# RAW Viewership (19/12/11)



## BlakeGriffinFan32 (Aug 18, 2011)

Doesn't look like anything too bad.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

lol @ the lowest number being where DB/Punk/Ryder wrestled. Get these nerds off the TV.


----------



## A-C-P (Jan 5, 2010)

Well at least this week the ratings thread will have alot less !s in it :lmao 

Same #s as they've been pulling the last few weeks no big news here. But like i said in last weeks "ratings" thread this will inevitably be a 20 page shitstorm where everyone blames the ratings on one sole person, so have fun guys (and ladies) will have lots of fun reading it all.


----------



## Fanboi101 (Jul 15, 2011)

I guess we are at the point where bad ratings are consistent ratings...welcome to the CM Punk era everybody


----------



## WWE (Jul 16, 2011)

Lol here we go


----------



## SimbaTGO (Mar 29, 2011)

very good ratings for a transition period.


----------



## DanTheMan07 (Sep 27, 2010)

These aren't good ratings anyway you spin it.. You should have more viewers on a night after a PPV.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

"If you can't behind this, you'll be left behind"

Looks like a lot of people couldn't get behind this. :lmao

It's what happens when you indie midget dorks as world champ.


----------



## D.M.N. (Apr 26, 2008)

DanTheMan07 said:


> These aren't good ratings anyway you spin it.. You should have more viewers on a night after a PPV.


I think everyone needs to accept that there is a transitional period right now. I can almost certainly predict that Q1, Q2, Q5 and Q8 will have done well, the rest of the show not as well. That's not a bad thing, it takes the audience time to adapt. WWE needs to stop - and they have stopped (or at least for the past month or so) - haphazard booking by suddenly stopping showing people on screen.

Q1 and Q2 would have done well because of the familiar faces, although as always Q2 will have dropped from Q1. Q3 will have surely dropped because of a Divas' squash match (although why Beth was in a squash, I have no idea) and Q4 similar but replace Divas' with Sheamus. Mahal doesn't even deserve a place on the show to be honest, because to be honest he isn't going places anytime soon. They need to hope that the fans keep getting behind Sheamus and don't lose steam with him even though he isn't in a feud at the moment. Q6 had the tag match which was interesting considering I don't think neither team has either been on RAW before so a drop definitely there as well, but they can't be haphazard here - these teams need to be pushed alongside Air Boom - but no doubt in a month one of these two teams will be waaay off the radar. Q7 had Cody which probably increased slightly, but that was a character building win after TLC with Booker rather than a Sheamus 'we have nothing for you' win.

The mid-card (or new mid-card?) still needs direction, people like Sheamus should not be stuck in a feud with Jindal Mahal of all people.


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

Terrible number, last week for the regular 2 hours:
Hour 2 - 4.493m
Hour 3 - 4.161m
and this is a RAW after PPV, shows that nobody cares about indy hacks celebrate in the ring while nobody knows or cares about their story, I hope the main event did a terrible overrun, this will tell Vince what his fanbase wants to see and what garbage to send to Jim Cornette. and this number got the extra people from the PPV, lol, can't wait for next week.


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

The IWC golden boys continue to prove that they can't draw. How pathetic. 

Only The Great Khali can save Raw.

LAWLS


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

Randy Orton was a big ratings draw in 2009, bring him back to RAW as a real character, not in meaningless matches in the second quarter.


----------



## Cactus (Jul 28, 2011)

Rock316AE said:


> Terrible number, last week for the regular 2 hours:
> Hour 2 - 4.493m
> Hour 3 - 4.161m
> and this is a RAW after PPV, shows that nobody cares about indy hacks celebrate in the ring while nobody knows or cares about their story, I hope the main event did a terrible overrun, this will tell Vince what his fanbase wants to see and what garbage to send to Jim Cornette. and this number got the extra people from the PPV, lol, can't wait for next week.


I'm not getting involved in this sad little ratings war that happens every week, but why do you always call them indy hacks? Punk's been apart of the WWE for *6 years* now and Bryan for over *2 and a half years.* People mostly know them for their WWE time not their ROH runs.


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

Main event did good.
I can feel it8*D

My prediction have been pretty solid. Way too many filler matches remember people, usos? fucking carlito light? some dude in a turban vs sheamus?

Common now who wouldn't tune out.


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Fuck. I was just about to try my hand at a Rock316AE post, the fucker beat me to it. Oh well, I'll just sit back and watch this unnecessary shitstorm unfold.


----------



## A-C-P (Jan 5, 2010)

Ok i have to add one more thing to this...

Sorry bout now all of Rock316AE's posts will now be this for me..



