sheamus, and Cena all clean. That was an unthinkable event for any WWE performer and he has done it. HHH may be the next to major name to lose cleanly to him. If that happens, you know he is a made man.


----------



## KO Bossy

markedfordeath said:


> so you dont think Bryan will be yelled at for this? can't see it being his fault at all....


Its the fault of everyone on the card. Putting them on the card was done so to get a good buy rate. If they fail, then its their fault. Now some guys are more responsible for it than others. Brock and Cena would carry the heaviest weight. Then Bryan, since he was in the main storyline for the main event of the show. Then Punk, who was in a major storyline, but not in the main event. 

Will they be yelled at? Probably not. I mean, its hard to say to someone "I'm yelling at you because more people didn't buy the show." If they didn't buy it, it was an overall problem, and the Fed will have to rectify things for the future.


----------



## markedfordeath

well if you think about it, Cena main eventing this whole year has had shitty numbers, so he's not as big as he once was, maybe that is the problem.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

On the Summerslam number... that's pretty bad. Hopefully the final numbers show to be better. Regardless of what the final number comes out to be, I think two things hurt the buyrate:

1) Them not having Punk/Brock be the obvious biggest match in the card. They had it playing second fiddle to Bryan/Cena on most Raws leading up to Summerslam. And don't get me wrong, I personally have no problem with that. I love the fact they put effort into making two matches seem equally huge by making the stronger one in terms of star power take a backseat to the other. I also think how they ended up making the order of the matches worked out perfectly with how everything played out. However, I do think that them making it appear Punk/Brock was still just a secondary main event I think might've lost a few people. Brock/Punk was still the biggest match on the card (as any match with Brock would more than likely be), but the way they built up the show, they kinda took away a bit from it. That being said, this reason isn't quite a big of a reason as number 2, as they kinda did the same thing with Brock/HHH (although the difference was the WWE Title match from last year wasn't made out to be anywhere near as big of a deal and was a throw-a-way triple threat due to Big Show's involvement). 

2) What I think is the most important factor, is the losses Brock has taken. Losing at ER on his return was bad, but then when he lost to HHH at Mania I think took away a lot of appeal from Brock. Not to mention how the ER match played out where Brock was the one getting beaten down for most of the match, he lost a lot in terms of aura in that feud with HHH. Combine that with the natural diminishing returns for each time Brock appears, Punk/Brock was never going to be as big of a draw as it could've been, and tbh I'd say the same for any Brock match from here on out, even the Rock/Brock and Taker/Brock matches (especially the latter since a big part of the draw of that match is the image of the opponent). 

So yeah, even if Summerslam ended up getting 330-350 thousand buys, I'd stand by what I said. Only way I'd take it back is if they ended up, by some miracle (and it'd be a big miracle) they manage to beat 2012 or come within a hair of doing so. In that case, they had to do something right to match up with that number. It's not gonna happen, but just putting that out there.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It's kind of funny, because I don't know if people remember or not, but during the build to SummerSlam everyone was arguing over which of the two matches was the "bigger" match, or which was the "real" main event. Now? No one wants to take ownership :lol


----------



## markedfordeath

i dont care about the buy rate, I just don't want Bryan to be punished over this when you also have Punk, Brock, Triple H, Orton and Cena involved as well. but if he continues to open and close every show from here on out then they still have faith in him.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

That's what happens when you promote Daniel Bryan as the Summerslam main event. Lowest since 1997?

:lmao

God damn at all of these butt hurt Bryan marks though.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> That's what happens when you promote Daniel Bryan vs. John Cena as the Summerslam main event. Lowest since 1997?
> 
> :lmao
> 
> God damn at all of these butt hurt Bryan marks though.


Don't forget to mention, Brock gets his lowest buys when he's in a feud with Punk. That's very newsworthy, right there. unk2 Oh, and the prelim numbers already did better than SummerSlam 2011, which featured Punk vs Cena.


----------



## markedfordeath

its the guy's first main event and he's being chastized.....how is it his fault exactly? and ONLY his fault?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

The butthurt is still running wild. :lol This'll be fun. Nice trolling work by the way, Biast. It made the last few pages very entertaining.


----------



## markedfordeath

its not the lowest since 1997, the final numbers aren't out yet and all it needs is 13,000 more counted for buys to tie 2011......so the final numbers will have more than 13,000 extra i'd imagine..so it will end up 300,000+ which is decent.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'll repost this Quietus post from 5:28PM, just for shits and giggles..




Quietus said:


> Just Posted in PPV thread, Summerslam numbers last three years -
> 
> Summerslam 2011 - CM Punk vs John Cena - 180,000 North American; 313,000 Total
> Summerslam 2012 - Triple H vs Brock Lesnar - 298,000 North American; 399,000 Total
> Summerslam 2013 - CM Punk vs Brock Lesnar - 186,000 North American; 298,000 Total.
> 
> This is Lowest overall number since 1997(which drew 250,000), but lowest domestic since 97 was 2011 Summerslam headlined by Punk and Cena during summer of punk angle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that the buyrate is out, Some of the relevant posts from the past few pages in this thread. Not to criticize anyone, but to discuss their opinions...
> 
> It seems Biast is trolling Bryan fans -
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/22562393-post4232.html
> 
> You posted this yourself, Biast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll say this about Punk/Lesnar though, it never had a big fight feel as the matches did with Cena and HHH did. Plus they went with Punk vs Heyman direction making Brock the third wheel. Big Mistake. Lot of Punk fans thought it was the greatest thing ever, but clearly PPV buyers didn't think so. Suffices to say they wasted Brock on Punk. No way this PPV is profitable, Brock takes a big pay cut as well.
> 
> As for Bryan, I don't think it's fair to judge his PPV value off summerslam buys, because the whole feud was so random and lacked a clear cut direction mixed with Mcmahon stuff in it. They didn't even let him win MITB, instead they beat him and put it on Randy Orton. The next week Cena randomly makes the pick for his summerslam opponent. Not a good way to build a feud.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I actually can't wait for the NOC buyrate to come out, for even more hilarity to ensue.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Official Raw Ratings Thread [Post All TV Ratings Discussions Here]*

I'll repost this Quietus post from 5:28PM, just for shits and giggles..




Quietus said:


> Just Posted in PPV thread, Summerslam numbers last three years -
> 
> Summerslam 2011 - CM Punk vs John Cena - 180,000 North American; 313,000 Total
> Summerslam 2012 - Triple H vs Brock Lesnar - 298,000 North American; 399,000 Total
> Summerslam 2013 - CM Punk vs Brock Lesnar - 186,000 North American; 298,000 Total.
> 
> This is Lowest overall number since 1997(which drew 250,000), but lowest domestic since 97 was 2011 Summerslam headlined by Punk and Cena during summer of punk angle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that the buyrate is out, Some of the relevant posts from the past few pages in this thread. Not to criticize anyone, but to discuss their opinions...
> 
> It seems Biast is trolling Bryan fans -
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/22562393-post4232.html
> 
> You posted this yourself, Biast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by The Sandrone View Post
> As you can see, Taker/HHH was out-performing Rock/Cena in quarter ratings. Does that make it a bigger match? No. Does that mean it sold WM28? Fuck no. Actually Rock/Cena this year out-did what they did last year, but does that make the rematch bigger than the original? Hell fucking no! It's true that Bryan/Cena has out-performed Punk/Lesnar in the ratings, but the match that has the biggest star of the bunch, Lesnar, is what's selling the PPV and the biggest match on the card.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by KO Bossy View Post
> Objectively, yeah, I'd agree. But the biggest feud by far? That I don't agree on. Punk/Lesnar has been exclusively about that, while Bryan vs Cena has been muddled by a lot of overlapping and external feuds that kind of downplay the actual feud. If anything, I'd say they're about equal in terms of emphasis, with maybe a slight edge to Punk/Lesnar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by GillbergReturns View Post
> The final segment of Punk Lesnar actually did better than last year's closer with HHH v Lesnar (3.5 to 3.44). If Summerslam 13 comes anywhere close to last years numbers we can officially call it a night that Punk can't draw.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll say this about Punk/Lesnar though, it never had a big fight feel as the matches did with Cena and HHH did. Plus they went with Punk vs Heyman direction making Brock the third wheel. Big Mistake. Lot of Punk fans thought it was the greatest thing ever, but clearly PPV buyers didn't think so. Suffices to say they wasted Brock on Punk. No way this PPV is profitable, Brock takes a big pay cut as well.
> 
> As for Bryan, I don't think it's fair to judge his PPV value off summerslam buys, because the whole feud was so random and lacked a clear cut direction mixed with Mcmahon stuff in it. They didn't even let him win MITB, instead they beat him and put it on Randy Orton. The next week Cena randomly makes the pick for his summerslam opponent. Not a good way to build a feud.
Click to expand...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Sorry for the double post, but the 2nd post does contain quotes from that post, while the first one doesn't.


----------



## KO Bossy

Uh why'd you quote me exactly?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KO Bossy said:


> Uh why'd you quote me exactly?


I didn't. Quietus did. He posted that at 5:28PM tonight. Knocked it out of the park, tbf.


----------



## markedfordeath

I guess people just wait until Wrestlemania every year to buy PPV....times have changed I guess....i mean we get a brilliant show and no one buys it....oh well


----------



## Sonnen Says

2011 card wasn't as big as the majorities of other SS cards. This year it had two big Mainevents worthy matches it's a kinda a bad start but the final number will obviously be higher might even end to 360 buys.


----------



## markedfordeath

it cost me 55 bucks..thats a lot of money...maybe most people just don't like good wrestling or don't like how the build up was..they're sending the WWE a message to change things.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I'm a fan of the storyline and even as it continues, SummerSlam is the last PPV I'm buying for awhile. Just too expensive to buy on a monthly basis. Don't get me wrong, I could purchase a PPV every month if I wanted, but there are better places to spend $50 bucks a month than on a WWE PPV. And it doesn't matter who's on top, whether it be Bryan, Punk, Cena, or anyone else. Just too much money on a per month basis.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Since a post of mine was quoted in the Quietas post, I think I may need to re-word exactly what I meant in my last post in this thread. Punk/Brock I stand by was the biggest match on the card, but Bryan/Cena got as much, if not more _hype_ than Punk/Brock, and because they did that, they took away a bit from Punk/Brock as they tried to make it look secondary to that regardless of the star-power in it.

At the end of the day, we'll see what the final numbers are. Punk/Brock may have been the biggest match on the card in terms of starpower, but Bryan/Cena got the most hype, so it equals out. They're both responsible for the buyrate, whether good or bad. I just think the fact they took away focus from Punk/Brock hurt the PPV a bit... but of course that's just speculation (as is my entire last post including the whole "Brock's drawing power getting weakened" stuff).


----------



## markedfordeath

the fact that they came out with their financial report over the weekend means they probably figured the rest of the pay per views weren't going to do well, thats why their expectations were lowered...yet they still have the same guy on top, so maybe times are just tough for everyone....I bet this angle though helps business quite a bit. more to come from them.


----------



## checkcola

markedfordeath said:


> it cost me 55 bucks..thats a lot of money...maybe most people just don't like good wrestling or don't like how the build up was..they're sending the WWE a message to change things.


You also figure, WWE is still traveling around putting on their Smackdown/RAW shows, imagine a dad taking his kids to a WWE event during the build for a ppv, for a lot of people, splurging on one big entertainment item a month is a big deal. 

(Hell, some people may just been saving their cash for Grand Theft Auto)


----------



## markedfordeath

and because of that, i bet they don't care as much about pay per view revenue as past years....I mean don't get me wrong, it is important, but they know not everyone can afford them all the time....so they'll take what they can get there...that's why they have other ventures like merchandise sales and live events outside of tv...and all the charity stuff...they get profit from other things, especially digital media nowadays....plus, with any top star, even the ones from the past, I doubt it took their first pay per view to become a star..Austin headlined Wrestlemania 13 with Bret hart and I heard that buy rate sucked ass....so it takes awhile to grow a star.....Punk didn't draw huge Summerslam numbers, yet they still gave him a year long title reign....


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

At the end of the day, even though Brock/Punk was the biggest match in terms of star power, WWE _promoted _Bryan/Cena as the biggest match. All week long in LA for Summerslam, including press conferences, top billing and whatnot. Bryan/Cena was billed as the main event, and the main attraction. It's obviously the match that deserves most of the blame for the lack of interest.

Cena/Punk was the only match that sold SS 2011, hell there were only four matches on the card prior to the actual show. And the fact that Bryan/Cena couldn't outdo it even with Brock/Punk is still just really funny.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> At the end of the day, even though Brock/Punk was the biggest match in terms of star power, WWE _promoted _Bryan/Cena as the biggest match. All week long in LA for Summerslam, including press conferences, top billing and whatnot. Bryan/Cena got top billing. It's obviously the match that deserves most of the blame for the lack of interest.
> 
> Cena/Punk was the only match that sold SS 2011, hell there were only four matches on the card prior to the actual show. And the fact that Bryan/Cena couldn't outdo it even with Brock/Punk is still just really funny.


Uh, dude, these number are PRELIM numbers. The final numbers aren't out yet, and domestically (US, Canada, and Mexico), they've already beaten SS 2011:



> *Summerslam 2011 - CM Punk vs John Cena - 180,000 North American*; 313,000 Total
> Summerslam 2012 - Triple H vs Brock Lesnar - 298,000 North American; 399,000 Total
> *Summerslam 2013 - CM Punk vs Brock Lesnar - 186,000 North American*; 298,000 Total.
> 
> This is Lowest overall number since 1997(which drew 250,000), but lowest domestic since 97 was 2011 Summerslam headlined by Punk and Cena during summer of punk angle.


The final number will see an increase.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Uh, the total number is what you should be looking at.

And saying the final number will see an increase is pure speculation. In can happen, yes, but it could also turn out even worse than these estimations.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Uh, the total number is what you should be looking at.
> 
> And saying the final number will see an increase is pure speculation. In can happen, yes, but it could also turn out even worse than these estimations.


Both numbers for 2013 are prelim numbers. I won't bet against both matches seeing a decrease. I mean, one of the matches did feature Brock Lesnar, and most of his matches see huge numbers.


----------



## JY57

^ even though its still very likely to surpass 310,000 at least by the end of the year. he is right that it could happen to see a decrease like WM 29 which was viewed as 1.1 -1.2 million that ended up being 1.047 million


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Of course it could. I'd just be surprised to see a Brock Lesnar match do so badly.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Well it's not like the addition of Brock helped out the Wrestlemania number this year. It's all about promotion. And Bryan/Cena was promoted as the main selling point of Summerslam. That's where a huge chunk of the blame will obviously lie. The match that got top billing at this year's 'Mania was a rematch, which was probably the reason in the 'Mania drop in buys.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Yeah, this one of the worst Mania cards in awhile. Rock/Cena, in which the result was very obvious after WM 28's finish, and Taker/Punk, which everyone and their mother knew Punk had 0 shot of winning, and the build left alot to be desired. Should have been Taker/Brock. That would have drew.


----------



## markedfordeath

if they cared about buy rates so much, after 2011's summerslam that underperformed buyrate wise, why did Punk get the title for a year? see, they still push a guy regardless...because if you're pushing merchandise and can connect with the audience then that's all that matters.....why would you shell out 100 bucks for an event plus food, then turn around and buy a PPV? who has the money for that? so you go to a live event and buy a tee shirt, there's the profit....you can't do all at once and they shouldn't expect us to.


----------



## Jof

:lmao Punk marks seriously can't be putting this on Bryan? :lmao :lmao 

Desperate much?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

^ I know, it's absurd putting the blame on the fucking MAIN EVENT. :lol



ShowStopper '97 said:


> Yeah, this one of the worst Mania cards in awhile. Rock/Cena, in which the result was very obvious after WM 28's finish, and Taker/Punk, which everyone and their mother knew Punk had 0 shot of winning, and the build left alot to be desired. Should have been Taker/Brock. That would have drew.


If they promoted Taker/Brock as much as they promoted Rock/Cena I, I honestly think it would've done big numbers. Hell, it would have done even more if it happened around the time that video of the Taker/Lesnar confrontation was hot. That thing blew up pretty fucking huge.


----------



## markedfordeath

dude can you stop blaming Bryan....Cena is just as much to blame...people are sick of him and figured Bryan would probably have no chance against him or that his title would be taken away from Orton anyway...they only kept featuring Orton all the time..so they figured "instead of going forward with someone new on top, they're going with Orton or Cena again" so it turned people off.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> ^ I know, it's absurd putting the blame on the fucking MAIN EVENT. :lol
> 
> 
> 
> *If they promoted Taker/Brock as much as they promoted Rock/Cena I, I honestly think it would've done big numbers. Hell, it would have done even more* if it happened around the time that video of the Taker/Lesnar confrontation was hot. That thing blew up pretty fucking huge.


*LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL.
LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL.
LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL.
LOL. LOL. LOL. LOL.
LOL. LOL.
LOL.​*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> ^ I know, it's absurd putting the blame on the fucking MAIN EVENT. :lol
> 
> 
> 
> If they promoted Taker/Brock as much as they promoted Rock/Cena I, I honestly think it would've done big numbers. Hell, it would have done even more if it happened around the time that video of the Taker/Lesnar confrontation was hot. That thing blew up pretty fucking huge.


edit- Oh wait, Rock/Cena I? I don't know about that.


----------



## MaybeLock

I hope final numbers of SS improve, because it was a really good show and they deserve more buys for it. I wouldnt really blame any of the main eventers, they were good expected matches with a good build. The only reason I can find for the low buyrates is the disappointing midcard (a solid entertaining midcard always lifts the buyrates), or simply people kept their money and streamed it.

Anyways, it's still hilarious how marks still fight about the ratings, blaming Punk or Bryan for the low buys (if they were good it would be thanks to Cena and Bork), they are extremely over and did their job great, so there is NO reason to think it's their fault, buys would be even worse without them.


----------



## Jof

No one knew Cena/bryan was going to main event until Brock/Punk promo aired before their actual match. Read the Summerslam discussion thread if you don't believe me. Punk/Brock also closed the Go-home show. Punk vs Brock got the most hype.

*Best vs Beast*. You have that in your sig itself and still trying to put the blame on Bryan? Bryan was the untested, unestablished guy heading in, Punk was the bigger star(which is also something you have argued about 100 times) facing every part timer the entire year. Heck that's the reason they put him against Brock. And he failed to deliver, as usual.


----------



## JY57

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Of course it could. I'd just be surprised to see a Brock Lesnar match do so badly.


we'll see I guess, but I expect to see some type of increase from the preliminary of 298,000. just depends how much could be like 2012 (358,000 to 392,000) or like 2011 (Prelim. at 296,000 to 311,000). It would be sad if it decreased like WM 29 did though.


----------



## Sonnen Says

Jof said:


> No one knew Cena/bryan was going to main event until Brock/Punk promo aired before their actual match. Read the Summerslam discussion thread if you don't believe me. Punk/Brock also closed the Go-home show. Punk vs Brock got the most hype.
> 
> *Best vs Beast*. You have that in your sig itself and still trying to put the blame on Bryan? Bryan was the untested, unestablished guy heading in, Punk was the bigger star(which is also something you have argued about 100 times) facing every part timer the entire year. Heck that's the reason they put him against Brock. And he failed to deliver, as usual.


You fail to understand that it's not the final number. If WWE feel that way about Bryan they wouldn't put him in the mainevent instead of Brock/Punk. So this unestablished thing is not really an excuse after the fact he mainevented over them.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JY57 said:


> we'll see I guess, but I expect to see some type of increase from the preliminary of 298,000. just depends how much could be like 2012 (358,000 to 392,000) or like 2011 (Prelim. at 296,000 to 311,000). It would be sad if it decreased like WM 29 did though.


Yep, you never know. I'm not any good at predicting PPV numbers. Never really was interested in PPV numbers. I'm more interested in the TV ratings, myself. All I'm going to say is it would be sad for WWE as awhole since they featured 2 huge main events.


----------



## #Mark

The last image you saw on the go home RAW was Punk brawling with Brock. That feud had the show closing angle heading into the PPV so saying it wasn't promoted heavily is a lie. 

If Mania 18 bombed would people be blaming Jericho/Hunter for the buyrate or Rock/Hogan?


----------



## markedfordeath

they put Bryan in the main event only because that ending, with the cash in is how the show should end, if you make Brock the main event after that post match with Bryan, the crowd is too deflated to care about the main event.....so that's why Cena/ Bryan was last.


----------



## KO Bossy

Jof said:


> No one knew Cena/bryan was going to main event until Brock/Punk promo aired before their actual match. Read the Summerslam discussion thread if you don't believe me. Punk/Brock also closed the Go-home show. Punk vs Brock got the most hype.
> 
> *Best vs Beast*. You have that in your sig itself and still trying to put the blame on Bryan? Bryan was the untested, unestablished guy heading in, Punk was the bigger star(which is also something you have argued about 100 times) facing every part timer the entire year. Heck that's the reason they put him against Brock. And he failed to deliver, as usual.


Its no one person's fault. Its a collaborative effort. The most weight falls on Brock and Cena since they're supposed to be the big draws who are proven stars in their matches. Punk and Bryan fall into a lower category, since they aren't as big draws, but were still put in positions of prominence.

I'm curious as to how many buys from Mexico they got. Since ADR is supposedly this big draw, as his marks claim, and he was in a WHC match for the second year in a row (or technically, third if you count the WWE title he won in 2011), this time going in as champion...


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

@BillionDollarMan Not surprised you didn't understand my post. You sure a smart one, aren't ya?



ShowStopper '97 said:


> edit- Oh wait, Rock/Cena I? I don't know about that.


I didn't say that Taker/Brock would outdo Rock/Cena I. I said Taker/Brock would do even more than it would today, had the match happened during the time of that video. Taker/Brock was a hot topic at that point.



> No one knew Cena/bryan was going to main event until Brock/Punk promo aired before their actual match. Read the Summerslam discussion thread if you don't believe me. Punk/Brock also closed the Go-home show. Punk vs Brock got the most hype.
> 
> Best vs Beast. You have that in your sig itself and still trying to put the blame on Bryan? Bryan was the untested, unestablished guy heading in, Punk was the bigger star(which is also something you have argued about 100 times) facing every part timer the entire year. Heck that's the reason they put him against Brock. And he failed to deliver, as usual.


No one knew? :lmao Every cable and PPV provider listed it as so, it was the main focus of the press conference and every other piece of publicity WWE did during the week of Summerslam. Don't even try that.


----------



## #Mark

Uhh? You're just pulling that out of your ass dude. Brock/Punk was just as promoted as Bryan/Cena, maybe even more. Local PPV listings even had the match tagline as one of the major hype pieces.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

#Mark said:


> Uhh? You're just pulling that out of your ass dude. *Brock/Punk was just as promoted as Bryan/Cena, maybe even more. *Local PPV listings even had the match tagline as one of the major hype pieces.


No, it wasn't. :lol You can go rewatch the press conference too if you'd like. If you really think they didn't promote Cena/Bryan as the main event, or promoted them equally, then I really don't have much to say to you.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

#Mark said:


> Uhh? You're just pulling that out of your ass dude. Brock/Punk was just as promoted as Bryan/Cena, maybe even more. Local PPV listings even had the match tagline as one of the major hype pieces.


It's funny, because the weeks leading to SummerSlam, there were arguments all over this board about which storyline was being promoted the most and which match was the main event. Some argued for Punk/Brock and some argued for Bryan/Cena, and the subject hasn't been touched upon until now. Predictable.


----------



## markedfordeath

are we still arguing about this? holy shit!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This is Bryan's fault. Most of his fans are internet pirates. Seriously, I wonder just how many people do watch via an illegal stream or download it later. I know I invited my younger brother's friend to watch it at my house. He and some of his friends never buy the shows and always watch on certain sites. Hard to quantify how many people do it. If the number keeps growing, then the buyrates may keep dropping.


----------



## markedfordeath

but i'm sure they know that though..why do you think they almost always delete their pay per views from youtube when someone downloads them there..they remove it right away...they want people to pay for it....there's no getting around it, people don't buy pay per views every month like they used to, the numbers are down....they rely on live attendance, dvd sales and merchandise sales...as long as the other three are hot, then they will live.


----------



## Choke2Death

The only reason Bryan vs Cena got more promotion at the press conference is because Brock is a part-timer therefore they can't use him as much for such. Nobody knew that Bryan vs Cena would main event. Specially Punk marks who were laughing at that notion talking about how Punk vs Brock has more star power and will obviously main event because Brock is a huge star and all that. I remember the thread about what should/will main event very well and Punk marks were confident that his match would close, specifically because the Bryan vs Cena build-up was too shit and wasted on silly stuff like picking opponents and yelling Yes/No.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

People should have expected Cena/Bryan to close. It's Cena AND it was the most pushed angle on the show. Plus, the cash we all knew was gonna happen doesn't work as well unless you close with it.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

The biggest match heading into Summerslam 2013

*Before HHH became guest referee*:It was easily Punk vs Lesnar.

This forum was easily more excited about Lesnar vs Punk and wasn't even talking about a victory for Bryan.They were saying that Bryan should emerge strong from a defeat 

*After HHH became guest referee*:I would say Daniel Bryan vs John Cena overtook Lesnar vs Punk.

This forum started hating HHH for inserting himself into the match and saying how he is going to steal the spotlight from Bryan vs Cena.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

#Mark said:


> Uhh? You're just pulling that out of your ass dude. Brock/Punk was just as promoted as Bryan/Cena, maybe even more. Local PPV listings even had the match tagline as one of the major hype pieces.


Ahbsolutely.


The selling point of Summerslam 2013 was Bryan vs Cena *AND Punk vs Brock*.No one except blind marks can refuse to admit this.


If the PPV has bombed,blame shouldn't be on Bryan since his push(as a bona fide main-eventer) has literally just begun,IMO.


Punk and Cena should take this blame all by themselves.As I said in the other thread about Cena's drawing power, that Cena as a PPV draw(along with Punk) is complete failure,until of course both of them are paired with the SINGLE greatest wrestling PPV(aka box-office) draw of all time The GOAT :rock4


And that ain't any conspiracy theory folks,but the bloody reality.Deal with it:cool2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> The biggest match heading into Summerslam 2013
> 
> *Before HHH became guest referee*:It was easily Punk vs Lesnar.
> 
> This forum was easily more excited about Lesnar vs Punk and wasn't even talking about a victory for Bryan.They were saying that Bryan should emerge strong from a defeat
> 
> *After HHH became guest referee*:I would say Daniel Bryan vs John Cena overtook Lesnar vs Punk.
> 
> This forum started hating HHH for inserting himself into the match and saying how he is going to steal the spotlight from Bryan vs Cena.


Well that was certainly random.

Bryan/Cena never really "overtook" Punk/Lesnar. It main evented, and HHH had little to do with that as chances are that was the planned main event from the beginning (whether it should've been or not is another story). It was a fairly big match they tried to make as big as possible with a potential "passing of the torch" type moment. Then you have the fact they did the Orton cash-in, then on top of that the HHH heel turn, Punk/Brock in hindsight never really did have a chance as there was much more to come out of Bryan/Cena than Punk/Brock. HHH was obviously a piece of that, but looking back it was clear they had planned to have Bryan/Cena close the show since at the very least when it was announced. Everything seemed to be written out since around that time, or maybe even earlier.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

The Sandrone said:


> Well that was certainly random.
> 
> Bryan/Cena never really "overtook" Punk/Lesnar. It main evented, and HHH had little to do with that as chances are that was the planned main event from the beginning (whether it should've been or not is another story). It was a fairly big match they tried to make as big as possible with a potential "passing of the torch" type moment. Then you have the fact they did the Orton cash-in, then on top of that the HHH heel turn, Punk/Brock in hindsight never really did have a chance as there was much more to come out of Bryan/Cena than Punk/Brock. HHH was obviously a piece of that, but looking back it was clear they had planned to have Bryan/Cena close the show since at the very least when it was announced. Everything seemed to be written out since around that time, or maybe even earlier.


I am not saying HHH was the one entirely responsible for Cena vs Bryan becoming bigger than Punk vs Lesnar.HHH being in the match made sure the potential in Cena vs Bryan became more unpredictable that it severly lacked before.By the time Summerslam started,it became obvious that Bryan vs Cena had much more potential than Lesnar vs Punk.So eventually,Bryan vs Cena did overtake Punk vs Lesnar


----------



## Londrick

Wrestlingfan35 before the numbers came out:



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Except what you don't understand is Punk/Lesnar is the selling point of this PPV. Bryan/Cena isn't even in the discussion.