Adramelech said:


> I completely agree. The Rock is the only thing saving this embarrassing product. The Rock is responsible for everything good that happens on WWE television just from sheer force of will. The Rock did what that phony vanilla midget CM Punk could never do and bring change to the WWE. Too bad a bunch of talentless three foot tall internet monkeys have taken those opportunities away. Then again, it's not like you have much of a choice with this bland, boring, talentless, charismaless, dull roster. Just like Michael Cole says, these guys are big dumb goofs and I hope that Vince smartens up, takes PG sideways, shoves it straight up his candy ass and brings back real stars like Val Venis and Billy Gunn so the WWE can start getting 28.5 ratings again and we can cure cancer. The Rock is the only star in wrestling who can draw a damn dime.
> 
> That fruity pebble John Cena is a goof and he's going to get checked into the Smackdown Hotel down on Jabroni Drive when he goes one on one with the Great One. BTW I'm not a mark I'm just realistic.


Again man I wish I could rep you 1,000,000 more times....

You may now continue the shitstorm.


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

John Cena mentioned the Rock in his promo so that will be the reason for the high rating in that quarter.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Eh, why bother? Let them have their mindless fun.


----------



## Boss P (Apr 26, 2008)

(puts popcorn in the oven)

(prepares to watch Season 9, Episode 11 of Mark War)


----------



## Smackdownfan777 (Oct 28, 2009)

Vanilla midget sinks the ratings again.


----------



## D.M.N. (Apr 26, 2008)

Rock316AE said:


> Terrible number, last week for the regular 2 hours:
> Hour 2 - 4.493m
> Hour 3 - 4.161m
> and this is a RAW after PPV, shows that nobody cares about indy hacks celebrate in the ring while nobody knows or cares about their story, I hope the main event did a terrible overrun, this will tell Vince what his fanbase wants to see and what garbage to send to Jim Cornette. and this number got the extra people from the PPV, lol, can't wait for next week.


The PPV was not promoted much last week, in case you have forgotten last week was the Slammy Awards. Oh, and there was a return in the last segment which did not promote the PPV at all, you seem to have conveniently forgotten that...



Rock316AE said:


> Randy Orton was a big ratings draw in 2009, bring him back to RAW as a real character, not in meaningless matches in the second quarter.


No, the big ratings draw in 2009 after WrestleMania was the celebrity hosts concept. If you're to credit Orton as the big ratings draw, then you would have to credit Triple H with being a draw in that Road to WrestleMania too.


----------



## El Dandy (Oct 2, 2007)

I think Punk's the new Orton in terms of being a ratings cancer.

The people just don't care.


----------



## Cookie Monster (Jun 28, 2011)

What were ratings like when Eddie and Benoit were champions? After all they are even smaller than Punk and Eddie was smaller than Bryan. Can't be nothing to do with size then can it? Or wrestling seeing as Punk and Bryan are two of the best wrestlers in the business.

It's a shame people actually care about ratings and not just watch the product out of enjoyment rather than ratings and then saying negative stuff despite going on to watch it anyway.


----------



## KO Bossy (Oct 23, 2011)

20 bucks says that all the morons whining and complaining about 'the vanilla midgets' CM Punk and Daniel Bryan will be the first ones on the bandwagon when they start drawing and improving the product.


----------



## Mike` (Mar 26, 2011)

Still cannot believe that this many people on a forum care about ratings.


----------



## Chocolate Soup (Oct 29, 2011)

one of, if not the most important thing to being a draw is your look and presentation, neither punk nor bryan excel in those things, you cann't expect them to be insta-draws like batista or goldberg or mark henry, they're going to have to show some real talent (aka charisma and entertainment) for a while


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

D.M.N. said:


> The PPV was not promoted much last week, in case you have forgotten last week was the Slammy Awards. Oh, and there was a return in the last segment which did not promote the PPV at all, you seem to have conveniently forgotten that...
> 
> 
> 
> No, the big ratings draw in 2009 after WrestleMania was the celebrity hosts concept. If you're to credit Orton as the big ratings draw, then you would have to credit Triple H with being a draw in that Road to WrestleMania too.


It's still a PPV, 90% of the PPVs today has terrible "build up".

And I'm talking about the Orton/Vince, Orton/Shane, Orton/HHH storyline, did big, above average numbers at that time(before the GH concept which was obviously the reason for the yearly average in that year)what I'm saying is that he has the potential to draw big, he's a real star and a marketable face(not a indy darling), he can be much more than a wrestling star, bring him back to RAW where he belongs and put in the main storylines, things will look a lot better.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

Chocolate Soup said:


> one of, if not the most important thing to being a draw is your look and presentation, neither punk nor bryan excel in those things, you cann't expect them to be insta-draws like batista or goldberg, they're going to have to be on top for a long while


If they're on top too long TNA's gonna get better ratings. They don't have a vanilla midget as their world champ.


----------



## Brave Nash (Jul 16, 2011)

Ratings only matters in USA or in UK I watch the show from YouTube or on a live steam, ratings doesn't matter as much as when they actually watch the show. It's a late show you know.


----------



## Smackdownfan777 (Oct 28, 2009)

Carcass said:


> If they're on top too long TNA's gonna get better ratings. They don't have a vanilla midget as their world champ.


Um excuse you that's the no drawing vanilla midget to you good sir.

:lmao


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

Carcass said:


> If they're on top too long TNA's gonna get better ratings. They don't have a vanilla midget as their world champ.


I think they need to get the World Championships on Mason Ryan and Kevin Nash by the Royal Rumble if the WWE has any chance of surviving the next few months.


----------



## Cookie Monster (Jun 28, 2011)

Carcass said:


> If they're on top too long TNA's gonna get better ratings. They don't have a vanilla midget as their world champ.


Define me what you THINK vanilla midget means.


----------



## ValiantSaint (Jan 18, 2010)

Hey, at least they're giving us some new options for champions, right? I love the fact that all three of the champs are "IWC friendly" Hopefully, this will push WWE into a "rebirth" as such. They have the talent, so why don't they use it?


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

Cookie Monster said:


> Define me what you THINK vanilla midget means.


----------



## Cookie Monster (Jun 28, 2011)

You know most of the best wrestlers of all time are "vanilla midgets".. 

It's interesting you say Punk, he's the exact same height as Stone Cold, would you consider Stone Cold a vanilla midget?


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

Cookie Monster said:


> You know most of the best wrestlers of all time are "vanilla midgets"..
> 
> It's interesting you say Punk, he's the exact same height as Stone Cold, would you consider Stone Cold a vanilla midget?


Nah. When Stone Cold was champ ratings didn't tank like they're doing with these bland indy hacks who have the personality of an unplugged blender.


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

Cookie Monster said:


> You know most of the best wrestlers of all time are "vanilla midgets"..
> 
> It's interesting you say Punk, he's the exact same height as Stone Cold, would you consider Stone Cold a vanilla midget?


first time Austin stunned mcmahon in 97 it got a 2.2 rating
Yup sounds like vanilla midget
8*D


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

You Idiots...you expect instant change after Cena has been the only real top face on RAW for years?

It takes time...time meaning MONTHS! EVEN A YEAR! It's what happens when you build new talent.


----------



## Cookie Monster (Jun 28, 2011)

Carcass said:


> Nah. When Stone Cold was champ ratings didn't tank like they're doing with these bland indy hacks who have the personality of an unplugged blender.


Whilst I agree with Stone Cold not making ratings drop. He was involved in wrestling during a boom period in which the company as a whole was drawing in big numbers.


----------



## Mr Premium (Nov 15, 2011)

Seriously, even Jeff Jarrett was more of a believable heavyweight champion than these guys are.


----------



## D.M.N. (Apr 26, 2008)

Rock316AE said:


> And I'm talking about the Orton/Vince, Orton/Shane, Orton/HHH storyline, did big, above average numbers at that time(before the GH concept which was obviously the reason for the yearly average in that year)what I'm saying is that he has the potential to draw big, he's a real star and a marketable face(not a indy darling), he can be much more than a wrestling star, bring him back to RAW where he belongs and put in the main storylines, things will look a lot better.


That feud was on the Road to WrestleMania. Which was the reason it's viewership numbers were as big as they were - although coincidentally the biggest number on that road to WrestleMania was due to Floyd Mayweather and Big Show with above 6.0m.


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

I wish that troll with the ' I think they should bulk up a bit' gimmick was here . 

The troll we need but not the troll we deserve.


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

It's no lower than it has been anyway, why complain?

I promise you, as long as they keep pushing Punk but get away from all the filler, ratings will go up in time. Notice NONE of them have even had a real fude yet!


----------



## Smackdownfan777 (Oct 28, 2009)

How is vanilla midget gonna make "wrestling cool again" of he can't draw?


----------



## Brave Nash (Jul 16, 2011)

Some people here are stupid do they actually know what a midget mean?
Punk is not a midget you guys are stupid if you really think that way.
Just bring back Skip Sheffield and Brodus Clay to see if they can save the show or not.
I'm sick of this stupid comparison of who can draw and who can't.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

This is Your Life with The Rock got 8.4 in the ratings, that means he's twice the wrestler that the crack addict fry cook is.