Wrestlinfan35 said:


> lol, people actually thinking casuals care more about Cena vs. fucking Daniel Bryan over Punk/Lesnar. Get real. Punk/Lesnar is the main selling point of this show.


:ti


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

Dunmer said:


> Wrestlingfan35 before the numbers came out:
> :ti


Owned :lmao :lol


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

@Dumner, As if that's any different from the Bryan supporters doing the same.  Was Punk/Lesnar the bigger match? Yeah. Was it the main event WWE heavily promoted over the other? No, and it's silly to think otherwise.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Dunmer said:


> Wrestlingfan35 before the numbers came out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :ti


:damn

/thread.


----------



## THANOS

ShowStopper '97 said:


> It's kind of funny, because I don't know if people remember or not, but during the build to SummerSlam everyone was arguing over which of the two matches was the "bigger" match, or which was the "real" main event. Now? No one wants to take ownership :lol





> You must spread Reputation around before giving it to ShowStopper '97 again.


I tried :lol.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Nah. Bryan is in the spotlight for this PPV.


:side:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> :side:


And I still haven't said otherwise.

You're the one now arguing the other stance. Not me. All 4 guys in the 2 matches deserve the "blame" IMO.

But since this storyline has kept them in the 3 range on Monday nights and not getting as ravaged as we all thought they would since the NFL season started, they'll take it.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

So if he was the one in the spotlight, why wouldn't majority of the blame go to him? You're certainly giving him and him alone all of the credit for TV ratings because he's the one in "the spotlight."


----------



## Choke2Death

Dunmer said:


> Wrestlingfan35 before the numbers came out:
> 
> :ti


:lol

That's what I was getting at when talking about Punk marks laughing off the idea of Bryan main eventing but was too lazy to go and look it up.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> So if he was the one in the spotlight, why wouldn't majority of the blame go to him? You're certainly giving him and him alone all of the credit for TV ratings because he's the one in "the spotlight."


I never said you couldn't give him the majority of the blame. If you want to, go right ahead. But right now he's the most over/popular guy in the company. I'd hate to see how low the buyrate would have been without that match, and if Cena just had his typical "LOLCENAWINS" kind of match and opponent.

I honestly thought a match with Brock/Punk would shoot the PPV buys far and ahead of what they got though, since all we heard was how much "star-power" that match had. And especially since Brock matches draw 99% of the time, especially since his comeback.

To be fair to both matches though, still have to wait to see those final numbers.


----------



## CALΔMITY

THANOS said:


> I tried :lol.


Just rep 15 random people. :dance


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

ShowStopper '97 said:


> I never said you couldn't give him the majority of the blame. If you want to, go right ahead. But right now he's the most over/popular guyt in the company. I'd hate to see how low the buyrate would have been without that match, and if Cena just had his typical "LOLCENAWINS" kind of match and opponent.
> 
> I honestly thought a match with Brock/Punk would shoot the PPV buys far and ahead of what they got though, since all we heard was how much "star-power" that match had. And especially since Brock matches draw 99% of the time, especially since his comeback.


It's not what I want, lol. If he was the focus of the PPV, as you said, then he's the one to get majority of the blame. Simple as that. All four deserve blame, absolutely, but out of the bunch, majority of it falls on Bryan and there's no way of going around it, really.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

If one guy deserved the blame, it's the top star and that's Cena. However, numbers are bullshit. Live streaming is the reason ppvs don't do shit most times.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

^Why should the majority of the blame fall on Bryan?He should be the least of the 4 guys to get the blame.How can anyone blame someone who is main-eventing his first PPV?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> It's not what I want, lol. If he was the focus of the PPV, as you said, then he's the one to get majority of the blame. Simple as that. All four deserve blame, absolutely, *but out of the bunch, majority of it falls on Bryan and there's no way of going around it, really.*


Funny you now say that Bryan was the focus of the PPV, when going into the PPV, you did not hold that belief. In fact, you felt Brock/Punk was the "selling point" of the PPV. To me, "selling point" means if the PPV does well, that match deserves most of the credit. And if the PPV doesn't do well, then it deserves most of the blame. Yet, now you're saying the opposite.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Slowhand said:


> Live streaming is the reason ppvs don't do shit most times.


This exactly

But if I *have to* blame anyone,this would be the order:
1.Brock
2.Cena
3.Punk

I won't blame Bryan at all.He isn't even an established star


----------



## KO Bossy

My god, you guys are seriously like children. Why exactly do you care what the PPV buyrate was? Does that mean the show was bad? No, it was great. This entire concept of drawing is a completely erroneous factor people use to try and justify why they don't like someone. If X hates Punk, and the PPV does poorly, he'll blame Punk. Why? The fact that more people didn't buy, in that person's mind, is because of Punk, and so to them, that's their way of agreeing with him about not liking Punk, when really, that person is just reaching for reasons to try and convince others to give in to his opinion. In other words, he's manipulating information to justify his particular dislike for a wrestler and force others to also not like him. This same formula goes for any wrestler that has people who don't like them.

Bottom line is that its a number. A stupid fucking number that has no bearing on any of you. Yet you still fight about it. If you like the show, great. That should be enough. If someone doesn't agree with you, ignore them or silently hold disdain for them. Or maybe, just concede the fact that others have a different opinion. Don't just sling mud back and forth to try and prove your hidden agenda. Its so petty, and ultimately, shallow.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

ShowStopper '97 said:


> *Funny you now say that Bryan was the focus of the PPV*, when going into the PPV, you did not hold that belief. In fact, you felt Brock/Punk was the "selling point" of the PPV. To me, "selling point" means if the PPV does well, that match deserves most of the credit. And if the PPV doesn't do well, then it deserves most of the blame. Yet, now you're saying the opposite.


No, you said that, and now you're going back on it. :lol 

Vintage bias in the ratings thread.


----------



## KO Bossy

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> ^Why should the majority of the blame fall on Bryan?He should be the least of the 4 guys to get the blame.How can anyone blame someone who is main-eventing his first PPV?


He was on the PPV in a position of high prominence. He deserves blame, just as anyone else on the PPV does. Bottom line is that his presence failed to draw, despite his popularity with the audience. That goes for everyone, including Punk. Its not one person's fault.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I take it back, I blame Miz.

Dat most must-see host.

:rock laughs at :miz


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> No, you said that, and now you're going back on it. :lol
> 
> Vintage bias in the ratings thread.


Ever since the SS numbers have come out today, you have done a complete 180 on which match was the "selling point." Pretty ballsy to mention anyone else's bias when you just got completely and utterly :buried by Dunmer.

Unlike you, I can say that Bryan deserves blame. If someone wants to blame him the most (like you), go for it. Even though, these past few weeks you've been arguing Bryan is NOT an established star yet, and that his first "true test" won't come until his NEXT storyline. So, in that case, why blame the one guy out of the four who isn't an established star? And yes, he deserves blame, but I'm just using your logic and recent arguments.

Hm.


----------



## CALΔMITY

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> No, you said that, and now you're going back on it. :lol
> 
> Vintage bias in the ratings thread.


No you technically said it too by the logic you presented.


> It's not what I want, lol. *If he was the focus of the PPV, as you said, then he's the one to get majority of the blame.* Simple as that. All four deserve blame, absolutely, but out of the bunch, *majority of it falls on Bryan and there's no way of going around it*, really.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Unlike you, I can say that Bryan deserves blame. If someone wants to blame him the most (like you), go for it. Even though, these past few weeks you've been arguing Bryan is NOT an established star yet, and that his first "true test" won't come until his NEXT storyline. So, in that case, why blame the one guy out of the four who isn't an established star? And yes, he deserves blame, but I'm just using your logic and recent arguments.
> 
> Hm.


Actually, I can also say Bryan deserves blame.

But he is the one that deserves the most, because he was the main fucking focus, like _you_ said. And funny how you bring that up, because this number only proves Bryan isn't established yet. And if the NOC number bombs, which is likely, it would also prove that. If it doesn't bomb, then I'd gladly be proven wrong. Why blame him because he isn't established? Because he was in the prominant role of the PPV..


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Actually, I can also say Bryan deserves blame.
> 
> But he is the one that deserves the most, because he was the main fucking focus, like _you_ said. And funny how you bring that up, because this number only proves Bryan isn't established yet. And if the NOC number bombs, which is likely, it would also prove that. If it doesn't bomb, then I'd gladly be proven wrong. Why blame him because he isn't established? Because he was in the prominant role of the PPV..


I meant that you can't admit Punk is to blame for anything, ever. Which is truth, as this very thread has highlighted dozens of times.

And now you're going back on your "Bryan's true test hasn't come yet. It'll come once this storyline is over" comment. What a shock. You went back on your Punk/Lesnar "selling point" comment, you might as well go back on this, too.

Say what you want about Bryan (you know, the most popular guy in the company right now), but he's not the only guy thus far who can't draw with Brock fuckin' Lesnar.


----------



## KO Bossy

And I see my words of wisdom fell on deaf ears, as people are still fighting.

Fine, whatever.


----------



## CALΔMITY

KO Bossy said:


> And I see my words of wisdom fell on deaf ears, as people are still fighting.
> 
> Fine, whatever.


I'd call this more of a debate than a fight. :ex:


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

KO Bossy said:


> He was on the PPV in a position of high prominence. He deserves blame, just as anyone else on the PPV does. Bottom line is that his presence failed to draw, despite his popularity with the audience. That goes for everyone, including Punk. Its not one person's fault.


Brock Lesnar:A special attraction and he wrestles once a year.

John Cena:WWE's biggest star 

CM Punk:WWE's second biggest star

Daniel Bryan:Involved in his first high profile match and had never main-evented a PPV before.



There's no absolutely no logic to blame Daniel Bryan in this case.If Brock Lesnar,John Cena and CM Punk themselves didn't draw huge numbers,how fair is to blame Daniel Bryan(who has done absolutely nothing credible till then)?


----------



## KO Bossy

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Brock Lesnar:A special attraction and he wrestles once a year.
> 
> John Cena:WWE's biggest star
> 
> CM Punk:WWE's second biggest star
> 
> Daniel Bryan:Involved in his first high profile match and had never main-evented a PPV before.
> 
> 
> 
> There's no absolutely no logic to blame Daniel Bryan in this case.If Brock Lesnar,John Cena and CM Punk themselves didn't draw huge numbers,how fair is to blame Daniel Bryan(who has done absolutely nothing credible till then)?


Sure there is. Did they or did they not put him in a major role in one of the main events? Has he not been over consistently for over a year? Did he not main event the PPV the month before? Yes, to all counts. Thus, he takes blame. The fact of the matter is that, just like everyone else, he was expected to draw, which is why they put him in that position. He didn't, so he bears some of the responsibility. EVERYONE on the roster does because they were all put onto the card for that one reason-to draw. They didn't, so everyone has at least SOME fault. To what degree is another story, but nobody's hands are clean, unless they flat out didn't appear on the show. Tyson Kidd has no fault, for example.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

KO Bossy said:


> My god, you guys are seriously like children. Why exactly do you care what the PPV buyrate was? Does that mean the show was bad? No, it was great. This entire concept of drawing is a completely erroneous factor people use to try and justify why they don't like someone. If X hates Punk, and the PPV does poorly, he'll blame Punk. Why? The fact that more people didn't buy, in that person's mind, is because of Punk, and so to them, that's their way of agreeing with him about not liking Punk, when really, that person is just reaching for reasons to try and convince others to give in to his opinion. In other words, he's manipulating information to justify his particular dislike for a wrestler and force others to also not like him. This same formula goes for any wrestler that has people who don't like them.
> 
> Bottom line is that its a number. A stupid fucking number that has no bearing on any of you. Yet you still fight about it. If you like the show, great. That should be enough. If someone doesn't agree with you, ignore them or silently hold disdain for them. Or maybe, just concede the fact that others have a different opinion. Don't just sling mud back and forth to try and prove your hidden agenda. Its so petty, and ultimately, shallow.


It's a forum.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Ever since the SS numbers have come out today, you have done a complete 180 on which match was the "selling point." Pretty ballsy to mention anyone else's bias when you just got completely and utterly :buried by Dunmer.
> 
> Unlike you, I can say that Bryan deserves blame. If someone wants to blame him the most (like you), go for it. Even though, these past few weeks you've been arguing Bryan is NOT an established star yet, and that his first "true test" won't come until his NEXT storyline. So, in that case, why blame the one guy out of the four who isn't an established star? And yes, he deserves blame, but I'm just using your logic and recent arguments.
> 
> Hm.


You have massacred that man, Dumner as well.


----------



## markedfordeath

on the October 7th Raw, if they have Bryan still open and close the show, then the Summerslam numbers aren't a big deal to them.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I'm calling this fight. ShowStopper'97 wins via ref stoppage. Stay tuned for the rematch next month when the NOC numbers are released.


----------



## markedfordeath

the argument is moot...how about this? maybe nobody nowadays can afford a big time ppv....ever think of that? maybe it wasn't the lack of interest or that it was a bad show, just that no one wanted to shell out the money..I almost didnt, it was a lot.


----------



## joeycalz

This is exactly how I feel, every week.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

KO Bossy said:


> Did they or did they not put him in a major role in one of the main events? .



Was R-Truth expected to draw for Capitol Punishment 2011 just because he faced Cena for the WWE championship?Absolutely not.It was the first time he was main-eventing a PPV.





KO Bossy said:


> Has he not been over consistently for over a year?


Daniel Bryan wasn't involved with any top storyline or any top WWE star.He was involved with perennial jobber,Kane.Bryan was a Tag Team Champion and that means nothing in WWE nowadays

I ll agree that Daniel Bryan was extremely popular with the fans.But he was an unproven draw.B



KO Bossy said:


> Did he not main event the PPV the month before? .


Main-event a PPV?Bryan was one of the six participants in the MITB match.




KO Bossy said:


> fact of the matter is that, just like everyone else, he was expected to draw, which is why they put him in that position.


Absolutely not.Brock Lesnar was expected to draw because he is a special attraction and wrestles once a year.John Cena is expected to draw considering he is WWE's top star since 2006.CM Punk is expected to draw because he has been their number 2 star for the past two years.If Summerslam 2013 doesn't get enough buys,the blame should fall on those three


----------



## Happenstan

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Well it's not like the addition of Brock helped out the Wrestlemania number this year. It's all about promotion. And Bryan/Cena was promoted as the main selling point of Summerslam. That's where a huge chunk of the blame will obviously lie. The match that got top billing at this year's 'Mania was a rematch, which was probably the reason in the 'Mania drop in buys.


That's funny but I seem to remember the final RAW before the PPV end by having Punk smash a camera over Lesnar's head. I could just as easily make an argument that seeing the beast downed so easily caused mass cancellations of PPV buys and this is all Punk's fault now. I won't because I have 0 proof of this just like you Bryan haters have no proof that Punk main eventing would have made a damned bit of difference.

While the *prelim* numbers aren't great WWE has known about them for a while and yet Bryan still main events every RAW and Smackdown while Punk is mid carding it. And oh guess who's in most if not all of the highest rated segments on both RAW and Smackdown each week....Bryan. Case closed.




Jof said:


> No one knew Cena/bryan was going to main event until Brock/Punk promo aired before their actual match. Read the Summerslam discussion thread if you don't believe me. Punk/Brock also closed the Go-home show. Punk vs Brock got the most hype.
> 
> *Best vs Beast*. You have that in your sig itself and still trying to put the blame on Bryan? Bryan was the untested, unestablished guy heading in, Punk was the bigger star(which is also something you have argued about 100 times) facing every part timer the entire year. Heck that's the reason they put him against Brock. And he failed to deliver, as usual.


Exactly.




#Mark said:


> The last image you saw on the go home RAW was Punk brawling with Brock. That feud had the show closing angle heading into the PPV so saying it wasn't promoted heavily is a lie.
> 
> If Mania 18 bombed would people be blaming Jericho/Hunter for the buyrate or Rock/Hogan?


Just quoting those truth bombs.




KO Bossy said:


> *Punk* and Bryan fall into a lower category, since they *aren't as big draws*, but were still put in positions of prominence.


That's my line. I thought Punk was supposed to be the biggest draw since the Crucifixion.


----------



## markedfordeath

well said, well said..and just a note, Steve Austin, you know of the Stone Cold persuasion, yeah that Steve Austin, had horrible ppv buy rates when he first became popular.....then out of nowhere the chase for the title made him a star....so yes, no wrestler becomes a huge draw their first pay per view main event, you need to build yourself...


----------



## Happenstan

KO Bossy said:


> And I see my words of wisdom fell on deaf ears, as people are still fighting.
> 
> Fine, whatever.


So let them fight next time. We don't need a Forum Daddy thanks very much. Besides this is entertaining. I haven't seen someone take a beating like this since Starbuck stole mblonde's lunch money.


----------



## #Mark

What's this nonsense that Bryan was main eventing before his match against Cena? He was the Shield's personal jobber up until July.


----------



## markedfordeath

i think maybe some of it had to do with the fact that some parents didn't want to tune in to see a guy get "bullied" you know how everyone has been complaining of Bryan being bullied...welll Vince calling him "troll" and a "hobbit" pre Summerslam didn't help....he should have had him look strong for the build to face Cena. Just like the 7 straight beatdowns leading up to Night of Champions didn't help either....


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

markedfordeath said:


> i think maybe some of it had to do with the fact that some parents didn't want to tune in to see a guy get "bullied" you know how everyone has been complaining of Bryan being bullied...welll Vince calling him "troll" and a "hobbit" pre Summerslam didn't help....*he should have had him look strong for the build to face Cena.* Just like the 7 straight beatdowns leading up to Night of Champions didn't help either....


*I was happy that Cena wasn't the "underdog" in that match*.The more WWE openly express their displeasure about Bryan,the more popular he is going to become.


----------



## markedfordeath

yeah i'm just saying it probably turned people off..if that is the ROH version of Bryan going against Cena people would have been more interested...but since Summerslam they've come a long way.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Seeing that the Mayweather/Canelo fight had 2.2 million buys and aired the day before NOC, it is reasonable to assume that it had to have some adverse effect on the wrestling buyrate, assuming there is any crossover audience at all.


----------



## MaybeLock

And still can't understand how marks love to blame a certain superstar for the buyrates and the ratings. It´s all creative fault, you like or not. Was Kevin Nash fault to get the lowest ratings in history as champion? NO, it´s the fault of the idiot who gave him the title for a year. 

Analyzing Summerslam, it is obvious that you can´t blame the main events, because they were perfect, the problem with the show was the midcard, which the creatives didn't give a shit about. When you pay 50 bucks for a PPV you pay for 3 hours of wrestling, not only for the main event, and there is no doubt that while the Main Event was worth it, the midcard was not.

But well, I guess people will keep using ratings and shit to justify their favourite guys (it is always very easy to look at the numbers subjectively and award my favourite the big numbers while blaming the ones I hate for the bad numbers).


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Wait a fucking second, I remember when it was the week before Summerslam ALL of you Punk Marks were saying that Punk/Brock was the only reason people were going to watch the show, and now that the PPV number is mediocre, it's Bryan's fault? Blatant hypocrisy.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I think we need a new thread.


----------



## JY57

why are people even mentioning how well Night of Champions will do or not do? It hasn't been good since 2008 (273,000 buys) & 2009 (267,000 buys) when they were the PPV was in June/July. The last 3 years have been awful and Orton/Bryan won't change that.


----------



## Starbuck

I knew this thread would turn into a gold mine when more people saw the news. Brilliant last few pages and Wrestlinfan35 got absolutely demolished at the hands of Dunmer. He got you good there, 35. Got you big time. :lol

Round 2.................GO!


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Lol, only angry depressed fat virgin shut in nerds who will die alone & unloved such as myself give a damn about Tylenol PM Junk.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Happenstan said:


> That's funny but I seem to remember the final RAW before the PPV end by having Punk smash a camera over Lesnar's head. I could just as easily make an argument that seeing the beast downed so easily caused mass cancellations of PPV buys and this is all Punk's fault now. I won't because I have 0 proof of this just like you Bryan haters have no proof that Punk main eventing would have made a damned bit of difference.
> 
> While the *prelim* numbers aren't great WWE has known about them for a while and yet Bryan still main events every RAW and Smackdown while Punk is mid carding it. *And oh guess who's in most if not all of the highest rated segments on both RAW and Smackdown each week....Bryan. Case closed.*


No proof, other than him being the main focus of the show and the show turning out to do horrible numbers. lol, what more proof do you need? It's time to stop being so butthurt, pal.

I like how you act as if Punk taking a break from the main event picture is somehow a shot at me. :lol Oh wait, Punk can't be the main event all of the time? What tragic news! Also @bold, Funny that you say that. Since Punk was main eventing the shows this time last year and also pulling in the highest rated segments. Pulling in a 1.2m gain with Vince, too, without a huge angle like this. But I bet you won't comment on that because you're ignorant, completely biased and pretty brainless, as your posts show.


----------



## Cliffy

Slowhand said:


> If one guy deserved the blame, it's the top star and that's Cena. However, numbers are bullshit. Live streaming is the reason ppvs don't do shit most times.


Nah it's still a minor factor for the most part. The Floyd fight did just over 2 million buys. The buys are roughly the same now as they were for WWE in the mid nineties. The attitude era has warped people's perspectives on the business when it comes to numbers and non-boom period popularity.

As for the argument in here, people need to calm down. The buyrate was poor because of bad booking it's as simple as that. Nobody cared about the Heyman love triangle and the build for the title match was having the 2 babyfaces suck each others dicks. Was that how WM 17 was sold ?, LOLNO.


----------



## CALΔMITY

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> Lol, only angry depressed fat virgin shut in nerds who will die alone & unloved such as myself give a damn about Tylenol PM Junk.


I don't mark for him too much, but I give a bit of a damn.  I guess that still bodes ill for me based off of that logic.


----------



## Osize10

That was the first ppv I've bought since Extreme Rules 2012...so I say the people that didn't buy it are idiots


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Calahart said:


> I don't mark for him too much, but I give a bit of a damn.  I guess that still bodes ill for me based off of that logic.


:sadpanda


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Dunmer said:


> Wrestlingfan35 before the numbers came out:
> 
> Wrestlingfan35 before the numbers came out:
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Wrestlinfan35 View Post
> Except what you don't understand is Punk/Lesnar is the selling point of this PPV. Bryan/Cena isn't even in the discussion.
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Wrestlinfan35 View Post
> lol, people actually thinking casuals care more about Cena vs. fucking Daniel Bryan over Punk/Lesnar. Get real. Punk/Lesnar is the main selling point of this show.
> 
> 
> 
> :ti


Lol, this thread is great.


----------



## KO Bossy

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Was R-Truth expected to draw for Capitol Punishment 2011 just because he faced Cena for the WWE championship?Absolutely not.It was the first time he was main-eventing a PPV.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel Bryan wasn't involved with any top storyline or any top WWE star.He was involved with perennial jobber,Kane.Bryan was a Tag Team Champion and that means nothing in WWE nowadays
> 
> I ll agree that Daniel Bryan was extremely popular with the fans.But he was an unproven draw.B
> 
> 
> 
> Main-event a PPV?Bryan was one of the six participants in the MITB match.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely not.Brock Lesnar was expected to draw because he is a special attraction and wrestles once a year.John Cena is expected to draw considering he is WWE's top star since 2006.CM Punk is expected to draw because he has been their number 2 star for the past two years.If Summerslam 2013 doesn't get enough buys,the blame should fall on those three


Sigh...

Look, its really simple. What is a wrestler's job, at its core? Two-fold answer-go out and wrestle is the first part. Second part is to get viewers. In other words, part of their job is to draw. That goes for every single person on the roster. Their job is to get people to watch them. 

I don't care if he's unproven, or if he's been badly booked or whatever. His job is still to get people to watch him. This number indicates that, considering the hype for the event, everyone on the show didn't do their job that well. EVERYONE. Not just the top 3 guys, every single person. 

There are DEGREES of blame that can go around, and yes, a larger chunk would fall on Punk, Cena and Brock for that. However, that doesn't magically absolve Bryan of guilt. He was booked as being in one of the two big stories for the show, if you're getting that much exposure and importance placed on you, you damn well are expected to pull in viewers to make that prominent position worthwhile. However, he didn't. No one did. Thus, they all did their jobs poorly and bear the burden of that.

Its absolutely ludicrous for you and anyone else to say that "well the blame should fall only on the top 3 guys for not being big ENOUGH draws." I'm sorry, but there were other people on this show. They were advertised as being featured as well. Where is it written that 3 guys SOLELY carry the company? Were that the case, they should be the only 3 on the roster, and the only 3 fighting. But they weren't. They had opponents, and those opponents are expected not necessarily to be of equal drawing power, but to at least contribute SOMETHING in terms of viewership. This final number indicates that nobody really did. They have expectations, and they weren't lived up to. EVERYBODY. Hence, they all take some blame.

I find it laughable for people to have the gall to point out that the top 3 guys should take all the fall for this bad number, but were the number reversed, would try to credit their favorite wrestlers disproportionately. In other words, if the PPV did well, I guarantee people would be crediting Bryan with helping pull in a big part of that number, trying to put him over in their minds. But now that the PPV did below expectations, they have the nerve to throw up shields trying to block Bryan from taking any of the backlash for that, and instead pin it on the failings of others. That's a bullshit double standard. "The PPV did well, obviously Bryan helped that number a lot because he's so popular and the idea of him challenging for the title is fresh and interesting." "Oh, the PPV did poorly, well its not Bryan's fault. He's not a proven draw and wasn't 100% the main focus, the blame clearly lies on Cena, Punk and Brock." Give me a break, what a load of crap.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KO Bossy said:


> Sigh...
> 
> Look, its really simple. What is a wrestler's job, at its core? Two-fold answer-go out and wrestle is the first part. Second part is to get viewers. In other words, part of their job is to draw. That goes for every single person on the roster. Their job is to get people to watch them.
> 
> I don't care if he's unproven, or if he's been badly booked or whatever. His job is still to get people to watch him. This number indicates that, considering the hype for the event, everyone on the show didn't do their job that well. EVERYONE. Not just the top 3 guys, every single person.
> 
> There are DEGREES of blame that can go around, and yes, a larger chunk would fall on Punk, Cena and Brock for that. However, that doesn't magically absolve Bryan of guilt. He was booked as being in one of the two big stories for the show, if you're getting that much exposure and importance placed on you, you damn well are expected to pull in viewers to make that prominent position worthwhile. However, he didn't. No one did. Thus, they all did their jobs poorly and bear the burden of that.
> 
> Its absolutely ludicrous for you and anyone else to say that "well the blame should fall only on the top 3 guys for not being big ENOUGH draws." I'm sorry, but there were other people on this show. They were advertised as being featured as well. Where is it written that 3 guys SOLELY carry the company? Were that the case, they should be the only 3 on the roster, and the only 3 fighting. But they weren't. They had opponents, and those opponents are expected not necessarily to be of equal drawing power, but to at least contribute SOMETHING in terms of viewership. This final number indicates that nobody really did. They have expectations, and they weren't lived up to. EVERYBODY. Hence, they all take some blame.
> 
> I find it laughable for people to have the gall to point out that the top 3 guys should take all the fall for this bad number, but were the number reversed,* would try to credit their favorite wrestlers disproportionately. In other words, if the PPV did well, I guarantee people would be crediting Bryan with helping pull in a big part of that number, trying to put him over in their minds. But now that the PPV did below expectations, they have the nerve to throw up shields trying to block Bryan from taking any of the backlash for that, and instead pin it on the failings of others.* That's a bullshit double standard. "The PPV did well, obviously Bryan helped that number a lot because he's so popular and the idea of him challenging for the title is fresh and interesting." "Oh, the PPV did poorly, well its not Bryan's fault. He's not a proven draw and wasn't 100% the main focus, the blame clearly lies on Cena, Punk and Brock." Give me a break, what a load of crap.


And on the flipside, if the PPV did really well, people would have continued with their assertions that they made pre-SummerSlam that Brock/Punk was the biggest match on the card.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

ShowStopper '97 said:


> And on the flipside, if the PPV did really well, people would have continued with their assertions that they made pre-SummerSlam that Brock/Punk was the biggest match on the card.


Exactly. People were calling it a dream match.:banderas

I never gave the slightest fuck about the match after the build( which I thought was complete shit), so even Brock couldn't get me to order.


----------



## Choke2Death

ShowStopper '97 said:


> And on the flipside, if the PPV did really well, people would have continued with their assertions that they made pre-SummerSlam that Brock/Punk was the biggest match on the card.


True. I can already picture Punkfan35 running around bragging about how Brock/Punk sold the PPV while giving most of the credit to Punk and if anyone would point to Cena/Bryan, they'd get the generic "LULZ, you think Daniel fucking Bryan drew the numbers? CM PUNK IS A DRAW!!!!!!" response.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Choke2Death said:


> True. I can already picture Punkfan35 running around bragging about how Brock/Punk sold the PPV while giving most of the credit to Punk and if anyone would point to Cena/Bryan, they'd get the generic "LULZ, you think Daniel fucking Bryan drew the numbers? CM PUNK IS A DRAW!!!!!!" response.


:lmao And so what, that suddenly that makes every Bryan mark doing the same thing if the numbers turned out well justified? The funniest part to me is that so many people in this thread will call others out on being hypocritical when they're just as bad. And while their boy Bryan could only pop the worst number since 97, I'm just sitting here enjoying all of their insane butthurt. It's really more than I ever could have expected.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> :lmao And so what, that suddenly that makes every Bryan mark doing the same thing if the numbers turned out well justified? The funniest part to me is that so many people in this thread will call others out on being hypocritical when they're just as bad. And while their boy Bryan could only pop the worst number since 97, I'm just sitting here enjoying all of their insane butthurt. It's really more than I ever could have expected.


Kind of hard for Bryan to pop a number when "Brock/Punk is the clear selling point of this PPV."

CM Punk, the only guy in WWE who can't pop a good buyrate when working with BROCK LESNAR.

:lmao


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I'd love to know how many times you've made that comment.

:lmao The Bryan mark butthurt lives, and it's still just as funny.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Yep, you are right about that (congrats on that, btw). But the reason I've said it is the best of all.

BECAUSE IT'S HILARIOUS :lmao


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I'd love to know how many times you've made that comment.
> 
> :lmao The Bryan mark butthurt lives, and it's still just as funny.



You've been trapped in a prison of your own words, and all the little rolling happy faces cant help you escape. Advantage: ShowStopper.


----------



## KO Bossy

ShowStopper '97 said:


> And on the flipside, if the PPV did really well, people would have continued with their assertions that they made pre-SummerSlam that Brock/Punk was the biggest match on the card.


Yeah, probably. And that would be wrong. We'll never know who each person who bought the PPV bought it to actually see. 

See, my problem with this whole things is this. Let's say the PPV did well and we did have opposing sides battling over whether Punk/Lesnar or Bryan/Cena was the bigger draw. Well, in the end, the PPV would have done a great number, so you can say they all deserve credit. However, the fact is that it didn't draw well. So the argument I see instead is that Punk, Cena and Lesnar deserve the blame...but not Bryan. Its this idea that a person can be guilt free in a negative outcome, yet one of the biggest contributors to a positive outcome that pisses me off. That goes for Bryan, Punk, whoever. Bryan DOES deserve blame. He was in a major role on this PPV and the numbers are down. Punk was in a major role, too, against Brock, and the numbers are still down. Hence, he deserves blame, as well. The fact of the matter is that anyone on the PPV deserves blame, but the biggest portion ends up going to the people who the show was prominently structured around. They were put in that big position to draw and they didn't. That includes BOTH Punk and Bryan.


----------



## Choke2Death

lol @ trying to justify your own hypocrisy by pointing the finger at others. FYI, I don't remember any Bryan marks confidently laughing off anyone who disagreed with them, saying "Bryan is selling this PPV, if it does well, it's all because of him!". And to be fair, he deserves the least of the blame out of the four guys since it was his first true main event program. No, I'm not saying he's free of any blame but Brock, Cena and... Punk, I guess, we've all come to expect better from since they have been put in the position to draw for a long time.

Also I'm the furthest thing from a "butthurt Bryan mark" since I'm far from a big fan of the guy. He's one of my favorites today but that doesn't mean much.


----------



## Brogue Kick

should have done Cena vs Triple H/Lesnar for the wwe championship

It's too bad all three wasted on the two vanilla midget losers. Now Cena. Triple H, and Lesnar look bad because of those two fucking failures.

Punk & Bryan will always be a joke


----------



## funnyfaces1

Damn. Sheamus is such an anti-draw that he doesn't even have a smiley here.


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> lol @ trying to justify your own hypocrisy by pointing the finger at others. FYI, I don't remember any Bryan marks confidently laughing off anyone who disagreed with them, saying "Bryan is selling this PPV, if it does well, it's all because of him!". And to be fair, he deserves the least of the blame out of the four guys since it was his first true main event program. No, I'm not saying he's free of any blame but Brock, Cena and... Punk, I guess, we've all come to expect better from since they have been put in the position to draw for a long time.
> 
> Also I'm the furthest thing from a "butthurt Bryan mark" since I'm far from a big fan of the guy. He's one of my favorites today but that doesn't mean much.


Well, there were people claiming Cena/Bryan is the most important match in the past 5 years or so, as well as the belief that it being Bryan's first PPV main event, it would have some novelty to it, but that's another issue.

However, you acknowledge that Bryan is deserving of at least some blame. That's all I've been trying to say. Its the people like austin3:16GOAT who say its not Bryan's fault at all that baffle me. He was on the show; thus, he gets some blame.


----------



## Oliver-94

CM Punk the lowest drawing champion since Diesel and the only wrestler to make Lesnar look like a weak draw. LOL

:cena3 unk3


----------



## Happenstan

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> No proof, other than him being the main focus of the show and the show turning out to do horrible numbers. lol, what more proof do you need? It's time to stop being so butthurt, pal.
> 
> I like how you act as if Punk taking a break from the main event picture is somehow a shot at me. :lol Oh wait, Punk can't be the main event all of the time? What tragic news! Also @bold, Funny that you say that. Since Punk was main eventing the shows this time last year and also pulling in the highest rated segments. Pulling in a 1.2m gain with Vince, too, without a huge angle like this. But I bet you won't comment on that because you're ignorant, completely biased and pretty brainless, as your posts show.


Did we hurt the baby's feelings? And seriously what is with using the word butthurt in every single post? Did the baby learn a new word today. It's so sad watching you defecate all over yourself yet again.

BTW Punk was not drawing high ratings. He was drawing mediocre ratings which is why they turned him heel sooner than planned for his Rock feud.




Oliver-94 said:


> CM Punk the lowest drawing champion since Diesel and the only wrestler to make Lesnar look like a weak draw. LOL
> 
> :cena3 unk3


"CM Punk a ratings failure last year...that's unpossible. You're butthurt."


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

BITW: Butthurt is the Word.


----------



## Sonnen Says

People act like Lesnar was drawing monster numbers this year. He didn't add anything to WM (lower buys than last year) and he didn't add to ER as well. So it's not like Brock was breaking records this year and Punk all of a sudden ended it. Punk credibility was destroyed before the match was even announced, people knew he will lose because there is no way after losing to Rock twice, Cena, and Taker he will beat him. Brock credibility was destroyed by WWE in the way they handled him. In the end it doesn't and shouldn't change the quality of the match or the feud overall. Since people wanna shit on Punk because of numbers they should relate to the quality more likely. WWE, Bryan, Cena, Punk, and Brock all should have the blame. By the way it wasn't a perfect card there was only two anticipated matches, the rest of the card felt like a filler and were announced very shortly before the PPV.



Oliver-94 said:


> CM Punk the lowest drawing champion since Diesel and the only wrestler to make Lesnar look like a weak draw. LOL
> 
> :cena3 unk3


Cm Punk should get credit for every bad number because that's a great logic.


----------



## markedfordeath

FYI, last week's Raw did almost a 3.0 and 4 million viewers without Cena or CM Punk..just saying!!


----------



## #Mark

The buyrate shouldn't solely rest on Punk's shoulders though. Compare the undercard of this years Summerslam to last years. Last year had Jericho, a white hot Bryan, Mysterio, and Sheamus all in midcard matches. This year had no undercard matches with any intrigue besides maybe the Wyatt match.


----------



## Londrick

I don't see the point in trying to blame anyone on the low buys. It was a great card and w/o Punk vs Brock and Bryan vs Cena I can't see it doing better unless perhaps they had Brock vs Cena for the title or Taker making an appearance. Just imagine how much worse it would be if it was Cena vs someone line Ryback and Punk and GOAT involved in much less important matches.

j/k

First PPV in a long time with Orton in a title match and the PPV bombs. rton2


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

KO Bossy said:


> However, you acknowledge that Bryan is deserving of at least some blame. That's all I've been trying to say. *Its the people like austin3:16GOAT who say its not Bryan's fault at all that baffle me. He was on the show; thus, he gets some blame.*


I still say Cena,Brock and Punk deserve to blamed the most if Summerslam 2013 doesn't do well._I don't agree that someone who is involved in his first high profile feud to take the blame._

Survivor Series 1996 numbers dropped a lot compared to what it did two years before.I don't blame Stone Cold who was just an upcoming star.I blame Bret Hart,Shawn Michaels and Sid for that.


----------



## markedfordeath

if you look at their financial report...business has been downhill since 2012. Nobody can afford their pay per views as much anymore unless its something like Wrestlemania which is a month long show almost. Even sometimes the live events are expensive to go to....But ratings of Raw and Smackdown have been stronger than they have been in years due to this angle and the people are still buying merchandise...Live events and merchandise sales the report said was carrying their business right now...No one buys the pay per views anymore compared to years previous, times have changed and they're too expensive....its hard to buy a tee shirt, wristbands and all the other merchandise and pay to see an event in person and have enough squared away for a pay per view....so I doubt they're making a big deal about it because they already knew it would do badly because they lowered their expectations for this year finance wise. Wrestlemania next year will be very profitable and then things will get better.


----------



## LovelyElle890

funnyfaces1 said:


> Damn. Sheamus is such an anti-draw that he doesn't even have a smiley here.


Being an anti-draw is great though. At least you don't have to worry about your marks defending every minute of your segment, while swearing up and down that you weren't responsible for that 500k loss in the quarter.

God. I miss Sheamus.
:angel


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Happenstan said:


> Did we hurt the baby's feelings? And seriously what is with using the word butthurt in every single post? Did the baby learn a new word today. It's so sad watching you defecate all over yourself yet again.
> 
> BTW Punk was not drawing high ratings. He was drawing mediocre ratings which is why they turned him heel sooner than planned for his Rock feud.


Oh man, this is rich coming from you. The best part about you is that you throw around these childish insults at punk supporters, when you do the same thing you're insulting them for with your boy toy Bryan. And it seems like you don't even realize you do it, because you're too busy thinking you're above everybody. :lol Practice what you preach there, son. And butthurt is just the best way to describe you. Sounding like a teenager will make you look butthurt. Unless that's the only way you know how to respond to people, in which case I feel a bit bad for you.


----------



## GillbergReturns

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> I still say Cena,Brock and Punk deserve to blamed the most if Summerslam 2013 doesn't do well._I don't agree that someone who is involved in his first high profile feud to take the blame._
> 
> Survivor Series 1996 numbers dropped a lot compared to what it did two years before.I don't blame Stone Cold who was just an upcoming star.I blame Bret Hart,Shawn Michaels and Sid for that.


Agreed. If you're going to give anyone a pass it's Daniel Bryan. It's way too early in his push to expect him to be able to draw.

I hate to say it but I think Punk is the big loser here. Great build, a match everyone knew would deliver from the start, 2 years of non stop pushing and he can't deliver against Brock Lesnar. They could have got 298 with Miz going up against Lesnar. Complete waste of a Lesnar appearance. Not all Punk's fault you can't move someone from face to heel pending the matchup and on a drop of dime and expect him to draw but still this PPV was really catering to the smarks and it drew like sh** which really is no surprise.


----------



## TrentBarretaFan

Why do people care so much about buyrates and ratings?
Would you prefer Summerslam with Sheamus vs Del Rio as ME with 400.000 buyrates or Summerslam with Punk vs Bryan as ME with 300.000 buyrates?
I think Summerslam 2013 was great and I enjoyed both Brock vs Punk and Cena vs Bryan so what's the problem? Buyrates don't change quality of the show and I don't understand why people care so much about them...


----------



## Chan Hung

TrentBarretaFan said:


> Why do people care so much about buyrates and ratings?
> Would you prefer Summerslam with Sheamus vs Del Rio as ME with 400.000 buyrates or Summerslam with Punk vs Bryan as ME with 300.000 buyrates?
> I think Summerslam 2013 was great and I enjoyed both Brock vs Punk and Cena vs Bryan so what's the problem? Buyrates don't change quality of the show and I don't understand why people care so much about them...


Buyrates? Because in the end..it's what's best for business :HHH2


----------



## GillbergReturns

TrentBarretaFan said:


> Why do people care so much about buyrates and ratings?
> Would you prefer Summerslam with Sheamus vs Del Rio as ME with 400.000 buyrates or Summerslam with Punk vs Bryan as ME with 300.000 buyrates?
> I think Summerslam 2013 was great and I enjoyed both Brock vs Punk and Cena vs Bryan so what's the problem? Buyrates don't change quality of the show and I don't understand why people care so much about them...


Entertainment is subjective. Some people need to get over their own opinions. If WWE attracted a new Mexican fanbase that got behind Del Rio yeah I'd take one for the team and enjoy his work even if I didn't find him to be that entertaining.

PPVs don't draw unless someone is being entertained.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

TrentBarretaFan said:


> Why do people care so much about buyrates and ratings?
> Would you prefer Summerslam with Sheamus vs Del Rio as ME with 400.000 buyrates or Summerslam with Punk vs Bryan as ME with 300.000 buyrates?
> I think Summerslam 2013 was great and I enjoyed both Brock vs Punk and Cena vs Bryan so what's the problem? Buyrates don't change quality of the show and I don't understand why people care so much about them...


Personally, I would prefer Summerslam 2013 with the two great matches. Pretty sure, WWE would prefer the 100,000 extra buys from the boring twins. It is ultimately about making money in this business, not currying critical favor from the fans.


----------



## Starbuck

I actually love this thread. 

:lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Haven't been in here in a bit, haven't seen gains and losses in a while.

unk7


----------



## Starbuck

People are too busy fighting about the Summerslam buys to care about da ratingz, Swag.


----------



## VGooBUG

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> I still say Cena,Brock and Punk deserve to blamed the most if Summerslam 2013 doesn't do well._I don't agree that someone who is involved in his first high profile feud to take the blame._
> 
> Survivor Series 1996 numbers dropped a lot compared to what it did two years before.I don't blame Stone Cold who was just an upcoming star.I blame Bret Hart,Shawn Michaels and Sid for that.


when austin won his first championship while a top face(just like bryan), he broke records with Wrestlemania 14. Yes i can blame daniel bryan


----------



## LovelyElle890

TrentBarretaFan said:


> Why do people care so much about buyrates and ratings?
> Would you prefer Summerslam with Sheamus vs Del Rio as ME with 400.000 buyrates or Summerslam with Punk vs Bryan as ME with 300.000 buyrates?
> I think Summerslam 2013 was great and I enjoyed both Brock vs Punk and Cena vs Bryan so what's the problem? Buyrates don't change quality of the show and I don't understand why people care so much about them...


Well, you are assuming that Del Rio and Sheamus can't put on a classic and that Punk and Bryan are guaranteed to put on one. If Del Rio/Sheamus ends up being better than Punk/Bryan, then I want Del Rio/Sheamus. I don't care. I just want to see good matches. Plus, Del Rio/Sheamus could have a strong undercard and Bryan/Punk could have a terrible one. Main events don't sell me on PPVs. The days of me paying 60 dollars for one match are over.

Also, if the supposed "anti-draws" Del Rio and Sheamus get more buys than a Punk/Bryan headlined PPV, then this thread would be a hilarious bloodbath.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Starbuck said:


> People are too busy fighting about the Summerslam buys to care about da ratingz, Swag.


Thought that debate was taking place in the thread that reported it. lol


----------



## FreakyZo

Lol at all the losers in this thread getting worked uped because wrestling isn't as hot as it used to be and blaming the wrestlers of today as if they have the exact same opportunities to get over on that level guys back in the day used to get. The wrestlers were given more to work with and had waaayyy more freedom, better promotion,and better storylines back in the day which is why they're ledgends today. A wrestler can't be bigger than the WWE in today's day in age because Vince won't allow it so everyone is held down to where they won't seem as special but, I personally see some guys who are just as good if not better than nostalgia. So the only people to blame for ratings are noone but the man himself. Stop being such virgins guys,its pathetic getting mad at wrestlers for not "drawing". Like seriously if this makes you upset then you are a loser, sorry.


----------



## GillbergReturns

VGooBUG said:


> when austin won his first championship while a top face(just like bryan), he broke records with Wrestlemania 14. Yes i can blame daniel bryan


WrestleMania, Mike Tyson


----------



## #Mark

GillbergReturns said:


> Entertainment is subjective. Some people need to get over their own opinions. If WWE attracted a new Mexican fanbase that got behind Del Rio yeah I'd take one for the team and enjoy his work even if I didn't find him to be that entertaining.
> 
> PPVs don't draw unless someone is being entertained.


So you value the entertainment of others more than your own entertainment?


----------



## Rick Sanchez

It's funny, I don't know anyone who ever bought a wrestling ppv to see Trump or some other celebrity. Almost seems stupid. Tyson maybe but what do people think, spending that much money to see most of these celebrities for like, ten minutes maybe in the whole show? Trump apparently helped WM 23 but he barely did anything. Who spends 75 bucks to see that? The celebrity draw has always made me laugh.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

swagger_ROCKS said:


> Thought that debate was taking place in the thread that reported it. lol


Why have only one thread devoted to it when you can have two?



> It's funny, I don't know anyone who ever bought a wrestling ppv to see Trump or some other celebrity. Almost seems stupid. Tyson maybe but what do people think, spending that much money to see most of these celebrities for like, ten minutes maybe in the whole show? Trump apparently helped WM 23 but he barely did anything. Who spends 75 bucks to see that? The celebrity draw has always made me laugh.


This is something I've always been curious about as well, especially in the Trump situation. I can't imagine all those extra buys coming in just to see Trump... then again maybe they did for the idea of seeing him bald, which casuals/non-watchers may have bought into. 

Of course for a case like, Mayweather at WM24, he had a match and if people would maybe... whatever it was for the boxing match (I thought I saw $60... but don't quote me on that) from last weekend, I could see all those Mayweather fans/haters buying strictly for his match at that event.


----------



## markedfordeath

every pay per view other than Wrestlemania this year made absolutely no profit...maybe starting next year they can just have the Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam and Survivor Series. Just keep the four. No one buys pay per views except on special occassions any way..Their financial report earlier this year said that live events and merchandise is what is carrying the company right now any way....their pay per view revenue is down....times have changed.


----------



## Vyer

I'm a little surprised. I thought WWE put a lot of effort into the build-up to grab people's attention. The matchs were good. Cena, Brock, and Triple H was on the card too. I don't know, maybe people were watching Breaking Bad.....


----------



## JY57

markedfordeath said:


> every pay per view other than Wrestlemania this year made absolutely no profit...maybe starting next year they can just have the Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam and Survivor Series. Just keep the four. No one buys pay per views except on special occassions any way..Their financial report earlier this year said that live events and merchandise is what is carrying the company right now any way....their pay per view revenue is down....times have changed.


Royal Rumble actually did great and WWE got good profit from it from what I gather


----------



## markedfordeath

okay, that's two pay per views that did well...all the others aren't, and they're losing money because they're so close together that its tough to choose which one you want because you know you can't have all of them...they really don't do pay per views well based upon scheduling and other factors.....only the big four make them money any way. And I guarantee after the Rumble this year, people wanted their money back after Cena won.


----------



## THANOS

VGooBUG said:


> when austin won his first championship while a top face(just like bryan), he broke records with Wrestlemania 14. Yes i can blame daniel bryan


You do know that Stone Cold's massive push began a year BEFORE he won that title right? It began the night he passed out in the Sharpshooter to Bret Hart. Bryan's big push came out of nowhere and he's just facing his first big storyline stable now. Stone Cold had to get through the Hart foundation stable before winning the title at the following Mania from HBK, then facing ANOTHER stable, The Corporation post Mania. He went through BOTH stables dominantly. He did not begin drawing until after he beat HBK, exactly one year after his massive push as the top face initially began.


----------



## Happenstan

THANOS said:


> You do know that Stone Cold's massive push began a year BEFORE he won that title right? It began the night he passed out in the Sharpshooter to Bret Hart. Bryan's big push came out of nowhere and he's just facing his first big storyline stable now. Stone Cold had to get through the Hart foundation stable before winning the title at the following Mania from HBK, then facing ANOTHER stable, The Corporation post Mania. He went through BOTH stables dominantly. He did not begin drawing until after he beat HBK, exactly one year after his massive push as the top face initially began.


Nothing but love for ya but you're wasting your time. Half these goobers who quote WWE history probably weren't even around to know what they are talking about. Case in point, the GooBug. Spouting off past events when he has no clue what he's talking about.


----------



## KO Bossy

THANOS said:


> You do know that Stone Cold's massive push began a year BEFORE he won that title right? It began the night he passed out in the Sharpshooter to Bret Hart. Bryan's big push came out of nowhere and he's just facing his first big storyline stable now. Stone Cold had to get through the Hart foundation stable before winning the title at the following Mania from HBK, then facing ANOTHER stable, The Corporation post Mania. He went through BOTH stables dominantly. He did not begin drawing until after he beat HBK, exactly one year after his massive push as the top face initially began.


You know I mean no offense, but some of these facts are not entirely correct.

1. Despite Austin's push against, he didn't exactly steamroll through the Hart Foundation. Bret beat him at Survivor Series, Bret beat him at WM13, etc. Owen pinned Austin at Canadian Stampede. The only time Bret ever lost to Austin is at IYH: Revenge of the Taker, and that was by DQ, so Austin didn't pin him. The only times Austin really got one over on any of the Harts were at the 1997 Rumble when he cheated to eliminate Bret, and when he beat Owen at Summerslam and Survivor Series 1997. However, its hard to call the Summerslam win a victory since he broke his neck and it went right back to Owen after a tournament. Survivor Series was basically a quick redo to get the proper outcome. So, I wouldn't call that dominating the Harts.

2. The Corporation itself didn't come into being until late 1998. To be completely accurate, it was the night after Survivor Series 1998 when Rock became champion that they officially brought it into being. Prior to that, it wasn't a stable. Vince worked with Patterson, Brisco and Slaughter to try and fuck him over from a position of higher authority, but there were no actual wrestlers in the stable-it was all authority figures. Yeah, Austin did go through them, but that was to be expected since...well, they weren't wrestlers at the time. Think of it as a non-official group of referees. The only one on Austin's level was Dude Love, who worked with them, but after failing to get the job done twice, he went back to being Mankind.

3. After the WM13 double turn, Austin didn't automatically become a face. He was a tweener who was on his way to becoming a face, but still acted like and was considered a heel in some regards. It wasn't until his feud with Bret became the feud with the Hart Foundation that the wheels toward he face turn started rolling at a quick pace. That feud turned Austin into a star, and the initial turn was at WM13, but it wasn't like that match suddenly made him the top face. It took time. On top of that, Taker was a face at the time, and the champion, and he was arguably more over than Austin around Spring of 1997. Then you had Shawn come back around the end of May/early June 1997 as well, and despite him being a mega heel in Canada, he was still a huge face in the US, and IMO the face of the company at that point. Austin only really started taking over as the top face in the fall of 1997, after he returned and won the IC title from Owen at Survivor Series. That's because at that point, he had a ton of momentum behind him and was ready to assume that role. Right after WM13, he wasn't quite there yet. It took the Hart Foundation feud to make that happen. My point is that he didn't get this MASSIVE push as the top face for a year. He was getting a push, and was on his way to becoming the top face, yes, but that really started later in the summer. Look at his PPV record, he lost against Taker at IYH: A Cold day in Hell, fought Shawn to a double DQ at KOTR, lost at Canadian Stampede, then vacated the IC title right after he won at Summerslam. The real superstar, dominant, top face push really began at Survivor Series. Let's compare: he won the IC title at Survivor Series, beat the Rock AND the entire Nation of Domination at D-Generation X: IYH, gave up the IC title on his own to tell Vince to fuck off, won the Rumble very strongly, won the unsanctioned 8 man tag at No Way Out then beat Shawn at WM14. The way I look at it, the Bret feud got Austin noticed, the Hart Foundation feud built him up to be a top guy/face, and at Survivor Series when he returned, that's when they kicked it into high gear and made him THE guy. He got a good push coming out of WM13, but the massive, star making push started at Survivor Series. So it was really more like 4-5 months of the giant push, not a year.


----------



## Happenstan

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Oh man, this is rich coming from you. The best part about you is that you throw around these childish insults at punk supporters, when you do the same thing you're insulting them for with your boy toy Bryan. And it seems like you don't even realize you do it, because you're too busy thinking you're above everybody. :lol Practice what you preach there, son. And butthurt is just the best way to describe you. Sounding like a teenager will make you look butthurt. Unless that's the only way you know how to respond to people, in which case I feel a bit bad for you.


What insults? I call some of them Punktards. Retarded Punk fans....case in point, your silly ass. And still with the butthurt? You do know it is 2013, right?


----------



## Happenstan

KO Bossy said:


> Despite Austin's push against, he didn't exactly steamroll through the Hart Foundation. Bret beat him at Survivor Series, Bret beat him at WM13, etc. Owen pinned Austin at Canadian Stampede. The only time Bret ever lost to Austin is at IYH: Revenge of the Taker, and that was by DQ, so Austin didn't pin him. The only times Austin really got one over on any of the Harts were at the 1997 Rumble when he cheated to eliminate Bret, and when he beat Owen at Summerslam and Survivor Series 1997. However, its hard to call the Summerslam win a victory since he broke his neck and it went right back to Owen after a tournament. Survivor Series was basically a quick redo to get the proper outcome. So, I wouldn't call that dominating the Harts.



Did SCSA dominate the Harts, no but since when did not winning = not being pushed? Especially during the AE.


----------



## KO Bossy

Oh yeah, I almost forgot I wanted to draw comparisons.

Bryan's big push started...well, let's see. Probably around May when he was main eventing Raw pretty regularly, or at least put in high prominence matches with the Shield or Orton. He also started winning a lot more and stopped losing regularly. At Payback, he went on second from the top. He was in the main event of MiTB. And he main evented Summerslam and won. So he'd been getting...I dunno, 3-4 months of real star making booking by the time Summerslam rolled around. Now he's the top face, obviously.

Though I also wouldn't say his big push came out of nowhere. Right after he dropped the tag belts, he started getting a lot better booking and he's been over for a while. You make it sound like they closed their eyes and randomly pointed at someone to get a title shot at Summerslam, and it just happened to be Bryan. Not quite the case.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

KO Bossy said:


> Oh yeah, I almost forgot I wanted to draw comparisons.
> 
> Bryan's big push started...well, let's see. Probably around May when he was main eventing Raw pretty regularly, or at least put in high prominence matches with the Shield or Orton. He also started winning a lot more and stopped losing regularly. At Payback, he went on second from the top. He was in the main event of MiTB. And he main evented Summerslam and won in his *first ever WWE title match* (for comparison's sake, Austin didn't win the WWF title in his first shot at it). So he'd been getting...I dunno, 3-4 months of real star making booking by the time Summerslam rolled around. Now he's the top face, obviously.
> 
> Though I also wouldn't say his big push came out of nowhere. Right after he dropped the tag belts, he started getting a lot better booking and he's been over for a while. You make it sound like they closed their eyes and randomly pointed at someone to get a title shot at Summerslam, and it just happened to be Bryan. Not quite the case.


Actually, he had a few WWE Title matches with Punk in 2012, and lost all of them.


----------



## Choke2Death

Did you forget Bryan's three PPV matches with Punk from last year that were for the WWE Title?

EDIT: Beaten to it.


----------



## Happenstan

KO Bossy said:


> Oh yeah, I almost forgot I wanted to draw comparisons.
> 
> Bryan's big push started...well, let's see. Probably around May when he was main eventing Raw pretty regularly, or at least put in high prominence matches with the Shield or Orton.


Ok you're just wrong or trolling your ass off now. Hell No had been feuding with Shield for months before they split. And Bryan didn't start main eventing with Orton until late June/early July. And he main evented MITB? Sure with 5 other main eventer players.

RAW main events:
5/06/13 Ryback v. Kane
5/13/13 Lesnar/HHH Brawl; Real final match AJ Lee v. Natalya
5/20/13 Triple H v. Curtis Axel w/ Paul Heyman
5/27/13 John Cena v. Curtis Axel (Axel over Cena via CO)
6/03/2013 John Cena v. Curtis Axel No DQ
6/10/2013 Show ends with a Cena/Ryback promo; Real final match was Damien Sandow v. R-Truth 
6/17/2013 CM Punk def. Alberto Del Rio via CO (non-title)
*6/24/2013 Daniel Bryan v. Randy Orton Street Fight*
7/01/2013 John Cena vs. Alberto Del Rio
7/08/2013 Randy Orton v. CM Punk
7/15/2013 *Cena picks Bryan for Summerslam*; Real final match Rob Van Dam v. Chris Jericho

And as I've been told by numerous Punk fans about last year, if you don't consistently close the show you aren't the top guy.


----------



## Waffelz

Breakdown from last week out?


----------



## KO Bossy

Oh yeah, you're right. My bad, I for some reason completely forgot 2012. Though to be fair, I try to block out 2012 because it was such a shit year.

OK, scratch that part of what I said.


----------



## THANOS

KO Bossy said:


> You know I mean no offense, but some of these facts are not entirely correct.
> 
> 1. Despite Austin's push against, he didn't exactly steamroll through the Hart Foundation. Bret beat him at Survivor Series, Bret beat him at WM13, etc. Owen pinned Austin at Canadian Stampede. The only time Bret ever lost to Austin is at IYH: Revenge of the Taker, and that was by DQ, so Austin didn't pin him. The only times Austin really got one over on any of the Harts were at the 1997 Rumble when he cheated to eliminate Bret, and when he beat Owen at Summerslam and Survivor Series 1997. However, its hard to call the Summerslam win a victory since he broke his neck and it went right back to Owen after a tournament. Survivor Series was basically a quick redo to get the proper outcome. So, I wouldn't call that dominating the Harts.
> 
> 2. The Corporation itself didn't come into being until late 1998. To be completely accurate, it was the night after Survivor Series 1998 when Rock became champion that they officially brought it into being. Prior to that, it wasn't a stable. Vince worked with Patterson, Brisco and Slaughter to try and fuck him over from a position of higher authority, but there were no actual wrestlers in the stable-it was all authority figures. Yeah, Austin did go through them, but that was to be expected since...well, they weren't wrestlers at the time. Think of it as a non-official group of referees. The only one on Austin's level was Dude Love, who worked with them, but after failing to get the job done twice, he went back to being Mankind.
> 
> 3. After the WM13 double turn, Austin didn't automatically become a face. He was a tweener who was on his way to becoming a face, but still acted like and was considered a heel in some regards. It wasn't until his feud with Bret became the feud with the Hart Foundation that the wheels toward he face turn started rolling at a quick pace. That feud turned Austin into a star, and the initial turn was at WM13, but it wasn't like that match suddenly made him the top face. It took time. On top of that, Taker was a face at the time, and the champion, and he was arguably more over than Austin around Spring of 1997. Then you had Shawn come back around the end of May/early June 1997 as well, and despite him being a mega heel in Canada, he was still a huge face in the US, and IMO the face of the company at that point. Austin only really started taking over as the top face in the fall of 1997, after he returned and won the IC title from Owen at Survivor Series. That's because at that point, he had a ton of momentum behind him and was ready to assume that role. Right after WM13, he wasn't quite there yet. It took the Hart Foundation feud to make that happen. My point is that he didn't get this MASSIVE push as the top face for a year. He was getting a push, and was on his way to becoming the top face, yes, but that really started later in the summer. Look at his PPV record, he lost against Taker at IYH: A Cold day in Hell, fought Shawn to a double DQ at KOTR, lost at Canadian Stampede, then vacated the IC title right after he won at Summerslam. The real superstar, dominant, top face push really began at Survivor Series. Let's compare: he won the IC title at Survivor Series, beat the Rock AND the entire Nation of Domination at D-Generation X: IYH, gave up the IC title on his own to tell Vince to fuck off, won the Rumble very strongly, won the unsanctioned 8 man tag at No Way Out then beat Shawn at WM14. The way I look at it, the Bret feud got Austin noticed, the Hart Foundation feud built him up to be a top guy/face, and at Survivor Series when he returned, that's when they kicked it into high gear and made him THE guy. He got a good push coming out of WM13, but the massive, star making push started at Survivor Series. So it was really more like 4-5 months of the giant push, not a year.


I know you mean no offense and thanks for the elaborate refresher . It's great thinking about that time again in detail. What I meant by massive push, was once he passed out to the Sharpshooter which, correct me if I'm wrong here, was the first time someone didn't tap out to it; you knew that Vince was going all in with him and began his slow boil push. The Hart Foundation was used post Mania to put over Austin, but since he was doing the slow turn, he wasn't going to steamroll them initially. Fresh off the pass out loss at Mania, he was being booked as the tough SOB, who, despite being a bad guy, wouldn't give up. This was his first big face trait, and it began the year long transition from heel to top face for him. It was good not to book him to go cleanly over the Hart Foundation initially since at Mania he was booked to be able to "hang" with Bret Hart, but not beat him, so they let you know that he wasn't there just yet. So I consider his push's beginning to be at that Mania, only it was a slower push with upward mobility that took on an entire new life once he returned from injury.

The biggest point I wanted to make was that Vince knew he wanted Austin as the face of his company once that feud with Bret Hart began, as said on one of his DVD's, but Bryan's recent push seems to only have begun once Team Hell No lost the tag titles, which is clearly a much shorter time span than it took Austin to begin drawing massive ratings.

This was the point I was attempting to make lol, but I guess I may have condensed my facts a bit too loosely.

Also, I don't really count the Punk matches from 2012, since Bryan was only a filler opponent for Punk at the time. It was the same as that match Austin had with Bret, several months before their clash at Mania, when Bret first returned from injury. At this point Austin was used as Bret's return match/feud to get him back into the swing of things, instead of the big game changer feud that began months later.

Neither guy was positioned on a push to become the top face at that point in their careers so that's why I didn't count that. This is especially true when we consider that the first Punk/Bryan feud was centered around AJ, and Bryan could have easily been replaced with any other heel at that point in that feud and wouldn't have changed the booking.


----------



## KO Bossy

THANOS said:


> I know you mean no offense and thanks for the elaborate refresher . It's great thinking about that time again in detail. What I meant by massive push, was once he passed out to the Sharpshooter which, correct me if I'm wrong here, was the first time someone didn't tap out to it; you knew that Vince was going all in with him and began his slow boil push. The Hart Foundation was used post Mania to put over Austin, but since he was doing the slow turn, he wasn't going to steamroll them initially. Fresh off the pass out loss at Mania, he was being booked as the tough SOB, who, despite being a bad guy, wouldn't give up. This was his first big face trait, and it began the year long transition from heel to top face for him. It was good not to book him to go cleanly over the Hart Foundation initially since at Mania he was booked to be able to "hang" with Bret Hart, but not beat him, so they let you know that he wasn't there just yet. So I consider his push's beginning to be at that Mania, only it was a slower push with upward mobility that took on an entire new life once he returned from injury.
> 
> The biggest point I wanted to make was that Vince knew he wanted Austin as the face of his company once that feud with Bret Hart began, as said on one of his DVD's, but Bryan's recent push seems to only have begun once Team Hell No lost the tag titles, which is clearly a much shorter time span than it took Austin to begin drawing massive ratings.
> 
> This was the point I was attempting to make lol, but I guess I may have condensed my facts a bit too loosely.
> 
> Also, I don't really count the Punk matches from 2012, since Bryan was only a filler opponent for Punk at the time. It was the same as that match Austin had with Bret when Bret first returned from injury prior to that Mania, while Austin was full on heel and Bret the top face.
> 
> Neither guy was positioned on a push to become the top face at that point in their careers so that's why I didn't count that. This is especially true when we consider that the first Punk/Bryan feud as centered around AJ, and Bryan could have easily been replaced with any other heel at that point in that feud and wouldn't have changed the booking.


See, this is one of the big differences between Austin and Bryan. As you said, Austin's push was really slow. Its kind of the snowball effect, when its starts its tiny but grows into something massive. Bryan is almost the exact opposite. I remember from January to mid May, he was the one in Hell No to take the pin falls or get laid out all the time. Then once they dropped the belts, Bryan's booking did a total 180. He ends the Shield's undefeated streak, beats Orton clean, wins the gauntlet match against the Real Americans and Ryback, beats Kane, beats Cena CLEAN (which is gigantic), beats the Shield in a gauntlet match, beats Orton for the title again clean (fuck that fast count stuff, it was clean)...Austin had to build up to becoming that big star through increasingly high profile feuds, whereas Bryan just started getting booked better one day. In that snowball analogy, its like they just took a giant snowball, and threw it right straight at the base of the mountain instead of letting it build up. Makes sense, though-strike while the iron is hot and all.

Anyway I think this whole thing got started because of people talking about draws. My point is that they're two entirely different situations. So Bryan's first big program against the top guy didn't draw as well as hoped-so what? Punk/Lesnar didn't draw as well as hoped-again, so what? It was still a good PPV. Buys don't gauge a PPV's quality-if that were the case, WM28 would be considered better than WM17, and that's totally laughable. Summerslam 2013 was way better than 2012, so who cares if 2012 drew more? Why does it matter, we all enjoyed it, didn't we?


----------



## THANOS

KO Bossy said:


> See, this is one of the big differences between Austin and Bryan. As you said, Austin's push was really slow. Its kind of the snowball effect, when its starts its tiny but grows into something massive. Bryan is almost the exact opposite. I remember from January to mid May, he was the one in Hell No to take the pin falls or get laid out all the time. Then once they dropped the belts, Bryan's booking did a total 180. He ends the Shield's undefeated streak, beats Orton clean, wins the gauntlet match against the Real Americans and Ryback, beats Kane, beats Cena CLEAN (which is gigantic), beats the Shield in a gauntlet match, beats Orton for the title again clean (fuck that fast count stuff, it was clean)...Austin had to build up to becoming that big star through increasingly high profile feuds, whereas Bryan just started getting booked better one day. In that snowball analogy, its like they just took a giant snowball, and threw it right straight at the base of the mountain instead of letting it build up. Makes sense, though-strike while the iron is hot and all.
> 
> Anyway I think this whole thing got started because of people talking about draws. My point is that they're two entirely different situations.


It's true when you look at it from the quality of their pushes, it's easy to see that Bryan got a more immediate super push out of nowhere, like you said, once he lost the tag titles (it's like WWE were biding their time with him until he was solo?), and Austin's began slowly with Bret. However despite them being booked drastically different at the beginning of their big pushes, one thing is similar, these were top guy pushes. Both Austin's and Bryan's were/are "top guy" pushes just like Cena's was when he beat JBL in 2005 for the title and never looked back. This is why I feel the comparison is fair, and I believe Bryan should be given much more leeway than he's getting on here by some critics.

That post was directly in response to one of, said, critics who branded Bryan fully blameable for the Summerslam buyrate, and has said previously that Bryan's push is a dud (in different words). My point was that it's not an accurate sample size to look at Bryan's 3/4 month push (where he's actually doing quite well in ratings in his segments) and say "the Summerslam buyrate proves xyz can't be a draw".


----------



## Happenstan

KO Bossy said:


> See, this is one of the big differences between Austin and Bryan. As you said, Austin's push was really slow. Its kind of the snowball effect, when its starts its tiny but grows into something massive. Bryan is almost the exact opposite. I remember from January to mid May, he was the one in Hell No to take the pin falls or get laid out all the time. Then once they dropped the belts, Bryan's booking did a total 180. He ends the Shield's undefeated streak, beats Orton clean, wins the gauntlet match against the Real Americans and Ryback, beats Kane, beats Cena CLEAN (which is gigantic), beats the Shield in a gauntlet match, beats Orton for the title again clean (fuck that fast count stuff, it was clean)...Austin had to build up to becoming that big star through increasingly high profile feuds, whereas Bryan just started getting booked better one day. In that snowball analogy, its like they just took a giant snowball, and threw it right straight at the base of the mountain instead of letting it build up. Makes sense, though-strike while the iron is hot and all.


Now see with this I totally understand where you're coming from. I've said a few times that I think the reason for Bryan's quick push is that when Punk came back for Payback he told Vince he was gonna retire soon (When his contract is up next spring). The rumors of Bryan getting a major summer long push started a week after Punk's return at Payback. Could that just be a coincidence? Sure. Is it? Probably not. The WWE finding out Cena was gonna be on the shelf right after this couldn't have went over too well either.


----------



## THANOS

Happenstan said:


> Now see this I totally get. I've said a few times that I think the reason for Bryan's quick push is that when Punk came back for Payback he told Vince he was gonna retire soon. The rumors of Bryan getting a major summer long push started a week after Punk's return at Payback. Could that just be a coincidence? Sure. Is it? Probably not.


This is a good assertion based on everything we've heard from Punk about his career longevity, but I think when Punk says, "I'm not going to be wrestling that much longer", he really means that he won't be wrestling *full-time* much longer. I think after his contract expires next summer, he'll be looking for a similar deal to jericho's current part-time one. I don't think Punk will be fully retired until his early 40's to be honest, but you're right that they need a full-time top face to replace his current presence, and that definitely has something to do with Bryan's push, and maybe even why Punk hasn't been given wins over a lot of big names. 

I honestly think WWE was hedging their bets when they discovered that he wasn't a long-term full-time investment for them, and maybe that had something to do with why they didn't push him over Cena as the top guy? I could just be spinning my wheels here as I have no way of knowing for sure, but it seems like a reasonable assertion given his huge merchandise sales and immense popularity back in 2011 and odd lack of focus his big push got, as opposed to Bryan's current one. Hmmmmmm.


----------



## Happenstan

THANOS said:


> This is a good assertion based on everything we've heard from Punk about his career longevity, but I think when Punk says, "I'm not going to be wrestling that much longer", he really means that he won't be wrestling *full-time* much longer. I think after his contract expires next summer, he'll be looking for a similar deal to jericho's current part-time one. I don't think Punk will be fully retired until his early 40's to be honest, but you're right that they need a full-time top face to replace his current presence, and that definitely has something to do with Bryan's push, and maybe even why Punk hasn't been given wins over a lot of big names.
> 
> I honestly think WWE was hedging their bets when they discovered that he wasn't a long-term full-time investment for them, and maybe that had something to do with why they didn't push him over Cena as the top guy? I could just be spinning my wheels here as I have no way of knowing for sure, but it seems like a reasonable assertion given his huge merchandise sales and immense popularity back in 2011 and odd lack of focus his big push got, as opposed to Bryan's current one. Hmmmmmm.



Oh I've said just that. When I say retire I also mean from the full time roster. I fully expect Punk to pull a Jericho and perform 3-6 months a year...maybe more, maybe less. I think he'll take a year off to just heal up and screw around after next Spring. I personally don't expect him back until RR 2015 most likely.


----------



## KO Bossy

THANOS said:


> It's true when you look at it from the quality of their pushes, it's easy to see that Bryan got a more immediate super push out of nowhere, like you said, once he lost the tag titles (it's like WWE were biding their time with him until he was solo?), and Austin's began slowly with Bret. However despite them being booked drastically different at the beginning of their big pushes, one thing is similar, these were top guy pushes. Both Austin's and Bryan's were/are "top guy" pushes just like Cena's was when he beat JBL in 2005 for the title and never looked back. This is why I feel the comparison is fair, and I believe Bryan should be given much more leeway than he's getting on here by some critics.
> 
> That post was directly in response to one of, said, critics who branded Bryan fully blameable for the Summerslam buyrate, and has said previously that Bryan's push is a dud (in different words). My point was that it's not an accurate sample size to look at Bryan's 3/4 month push (where he's actually doing quite well in ratings in his segments) and say "the Summerslam buyrate proves xyz can't be a draw".


Solely his fault? Ridiculous. Partly, yes, but not solely. And yeah, 3-4 months isn't really very fair. If it were 6 or more, then maybe, but that's bare minimum.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

VGooBUG said:


> when austin won his first championship while a top face(just like bryan), he broke records with Wrestlemania 14. Yes i can blame daniel bryan


Stone Cold's push started around late 1996.He was buulding momentum in 1997 and helped win the war in 1998.That's not the case with Daniel Bryan.*No one becomes a draw overnight*


----------



## Mqwar

Stop comparing two different eras. Back then Vince was forced to go with Austin, now that isn't the case. WWE has a monopoly in the industry, so many wrestlers would kill to be in Bryan's position. Vince could easily drop Bryan's push and move on. Nothing would change, the corporation angle has the potential to make anyone(with charisma) a Star. Bryan's not that essential to this, heck CM Punk by all means could easily replace Bryan as the face. However that being said, this is Bryan's push which he has rightfully earned. He's a tremendous talent and certainly deserves to be become a star at the end.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

You can become a huge draw only when you can draw the casuals into the product.The biggest litmus test for any pro-wrestler IMO.


----------



## markedfordeath

I think the fact that Bryan wrestles every single night and never misses a show makes management love him even more.


----------



## AthenaMark

KO Bossy said:


> See, this is one of the big differences between Austin and Bryan. As you said, Austin's push was really slow. Its kind of the snowball effect, when its starts its tiny but grows into something massive. Bryan is almost the exact opposite. I remember from January to mid May, he was the one in Hell No to take the pin falls or get laid out all the time. Then once they dropped the belts, Bryan's booking did a total 180. He ends the Shield's undefeated streak, beats Orton clean, wins the gauntlet match against the Real Americans and Ryback, beats Kane, beats Cena CLEAN (which is gigantic), beats the Shield in a gauntlet match, beats Orton for the title again clean (fuck that fast count stuff, it was clean)...Austin had to build up to becoming that big star through increasingly high profile feuds, whereas Bryan just started getting booked better one day. In that snowball analogy, its like they just took a giant snowball, and threw it right straight at the base of the mountain instead of letting it build up. Makes sense, though-strike while the iron is hot and all.
> 
> Anyway I think this whole thing got started because of people talking about draws. My point is that they're two entirely different situations. So Bryan's first big program against the top guy didn't draw as well as hoped-so what? Punk/Lesnar didn't draw as well as hoped-again, so what? It was still a good PPV. Buys don't gauge a PPV's quality-if that were the case, WM28 would be considered better than WM17, and that's totally laughable. Summerslam 2013 was way better than 2012, so who cares if 2012 drew more? Why does it matter, we all enjoyed it, didn't we?


Well the whole time he was in the tag team was to hold him down and screw over the momentum he earned after WM 28 when the fans were solidly cheering for him against CM Punk and going wild for any little thing he did. Then they had him say "No" to try derail the fan support for him..all the while letting Punk go over the entire roster and pretty much coast until Rumble 2013 and beyond. As soon as they had Bryan coming out to his own music and shit like that...he was unstoppable.


----------



## markedfordeath

if this storyline keeps getting good ratings and Bryan keeps selling shirts like he has been, what the fuck do they do with Cena when he gets back?


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Face Taker and turn heel at Wrestlemania?


----------



## markedfordeath

I just think the dude should retire..he keeps saying he'll come back stronger than ever but the dude is 37 years old, he can't expect to still carry the company on his back when he returns....no one likes him anymore. he should just move on, he has a shit load of money......just make like a tree and leave already.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

^I haven't liked John Cena(the wrestler) for a long time but I believe he gets too much hate in this forum.There's no reason for him to retire at the age of 36.He is still WWE's biggest draw and has a lot more to offer to the product when he turns heel.


----------



## markedfordeath

do you see anyone taking his place?


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

markedfordeath said:


> do you see anyone taking his place?


I see Daniel Bryan becoming the next top babyface but John Cena still being the top guy


----------



## AthenaMark

It's kind of funny when I see he's the biggest draw...no one really explains what that means when they talk. If not for the Rock, Cena would not have been maineventing WM over the last 3 years. He was behind HHH/Orton and Undertaker matches. He hadn't main evented since WM 23 back in 2007 and in truth, that show was built on Trump vs McMahon with Austin/Umaga/Lashley as the centerpieces. Michaels/Cena had no heat or energy weekly until Roddy Piper destroyed them both on the mic.


----------



## LovelyElle890

Boots2Asses said:


> You can become a huge draw only when you can draw the casuals into the product.The biggest litmus test for any pro-wrestler IMO.


It would also help if your marks would actually order the PPV to see you.

This is my gripe with Bryan and Punk marks. They don't support their favorites by ordering the PPVs and then they try to call foul when the WWE uses this as a reason to keep them behind Cena. 

I told you guys to order Night of Champions. Now, the WWE is going to have 2 PPV's in a row where Bryan and CM Punk were in the two most important feuds and the PPV bombs. If Cena comes back and is fast tracked to the title, you have nothing but yourselves to blame.

Bryan and Punk will always be number twos because their fans have a number two mentality. 

Do Cena fans say things like, "I'm not ordering the PPV because The Rock and Brock Lesnar will get all of the credit for the PPV buys," even though that is exactly what happens when he works with them too? Nope. They just shut up and buy the PPV's and the merchandise, in support of their favorite star. You can turn your noses up at the casuals all you want but they are better "fans" than you.


----------



## THANOS

LovelyElle890 said:


> It would also help if your marks would actually order the PPV to see you.
> 
> This is my gripe with Bryan and Punk marks. They don't support their favorites by ordering the PPVs and then they try to call foul when the WWE uses this as a reason to keep them behind Cena.
> 
> I told you guys to order Night of Champions. Now, the WWE is going to have 2 PPV's in a row where Bryan and CM Punk were in the two most important feuds and the PPV bombs. If Cena comes back and is fast tracked to the title, you have nothing but yourselves to blame.
> 
> Bryan and Punk will always be number two's because their fans have a number two mentality.
> 
> Do Cena fans say things like, "I'm not ordering the PPV because The Rock and Brock Lesnar will get all of the credit for the PPV buys," even though that is exactly what happens when he works with them too? Nope. They just shut up and buy the PPV's and the merchandise, in support of their favorite star. You can turn your noses up at the casuals all you want but they are better "fans" than you.


:clap Well done! I will say that I did buy Night of Champions, but it came down to the final minutes before the show aired for that decision.


----------



## LovelyElle890

THANOS said:


> :clap Well done! I will say that I did buy Night of Champions, but it came down to the final minutes before the show aired for that decision.


Sometimes business decisions come down to the wire. 

But in the end THANOS, you did what was best for business.

:HHH2


----------



## THANOS

LovelyElle890 said:


> Sometimes business decisions come down to the wire.
> 
> But in the end THANOS, you did what was best for business.
> 
> :HHH2


Triple Nose would be oh so proud of me :. It'll be hard to justify buying Battleground though, knowing it'll end with another screw-job, unless of course there's an iron man match like rumored. If this gets made Tonight then I'll order it hands down to watch that match!


----------



## JY57

*Effect Of MNF (First Two Weeks) On Raw Last Several Years*

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_73502.shtml#.UkB1VRb3CL0



> PWTorch has examined the effect of Fall Season premieres and the NFL Monday Night Football season on WWE Raw ratings over the past seven years.
> 
> Looking at the first two weeks of Raw vs. football over the past seven years, out of a possible 14 Raws, only one episode increased compared to the August average. The other 13 episodes showed single or double-digit declines compared to the August average.
> 
> The only increase was for the first Raw opposing football in September 2007, which increased 7.4 percent when WWE ran the McMahon Illegitimate Son storyline reveal against a weak NFL doubleheader. This was WWE's attempt to get their audience back following the Benoit Family Tragedy in June 2007 that hurt July and August ratings.
> 
> - Specific to 2013, the first two weeks of WWE Raw vs. football were down 4.7 percent and 3.1 percent compared to the average rating in the month of August pre-football.
> 
> In 2012, the first two weeks of Raw vs. football were down 8.8 percent and 9.1 percent compared to August.
> 
> The percentage has stayed in the single-digits the past two years, which can mainly be attributed to Raw ratings already being near the floor-level, so the effect of Fall TV & Football is less pronounced because there isn't as much room to drop.
> 
> Whereas, when Raw was in the mid-to-high-3.0-ratings range in the late 2000s, a sharp decline to a low-3.0 rating in early September produced a more pronounced drop-off.
> 
> - The following is a Chart comparing the first two weeks of Raw vs. the NFL to the August Ratings Average over the past seven years.


----------



## AthenaMark

Well the Rock and Lesnar did get full credit for the PPVs they were on. Who really believes that Cena meant much to Mania 29 and 28? He didn't. How is that possible when he didn't mean shit on WM 26 and 25 and things were borderline laughable when it came to returns? NO. Rock was the HUGE difference and it would of even been bigger last year had they not been obsessed with trying to let Cena look a certain way on the mic and wanted to tear down the Rock to build up a guy no one respects. Shouldn't have been 1.3..should of been 1.6 or better.


----------



## Bfo4jd

> The only increase was for the first Raw opposing football in September 2007, which increased 7.4 percent when WWE ran the McMahon Illegitimate Son


Hornswggle is a draw?


----------



## Bfo4jd

> - Specific to 2013, the first two weeks of WWE Raw vs. football were down 4.7 percent and 3.1 percent.
> 
> In 2012, the first two weeks of Raw vs. football were down 8.8 percent and 9.1 percent.


:bryan > unk


----------



## JY57

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...Twitter&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitter



> *USA is the #1 Cable Network for an Unprecedented 29th Consecutive Quarter*
> 
> 
> via press release:
> 
> USA IS THE #1 CABLE NETWORK FOR AN UNPRECEDENTED 29TH CONSECUTIVE QUARTER
> 
> Powerful Portfolio of Originals, WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW and Syndicated Series Garners Success for the Network
> 
> GRACELAND is One of the Top New Cable Dramas of the Summer
> 
> NEW YORK – September 23, 2013 – USA is pacing to win 3Q13 for an eighth consecutive third quarter in all key demos, as well an unprecedented 29th consecutive quarter as the #1 ad-supported cable entertainment network in prime among total viewers, beating the nearest competitor by double-digits in that demo.
> 
> USA was the #1 ad-supported cable network for the eighth third quarter in a row among P18-49 (1.12 million, +13% more than #2 TBS), P25-54 (1.16 million, +22% more than #2 TBS) and total viewers (2.97 million, +18% more than #2 DSNY) for 3Q13. USA also delivered the quarter’s top P18-34 audience (554,000, +3% more than #2 TBS).
> 
> 3Q13 marks the 29th consecutive quarter that USA has been the #1 ad-supported cable entertainment network in total viewers.
> 
> USA's win was driven by the network's powerful slate of originals – Suits, Burn Notice, GRACELAND, Royal Pains, Covert Affairs and Necessary Roughness – each averaging over 3 million total viewers, 1.5 million P25-54, 1 million P18-49 and half a million P18-34, as well as the mighty WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW and the most-watched “off-net” series on cable, NCIS and LAW & ORDER: Special Victims Unit.
> 
> Freshman drama GRACELAND was one of the top new scripted shows on cable in P18-49 for the summer, as well as television’s top scripted series with original episodes Thursdays in P18-34. When the show aired on Thursdays at 10pm, USA was behind only ABC and NBC in all of television in delivering P18-49, P25-54 and P18-34 as well as being the most watched network on cable in total viewers.
> 
> The Emmy-award nominated drama Burn Notice had USA’s second most watched series finale ever (only behind MONK), among P18-49, P25-54 and total viewers.
> 
> WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW continued to dominate in 3Q13 averaging over 2 million in the demos and nearly 4.5 million total viewers.
> 
> NCIS and LAW & ORDER: Special Victims Unit were the top two acquired dramas in prime this summer and the only ones to deliver over 2 million total viewers (NCIS 2.59 million / SVU 2.08 million) as well as being the #1 acquired dramas for P18-49 (649,000 / 783,000), P25-54 (775,000 / 756,000) and P18-34 (279,000 / 443,000).
> 
> USA’s fourth quarter brings the season five premiere of White Collar on its new night and time, Thursday, October 17 at 9/8, as well as the final six episodes of Covert Affairs season four, also on its new night and time at 10/9c. On Friday, November 1, just in time for the holidays, the reality series event IT TAKES A CHOIR premieres, hosted by the dapper and charismatic British sensation Gareth Malone. And on Sunday, December 15, a holiday treat that fans of the hit show Psych have been highly anticipating, a special two-hour Psych: THE MUSICAL.
> 
> Note: Data reflect time period data with the most current combination of Live+7 (7/1-9/8), Live+3 (9/9-9/18) and Live+SD (9/19-9/21); program data are the most current combination of Live+7 (7/1-9/8) and Live+SD (9/9-9/19). Exception: Burn Notice 2nd best series finale claim LS.


----------



## markedfordeath

if you look at the ppv buys of all of 2013 very closely, all the events with Cena in the main event bombed! Except for Mania and Royal Rumble where Rock was involved. In other words, Cena isn't as big as he used to be. go look it up, the evidence is there...all the buys tanked under Cena in the main event.


----------



## JY57

http://pwinsider.com/article/80475/smackdown-audience-drops-.html?p=1



> The 9/20 edition of Smackdown did 2,602,000 viewers, down significantly from last week.


down from 2,827,000 from last week


----------



## THANOS

JY57 said:


> http://pwinsider.com/article/80475/smackdown-audience-drops-.html?p=1
> 
> 
> 
> down from 2,827,000 from last week


I'm going to take a wild guess and say Vickie, and the first few jobbers losing to the Shield lost all the viewers.


----------



## markedfordeath

the Smackdown ratings don't matter, because they're always number one on Fridays.....they've been number one for awhile..thats all they should care about.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

markedfordeath said:


> if you look at the ppv buys of all of 2013 very closely, all the events with Cena in the main event bombed! Except for Mania and Royal Rumble where Rock was involved. In other words, Cena isn't as big as he used to be. go look it up, the evidence is there...all the buys tanked under Cena in the main event.


Even this year's Mania is down from last year's.

Only two PPVs that have increased over last year are Royal Rumble 2013 and Elimination Chamber 2013(not sure about Payback??!!).


So,you're dead right,no full time superstar apparently can draw on the PPVs.And frankly,if you have followed his career closely,you'll know that Cena was never a huge PPV draw to begin with.


Only recent guy,who made a difference in PPV business was Dave 'The Animal' Batista.The last of big box-office draw.All current guys can only move merchandise and that's about it.



PS:Lets see if Bryan can achieve something which guys like Cena/Orton and Punk have failed to do i.e. draw huge on PPVs


----------



## markedfordeath

I bet Bryan draws if he faces people that aren't Cena or Orton in a ppv match...how does WWE not notice that they suck at drawing? I don't get it.....if you put Bryan in a feud for the title with an up and comer or someone that hasn't been in the main event scene before, they'll draw better..no one wants to watch Cena in the main event or Orton for that matter....the WWE just refuses to accept that...Summerslam suffered because everyone figured Orton would cash in and win it...or Cena would retain like he always does. They're on the right track with Bryan though, he gets big pops every arena, put him in a feud with someone that doesn't suck out the energy from the building and you might have something.....put him in a feud with Punk to start, by themselves, no other secondary match selling it, and I guarantee that match sells itself..and you don't be stupid and put Cena on AFTER them like Over the Limit, that was fucked up!


----------



## KO Bossy

markedfordeath said:


> I bet Bryan draws if he faces people that aren't Cena or Orton in a ppv match...how does WWE not notice that they suck at drawing? I don't get it.....if you put Bryan in a feud for the title with an up and comer or someone that hasn't been in the main event scene before, they'll draw better..no one wants to watch Cena in the main event or Orton for that matter....the WWE just refuses to accept that...Summerslam suffered because everyone figured Orton would cash in and win it...or Cena would retain like he always does. They're on the right track with Bryan though, he gets big pops every arena, put him in a feud with someone that doesn't suck out the energy from the building and you might have something.....put him in a feud with Punk to start, by themselves, no other secondary match selling it, and I guarantee that match sells itself..and you don't be stupid and put Cena on AFTER them like Over the Limit, that was fucked up!


Wait, what? Prior to his heel turn, Orton wasn't sucking the energy out of anywhere, he was constantly one of the best reactions on the show, sometimes THE best. And despite it being the opposite desired reaction, Cena still gets a reaction. Loud ones. 

All I see in your post is desperate justifications. Well if WWE booked Bryan the way I wanted him to, surely everyone would think its better. From what I've gathered from your posting, you'd have Bryan out there wrestling 90 minute matches every week and constantly outwitting the Corporation 2.0. And guess what? People would stop tuning in for that because it'd get incredibly stale very quickly. Maybe, just maybe, people didn't buy the PPV because they just didn't feel the interest was there? I mean, you're going so far in your ramblings to actually call Cena a poor draw. Seriously? The guy is one of the few ACTUAL draws on the roster. You're basing a few months of PPV numbers being down and using that as grounds to judge whether someone is a draw? Wasn't there an entire argument in this thread saying that you need to look at drawing numbers over a period, not just a few months? I believe at the time it was when we were discussing Bryan being a possible reason for the poor Summerslam number. In fact, you participated in the conversation. So...what, its not fair to judge Bryan using those parameters, but its alright to judge Cena like that? Wrestlemania 29 had a god awfully shit card, minus one match, and STILL managed to pull in a solid buyrate of over a million, despite it being nothing but rematches. WM28 was also a bad show, apart from 1 match, and it did like...1.3 million buys, or in that ball park. Was the draw seeing Rock? Partly, but it was also seeing a match that was considered by some to be a dream match. There was money to be made between Rock and Cena, and Cena is part of that draw. So saying he isn't is such a laughably stupid statement.

Not to mention that your post is full of ifs and buts. How do you know Bryan would get good buy rates only working with an up and coming guy? You don't, and have no grounds to try and prove it. You're talking out of your ass and stating it like its truth. YOU don't want to see Cena, and a good portion of this forum doesn't either. Except the IWC is like...what, 5% of the total audience? Tons of people still want to, so your argument has zero merit.

Seriously, saying Cena isn't a draw...shaking my head.


----------



## markedfordeath

no no no tough guy! all he's faced in the main event is Cena and Orton..look at the post above yours, that guy looked up and did research too..do some research and you'll see that Cena and Orton's track record for PPV's is lackluster man.....don't attack me! its the truth. and if you can't see it, i'm sorry, that's all on you! Cena isn't a fucking PPV draw anymore, look at the numbers with him in the main event....


----------



## KO Bossy

So I'm supposed to listen to cherry picked stats, assembled together to make one guy look bad? What kind of fucking moron do you take me for? 

All the other guy said was "Cena was never really a draw". Does he prove it? No, so it has no merit. I'm not going to take his word at a whim (and besides, I know its not correct anyway). You're judging a few months of buyrates compared to like...6 years. Ridiculous. He headlined the WM with the most buys in history. You think it'd have done that great a number if Rock was facing Zack Ryder? Not a chance. Using a few PPVs being down as a basis for saying a guy isn't a draw at all anymore is stupid as all hell. Hey, WM18 was down from WM17. Guess Rock and Hogan aren't as great draws, either? That's the logic you're using, and its idiotic.


----------



## markedfordeath

actually, i take you for a big gigantic moron!! Personally I hope you fall and break your neck, but that won't happen fast enough for me.


----------



## KO Bossy

Wow, how butt hurt. I mean, some people disagree with me, but this is the first time I've ever been told by someone that they wish I end up dead or paralyzed. And all because I have the gall to point out to you that your moronic belief that Cena has never been a draw is, quite frankly, moronic. What happens when the pizza man is a few minutes late, do you toss a Molatov into his car? I mean, that would fit in with your apparent nature of overreacting. 

This is monumental. Someone has been bitter enough by my pointing out their ignorance that they've wished bodily harm upon me.

Regardless, this entire thing comes down to one important factor. You are absolutely convinced that Bryan can draw well, but not when working with Orton or Cena because its their fault. You refuse to acknowledge the fact that maybe Bryan himself isn't a draw. You make all these assumptions based on those 2 criteria-Bryan can draw well and if he doesn't, its the other person's fault, despite all of the evidence leading to a conclusion completely opposite. You're in denial at worst, and at best, you're a blind mark. You'll even go so far as to attack Cena's drawing power over a short period to prove that he ISN'T a draw (despite 6 years showing the contrary), so that it doesn't harm Bryan's cred.


----------



## Happenstan

KO Bossy said:


> You are absolutely convinced that Bryan can draw well, but not when working with Orton or Cena because its their fault. You refuse to acknowledge the fact that maybe Bryan himself isn't a draw.


And he's right. Weekly ratings are proving that....plus he is on par PPV buys wise with where Punk and SCSA were at this point in their pushes. You don't have to like it, but Bryan is getting the job done.




markedfordeath said:


> actually, i take you for a big gigantic moron!! Personally I hope you fall and break your neck, but that won't happen fast enough for me.


Way uncalled for. You're quickly becoming a punchline here. Knock this shit off already.


----------



## markedfordeath

That's right, Stone Cold wasn't a draw right away..what the fuck! how can anyone say that Bryan isn't a draw when people are wearing his fucking shirts in the arena, holding his fucking signs, and waving his fucking rally towels? I don't get this! And he brings in the highest rated segments on both shows, but yes Bryan isn't a draw! OMG! That just boggles my mind how people can say he isn't a draw....just beyond me! gets the most reactions, has the most tee shirts sold right now..my friend told me that the live event last week he went to, his shirts were sold out, and the clerk said they have been out of them for awhile..... yeah Bryan isn't a draw!


----------



## JY57

markedfordeath said:


> actually, i take you for a big gigantic moron!! Personally I hope you fall and break your neck, but that won't happen fast enough for me.


no need to get personal man, its just a tv show. stuff like that will get you banned.


----------



## markedfordeath

hes' calling me ignorant...when he keeps saying Bryan isn't a fucking draw, the evidence points to the opposite...he's going by pay per view buys, but daily merchandise selling is worth way more and people are coming to see Bryan at every event....but yeah, since no one buys a pay per view, he's such a horrible draw! whatever! ppv buys didn't stop Punk from getting a year long title reign, WWE doesn't care about that shit enough obviously..seeing as how Hart and Michaels never drew ppvs either.


----------



## Happenstan

markedfordeath said:


> hes' calling me ignorant...when he keeps saying Bryan isn't a fucking draw, the evidence points to the opposite...he's going by pay per view buys, but daily merchandise selling is worth way more and people are coming to see Bryan at every event....but yeah, since no one buys a pay per view, he's such a horrible draw! whatever! ppv buys didn't stop Punk from getting a year long title reign, WWE doesn't care about that shit enough obviously..seeing as how Hart and Michaels never drew ppvs either.


Who cares what he or anyone else thinks? Anyone that doubts Bryan's drawing ability at this point is never gonna listen to facts or figures. They are gonna choose to remain ignorant no matter what. Relax dude. Death threats over ratings? Come on, son. You're quickly earning the title of "First Ever Bryantard".


----------



## markedfordeath

okay I take it back!! but still, the drawing power is way high! and he just frustrated me because he is constantly being negative with my posts, i couldn't take it anymore..but now i'm over it and i'll go buy another Bryan tee shirt.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The ratings success of Total Divas looks like it may be helping the careers of its performers. Obviously there is the Divas vs Total Divas storyline. Brie even went over AJ clean on Raw. Now the Usos have looked great against the Shield the last couple of weeks. Coincidentally,or not, Jey Uso is a regular on the Total Divas show. Bryan was already getting pushed before the show so the show has nothing to do with him. This is just speculation, but WWE must be happy to have another show producing an advertising revenue stream, so perhaps they are rewarding the performers. Can't prove it, but the Usos have been featured as strong allies of Bryan in the Corporate storyline now.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

markedfordeath said:


> okay I take it back!! but still, the drawing power is way high! and he just frustrated me because he is constantly being negative with my posts, i couldn't take it anymore..but now i'm over it and i'll go buy another Bryan tee shirt.


Dont forget the YES towel and those wristbands. Believe in Bryan.


----------



## markedfordeath

Yeah, Bryan was already in the plans to be a top guy even before the show aired or was even thought of being aired...they dropped the ball..they really should have had him beat Punk in 2012 during their feud, he was way over even back then as well....and he was considered a heel. Glad they made up for it now. The dude is probably the most over guy in 15 years for a full timer. And yes I won't forget those wristbands lol He's been selling out things left and right, his future looks amazing..holy shit its exciting.


----------



## wb1899

JY57 said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...Twitter&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> USA is the #1 Cable Network for an Unprecedented 29th Consecutive Quarter
> 
> [...]
> 
> WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW continued to dominate in 3Q13 averaging *over 2 million in the demos* and nearly 4.5 million total viewers.
> 
> [...]
> 
> 
> Note: Data reflect time period data with the most current combination of Live+7 (7/1-9/8), Live+3 (9/9-9/18) and Live+SD (9/19-9/21); program data are the most current combination of Live+7 (7/1-9/8) and Live+SD (9/9-9/19). Exception: Burn Notice 2nd best series finale claim LS.
Click to expand...

Good numbers!


----------



## Dudechi

Some of you are children, huh?


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

Bossy,

I never said that Cena isn't a big draw.So no need to shake your head.In fact I agree that Cena is one of the biggest if not the biggest merchandise draw of all time.


*However,my point was that Cena has never been a true HUGE box-office draw,just like Randy Orton and CM Punk.*


Unless all of these are working with the biggest PPV draw of all time in The Rock.


CM Punk headlines THE SECOND BIGGEST show of the year with Brock Lesnar and the show bombs,compare it with this year's Royal Rumble that has almost got 600k buys and became the biggest RR of the last 10 years.


Yes,Rock vs Ryder won't draw as big as Rock vs Cena or even for that matter Rock vs Punk,but the real difference maker in both these scenario is the Rock and not Cena/Punk.


PS: Your real test of drawing power is when you're working with a lesser star.Take for example the main-event of Fully Loaded 2000 PPV.The Rock was working with Chris Benoit in the main-event and yet that PPV got 424k PPV buys all domestic(a record that still exists till date).That's what a real draw is IMO.


----------



## THANOS

markedfordeath said:


> okay I take it back!! but still, the drawing power is way high! and he just frustrated me because he is constantly being negative with my posts, i couldn't take it anymore..but now i'm over it and i'll go buy another Bryan tee shirt.


Good to hear. I don't want to see that kind of stuff in here, it makes all of us look bad, and Bossy may not see eye to eye with us on a lot of things Bryan, but the guy is more than fair in his posts, and a great guy personally. Just don't let your emotions get the best of you, and just continue using your logic and let your quality of posts stand for themselves .


----------



## Cack_Thu

markedfordeath said:


> actually, i take you for a big gigantic moron!! Personally I hope you fall and break your neck, but that won't happen fast enough for me.





markedfordeath said:


> okay I take it back!! but still, the drawing power is way high! and he just frustrated me because he is constantly being negative with my posts, i couldn't take it anymore..but now i'm over it and i'll go buy another *Bryan* tee shirt.


You know people are being totally irrational and infact biased - only spewing blind hate, when they accuse Guan Sena's entire fanbase consists only of immature,unintelligible ,preadolescent children - who are yet to hit puberty!

I'll contact Hunter right away and insist on changing Daniel Bryan's ring name to Daniel *A*ryan and give Shakespeare's well known quote a run for its money,for the betterment of business and to quell few Bryan marks' inbuilt 11 year old children's argumentative mentality.


----------



## JY57

> -- WWE Raw dropped to a three-month low in social media activity on Monday night.
> 
> Raw scored 212,182 in social activity, according to Trendrr.TV, down 22 percent from last week's post-Night of Champions episode. It was the lowest score since 206k on June 10.
> 
> Raw ranked #2 on cable TV behind Monday Night Football on ESPN.


via PWTorch


----------



## hazuki

Why are there empty 5 new pages?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

hazuki said:


> Why are there empty 5 new pages?


They are vacant to honor the current WWE champion.


----------



## markedfordeath

WWE is all over the place now. Its almost as if they're confused at this point. Like they're writing the shows the day of.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

Boots2Asses said:


> Only recent guy,who made a difference in PPV business was Dave 'The Animal' Batista.The last of big box-office draw.All current guys can only move merchandise and that's about it.
> 
> PS:Lets see if Bryan can achieve something which guys like Cena/Orton and Punk have failed to do i.e. draw huge on PPVs


Cena/Orton headlined Summerslam 2007 and drew 537,000 buys, the second highest in the last decade after Hogan/HBK in 2005, and almost double what this year did.

And Batista was a more consistent draw overall than Orton but he's not on Cena's level. Dave drew big with Triple H and Undertaker but doesn't have much else of a track record. Cena, on the other hand, did big business with Edge, Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, JBL, Nexus, Brock Lesnar and of course Rock. Even his main events on B shows with people like Khali, Umaga and Lashley did above average in relative terms.


----------



## markedfordeath

but he's old now...now its time to move on.


----------



## markedfordeath

bummer..it didn't hit 4 million this week....oh well, maybe next week....the show started off weak, with a 1.2 in the first hour...but we all know why, who wasn't in the first segment? lol


----------



## JY57

hour 1 - 3.603 million
hour 2 - 3.795 million
hour 3 - 3.820 million


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Pretty bad numbers.


----------



## markedfordeath

the viewers went up in the last hour? that never happens.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Third hour is where most of the stuff worth watching actually happened, so no shock there. Punk, Rhodes' attacking Shield, and the main event.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

markedfordeath said:


> the viewers went up in the last hour? that never happens.


The Raiders vs Broncos game was pretty much over.


----------



## JY57

9/24/12 last year did a 2.72 rating (average 3.79 million viewers). pretty much similar to this year

next week will be interesting since the same time last year (10/1) did 2.54 with 3.50 million average


----------



## markedfordeath

i enjoyed the show last night, but fucking Triple H acting all tweener again..just stay full blown heel...and fucking Ryback, I hate that guy!! if I were Punk I would have chicago street fight his ass.


----------



## Londrick

Can't wait til Cena comes back so those numbers go back up. :cena3


----------



## markedfordeath

Cena won't add shit, its fucking awesome without him....its incredible without him. there will be a lot of unhappy workers in the back when he returns because they know their spot is gone.


----------



## Cliffy

Can't believe the ratings haven't gone up.

It baffles me, I would've thought the bad booking and Hunter and Steph burying everybody would have done big numbers. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## THANOS

Cliffy Byro said:


> Can't believe the ratings haven't gone up.
> 
> It baffles me, I would've thought the bad booking and Hunter and Steph burying everybody would have done big numbers.
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


:lmao :clap

I wonder if this will force HHH to change his ways!? Nahhhh... :HHH2


----------



## markedfordeath

well at least the ratings aren't going down substantially.....this is the first week that they've been this number....they just seem to be phoning it in until Survivor Series I guess...or maybe they'll start off big going into Hell in a Cell......because the build to NoC and the build to Battleground has been sub par.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Not surprised at all with the 3rd hour being the highest. The opening segment with HHH and Steph fell so flat for me. Plus The Voice started last night and it kills in the demo.


----------



## markedfordeath

the whole best for business tagline is over with....business in the pro wrestling industry isn't exactly booming nowadays...I really hope starting in October this thing really gets going....because man oh man....


----------



## cindel25

Time for HHH and Steph to get gone!


----------



## checkcola

That first hour was painful, well deserved


----------



## markedfordeath

I don't know what can save wrestling at this point....they need something big to happen.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Can't expect much with this shitty Corporation angle still going on. It somehow gets worse every week. Not even Triple H and the GOATs the Shield can save the dullness that Orton and Bryan bring to the table.


----------



## JY57

markedfordeath said:


> I don't know what can save wrestling at this point....they need something big to happen.


yeah January to come as fast as possible for them.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Big part of the problem is the only angle that anyone gives a shit about is the Corporation angle. Other than that, there is absolutely, positively nothing even remotely worth watching. It's basically the Triple H, Bryan, Shield, and Orton show. Everything else is the drizzling shits.


----------



## validreasoning

markedfordeath said:


> the whole best for business tagline is over with....business in the pro wrestling industry isn't exactly booming nowadays...I really hope starting in October this thing really gets going....because man oh man....


wwe are in off season right now until january, like i said weeks ago they will be happy to average 3.5-4 million for the rest of the year. october/early november will be worse not better because raw will be going up against the world series as well as some massive football games


----------



## apokalypse

haven't read the ratings yet and i be suprise if WWE get good ratings...


----------



## markedfordeath

so basically its official, they're waiting for Cena to come back...so basically they put Punk and Bryan in a position to fail on purpose.....putting them in charge in a season that never does well for them, not exactly fair.....


----------



## JY57

markedfordeath said:


> so basically its official, they're waiting for Cena to come back...so basically they put Punk and Bryan in a position to fail on purpose.....putting them in charge in a season that never does well for them, not exactly fair.....


nothing to do with Cena. 

September - December is just a terrible time for them period regardless who is in the main event.


----------



## markedfordeath

then its not Bryan's fault if business goes down then....but i hate the fact that when he gets the title, nobody will watch and see it....


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Cena is really hurt. This isnt some plot to frame Punk and Bryan. It just happens that Cena is hurt during football season. WWE knew this going in and its not time to push the eject button.


----------



## markedfordeath

i think all the current guys are doing a great job, and from a viewer aspect, I would feel bad for them once they go back to their original spots.....but that's how it goes..I just hope Bryan stays where he's at...because he deserves it, he's working his ass off..hasn't missed a show until tonight..this is his only day off for the summer.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Bryan deserves a break. He has been the workhorse of the WWE this year. I think I linked this a couple of weeks ago, but this site records the won/los records for every show, including house shows.

http://www.wrestlingdata.com/index.php?befehl=bilanzen&bilanzart=&showart=&kategorie=1&liga=3&jahrzehnt=201&jahr=2013&monat=0&sort=0


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

If anyone thinks WWE is going to get to Attitude Era level of ratings and business, you are nuts. It's just not going to happen. Can they improve from the level of business they've been at these past few years? I think so.

But people forget that despite 1997 being a GOAT year in terms of the product, that the ratings didn't go up until mid '98, and they never beat WCW even once in 1997. Got to give them some time and WWE has to stay the course of making some new stars, otherwise they are fucked even worse when Cena retires.


----------



## markedfordeath

yep, which is why they need to continue what they're doing now.....dont shove Sheamus and Cena down our throats. and Bryan does work that much, which is why he deserves a push, but he also needs time off for his personal life, you know like marriage and all of that, that he wants to do.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Yeah, I remember being so frustrated at why Raw kept losing to Nitro when it was putting on some seriously hot tv. Things dont move instantaneously.Keep putting on a good show and hopefully that momentum yields results eventually.


----------



## Oakue

With the NFL back and now the fall television season kicking off, I'd be surprised to see numbers that were better than these moving forward.


----------



## markedfordeath

it'll keep going and continue to be red hot....just that they need to be smart and continue to include everyone except for giving the same people the same segments over and over again..change it up.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

JY57 said:


> 9/24/12 last year did a 2.72 rating (average 3.79 million viewers). pretty much similar to this year
> 
> next week will be interesting since the same time last year (10/1) did 2.54 with 3.50 million average


Right now it seems they're just falling under last year's numbers, so if that trend continues, maybe 3.4-3.45 million would be a good guess.

Third hour doing the best doesn't surprise me. Had Punk/Ryback-Heyman and the main event. Unfortunately, problem is outside of those two storylines... well, there is really nothing else. I mean the Steph/Big Show and HHH/Locker room stuff is there, but that's just a part of the main event storyline.

In any event, bad numbers. Expected? Sure, but still bad. No hour came close to breaking 4,000,000.

Edit: Although, if I remember correctly, last year's show on the same week for next week wasn't the go-home show into a PPV, so maybe with that in mind, they might do better, or even closer to breaking even. Not sure though, as go-home shows don't necessarily=ratings.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

> next week will be interesting since the same time last year (10/1) did 2.54 with 3.50 million average


If that's what they did last year (much worse than I remember, ouch), I'm sure they'll beat that next week. Would be nice if they added another good storyline outside of the main event one, though.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

ShowStopper '97 said:


> If that's what they did last year (much worse than I remember, ouch), I'm sure they'll beat that next week. Would be nice if they added another good storyline outside of the main event one, though.


Well there is another one that's been very popular with the crowds, and from the looks of it the TV audience as well. unk2 :heyman

(Doesn't mean you have to find it good, but there is another main event angle grabbing a good deal of attention that's going on, which funny enough, is one more than last year at this time).


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Sandrone said:


> Well there is another one that's been very popular with the crowds, and from the looks of it the TV audience as well. unk2 :heyman
> 
> (Doesn't mean you have to find it good, but there is another main event angle grabbing a good deal of attention that's going on, which funny enough, is one more than last year at this time).



I think this storyline would be alot better off if this was the 3rd biggest storyline in the company right now. But it being the second biggest storyline in the company is kind of lackluster.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

ShowStopper '97 said:


> I think this storyline would be alot better off if this was the 3rd biggest storyline in the company right now. But it being the second biggest storyline in the company is kind of lackluster.


I gotcha. It's just you say there's only one "good" storyline, or in more objective words, a storyline that's drawing well, which is the reason you're giving for the low ratings, when in actuality there's two that are doing well. Of course the main angle is doing better, but the secondary angle is doing very well as well (for the average viewership the show's been getting).

Personally, neither storyline is doing it for me like they were before NOC. This week was disappointment all around imo and I'm hoping things pick back up next week for the go-home show.


----------



## markedfordeath

without Bryan and Punk, this company would have no chance right now....those guys deserve a raise for all of their hard work, especially Bryan who hasn't missed a show including a house show until today...he won't be at smackdown tonight, so imagine the rating on that one.....boy works his ass off! Vince McMahon better recognize this.


----------



## Sonnen Says

The only way ratings will improve is if they have at least 10 legit Maineventers. Punk, Bryan, Orton, Cena (injured) and? In TNA they have a lot like Roode, Joe, Hardy, Aries, Angle, AJ, Magnus (getting there), Bully, Daniels, and Storm but since they're not used right or in a company that's as famous as WWE they don't really matter. If WWE has them they will do great business and will probably get higher ratings. The show is 3 hours and there is only few interesting parts like Punk, Bryan and Cesaro (rarely shows up and doesn't get an enough air time) other than that I lose interest.


----------



## markedfordeath

I think the Shield should kick out Rollins and have him start a feud with Bryan after he wins the title and Rollins/Bryan feud for the WWE title..they could have ironman matches, cage matches, last man standing matches, they could do it all, they have amazing chemistry.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Yeah, it's 3 hours and ALOT of filler. You can't have just 1 storyline that's at the top (even if it is quite good and is involving a bunch of guys like Cody, Miz, Show, etc) and then another storyline (Punk/Heyman) that is what it is, and then pretty much nothing. It's one thing if you're trying to fill 2 hours with that content (which still wouldn't be good, BTW), but 3 hours and it's like...you need more quality content. 3 hours is a very long time. 

Think about how long you are in a movie theater when you are watching a 3 hour movie. By the end of the movie when you go to get up out of your seat, your kind of tired and need to stretch when you get up. Well, that's how long Raw is every. single. week. They just need more quality content on a per week basis.


----------



## JY57

final rating - 2.81


----------



## markedfordeath

2.81? it was down, but way better than last year's....its not falling dramatically to 2.2's or anything....so i mean better than expected..not the greatest, but better than expected.


----------



## Jingoro

have the ratings basically been the same compared to last year and the year before and the year before? not that i've checked, but i only read about them back in the attitude era days. now the only news about them is a particularly low rating which always gets blamed on a football game or holiday.


----------



## markedfordeath

they've been improving from last year...they just are on the cusp of the writing team finding gold to make it better, they're so close.


----------



## stonefort

Raw down 300k viewers. Not a shock with snoozefest DBryan featured. All his matches are the same. Can it get more boring? 1000 kicks to the chest every match gets real old, real quick. No imagination.


----------



## markedfordeath

oh the trolls are out tonight! yep, all his fault, the bad rating was from the first hour and the hour he was in gained viewers, moron! he was only in the third hour and that had the higher viewership, yep, all Bryan's fault for Raw.


----------



## CALΔMITY

Too obvious of a troll. :lol


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

markedfordeath said:


> actually, i take you for a big gigantic moron!! Personally I hope you fall and break your neck, but that won't happen fast enough for me.





markedfordeath said:


> oh the trolls are out tonight! yep, all his fault, the bad rating was from the first hour and the hour he was in gained viewers, moron! he was only in the third hour and that had the higher viewership, yep, all Bryan's fault for Raw.


God damn, this guy needs to relax.

I know I've used butthurt a lot to describe most Bryan fans, and it is the case, but this is some next level shit.


----------



## KO Bossy

My god are you defensive, any possible criticism of Bryan you take as this vicious personal attack.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

DEM TROLLS ALL ANGRY.

DEAL WITH IT.

:bryan


----------



## markedfordeath

I still get attacked, but come on, Punk and Bryan are fucking carrying the show...they both deserve credit....they probably both put them toward the end of the show on purpose because they knew the first hour was going to suck balls....


----------



## KO Bossy

And its their own fault for making the first hour suck balls...they always put on the bigger stars at quarter hours because statistically, that's when people are conditioned to tune in, in addition to the overrun, which gains the most.


----------



## markedfordeath

fucking Raw....goddamn Vince needs to make it two hours again! this is seriously getting wacky, its not like the added revenue for that extra hour is doing them any good.....they should try something out where all the veteran guys get paid vacation and bring up the people from NXT and put them on Raw and see how the ratings do....couldn't hurt.


----------



## KO Bossy

I still fail to see why Raw needed to be 3 hours in the first place, so I agree. 2 hours is golden. When they made the switch in July 2012, they barely had 40 minutes that was actually worth watching. If they had 2 whole hours that were great and decided to expand on that, that's one thing. But they didn't even have a great 2 hour show, and then they added on an extra. Why? All its done is make the show drag on even longer and we get exposed to even more filler. So to make up that time, we get more useless matches like Barrett vs Miz, more social media plugs, more movie trailers, more recaps and week after week of instructions on how to use a fucking smart phone app. 

The problem with bringing up NXT guys is that they themselves aren't draws yet, and to make a name for themselves, they need veterans there to make them look good and help establish their place. Kassius Ohno winning the WWE title from Jacob Novak means almost nothing because neither have cred in the Fed. Ohno beating Cena or Punk or Orton for the title, now you've got something. That win means a lot because the person defeated means a lot. So a paid vacation for the veterans doesn't really make any sense.


----------



## Sonnen Says

They should have separate major storylines. The following deserves a shot and will probably add a lot to the show:

- Wyatt family doesn't have someone to feud with which is sad there should be a major babyface for the US title so that Bray at least knows what to do and holds a title that he will legitimize.
- Sandow is lost and is a complete after thought I mean give him something to work with is it that hard. The guy deserves way better than this.
- Cesaro. Give him the WHC already thats the only way I will be interested in it. Let him feud with ADR (just to beat him for it), Show, Cody, RVD, Ziggler, Barrett (returns as a face), Ryback (turns face in the start of next year), Henry (when he returns), etc. and the guy will shine like no other.
- Ziggler as much as I dont like him he should have someone to work with let him fight for the IC title at least by feuding with Axel which ends by him winning it.
- The tag division right now is pointless the only good ones are The Usos and The Shield. They should build more by having KOW (Ohno/Cesaro), debut Sami with a partner will have said Steen but since he's not even signed I would say Neville and also signing The Briscoes will help the division a lot.

That's the only way I will be interested in the rest of the show.


----------



## markedfordeath

Bryan already did that and they're going backward on him...I'm curious to see how the ratings would do with him as champion, might as well try it out. ..They should just give it to him already, and have him elevate other guys...like have mini feuds with the Real Americans and they should break Rollins off from the Shield and they could have a mini feud going....there's so much they can do....They should have put Punk in the main angle now that I think about it..that was a fail on their part...instead inserting Ryder and Gabriel, I mean not to take anything away from them, but Punk in that angle would have been golden, now they just ruined it....Now Triple H thinks he's a face, and its just getting boring. They fucked it up like I feared they would have...Not to mention they gave two shits about Night of Champions and Battleground...they're just half assing it to get to January. Where Cena and Sheamus can save everything, and the guys being used now will never be seen or heard from again. So many options and they blew them all.


----------



## KO Bossy

Why would they just give him the title already? The story is his chase for the title, a path he's been on for little over a month. Good things require time to build up and unfold. Right now, he's on the rise, but his name isn't big enough that he can make other guys. Cena was on top for 7 years, so when Bryan and Punk beat him, it meant a lot. Bryan has been on top for a month, so having Justin Gabriel beat him isn't going to make Gabriel's career or anything. Bryan isn't important enough to have that kind of sway attached to his name, yet. It takes years to build up to that point.


----------



## markedfordeath

they've fucked up so much with having Cena being the only guy featured for so long, that the product is going to be mediocre until most of the young guys are ready for the big time..that can take awhile.....


----------



## wb1899

A18-49 viewership:
8:00: 1,549,000 (-115,000)
9:00: 1,613,000 (-229,000)
10:00-11:05: 1,765,000 (-191,000)
----
Average: 1,642,233 (-178,333)


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Raw would probably get a better rating if it is just 2 hours


----------



## validreasoning

markedfordeath said:


> so basically its official, they're waiting for Cena to come back...so basically they put Punk and Bryan in a position to fail on purpose.....putting them in charge in a season that never does well for them, not exactly fair.....


cena will be the top guy when he returns unless bryan starts drawing insane numbers which this program was never allowing him to do in the first place 



Sonnen Says said:


> The only way ratings will improve is if they have at least 10 legit Maineventers. Punk, Bryan, Orton, Cena (injured) and? In TNA they have a lot like Roode, Joe, Hardy, Aries, Angle, AJ, Magnus (getting there), Bully, Daniels, and Storm but since they're not used right or in a company that's as famous as WWE they don't really matter.


you don't need 10 maineventers, if you have one nuclear hot guy then everything would fall into place re: wwe in 1998. also tna don't have 10 maineventers either, they book everyone at the same level there so its impossible to be elevated, winning the tna title means nothing either.


----------



## MaybeLock

I think we all agree that creatives stepped up their game after WM29 and have been produced good shows since then, but now they seem to have lost it again. They have forgotten about the midcard, we see the same matches over and over again. For example, I´m tired of Ambrose vs Ziggler, I think that could be a good rivalry for the midcard, but they have already burnt it by making them wrestle the same match every week. The WHC feud is horrible, hell they even managed to cool down RVD, who came back red hot. And the Heyman/Punk feud is going way too long IMO. Then the Corporation, which is probably one of the biggest creative efforts in the last few years, it´s also having some repetitive segments as well.

I don't know, maybe it´s impossible to keep a good booking for so long, but there is obviously a problem when for Battleground, you put almost the same show you did on Night of Champions, which was one of the worst PPV in a long time and it´s also going to be a big disappointment in buyrates.


----------



## Marv95

JY57 said:


> nothing to do with Cena.
> 
> September - December is just a terrible time for them period regardless who is in the main event.


Not that long ago they were doing 3s and sometimes 4s during this period. And this was when Cena was injured ironically. Yeah the 3 hours _are_ a problem but even if they went back to 2 hours next week ratings can still be in the 2s. The presentation of the show is being overlooked as a problem. It's not just the talent and filler stuff.


----------



## validreasoning

Marv95 said:


> Not that long ago they were doing 3s and sometimes 4s during this period. And this was when Cena was injured ironically.


its along time since raw has been doing 4s during football season. the last time raw did a 4 rating during football season was 15th anniversary show in november 2007 and that was built to for weeks. raw doing a 4 during football season has been extremely rare since 2001 actually and all but one of those shows ie 15th anniversary happened in 2005. no raw in 2002 came close to a 4 e.g


first 3 weeks up against football last 5 years

2013
september 9......2.91
september 16.....2.96
september 23.....2.82

2012
september 10.....2.89
september 17.....2.86
september 22.....2.72

2011
september 12.....2.72
September 19.....3.01
September 26.....2.93

2010
september 12.....3.02	
september 20.....2.8	
september 27.....2.75

2009
september 14.....3.4
september 21.....3.1
september 28.....3.1

2008
september 8......3.05
september 15.....2.7
september 22.....3.05


----------



## Sonnen Says

validreasoning said:


> cena will be the top guy when he returns unless bryan starts drawing insane numbers which this program was never allowing him to do in the first place
> 
> 
> 
> you don't need 10 maineventers, if you have one nuclear hot guy then everything would fall into place re: wwe in 1998. also tna don't have 10 maineventers either, they book everyone at the same level there so its impossible to be elevated, winning the tna title means nothing either.


Back in the 90s they had 10 maineventers or is a mainevent act. Austin, Taker, Rock, Foley, Angle, Jericho, Kane, Benoit, Rikishi, HHH, Booker T, etc. and the tag teams division back then was red hot. What I meant about the guys in TNA is that even if theyre not booked as one they are a mainevent material. Each have the talent to be a major maineventer. Magnus or Roode will be perfect for the cooperation angle.


----------



## THANOS

validreasoning said:


> its along time since raw has been doing 4s during football season. the last time raw did a 4 rating during football season was 15th anniversary show in november 2007 and that was built to for weeks. raw doing a 4 during football season has been extremely rare since 2001 actually and all but one of those shows ie 15th anniversary happened in 2005. no raw in 2002 came close to a 4 e.g
> 
> 
> first 3 weeks up against football last 5 years
> 
> 2013
> september 9......2.91
> september 16.....2.96
> september 23.....2.82
> *Average..........2.90*:dazzler
> 
> 2012
> september 10.....2.89
> september 17.....2.86
> september 22.....2.72
> *Average..........2.82*:dazzler
> 
> 2011
> september 12.....2.72
> September 19.....3.01
> September 26.....2.93
> *Average..........2.89*:bryan
> 
> 2010
> september 12.....3.02
> september 20.....2.8
> september 27.....2.75
> *Average..........2.86*:yes
> 
> 2009
> september 14.....3.4
> september 21.....3.1
> september 28.....3.1
> *Average..........3.20*
> 
> 2008
> september 8......3.05
> september 15.....2.7
> september 22.....3.05
> *Average..........2.93*


If you average out the past 3 weeks of ratings for each of those years during football season, RAW in 2013 is doing the the best ratings since 2009! :bryan2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THANOS said:


> If you average out the last 3 weeks of ratings for each of those years during football season, RAW in 2013 is doing the the best ratings since 2008! :bryan2


B-b-b-but I read he's not a draw!1!1!!11

DAT GOAT.

:bryan

:HHH2 knows what's best for business.


----------



## JY57

^^ the nielsens ratings style change every year. but last year each week of those 3 weeks had more viewers than this year

9/24/12 - 3.79 million vs 9/23/13 - 3.739 million
9/17/12 - 4.1 million vs 9/16/13 - 3.87 million
9/10/12 - 4.14 million vs 9/9/13 - 3.88 million


----------



## murder

Sonnen Says said:


> Back in the 90s they had 10 maineventers or is a mainevent act. Austin, Taker, Rock, Foley, Angle, Jericho, Kane, Benoit, Rikishi, HHH, Booker T


Austin, Taker and Kane were the only established main eventers in the fall of 98.

Rock and Foley became legit main eventers in late 98 after WWF was doing 5's against Football and (!) Nitro. 

Triple H wasn't a main eventer until summer of 99. 

Angle, Jericho, Benoit, Rikishi and Booker were not around in 98.


----------



## doctor doom

The general consensus is Bryan will never draw a dime. The ratings might be the same as last year, but the viewers are going down & significantly at that. Between Wrestlemania & Survivor Series the WWE just goes on auto pilot anyway. They won't do anything to improve the show or ratings until late November/early December in time for the Royal Rumble.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

validreasoning said:


> its along time since raw has been doing 4s during football season. the last time raw did a 4 rating during football season was 15th anniversary show in november 2007 and that was built to for weeks. raw doing a 4 during football season has been extremely rare since 2001 actually and all but one of those shows ie 15th anniversary happened in 2005. no raw in 2002 came close to a 4 e.g
> 
> 
> first 3 weeks up against football last 5 years
> 
> 2013
> september 9......2.91
> september 16.....2.96
> september 23.....2.82
> 
> 2012
> september 10.....2.89
> september 17.....2.86
> september 22.....2.72
> 
> 2011
> september 12.....2.72
> September 19.....3.01
> September 26.....2.93
> 
> 2010
> september 12.....3.02
> september 20.....2.8
> september 27.....2.75
> 
> 2009
> september 14.....3.4
> september 21.....3.1
> september 28.....3.1
> 
> 2008
> september 8......3.05
> september 15.....2.7
> september 22.....3.05



Very impressive. All of the past years, they at least had Cena to rely on. Not this year. That makes it even more impressive that they've maintained their audience with NFL back and no Cena this year.


----------



## THANOS

doctor doom said:


> The general consensus is Bryan will never draw a dime. The ratings might be the same as last year, but the viewers are going down & significantly at that. Between Wrestlemania & Survivor Series the WWE just goes on auto pilot anyway. They won't do anything to improve the show or ratings until late November/early December in time for the Royal Rumble.


Your opinion is not the general consensus :lmao. Are you millions all in one?

Bryan's segments have ALL gained huge amounts of viewers compared to the rest of the shows, even when he's in odd quarters, or wrestling in under-hyped insignificant matches. Look at the ratings his random match with Barrett did on Smackdown a month ago, in comparison to the rest of the show, for even more proof of that assertion.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Well, it is the general consensus of all posters with Benoit as their avatar.


----------



## markedfordeath

wait, so all those sold out merchandise stands that are rid of Bryan's shirts means he's not drawing a dime for the WWE? oh it must hurt to be ignorant.


----------



## Sonnen Says

murder said:


> Austin, Taker and Kane were the only established main eventers in the fall of 98.
> 
> Rock and Foley became legit main eventers in late 98 after WWF was doing 5's against Football and (!) Nitro.
> 
> Triple H wasn't a main eventer until summer of 99.
> 
> Angle, Jericho, Benoit, Rikishi and Booker were not around in 98.


You don't get it! Those guys where in the roster either ways in 98 or 99 when I said 90s I meant the AE as a whole because that's the highest point in terms of ratings and that's when it begins and ends in 2001 which all the guys I mentioned where there at the top, nobody left until 2001/02.


----------



## CALΔMITY

doctor doom said:


> *The general consensus is Bryan will never draw a dime.* The ratings might be the same as last year, but the viewers are going down & significantly at that. Between Wrestlemania & Survivor Series the WWE just goes on auto pilot anyway. They won't do anything to improve the show or ratings until late November/early December in time for the Royal Rumble.


Oh it is, is it? I'm sensing a bit of a biased opinion here. You all mad that Bryan actually is doing well even when using a couple of moves that a non-existent wrestler was known for?

From what I've seen with the numbers game, if I understand correctly, Bryan may not be bringing in 4s (or whatever), but he is still a draw. If he's selling merch, then that's a step in the right direction. I know that when I'm about to tune in to Raw the first thing I think about is what's going to happen with Bryan and the corporation. I can't speak for everyone, but it wouldn't surprise me if there were many others who do too.


----------



## markedfordeath

no one can bring in 4's nowadays. they've stayed consistent and that's good news. they're still above last year's ratings around this time....Yes, he's a draw.....its a down period for the WWE around this time and he's doing well. Haters will always hate him for no reason.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Calahart said:


> Oh it is, is it? I'm sensing a bit of a biased opinion here. You all mad that Bryan actually is doing well even when using a couple of moves that a non-existent wrestler was known for?
> 
> From what I've seen with the numbers game, if I understand correctly, Bryan may not be bringing in 4s (or whatever), but he is still a draw. If he's selling merch, then that's a step in the right direction. I know that when I'm about to tune in to Raw the first thing I think about is what's going to happen with Bryan and the corporation. I can't speak for everyone, but it wouldn't surprise me if there were many others who do too.


I am with you pretty much. I am interested in the Bryan/Corporation first, then Punk/Heyman and really not much else. The Rhodes/Shield thing has promise too.

As far as this Benoit thing, the guy is mad because he sees Bryan's success coupled with him using a couple of Benoit's moves, so instantly Bryan sucks or Bryan has stolen Benoit's success. Oh, if only WWE had give Benoit an EH!, EH! ,EH! chant, then he could have been as over as Bryan and had as many title reigns.


----------



## Eddie Ray

doesn't matter who they bring in, the internet has changed the landscape. sure, some shows beat the trend but things that have been running for decades are not going to have as much hype as a hip new tv show that is finite. the exception to that, at least from a UK perspective, is things like soaps which cater to a very large audience to begin with and is a daily show so it becomes a habit for the watcher. factoring in the taboo about wrestling, be it from a "its fake" perspective or from a "its too violent" perspective then its never going to be mainstream again...the few big names that bring in ratings only bring them in because they are familiar and they are familiar because the were fortunate enough to be top dog when it went through a very small window of mainstream success. it will never ever be like that again...

...and thats fine. Wrestling is where it should be, firmly a place in geek culture. I always find its like watching a martial arts movie.


----------



## CALΔMITY

Eddie Ray said:


> ...and thats fine. Wrestling is where it should be, firmly a place in geek culture. I always find its like watching a martial arts movie.


That's an interesting way of putting it.



> I am with you pretty much. I am interested in the Bryan/Corporation first, then Punk/Heyman and really not much else. The Rhodes/Shield thing has promise too.


The Punk/Heyman and Rhodes/Shield feuds are tied at second for me. I don't know which one I like more than the other at the moment.


----------



## Apex Rattlesnake

ShowStopper '97 said:


> B-b-b-but I read he's not a draw!1!1!!11
> 
> DAT GOAT.
> 
> :bryan
> 
> :HHH2 knows what's best for business.


Daniel "Ratings" Bryan strikes again :bryan


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

JY57 said:


> ^^ the nielsens ratings style change every year. but last year each week of those 3 weeks had more viewers than this year
> 
> 9/24/12 - 3.79 million vs 9/23/13 - 3.739 million
> 9/17/12 - 4.1 million vs 9/16/13 - 3.87 million
> 9/10/12 - 4.14 million vs 9/9/13 - 3.88 million


unk > :bryan

Marks be sour.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

********Cena was on those Raws in 2012. He's not on these in 2013*******

Punk is better on the mic, that's about it.

There's a reason why someone is the main event storyline as the #1 babyface, and someone isn't.

unk3

Dem *Ratings*

2013
september 9......2.91
september 16.....2.96
september 23.....2.82

2012
september 10.....2.89
september 17.....2.86
september 22.....2.72


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Aw shit, IT'S ON!

Now discuss which is more important, ratings (Bryan wins) or viewership (Punk wins). Obviously for both of you what it's gonna be, so I don't even need to say.

GO!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

And you've got the McMahons on RAW this year, but looks like even they aren't enough to save little ol' Bryan. Shame. What happens when you put a McMahon with Punk? Well last year, it gets you a 1.2m gain. 

Bryan's better in the ring, and that's actually about it. But, yeah, sour marks are gonna mark. Honestly, I'm glad Bryan's getting his small taste of the main event right now. After Punk had his 434 days as champ and working with legends in the industry, he needs that break from the spotlight.

unk


----------



## RatedR10

doctor doom said:


> The general consensus is Bryan will never draw a dime. The ratings might be the same as last year, but the viewers are going down & significantly at that. Between Wrestlemania & Survivor Series the WWE just goes on auto pilot anyway. They won't do anything to improve the show or ratings until late November/early December in time for the Royal Rumble.


No, that is not the "general consensus".


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Vince was on Raw, what once? For one segment? :lol 

We all know who the real DRAW was in 2012. There's a reason why he pretty much had to babysit Punk during his title reign. There's a reason why after working with all of the legends, he's now in a shitty little feud with Ryback and Curtis Axel, and a fucking manager :lmao And given the fact that CM Punk has proven he can't draw with Lesnar, I wouldn't get too comfortable with the working with the legends thing.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

TBH, this year has more going for it. First off HHH is a bigger draw than Cena, and secondly the main storyline is much stronger in terms of... well... actually having a story, where last year it was just Punk running around with the belt going from Cena to Ryback. Plus this year has two main event storylines, where last year only had one. So I'd say this year has it better.

But they're just about even, so it really doesn't matter.

... I MEAN RATINZ! VIEWERSHIP! TROLLING! YAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! unk2 :bryan


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Sandrone said:


> TBH, this year has more going for it. First off HHH is a bigger draw than Cena, and secondly the main storyline is much stronger in terms of... well... actually having a story, where last year it was just Punk running around with the belt going from Cena to Ryback. Plus this year has two main event storylines, where last year only had one. So I'd say this year has it better.
> 
> But they're just about even, so it really doesn't matter.
> 
> ... I MEAN RATINZ! VIEWERSHIP! TROLLING! YAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! unk2 :bryan


I think we all know why this year has been better in terms of content...

:bryan

I guess they felt they had more options with little Danny Bryan.


----------



## markedfordeath

well either way, Bryan main events the two ppv's in October this year, so that combined probably keeps him in the main event...its like one big ppv...either way he's probably staying in the main event...you can't keep a guy like that in the mid card, wouldn't make sense...plus he keeps his nose clean and doesn't mouth off like Ziggler does...so he'll be fine..Punk isn't lasting that much longer, he's retiring probably within the next couple of years, so the mark wars clearly don't make sense, because Bryan will have more years active by the end of it.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Judging by those viewers, looks like the audience doesn't agree that it's "better content." :lol The Corporation angle is complete garbage right now too. No wonder Punk flipping between Ryback and Cena last year generated more viewers than the Corporation can this year. And this angle has the entire roster involved. Damn, sucks for them.

Bryan can't pop a good RAW viewership with the help of the McMahons, and can't pop good PPV buys with the help of Cena and Punk vs. Lesnar. Poor little guy.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Judging by those viewers, looks like the audience doesn't agree that it's "better content." :lol The Corporation angle is complete garbage right now too. No wonder Punk flipping between Ryback and Cena last year generated more viewers than the Corporation can this year. And this angle has the entire roster involved. Damn, sucks for them.
> 
> *Bryan can't pop a good RAW viewership with the help of the McMahons, and can't pop good PPV buys with the help of Cena and Punk vs. Lesnar. Poor little guy.*


*
*


But I thought the "selling point" of SS was Punk/Lesnar? 

unk2

:lmao :lmao :lmao

This corporation angle is better than anything Punk was involved in last year. There's a reason why Punk has pretty much been demoted this year to the upper midcard, working with the likes of Axel, Ryback, and a manager. I mean, if CM Punk was such this magnificent draw, why not keep him in the main event permanently, or at least for this year? There's a reason for that.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

You know, Showstopper brings up a good point. So good, I want to ask these now:

1) Why did Cena drop out of the main event in 2008 for a few months to feud with JBL?

2) Why did Batista drop in and out of the main event for well... a good portion of his run from 2005-on.

3) Why wasn't Taker in all the main events over the years?

4) Why did HHH stay out of the main event for awhile after returning in 2005... and then after returning in 2007 (bar No Mercy 2007)?

Why were all of them demoted to not being in the main event storyline? Them being a bunch of unentertaining no-draw hacks is the answer, obviously. :taker :cena :HHH

(God damn, I said to myself I'd keep out of the trolling. I'm such a fucking liar... sort of.  )


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

ShowStopper '97 said:


> [/B]
> 
> 
> But I thought the "selling point" of SS was Punk/Lesnar?
> 
> 
> This corporation angle is better than anything Punk was involved in last year. There's a reason why Punk has pretty much been demoted this year to the upper midcard, working with the likes of Axel, Ryback, and a manager. I mean, if CM Punk was such this magnificent draw, why not keep him in the main event permanently, or at least for this year? There's a reason for that.


And I thought Bryan was the spotlight?  Should be fun seeing the NOC number bomb, too.

Better? Nah. That comes to opinion, anway. But I'll easily take anything Punk did last year over any of this shit. And demoted? :lol Trolling aside for a second, but you're smart enough to not actually believe that right? There's no room for him in the main event right now, he can't be in there all the time. I bet you think Bryan will be in the main event of each show for 2 years straight or something. lol at you trying to debate that Punk isn't main event, after carrying the company for the entire calender year of 2012 and working with all of these industry legends. Something Punk's already done, is something Bryan still needs to work for. And likely won't ever get.

@Sandrone, come on, buddy. Don't you know if you don't close every single show for the rest of your career after you become a main eventer, you're just an upper mid carder? It's common knowledge, son. That time Undertaker feuded with Heidenreich and Luther Reigns? Pfft, what a mid carder that guy is.

unk2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Sandrone said:


> You know, Showstopper brings up a good point. So good, I want to ask these now:
> 
> 1) Why did Cena drop out of the main event in 2008 for a few months to feud with JBL?
> 
> 2) Why did Batista drop in and out of the main event for well... a good portion of his run from 2005-on.
> 
> 3) Why wasn't Taker in all the main events over the years?
> 
> 4) Why did HHH stay out of the main event for awhile after returning in 2005... and then after returning in 2007 (bar No Mercy 2007)?
> 
> Why were all of them demoted to not being in the main event storyline? Bunch of no-draw hacks is the answer, obviously.


Comparing Cena and Taker to Punk?

:lmao Come on, bruv.

As for the rest of the post. Really? There's a difference between working with other main eventers, and plain old mid-carders (Axel and Ryback, and Heyman, a manager). They could have easily had Punk be the main babyface against the Corporation. Yet, we have to hear what this great draw Punk is, and how Bryan is so awful at everything, and all of the non-stop whining. Meanwhile, he's putting up great numbers without Cena even on the show and with the NFL back. Spare us the nonsense. I've never, ever seen a group of marks more butt-hurt over the push of one guy ever. It's quite sad. It's fine if someone isn't enjoying it, but the whining is so pathetic.


----------



## CALΔMITY

Trolling aside, Showstopper never really said that Punk is a talentless no-draw. Bryan is just doing better right now and so his current position is reflecting that.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Heidenreich and Luther Reigns = main eventers.

:lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Undertaker was already at legend status trying to get over some new big men. Didn't work, but the guy had been in the company for how long?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

So, main eventer status, being used to try to get guys over, while the main event is being occupied for new faces. Isn't that something Punk's doing right now?

He had two and half years of being in the main event, consecutively. You really think having him work with guys like Ryback and Axel is suddenly him becoming a mid carder? Damn, the delusion has hit you hard.


----------



## Oliver-94

ShowStopper '97 said:


> [/B]This corporation angle is better than anything Punk was involved in last year. There's a reason why Punk has pretty much been demoted this year to the upper midcard, working with the likes of Axel, Ryback, and a manager. I mean, if CM Punk was such this magnificent draw, why not keep him in the main event permanently, or at least for this year? There's a reason for that.


 :clap:clap

I can't see why someone would think Punk's feuds in 2012 are better than the current corporation angle. Even his best feud with Jericho in 2012 is inferior to this angle. The other angles were either terrible (AJ/Bryan feud) or too predictable (Ryback).


----------



## Happenstan

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> lol at you trying to debate that Punk isn't main event, after carrying the company for the entire calender year of 2012


Really? I thought Punk got bitched out last year because Cena main evented 80% of the shows from Punk's 434 days of failure. Now Punk was carrying the company the whole time? You fuckers change your positions more often than you change your little CM underoos.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I never said Punk is going to be a mid-carder for the rest of his career, or anything of the sort. Just that he's working in the upper-midcard right now.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

> I can't see why someone would think Punk's feuds in 2012 are better than the current corporation angle.


Because sometimes people don't share the same opinion.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

Calahart said:


> Trolling aside, Showstopper never really said that Punk is a talentless no-draw. Bryan is just doing better right now and so his current position is reflecting that.


Raw was getting more viewers this time last year. And Night Of Champions and Hell In A Cell were both up in buys over the previous year with Punk headlining while everyone is expecting those same shows this year with Bryan headlining to bomb.

So no, Bryan is not doing better than Punk.


----------



## Happenstan

ShowStopper '97 said:


> I never said Punk is going to be a mid-carder for the rest of his career, or anything of the sort. Just that he's working in the upper-midcard right now.


Just wait until Punk jobs to Ryback at Battleground. The bitching and crying will be legendary.


----------



## Oliver-94

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Because sometimes people don't share the same opinion.


 Solid argument there (Y)


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> There's no room for him in the main event right now, he can't be in there all the time.


To say that Punk isnt in the Main Event because there is no room for him? How many times was WWF Hulk Hogan pushed down the card because there wasnt room? Same with Cena. Punk held the title but Cena was the real main eventer for the duration. Oh yeah, Punk didnt carry the company in 2012. Punk never got the training wheels off, Cena carried that heavy load.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

ShowStopper '97 said:


> I never said Punk is going to be a mid-carder for the rest of his career, or anything of the sort. Just that he's working in the upper-midcard right now.


Something every made main eventer does once in a while in their career.

That's kinda how it works.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Something every made main eventer does once in a while in their career.
> 
> That's kinda how it works.


True, but comparing Cena and Taker doing that, who had been in the company and have been the #1 draws for years in the past is alittle different.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Jerichoholic4Life said:


> Raw was getting more viewers this time last year. And Night Of Champions and Hell In A Cell were both up in buys over the previous year with Punk headlining while everyone is expecting those same shows this year with Bryan headlining to bomb.
> 
> So no, Bryan is not doing better than Punk.


I seem to remember the real draw of tv and ppv at that time was somebody you failed to mention. :cena4


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

ShowStopper '97 said:


> True, but comparing Cena and Taker doing that, who had been in the company and have been the #1 draws for years in the past is alittle different.


When was Undertaker ever the number one draw? But that's besides the point. Longevity doesn't matter. Punk was in the main event picture for two years straight, it was time to build somebody new up. In order to do that, the main event needed fresh faces. 



Best4Bidness said:


> To say that Punk isnt in the Main Event because there is no room for him? How many times was WWF Hulk Hogan pushed down the card because there wasnt room? Same with Cena. Punk held the title but Cena was the real main eventer for the duration. Oh yeah, Punk didnt carry the company in 2012. Punk never got the training wheels off, Cena carried that heavy load.


And that is why when Cena and Hogan were pushed down throats, no other stars were being made. Do you just not get it? Right now, they're bringing a fresh face in the main event and are focusing on him. That's Bryan. If they brought Punk in, the focus leaves Bryan and gets put on Punk. That's what they're trying to not do, hence why they completely keep the two angles away from each other.



Best4Bidness said:


> I seem to remember the real draw of tv and ppv at that time was somebody you failed to mention. :cena4


Wrong, HIAC was headlined by Punk and an up and coming Ryback. And that pulled in a very good C-PPV number. Up from 2011, showcasing Punk's ability to bring in numbers on his own. I'd be surprised if this year's surpasses it.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

ShowStopper '97 said:


> I never said Punk is going to be a mid-carder for the rest of his career, or anything of the sort. Just that he's working in the upper-midcard right now.


I wish he was. It's really is where he belongs. 

He's in the same boat as people say Miz is in. Good on the mic( in Punk's case only when breaking kayfabe), but absolute shit in the ring.


----------



## CALΔMITY

Jerichoholic4Life said:


> Raw was getting more viewers this time last year. And Night Of Champions and Hell In A Cell were both up in buys over the previous year with Punk headlining while everyone is expecting those same shows this year with Bryan headlining to bomb.
> 
> So no, Bryan is not doing better than Punk.


Did i say he was doing better than Punk on a grand scale? No. I'm talking right now in the present. Also that doesn't go to say that I'm comparing qualities so much as right now Bryan is hitting it off and so WWE is capitalizing more on it.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> When was Undertaker ever the number one draw? But that's besides the point. Longevity doesn't matter. Punk was in the main event picture for two years straight, it was time to build somebody new up. In order to do that, the main event needed fresh faces.
> 
> 
> 
> And that is why when Cena and Hogan were pushed down throats, no other stars were being made. Do you just not get it? Right now, they're bringing a fresh face in the main event and are focusing on him. That's Bryan. If they brought Punk in, the focus leaves Bryan and gets put on Punk. That's what they're trying to not do, hence why they completely keep the two angles away from each other.
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong, HIAC was headlined by Punk and an up and coming Ryback. And that pulled in a very good C-PPV number. Up from 2011, showcasing Punk's ability to bring in numbers on his own. I'd be surprised if this year's surpasses it.


It was because Ryback. Hell, I bought it to see Ryback win the title. WWE disappointed me, haven't bought a no-Rock PPV from them since.


----------



## Oliver-94

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Wrong, HIAC was headlined by Punk and an up and coming Ryback. And that pulled in a very good C-PPV number. Up from 2011, showcasing Punk's ability to bring in numbers on his own. I'd be surprised if this year's surpasses it.


 And then Payback decreased from last year's June PPV (No Way Out). Which was disappointing considering this event was meant to be Punk's 'huge' return but clearly not many were invested in him returning. Not saying it's his fault though.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Best4Bidness said:


> I seem to remember the real draw of tv and ppv at that time was somebody you failed to mention. :cena4


And this year has :HHH2

Feels like we're going in circles now. 



> When was Undertaker ever the number one draw? But that's besides the point. Longevity doesn't matter. Punk was in the main event picture for two years straight, it was time to build somebody new up. In order to do that, the main event needed fresh faces.


Taker was (arguably) in 1997, but yeah, the point is correct. Plus Punk/Ryback is really more of a lower-main event feud as opposed to mid-card, because it's a part of the bigger Punk/s.Heyman storyline. It's the two of them combined that makes this not just some other mid-card feud. I mean, Punk/Ryback or Punk/Axel on it's own right now... yeah, it would truly be an upper mid-card feud. Much like Ryback w/Paul Heyman vs. someone like... Ziggler... that would be a mid-card feud. Ultimately the story and background of Punk/Heyman is why I'd say it's above almost all the feuds I mentioned before, and that goes for anything within the Punk/Heyman feud (Punk/Ryback).

Right now of course, no one is saying Punk/Heyman is anywhere near as big as the whole Bryan/Corporation (HHH and Orton) stuff, so let's stop comparing it to that or using that as a reason why Punk/Heyman isn't a main event level feud.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Billion Dollar Man said:


> It was because Ryback. Hell, I bought it to see Ryback win the title. WWE disappointed me, haven't bought a no-Rock PPV from them since.


Er, no.



Oliver-94 said:


> And then Payback decreased from last year's June PPV (No Way Out). Which was disappointing considering this event was meant to be Punk's 'huge' return but clearly not many were invested in him returning. Not saying it's his fault though.


Is this post for real? I don't recall Punk's return being the center of Payback. I recall it being Ryback vs. Cena. And I'd hardly call an 8 week absence being a "huge return." Come on, buddy.


----------



## Happenstan

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Wrong, HIAC was headlined by Punk and an up and coming Ryback. And that pulled in a very good C-PPV number. Up from 2011, showcasing Punk's ability to bring in numbers on his own. I'd be surprised if this year's surpasses it.


HIAC took place at the end of October. This is the end of September, genius. NOC 2012 indeed was Punk vs Cena. Again you don't know what you're talking about. Aren't you tired of embarrassing yourself at this point? When is enough enough?




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Is this post for real? I don't recall Punk's return being the center of Payback. I recall it being Ryback vs. Cena. And I'd hardly call an 8 week absence being a "huge return." Come on, buddy.


Just stop. You know damned well Payback was partially built around Punk's big PPV return in Chicago against Jericho.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Cena has a bigger role on the show than ANYBODY and EVERYBODY. Including Triple H.


----------



## Oliver-94

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Is this post for real? I don't recall Punk's return being the center of Payback. I recall it being Ryback vs. Cena. And I'd hardly call an 8 week absence being a "huge return." Come on, buddy.


 :lmao :lmao

That's why I typed it as 'huge' because apprantly, some Punk fans on here believed it was big enough.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Happenstan said:


> HIAC took place at the end of October. This is the end of September, genius. NOC 2012 indeed was Punk vs Cena. Again you don't know what you're talking about. Aren't you tired of embarrassing yourself at this point? When is enough enough?


:lmao And once again, you don't understand a single word I post. Is there something wrong with your head? I know HIAC hasn't happened yet, that's why I said I *doubt* this year will be better. If you follow along with the thread like you are supposed to do in forums, you would know that somebody said NOC and HIAC were headlined by Cena. Enter my post, where I corrected them.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Cena has a bigger role on the show than ANYBODY and EVERYBODY. Including Triple H.


Nah, not a part-time wrestling COO Triple H. Not even close. Especially not 2012 Cena.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Sandrone said:


> Nah, not a part-time wrestling COO Triple H. Not even close. Especially not 2012 Cena.


It's not even close. Especially since Cena is always the main guy, as long he's on the show. And last time I checked Triple H hasn't wrestled as part of this storyline yet.


----------



## Happenstan

Oliver-94 said:


> :lmao :lmao
> 
> That's why I typed it as 'huge' because apprantly, some Punk fans on here believed it was big enough.


They were actually right that time. Well, huge may be an over statement but there was considerable buildup to Punk returning at that PPV. You can debate how good the buildup was (Jericho/Heyman contract signing for example) but it existed none the less.


----------



## Happenstan

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> :lmao And once again, you don't understand a single word I post. Is there something wrong with your head? I know HIAC hasn't happened yet, that's why I said I *doubt* this year will be better. If you follow along with the thread like you are supposed to do in forums, you would know that somebody said NOC and HIAC were headlined by Cena. Enter my post, where I corrected them.


Yeah, you're right I misread. Apologies. Unlike some, I can actually admit when I'm wrong.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

ShowStopper '97 said:


> It's not even close. Especially since Cena is always the main guy, as long he's on the show. And last time I checked Triple H hasn't wrestled as part of this storyline yet.


Again, no. And it doesn't matter that HHH hasn't wrestled yet. He's THE top guy as far as authority goes right now, and while he's not "the main guy" due to his part-time status, he's bigger than Cena and anybody on the active roster right now (excluding Rock, Taker, and Lesnar, if for some reason you count them). He's a bigger draw than Cena and a super important figure right now in this current Bryan storyline He's the main antagonist in it all.


----------



## JY57

ShowStopper '97 said:


> It's not even close. Especially since Cena is always the main guy, as long he's on the show. And last time I checked Triple H hasn't wrestled as part of this storyline yet.


outside both matches with The Rock and Bryan (Hunter was special ref) didn't Hunter main event over Cena each PPV he was wrestled in (as a part timer I mean)?


----------



## Happenstan

The Sandrone said:


> Again, no. And it doesn't matter that HHH hasn't wrestled yet. He's THE top guy as far as authority goes right now, and while he's not "the main guy" due to his part-time status, he's bigger than Cena and anybody on the active roster right now (including Cena, but excluding Rock, Taker, and Lesnar). He's a bigger draw than Cena and a super important figure right now in this current Bryan storyline.


Really? Didn't HHH's opening promo on Smackdown 2 weeks back draw the lowest quarter hour rating in years? A 1 point something?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Sandrone said:


> Again, no. And it doesn't matter that HHH hasn't wrestled yet. He's THE top guy as far as authority goes right now, and while he's not "the main guy" due to his part-time status, he's bigger than Cena and anybody on the active roster right now (including Cena, but excluding Rock, Taker, and Lesnar). He's a bigger draw than Cena and a super important figure right now in this current Bryan storyline.


Nah. Cena has been the biggest part of WWE, the face of WWE, the face of Raw since 2005. He's not on TV right now, obviously, so yeah, Triple H is bigger than him and has been since SS. But overall, these past 8 years, it's not even close. Cena is the face of WWE. No one comes close to him.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Happenstan said:


> Yeah, you're right I misread. Apologies. Unlike some, I can actually admit when I'm wrong.


It's fine, bud.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JY57 said:


> outside both matches with The Rock and Bryan (Hunter was special ref) didn't Hunter main event over Cena each PPV he was wrestled in (as a part timer I mean)?



I'm talking about week in and week out, not just once a year. Cena is the face of WWE. The whole show has been built around him for the past 8 years.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Happenstan said:


> Really? Didn't his opening promo on Smackdown 2 weeks back draw the lowest quarter hour rating in years? A 1 point something?


Yeah, but Cena's had many hiccups himself. I don't have them on the computer I'm not now, but Cena isn't exactly that big of a ratings draw. He does have his moment and is the biggest amongst the full-time roster, but it's not saying much. Although Bryan is making a strong case for himself.

Plus come to think of it, that quarter was the first quarter, right? SD's breakdowns always seem to be it increasing throuhgout the show, so it's almost guaranteed the main event will do the best, while the opening would do the worst. At least that's based on the few breakdowns I've seen.

In any event, HHH is a bigger draw and a bigger deal than Cena was in 2012, which is what we're comparing, which is why 2013 has it better as far as that goes... or at the very least, equal. Which is all I was getting at as Showstopper seems to be putting Cena as the main draw for 2012 where in reality, HHH is the same right now.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

When it comes to being a TV and PPV draw, today, Triple H has Cena beat. It comes with being a part-time wrestler.


----------



## Waffelz

If HHH was full time, Cena would decimate him.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Waffelz said:


> If HHH was full time, Cena would decimate him.


Well, yeah. I'd say the same about Brock too.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It's no where near just about being a draw. The entire company has been built around and focused on Cena for the past 8 years. They've dedicated more time to him than anyone else on the roster. Triple H isn't The Rock, Brock, or even Taker just because he's a part timer like them. The kids these days tune in to see Cena. Not Triple H. 

All I've ever heard on this place is that Cena is this great draw. Now, predictably he's not. Okay.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Waffelz said:


> If HHH was full time, Cena would decimate him.


Possibly, but again, it's the time periods we're comparing and as I edited in my last post, HHH right now is a bigger deal than Cena was in 2012.



> It's no where near just baout being a draw. The entire company has been built around and focused on Cena for the past 8 years. They've dedicated more time to him than anyone else on the roster. Triple H isn't The Rock, Brock, or even Taker just beause he's a part timer like them. The kids these days tune in to see Cena. Not Triple H.


The kids... yeah, especially since HHH turned heel. But we're comparing ratings as a whole, not just kids, and who's more influential in that right now and a year ago, and we're not comparing their body of work but rather their influence in the select timeframes. Cena could have 8 years put into him, but HHH is a legend, and his part-time status... it's like a cheat code that makes him a bigger deal/draw than he'd be without it because of the rare appearances (until recently) and the rare matches. Because of that HHH is a bigger deal right now than Cena is, or was in 2012.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

Payback got 186,000 buys.

The anti-Punk/pro-Bryan people mocking that getting such a "low" number just remember how terrible you said 186k was if the final numbers for the Bryan headlined B and C shows this fall come in at significantly lower than that.


----------



## markedfordeath

why do pay per view buys matter to people nowadays? so some of the numbers have been low...but if you're WWE, don't you have to be expecting that simply because you're building up new stars, and you should expect low numbers to start....I mean if you just keep relying on your proven draws every single big match, then how do you expect to progress as a company? you don't become a draw over night, with time eventually the new guys will, including Bryan...I don't understand how people can say he doesn't draw yet when he's just new to the scene.....its a stupid argument.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I like Triple H, but I don't agree. Cena lost some steam this year with his title reign, but that's it. Cena has been a bigger part of the show (as a matter of fact, the biggest part of the show week in and week out, for 8 years now).


----------



## markedfordeath

i can't believe the Bryan hate on this website..finally someone new to the main event and all people want to do is want him out of it and want Cena and Punk to take over all the time once again....its just assinine....people need time to adjust..how do you expect him to get huge buys right away? the comparisons are childish and bullshit! obviously WWE likes his work or they'd send him to the mid card and put someone else in his place.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I agree this is Bryan's chance to run with the ball. I wish they would give Punk a real break to heal up, so he can come back and go after Bryan. That crap press slam from Rybotch didnt help Punk physically at all. Some people will never be happy if their favorite isnt the star. I wasnt when Taker squashed Punk a few years ago or when Sin Cara beat Bryan repeatedly. All you can do is have patience and hope the powers that be recognize what you see in your favorite wrestlers.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, Showstopper.

markedfordeath... why so mad? Where are all these people that want Punk to take over Bryan's spot... there really aren't that many (at least not that I've seen)... and an even better question is who wants Cena to take over Bryan's spot? No one's expecting huge buys right away... or they shouldn't, at least.


----------



## markedfordeath

well they keep bringing up pay per view buys....everyone keeps mentioning them..who cares....a lot of the top stars never drew big numbers on PPV, that never stopped them from making it big...and it was already established that the Night of Champions number was going to be low due to the Mayweather fight.....Bryan is doing a top notch job, doing everything he's told, good company man, yet people still bash him, and we finally have someone new in the main event and its just very disheartening to see the hate. he works his ass off...He has a lot of years left in the tank, he'll probably be on top until he leaves...Cena probably only has 2-3 years left, Bryan will still be around by then, Punk? probably not..... so this mark war should be a non issue now....after Punk main events WM he said that's all he has left to do, then he's done. so the marks will go away.


----------



## KO Bossy

markedfordeath said:


> well they keep bringing up pay per view buys....everyone keeps mentioning them..who cares....a lot of the top stars never drew big numbers on PPV, that never stopped them from making it big...and it was already established that the Night of Champions number was going to be low due to the Mayweather fight.....Bryan is doing a top notch job, doing everything he's told, good company man, yet people still bash him, and we finally have someone new in the main event and its just very disheartening to see the hate. he works his ass off...He has a lot of years left in the tank, he'll probably be on top until he leaves...Cena probably only has 2-3 years left, Bryan will still be around by then, Punk? probably not..... so this mark war should be a non issue now....after Punk main events WM he said that's all he has left to do, then he's done. so the marks will go away.


Cena has a lot longer than 2-3 years left. He's taken good care of his body, he'll probably be a full timer until he's in his early to mid 40s. Hell, Big Show, Mark Henry are all at that age and still going. Cena is only 36.


----------



## markedfordeath

but due to the crowd reactions, WWE can't afford to remain shoving him down our throats...they are probably expecting him to get huge pops when he returns but its not going to happen. if they once again slot him into the main events of every show, then WWE will continue to suffer. He should go down to the mid card one time in his career, that would be swell. He should do what Punk is doing now...help the younger guys get over.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Cena has been getting mixed at best reactions for years. He will be at the top of the card until he retires. WWE see him as their public face and their ambassador. I dont ever see them turning their guy who does so much charitable work in their name. As far as putting over the midcard, I'm sure Cena filled that quota when he put over Bryan clean. I dont expect to see Cena doing that for anyone anytime soon.


----------



## markedfordeath

but I also don't see Bryan ever moving down again because he has Michaels, he has Regal, he has Cena having his back all the time....with his connections he'll probably stay put....Michaels got them to hire him the first time and him and Regal convinced Vince to bring him back in 2010...and now he's getting the push of his life probably because Cena went to bat for him...and he's doing a great job....so i dont see him going back down to where he was either...they could share the spotlight. The live crowds will demand it.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Well, they need more top guys, so there is room for Bryan. Sheamus will probably go heel because Bryan has supplanted him on the face side, plus most of the crowd hates his pasty ass.


----------



## markedfordeath

the thing I have trouble believing is how Bryan can't make it big...the crowds overwhelmingly love him...so I can't see him not being successful.....it wouldn't make sense for the crowds to love him everywhere in the world and chanting his name in every arena, and him not staying a top guy...that just doesn't make sense how he cant stay in the main event due to him being so popular....I mean is it possible? because he's the only one that is LOVED everywhere.....


----------



## checkcola

Best4Bidness said:


> Cena has been getting mixed at best reactions for years. He will be at the top of the card until he retires. WWE see him as their public face and their ambassador. I dont ever see them turning their guy who does so much charitable work in their name. As far as putting over the midcard, I'm sure Cena filled that quota when he put over Bryan clean. I dont expect to see Cena doing that for anyone anytime soon.


I don't see an obvious choice from other WWE babyfaces anyway. Kofi? Dolph? Santino? Ehhhh...


----------



## markedfordeath

Bryan will make it big....calling him troll doesn't help though.


----------



## CM BORK

CM GOAT bringing dem third hour ratings.

unk7


----------



## Happenstan

The Sandrone said:


> Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, Showstopper.
> 
> markedfordeath... why so mad? *Where are all these people that want Punk to take over Bryan's spot... there really aren't that many (at least not that I've seen*)... and an even better question is who wants Cena to take over Bryan's spot? No one's expecting huge buys right away... or they shouldn't, at least.


Then you're blind. While those calls have died down some this past week or so there was a point where we were getting multiple threads per day wishing Punk would join the Corp angle and supplant Bryan over time or just replace Bryan outright. Then some turned it into wanting Punk to replace Orton as Corp champion.

I haven't seen anyone who WANTS Cena to take over Bryan's spot, there have been many who FEAR that will happen.




CM BORK said:


> CM GOAT bringing dem third hour ratings.


When you wish upon a star, makes no difference who you are...


----------



## markedfordeath

do you see that happening? with Cena?


----------



## #Mark

Billion Dollar Man said:


> I wish he was. It's really is where he belongs.
> 
> He's in the same boat as people say Miz is in. *Good on the mic( in Punk's case only when breaking kayfabe)*, but absolute shit in the ring.


Sounds to me like you're describing Hunter.

I'm sort of baffled that people are still blaming Punk for the Payback buyrate. The guy was in a mid-card match with three weeks of build and he wasn't even on TV to build the angle. Not to mention the PPV was right before MITB and Summerslam. I guess since we're blaming Punk for that buyrate then The Rock deserved the blame for the disappointing Survivor Series 2011 buyrate right?


----------



## MaybeLock

Happenstan said:


> Then you're blind. While those calls have died down some this past week or so there was a point where we were getting multiple threads per day wishing Punk would join the Corp angle and supplant Bryan over time or just replace Bryan outright. Then some turned it into wanting Punk to replace Orton as Corp champion.
> 
> I haven't seen anyone who WANTS Cena to take over Bryan's spot, there have been many who FEAR that will happen.


Well, there was a guy who opened a thread because he wanted Rey Mysterio to take Bryan´s spot : It´s obvious that at some point Punk or Cena will go against the Corporation. In a storyline like this, it´s going to be impossibe that they stay away for so long without taking sides. Survivor Series might be a good excuse to get some new babyfaces into the storyline, in fact.

As far as Cena goes, it´s obvious that he´s going to be the golden boy of the WWE until he retires, that doesn't mean there is no room for more stars like Bryan or Punk to be in the Main Event. I´d say Punk and Cena, specially Cena, are at a level where they are above the WWE title and can produce good feuds without a title involved, while Bryan is still growing with title regins as a star, not in the level where I´d put him against guys like Lesnar or Rock.


----------



## validreasoning

meltzer numbers for last week



> Notes from the 9/16 Raw that did a 2.96 rating and 4.01 million viewers.
> 
> Dolph Ziggler vs. Dean Ambrose lost 280,000 viewers. Fandango vs. R-Truth lost 520,000 viewers. The Dusty Rhodes interview segment with Stephanie McMahon with The Shield and Big Show was a huge quarter, with a gain of 836,000 viewers. *Naomi & Cameron & Brie Bella vs. Aksana & Alicia Fox & Layla lost 1,020,000 viewers*, which again emphasizes that whatever exposure they got on E! doesn’t translate into more interest in them by the Monday night fans, nor has their been any new female shift in Raw viewers from the big female numbers of Total Divas. Rob Van Dam vs. Damien Sandow gained 240,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. The Miz gained 60,000 viewers. The Paul Heyman & Ryback promo at 10 p.m. lost 120,000 viewers which almost never happens in that time slot. The three-way tag match with The Usos vs. Jack Swagger & Antonio Cesaro vs. Brodus Clay & Sweet T gained 80,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Roman Reigns gained 580,000 viewers.


biggest loss of the year??


----------



## JY57

> For the segment-by-segment, Dolph Ziggler vs. Dean Ambrose lost 280,000 viewers. Fandango vs. R-Truth lost 520,000 viewers. The Dusty Rhodes interview segment with Stephanie McMahon with The Shield and Big Show was a huge quarter, with a gain of 836,000 viewers. Naomi & Cameron & Brie Bella vs. Aksana & Alicia Fox & Layla lost 1,020,000 viewers, which again emphasizes that whatever exposure they got on E! doesn’t translate into more interest in them by the Monday night fans, nor has their been any new female shift in Raw viewers from the big female numbers of Total Divas. Rob Van Dam vs. Damien Sandow gained 240,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. The Miz gained 60,000 viewers. The Paul Heyman & Ryback promo at 10 p.m. lost 120,000 viewers which almost never happens in that time slot. The three-way tag match with The Usos vs. Jack Swagger & Antonio Cesaro vs. Brodus Clay & Sweet T gained 80,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Roman Reigns gained 580,000 viewers.


estimated breakdown for last week (via WON)


----------



## JY57

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_73580.shtml#.UkQYfhb3CL0



> WWE NEWS: Raw TV quarter-hour ratings - Punk's return boosts entire show, how did the 11-on-3 main event fare?
> 
> C.M. Punk's return segment on the Monday, September 23 WWE Raw episode single-handedly boosted this week's Raw TV rating.
> 
> Punk's segment scored a 2.47 rating in the males 18-49 demographic. The next-highest rating was a 2.21 rating for a five-minute over-run, which contained the finish of the Team Bryan vs. Team Shield handicap elimination match.
> 
> Looking only at the regular portion of Raw (non-over-run), the next-highest-rated quarter-hour was the opening segment, which scored a 2.04 rating.
> 
> Raw Quarter-Hour Stats (for m18-49 demo):
> 
> - Punk's 2.47 rating was the highest-rated Q9 segment (top of the third hour) in one month and second-highest-rated of the last two months.
> 
> - The 2.21 over-run rating was the lowest since July 29. Last week's over-run rating was a 2.65 for the finish of Daniel Bryan vs. Roman Reigns one-on-one, plus a post-match angle involving the babyface roster "making the save" for Bryan.
> 
> - The start of the handicap elimination match scored a 1.78 rating in Q12, which was the lowest-rated Q12 in three months dating back to June 24. The rating was dragged down by two full commercial breaks.
> 
> - Raw scored a below-average 1.89 rating at the top of the second hour for the Miz TV segment involving Miz, Stephanie McMahon, and Big Show. This was the lowest-rated Q5 since July 29.
> 
> Raw Quarter-Hour Break Down (m18-49 demo)
> 
> - OVERALL: 1.90 rating / 1.197 million viewers.
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened with a 2.04 rating for Triple H and Stephanie McMahon addressing the roster, then booking the 11-on-3 handicap match main event.
> 
> The segment peaked with 1.491 million viewers at 8:10 p.m., which was the most-watched minute of the first two hours.
> 
> - Q2: Raw dropped to a 1.78 rating for the first-half of World champ Alberto Del Rio vs. Kofi Kingston, plus two full commercial breaks.
> 
> - Q3: Raw was about the same with a 1.79 rating for the finish of Del Rio-Kingston, one commercial, and backstage segments.
> 
> - Q4: Raw fell to a show-low 1.62 rating for the Prime Time Players vs. Wyatts and two full commercial breaks affecting the rating.
> 
> - Q5: Raw scored a 1.89 rating at the top of the second hour for Miz TV, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q6: Raw slipped to a 1.84 rating for Randy Orton vs. Rob Van Dam, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q7: Raw increased to a second-hour-high 1.92 rating for an Orton-RVD post-match angle, Stephanie and A.J. Lee backstage, other backstage segments, and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> - Q8: Raw fell to a 1.74 rating for Santino vs. Fandango, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q9: Raw popped to a 2.47 rating for C.M. Punk's return, Paul Heyman promo exchange, and Ryback brawl. There was no commercial break during the segment, similar to Q1.
> 
> The segment built from 1.330 million viewers at the top of the hour to a peak audience of 1.694 million viewers at 10:12 p.m. as the brawl unfolded. The segment blew the rest of the show out of the water, averaging more than 1.5 million viewers from 10:04 to 10:14 p.m.
> 
> - Q10: Raw dropped to a 1.69 rating for the "comedown segment" of Team A.J. Lee vs. Team Total Divas and two full commercials.
> 
> - Q11: Raw jumped to a 1.96 rating for Daniel Bryan's pre-main event promo, the Rhodes Brothers attacking The Shield, one commercial, and the start of the handicap main event.
> 
> The Rhodes attack popped the quarter-hour rating, registering a peak audience of 1.515 million viewers at 10:35 p.m. before Raw cut to break.
> 
> - Q12: Raw fell to a 1.78 rating for the meat of the main event, plus two full commercial breaks.
> 
> - Over-Run: Raw finished with a 2.21 rating for the finish of the main event. The segment peaked with a pedestrian 1.436 million viewers when Raw went off the air at 11:04 p.m.
> 
> Caldwell's Analysis: Punk vs. Heyman is a clearly-defined, singular feud centered on two compelling, strong characters. It drew a big audience this week. On the other hand, the Daniel Bryan & Team Babyfaces vs. the Kinda-Heel Power Couple storyline is a mess, which produced an odd 11-on-3 main event featuring interchangeable, emasculated babyfaces alongside the most-recent WWE champion, Daniel Bryan, whose character is in a delicate position right now. The result was a lukewarm reception for this week's main event.


quarter hour ratings from PWTorch for this week.

Punk/Heyman was clearly the winner of the night


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

:lmao And trolls want Brie as champ? pathetic.

rton2 with that small gain. not a good look for a top star. Eh, i'll see how much his match with RVD gained, should be better.

Edit: it's crazy how Punk and Heyman's colorful characters make this weak ass feud so watchable. Kudos to them

LOLbellas


----------



## MaybeLock

Awesome numbers for Punk/Heyman once again, this rivalry is really drawing more than I expected since Bork left.

PS: In before someone says it was all because of Heyman (or even Ryback) :


----------



## CALΔMITY

Well of course it was the highlight. I still stand by what I've said about Bryan and how I always anticipate the corporation angle the most. However, I tuned in last Monday expecting it to get all kinds of loud and exciting once Punk came out to his home town so it was an exception and just as anticipated as corporation. 

The question I ask is does this happen for punk all the time or was this as highly anticipated as it was for me? Because I enjoy the level of excitement and energy from the crowd? No doubt Punk is entertaining, but they always especially heavily advertise any appearance he makes in Chicago.


----------



## #Mark

The Punk/Heyman segment was by far the best thing on RAW so i'm pleased to see the number it got.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Interesting... Heyman/Ryback lost... but of course it's the same case as what happened with Punk a few weeks ago. If I remember correctly, that Heyman/Ryback segment took up only about a third of the quarter.

But wow, looks like Punk's "return" was a big success. Some credit goes to Heyman and even a little to Ryback I suppose. Even topping the overrun, which hasn't been done post-Summerslam up until this show, if I'm not mistaken. And what do ya know? The segment wasn't some 5 minute promo, it actually took up the whole quarter. 

unk2 :heyman


----------



## Eddie Ray

Punks newest incarnation is his best character to date. hes edgy with raw passion and a real thirst for blood. it easily outweighs his 2011 run which made him a little lame and Cena-ish.

I hope it continues to intrigue and gather him more fans.


----------



## kiguel182

I think this shows that the "babyfaces against The Shield" idea it's starting to get tiresome. They are making slight variations to the main-event every week and people want something new.

Sure, the ending with the babyfaces standing tall was different but that's not the advertised segment so I don't know how much that factor in.

Of course marks will throw every little number they can at each other to win some imaginary war but the fault here is probably more related to the way this angle is being written as of late and the way they are dragging it.


----------



## THANOS

Awesome to hear that Punk is doing huge numbers lately. Seeing him in Chicago is always a special attraction and this proved that yet again. Bryan's main event with the, as mentioned, emasculated babyfaces (thanks :HHH2 for helping their credibility), didn't do too well, but I suppose I understand why. His promo to start the match was one of the highest segments in the show, which shows that there is definitely interest in Bryan, fans just didn't want to see those (worthless :HHH2) babyfaces team with him to take on the Shield in a really oddly booked show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THANOS said:


> Awesome to hear that Punk is doing huge numbers lately. Seeing him in Chicago is always a special attraction and this proved that yet again. Bryan's main event with the, as mentioned, emasculated babyfaces (thanks :HHH2 for helping their credibility), didn't do too well, but I suppose I understand why. His promo to start the match was one of the highest segments in the show, which shows that there is definitely interest in Bryan, fans just didn't want to see those (worthless :HHH2) babyfaces team with him to take on the Shield in a really oddly booked show.


This show was light on Bryan, in comparison to past weeks. Which is probably why overall viewership was down in each of the 3 hours. I expect we see more Bryan next week, and going forward. Not a coincidence the Corporation angle didn't do as well with less Bryan than usual.

:bryan


----------



## #Mark

The more this angle plays out the less optimistic I am about it. Unfortunately, I think a year from now we'll be adding Daniel Bryan to the list of squandered talent.


----------



## markedfordeath

yeah there was a huge jump for Bryan's promo which was cool, the main event sucked, so no surprise..congrats to Punk.


----------



## hazuki

I thought Punk's promo was good not great but quite puzzled why WF hated it so much. He's in his home town of course hes going to try to get some cheap po for his city references and the segment afterwards was the best part of the show.


----------



## markedfordeath

no surprise, Punk and Bryan carry another show....they're the only two that don't lose viewers.


----------



## THANOS

hazuki said:


> I thought Punk's promo was good not great but quite puzzled why WF hated it so much. He's in his home town of course hes going to try to get some cheap po for his city references and the segment afterwards was the best part of the show.


I can tell you this much. I bet the ratings for RAW in my country were tremendous for that segment. Hockey will always equal a big win over here, and, personally, I loved it.


----------



## #Mark

hazuki said:


> I thought Punk's promo was good not great but quite puzzled why WF hated it so much. He's in his home town of course hes going to try to get some cheap po for his city references and the segment afterwards was the best part of the show.


I thought it was great. The underlying theme had little to do with Chicago and was easy to relate to. The point that he was trying to convey was that he's been beaten and broken but now he's more resilient then ever. The way he utilized Chicago to relate that message was brilliant. Heyman was gold per usual playing the smarmy and delusional heel. It was a classic pro wrestling promo, none of that shoot style BS that the WWE has been relying on as of late. The babyface was actually selling that he was pissed off because he lost and the heel rubbed the victory in his face.

I couldn't believe the backlash it received on here.


----------



## THANOS

#Mark said:


> I thought it was great. The underlying theme had little to do with Chicago and was easy to relate to. The point that he was trying to convey was that he's been beaten and broken but now he's more resilient then ever. The way he utilized Chicago to relate that message was brilliant. Heyman was gold per usual playing the smarmy and delusional heel. It was a classic pro wrestling promo, none of that shoot style BS that the WWE has been relying on as of late. The babyface was actually selling that he was pissed off because he lost and the heel rubbed the victory in his face.
> 
> I couldn't believe the backlash it received on here.


I agree completely. Great summary. The backlash came from the same simple minded people that hate all face style promos, and can't separate pandering from relating.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

That CM GOAT.

unk

Overrun looking pretty rough. lol.


----------



## Sonnen Says

Punk last week gained the most and now he gained the most to be the highest part of the show. From 1.74 to 2.47 that's huge.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

People hated the Punk promo? :lol shit was GOLD.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

swagger_ROCKS said:


> People hated the Punk promo? :lol shit was GOLD.


Haters gonn' hate, man. Looks like the vast majority completely disagree.

unk


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

swagger_ROCKS said:


> People hated the Punk promo? :lol shit was GOLD.


Maybe if you thought RAW was ESPN.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Corporation angle's back is getting tired from carrying the show the past couple of months.

As much as people get on Cena for his promos, Punk's promo was kind of Cena-esque this week. "CHICAGO! HOCKEY! BLACKHAWKS! I'M GOING TO KICK YOUR BUTT! LOUD NOISES!" It was bad.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I'd take that awesome Chicago promo Punk did over anything Bryan does in this Corporation angle, anyday. Watching a guy yell "Yes!" in horrible generic promos and kick somebody nonstop can get kind of stale.

And the audience thought so too. That Punk > Corporation storyline. :lol



> - Punk's 2.47 rating was the highest-rated Q9 segment (top of the third hour) in one month and second-highest-rated of the last two months.
> 
> - The 2.21 over-run rating was the lowest since July 29.


Sour.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Corporation angle has been carrying the show for 2 months. It also has been getting the best ratings on the entire show the past couple of months. It's this angle and then a HUGE gap between what is next. And it looks like it is staying that way for quite awhile.

And on a night where the Heyman/Punk/Ryback/Axel angle has the best number (2.47 :lol), the overall viewership of the show is down each of the 3 hours. Coincidence? I think not. Bryan was only in one segment, I think we get alot more of him going forward. Thankfully.


----------



## Sonnen Says

ShowStopper '97 said:


> The Corporation angle's back is getting tired from carrying the show the past couple of months.
> 
> As much as people get on Cena for his promos, Punk's promo was kind of Cena-esque this week. "CHICAGO! HOCKEY! BLACKHAWKS! I'M GOING TO KICK YOUR BUTT! LOUD NOISES!" It was bad.


I like how this goes when Punk does something for the casual "Oh thats crap! Pandering to the crowd now" but when his promos are described as IWC pandering people shit on him for being an Internet darling and that's all he does. So how this shit can work because every face right now from part timers to full timers are all about pandering to the crowd and cheap pops except Punk is at least more edgy. I like what Punk is doing let him have fun with his hometown crowd and stop questioning everything because Punk will bring out the best out of anyone if he wants to.


----------



## Soulrollins

ShowStopper '97 said:


> The Corporation angle's back is getting tired from carrying the show the past couple of months.
> 
> As much as people get on Cena for his promos, Punk's promo was kind of Cena-esque this week. "CHICAGO! HOCKEY! BLACKHAWKS! I'M GOING TO KICK YOUR BUTT! LOUD NOISES!" It was bad.



It was more like a Rock kind of thing, acting like the people's champion and talking and excited the audience with the heat on his home.

I think he just lacked scream. "and the millions!" :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Sonnen Says said:


> I like how this goes when Punk does something for the casual "Oh thats crap! Pandering to the crowd now" but when his promos are described as IWC pandering people shit on him for being an Internet darling and that's all he does. So how this shit can work because every face right now from part timers to full timers are all about pandering to the crowd and cheap pops except Punk is at least more edgy. I like what Punk is doing let him have fun with his hometown crowd and stop questioning everything because Punk will bring out the best out of anyone if he wants to.


Every other face panders? I must have missed where every other face wears the hockey jersey of the city and mentions the name of the city in the promo numerous times.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

Punk is allowed to pander for one night in his hometown. It's not like his current angle is any good anyways.


----------



## Sonnen Says

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Every other face panders? I must have missed where every other face wears the hockey jersey of the city and mentions the name of the city in the promo numerous times.


When I read this I think of The Rock and Mick Foley. It's not like he will wear it every week it happens to be in his hometown it's a great way to show support. Either ways he's more edgy than all the part timers and full timers and if you think otherwise than who's more edgy then.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Sonnen Says said:


> When I read this I think of The Rock and Mick Foley. It's not like he will wear it every week it happens to be in his hometown it's a great way to show support. Either ways he's more edgy than all the part timers and full timers and if you think otherwise than who's more edgy then.


I'm fine if he does it, no skin off my back. But let's just admit what it is.

And as for being edgy, that's fine. But I don't really care about being "edgy." Edgy doesn't necessarily mean good. And being edgy in this era isn't exactly saying much. It's like being the badass of the boy scouts.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

It was his hometown. He did this even when he was a heel. The promo's flow still went beautifully.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

ShowStopper '97 said:


> And on a night where the Heyman/Punk/Ryback/Axel angle has the best number (2.47 :lol), the overall viewership of the show is down each of the 3 hours. Coincidence? I think not. Bryan was only in one segment, I think we get alot more of him going forward. Thankfully.


Did you really just try to say that the overall viewership is down because of the show's best rated segment? You really just try to put the entire 3 hours on one segment, but also the one segment that topped the night by a large margin?

:lmao The desperation.

Punk's segment was the only segment that kept the overall number from being even lower. This week, the Corporation angle bombed hard. Including Bryan's overrun, doing the worst since July. lol. No need to be so upset it. Just accept it and move on.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Did you really just try to say that the overall viewership is down because of the show's best rated segment? You really just try to put the entire 3 hours on one segment, but also the one segment that topped the night by a large margin?
> 
> :lmao The desperation.
> 
> Punk's segment was the only segment that kept the overall number from being even lower. This week, the Corporation angle bombed hard. Including Bryan's overrun, doing the worst since July. lol. No need to be so upset it. Just accept it and move on.


No reason to be upset. It's about time another "feud" contributed something. It's too bad it took Raw being in Punk's hometown as was mentioned last week, and still didn't manage to get 4 million viewers.

And yes, not one hour went over 4 million viewers this week. Put Bryan in more than one segment, and you'll probably get there, just like previous weeks.


----------



## CALΔMITY

I don't know where you both keep getting your ammo from. :lol


----------



## stonefort

Not a shock that viewers don't want to watch Boring Daniel Bryan.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

stonefort said:


> Not a shock that viewers don't want to watch Boring Daniel Bryan.


Every other Raw this summer says differently.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Damn, the numbers this week really got under your skin, Showstopper. :lol It's a good thing Punk's segment did so well this week, the whole show would have bombed. 



> I don't know where you both keep getting your ammo from.


Don't need much ammo for this week. Punk completely tore the Corporation angle a new asshole. And not just in quality. unk



> Not a shock that viewers don't want to watch Boring Daniel Bryan.


Ain't that the truth.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Yeah, it only took Punk a good couple of months to beat out a Corporation angle segment. Party like it's 1999, bruv.

Bravo :clap ? I guess.

I'm sure next week will be business as usual. Putting Bryan in more than ONE segment, and get back to the 4 million viewers mark. Something that "high" Punk segment couldn't get the show to. It's too bad the Corporation segments have done that in the past couple of months, and quite often. Have your one week. You've waited awhile for it.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

Considering he's had Axel for the past several weeks, not really shocked Punk wasn't getting great numbers. I do love seeing people argue over numbers though, even though they don't prove anything.


----------



## markedfordeath

just shut up everyone! both guys have proven that they can carry the show...calm down! last week Punk wasn't on and it still almost got a 3.0....and this week Punk did well..can we just all admit that they're both doing well? geez!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

markedfordeath said:


> just shut up everyone! both guys have proven that they can carry the show...calm down! last week Punk wasn't on and it still almost got a 3.0....and this week Punk did well..can we just all admit that they're both doing well? geez!


What's that? The show got a higher rating last week when Punk wasn't on the show at all?

unk


----------



## markedfordeath

and people have proven there's interest in Bryan, and they love it when he wrestles, his main events the last two months have drawn quite the audience, its no coincidence that his pre-match promo this week gained viewers on its own..it had a big jump as the second highest rated segment of the night behind Punk's....so they're both doing well as the top two on every Raw...and people like it when Bryan wrestles by himself.no one wants to see a bunch of jobbers in a match helping him. Its not entertaining.. They like it when he wrestles on his own...can we stop hating on each other today please! Punk and Bryan both deserve the good ratings....I'm sure Vince is pleased. And since it was in Chicago, it makes sense to give Punk the bulk of the time....and be rewarded for it. I bet you when Raw is in Washington in October, the bulk of the time will go to Bryan, oh the ovation there.


----------



## Lebyonics

The entire show gets bombed except Punk's and still he gets blamed for the ratings fpalm


----------



## markedfordeath

because this Raw sucked compared to others...no surprise! But Punk deserved the huge gain and the ratings this week, congrats to him..next week for the go home show it better be awesome, I hate it when they phone shit in.


----------



## Londrick

Not surprised in the least about the ME/OR. IIRC, last time Zack Ryder main evented RAW it bombed too.


----------



## Billion Dollar Man

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Damn, the numbers this week really got under your skin, Showstopper. :lol It's a good thing Punk's segment did so well this week, the whole show would have bombed.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't need much ammo for this week. Punk completely tore the Corporation angle a new asshole. And not just in quality. unk
> 
> 
> 
> Ain't that the truth.


So now, a Punk pandering promo was quality now? I always knew you guys were massive hypocrites, but thanks for the continuous conformation.


----------



## markedfordeath

i can tell you this much, pretty soon both of the programs will lose attention, due to no one getting their revenge yet...Triple H has to get owned soon and so does Heyman.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

People need to stop living and dying on the week to week ratings. Just last week Bryan drew huge with Reigns. Now he cant draw? Nonsense. The fact that Bryan's promo outdrew the body of the 11-on-3 match is a testament to the clusterfuck booking of that match and the presence of the jobbers trinity of Zack, Justin, and Truth. Next week Punk may be in a less than stellar quarter and Bryan in a good one, and everyone here will react like chickens with their heads cut off running around trying to draw conclusions based on one show.


----------



## markedfordeath

yep, funny how Bryan's promo was the second highest rating of the night lol so there's interest in him..nobody wanted to see jobbers helping him, he does better on his own. Also, has anyone noticed that Randy Orton on his own can never break a 2.0? what is it about him that turns people off?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The segments with HHH and Steph and Punk/Heyman did share one commonality. Both were uninterrupted by commercials. The quarter hours with 2 commercial breaks tend to do worse. The main event was one of those quarters. Basically the powers that be will book themselves in non-commercial segments to try to make themselves look better and maximize their segment.


----------



## MaybeLock

Wow some guys here are really butthurt about Punk and Bryan. They proved they can draw good numbers, if you like them or not that's your choice but don't make up shit to justify it.


----------



## markedfordeath

it was still the jobbers that affected everything I think...Gabriel and Ryder last less than a minute altogether, kind of pathetic. Bryan kicked the Shield's asses by himself....it should have been 3 on 1..would have gotten a higher rating.


----------



## Loudness

Quarter hours aren't even out yet and the ratings marks war for this week is already in full effect. Just chill a few more days before making claims on who tanked/drew this week. Until then...


----------



## markedfordeath

we just looked at the quarter hours, that's what everyone is commenting on, we just don't know the exact gains or losses yet.


----------



## Loudness

^Where? Browsed the last few pages and only found the 3 Hour Ratings.


----------



## markedfordeath

page 643


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:lmao at the butthurt over the Punk segment doing well.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw with Punk this week, in his hometown:

9/23
hour 1 - 3.603 million
hour 2 - 3.795 million
hour 3 - 3.820 million

Raw without Punk, last week:

hour 1 - 3.865 million
hour 2 - 4.162 million
hour 3 - 4.012 million

DAT DRAW

unk

:lmao


----------



## krai999

bitch please. People wanted to see the crowd interaction with cm punk. Hometown crowd= ratings


----------



## Rick Sanchez

I'll never get why people whine over numbers. Has nothing to do with the quality of the show, which was poor last week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I do find it interesting the first full pandering promo by Punk (I think) since returning is his most impressive in terms of ratings in comparison to the rest of the show. :lmao

Maybe there is something to Cena doing it after all. :lmao


----------



## markedfordeath

people whine over numbers because apparently numbers make or break your career..but actually it isn't always the case because The Miz and RVD are always on TV yet their segments lose viewers...so I guess WWE is lenient now.


----------



## Jof

THANOS said:


> Awesome to hear that Punk is doing huge numbers lately. Seeing him in Chicago is always a special attraction and this proved that yet again. Bryan's main event with the, as mentioned, emasculated babyfaces (thanks :HHH2 for helping their credibility), didn't do too well, but I suppose I understand why. His promo to start the match was one of the highest segments in the show, which shows that there is definitely interest in Bryan, fans just didn't want to see those (worthless :HHH2) babyfaces team with him to take on the Shield in a really oddly booked show.


emasculated, worthless... what the fuck? WTF are you going on about? This angle is getting them over, not hurting them. When was the last time Zack fucking Ryder, Gabriel and Usos main evented RAW? Heck when was the last they got a reaction like that? when was the last time Cody was even relevant? Did the casuals even knew someone named Goldust existed before this? 

Stupid post.


----------



## Jof

The Sandrone said:


> I do find it interesting the first full pandering promo by Punk (I think) since returning is his most impressive in terms of ratings in comparison to the rest of the show. :lmao
> 
> Maybe there is something to Cena doing it after all. :lmao


Punk's segment was positioned at 10:04 perfectly to capture viewers switching over from the game, which he was successful at doing. But its not all that impressive considering rest of the show got murdered by the game.


----------



## markedfordeath

this Raw wasn't memorable, I deleted it from my DVR right away...hopefully next week kicks ass.


----------



## THANOS

Jof said:


> emasculated, worthless... what the fuck? WTF are you going on about? This angle is getting them over, not hurting them. When was the last time Zack fucking Ryder, Gabriel and Usos main evented RAW? Heck when was the last they got a reaction like that? when was the last time Cody was even relevant? Did the casuals even knew someone named Goldust existed before this?
> 
> Stupid post.


Them not getting a lot of tv time before this was actually in their favor, because if HHH had talked them up a bit on stage, instead of doing the opposite, those fans that you say "didn't even know they existed", might have bought into them and, thus, tuned into the mainevent. Instead Hunter and Steph began to strip them of all their credibility one by one, and then book all those faces they just shit on in the main event of the show. The outcome of that little experiment is very clear in Monday's ratings breakdown. If you fail to see the logic in that so be it.


----------



## Happenstan

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Yeah, it only took Punk a good couple of months to beat out a Corporation angle segment. Party like it's 1999, bruv.
> 
> Bravo :clap ? I guess.
> 
> I'm sure next week will be business as usual. Putting Bryan in more than ONE segment, and get back to the 4 million viewers mark. Something that "high" Punk segment couldn't get the show to. It's too bad the Corporation segments have done that in the past couple of months, and quite often. Have your one week. You've waited awhile for it.


Let them brag. Punk finally pulled his weight. Besides at the end of next month Bryan will either be a 3 time WWE champ or still feuding for said title and Punk will be trying to avenge his Battleground loss to Ryback. We both know who really wins in the end here.




ShowStopper '97 said:


> What's that? The show got a higher rating last week when Punk wasn't on the show at all?
> 
> unk


Or this is another way to go.


----------



## markedfordeath

everyone knows Bryan is the future. I have a feeling also that Vince hates the storyline right now....Triple H keeps making booking mistakes. just like Thanos said, making the jobbers look even weaker to start the show doesn't help you want to see them in the main event because realistically, none of them belong in the main event and everyone knew they'd get up getting pinned anyway and that Bryan would be the one that wins it or at least be the last one standing.


----------



## e1987p

meltzer report 
" Notes from the 9/16 Raw that did a 2.96 rating and 4.01 million viewers.

Naomi & Cameron & Brie Bella vs. Aksana & Alicia Fox & Layla lost 1,020,000 viewers, which again emphasizes that whatever exposure they got on E! doesn’t translate into more interest in them by the Monday night fans, nor has their been any new female shift in Raw viewers from the big female numbers of Total Divas."

And it also means the viewers are not interested in aj and what she says.


----------



## Jof

THANOS said:


> Them not getting a lot of tv time before this was actually in their favor, because if HHH had talked them up a bit on stage, instead of doing the opposite, those fans that you say "didn't even know they existed", might have bought into them and, thus, tuned into the mainevent. Instead Hunter and Steph began to strip them of all their credibility one by one, and then book all those faces they just shit on in the main event of the show. The outcome of that little experiment is very clear in Monday's ratings breakdown. If you fail to see the logic in that so be it.


This makes no fucking sense whatsoever. How does those borderline jobbers not getting TV time translate to fans "might have bought into them"? Being involved in the top angle has given all these guys, including shield, credibility and direction. Remember the shield aimlessly repeating the beat downs week after week with no direction? Again, none of those jobbers USOS, Gabriel, Ryder meant anything to fans before this, they didn't even get TV time. Now they are all relevant, they matter to fans as long as the corporate angle is ongoing. Honestly did you even watch the main event of the show? Crowd was going nuts for these guys, they were the underdogs. Even R truth who hasn't been relevant in years got a great pop when he was tagged in. Even after that amazing main event if you still believe this angle is hurting the babyfaces, then honestly there is no hope for you. 



> The outcome of that little experiment is very clear in Monday's ratings breakdown.


So just because RAW gets killed for one night due to NFL which btw, drew 13million viewers, all the babyfaces involved in the angle are failures? Idiotic. No one ever became a star in one week. It takes weeks, months, even years to build guys up into money drawing stars. Look up 2006 main event quarters, DX outdrew Cena's main events most of the time but they kept shoving Cena in the main event until he became a ratings draw himself. 

Ratings were down, one week. boo fucking hoo! stop losing your shit over it. If WWE pushed guys based on week to week ratings, then neither Bryan nor Punk would've gotten this far in the first place.


----------



## markedfordeath

exactly....it does take months and even years to make guys draws, that's why I say that Bryan will be fine in the long run.


----------



## Happenstan

No way they are gonna pull back after he beat Cena clean, and then overcame the Corp Champ on his own, even if it was one night only. Bryan's a made main eventer 4 life already, throw in the merch sales and chants and he's all good. Does anyone really think those yes chants are stopping anytime soon? Everyone is leeching on to that chant for heat. Even Punk was doing them at Raw last Monday after the show.


----------



## #Mark

I wonder what the WWE's rationale was to book a 11 on 3 babyface advantage match. It had to be one of the oddest matches I have ever seen.


----------



## markedfordeath

PPV revenue doesn't matter as much as it used to because wrestling isn't as popular as it used to be...so now they have other things to keep the company profitable. As long as you're over with the crowd in a big way and selling tee shirts then you're golden for life in that company. Punk's ppv numbers aren't staggering, yet he's still on top in a big way, so how does the Night of Champions buy rate make Bryan go out of the main event? Punk is still at the top...


----------



## stonefort

Boring Bryan is Boring.


----------



## CALΔMITY

stonefort said:


> Boring Bryan is Boring.


1/10 :lol


----------



## markedfordeath

the WWE has to be pleased with his work to this point..done everything asked of him, hasn't missed a show until this past Smackdown, which airs tomorrow night. He can be an effective top guy and he doesn't mind sharing the spotlight, big upgrade from Cena......he's a god send for the company.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

So has Bryan been fired yet? I kept reading all the experts here saying he cant draw and has no charisma. Wait... hold on... those people arent experts? They dont know what they are talking about? Okay, I understand now. Carry on.


----------



## markedfordeath

Bryan continues to be put over storyline wise on the WWE.com interviews with Triple H and Cole....they're going all out with it. They obviously realize how big he can actually get with time and the more they push him...every time another wrestler tries to draw heat with the fans by mocking his Yes chant, he should get royalties? like how they get a percentage of the merchandise sales, he should get royalties from the yes chant too lol


----------



## Choke2Death

Have to lol @ the divas match losing a million viewers. :lmao


----------



## markedfordeath

I know..its ridiculous huh? AJ is the only one that could gain viewers out of them..and she's still set to lose the title....how is that even possible?


----------



## superuser1

markedfordeath said:


> PPV revenue doesn't matter as much as it used to because wrestling isn't as popular as it used to be...so now they have other things to keep the company profitable. As long as you're over with the crowd in a big way and selling tee shirts then you're golden for life in that company. Punk's ppv numbers aren't staggering, yet he's still on top in a big way, so how does the Night of Champions buy rate make Bryan go out of the main event? Punk is still at the top...


I agree. People seem to overexaggerate numbers. Guys like HBK,Kevin Nash etc. never proved to be big drawing guys but they all had great careers.


----------



## markedfordeath

and they all were top guys, include Bret Hart in there as well....Maybe Bryan will eclipse all of them after the end of this storyline comes along and he'll start being the guy but he's doing well and who cares about the numbers? his segments on TV draw viewers and he sells merchandise and is over with the fans..that's all you need.


----------



## mblonde09

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Every other face panders? *I must have missed where every other face wears the hockey jersey* of the city and mentions the name of the city in the promo numerous times.


Well apparently you missed why Punk was wearing the jersey to begin with, as it actually became part of the promo - as opposed to him simply wearing it for a cheap pop.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

mblonde09 said:


> Well apparently you missed why Punk was wearing the jersey to begin with, as it actually became part of the promo - as opposed to him simply wearing it for a cheap pop.


Yeah, huge difference. Mentioning the name of the city numerous times, it's pandering. He's far from the only one whose done it, but it is what it is.


----------



## MaybeLock

ShowStopper '97 said:


> Yeah, huge difference. Mentioning the name of the city numerous times, it's pandering. He's far from the only one whose done it, but it is what it is.


That was obviously pandering. I don't usually like it either, in the same way I didn't like heel Punk used to insult the city where the show was taking place to get cheap heat (although I understand why he did it), but this was his hometown and the guy is a real fan of that team, so once in a while doesn't hurt IMO.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Pandering, he's from the place. People are making it sound like Cena and his "You boo me BUT BOY OHH BOY YOU'RE VOCAL TONIGHT AND THAT'S GREAT! X IS A PASSIONATE TOWN!". Punk could show up in a Red Wings jersey and still get adored in Chicago.


----------



## DOPA

Choke2Death said:


> Have to lol @ the divas match losing a million viewers. :lmao


Yeah, that was shocking to say the least :lol. I mean of course it was going to drop but it shows how very little interest this total divas storyline is gaining. Big waste of time.


----------



## e1987p

Crusade said:


> Yeah, that was shocking to say the least :lol. I mean of course it was going to drop but it shows how very little interest this total divas storyline is gaining. Big waste of time.


total divas and aj storyline


----------



## Bfo4jd

Just wanted to say, I'm loving all these new smilies...

:angle2 :trips2 :vince7 :delriounk7 :heyman2


----------