----------



## Tracer Bullet (Jun 28, 2010)

most of the people who are dogging punk/db/ryder all have undertaker, stone cold or rock avatars. clearly these guys are people in their late 30's early 40's who are living in the past. the sport has past you guys by, time to move on. go watch old clips of USWA.


----------



## Cookie Monster (Jun 28, 2011)

Wrestling as a company isn't a draw. I don't get why people can't understand this. No superstar in the world right now will ever get the show high Attitude Era numbers due to the fact that wrestling isn't as popular as it was in the late 90s, early 00s, and not even close.


----------



## Smackdownfan777 (Oct 28, 2009)

"Vanilla midget, vanilla midget hey hey hey, you can't draw!" "Vanilla midget, vanilla midget hey hey hey, you can't draw!"


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

ZackRyderMark said:


> most of the people who are dogging punk/db/ryder all have undertaker, stone cold or rock avatars. clearly these guys are people in their late 30's early 40's who are living in the past. the sport has past you guys by, time to move on. go watch old clips of USWA.


No way man. Da Attitude Era fo lyfe!


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

Carcass said:


> This is Your Life with The Rock got 8.4 in the ratings, that means he's twice the wrestler that the crack addict fry cook is.


Okay, dude, wrestling aside, that namecalling is low class. Show some respect to the person.

Foley was in that segment too! 

Act like an adult.


----------



## Quasi Juice (Apr 3, 2006)

Carcass said:


> lol @ the lowest number being where DB/Punk/Ryder wrestled. Get these nerds off the TV.


Numbers have gone down every RAW further along the show.


----------



## A-C-P (Jan 5, 2010)

Wow, just an observation, How empty would this thread be with out the words VANILLA and MIDGET?


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Everyone knows that 8.4 is 100% down to Foley. Rocky is nothing more than a caramel midget tbh.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

CM Punk should change his name to CD Punk, for Can't Draw. LOL


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Hell, I bet you Flex Kavana would draw a better rating than the Three Stooges.


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

Smackdownfan777 said:


> How is vanilla midget gonna make "wrestling cool again" of he can't draw?


it's already cool bro! punk bryan and ryder, thank you! DA FUTURAA is bright!!


Carcass said:


> If they're on top too long TNA's gonna get better ratings. They don't have a vanilla midget as their world champ.


Put Roode and Storm on RAW with the WWE machine behind them and you will get much better results, they actually look like stars, not like a drug addict homeless on the side of the road.



> That feud was on the Road to WrestleMania. Which was the reason it's viewership numbers were as big as they were - although coincidentally the biggest number on that road to WrestleMania was due to Floyd Mayweather and Big Show with above 6.0m.


No doubt, Floyd was the selling point, but still Orton and Vince drew a huge number in the punt segment if I remember correctly, yes it was in the WM season but it was above average even then.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

I can only imagine what the SD rating is gonna be now with that feminine lumberjack vegan as the world champ.


----------



## Brave Nash (Jul 16, 2011)

Punk is not a draw but I still love his work fuck the haters they think these guys can say what the rock says, it's a PG show almost everything should be kept PG so don't blame punk if he cant get a great match or a great promo like the epic promo he did it was his AE moment. When there is non great guys that are in his level than nothing is gonna change.


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

You really want him to burn in hell don't you, Carcass...i'm convinced, you want everyone you don't like to literally die.


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

Carcass said:


> I can only imagine what the SD rating is gonna be now with that feminine lumberjack vegan as the world champ.


Last weeks SD rating was like a 1.9 so this week it will probably sink to 1.8 now that Bryan has reduced the World Title into a Cruiserweight Title.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

> it's already cool bro! punk bryan and ryder, thank you! DA FUTURAA is bright!!


Who read this with the Tourette Guy's voice in mind?


----------



## Cactus (Jul 28, 2011)

HGF said:


> Last weeks SD rating was like a 1.9 so this week it will probably sink to 1.8 now that Bryan has reduced the World Title into a Cruiserweight Title.


You're right. I for one will definitely not be tuning in because of this mockery of such a prestigious championship and I'm sure 100,000 other viewers will be following me.


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Independent wrestlers suck.

I love Robert Roode and James Storm.


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

SAVEUS.ROCK


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

HGF said:


> Last weeks SD rating was like a 1.9 so this week it will probably sink to 1.8 now that Bryan has reduced the World Title into a Cruiserweight Title.


Sarcasm?


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

The Orton/Cena feud was way better in 07 and 09 than that fucking fail of a draw in Cena/Punk. Punk gets no ratings.


----------



## Helghan_Rising (Aug 8, 2011)

Did anyone ever think that maybe the fact Pittsburgh/San Fransisco was on last night had anything to do with it?

Of course, Raw's been drawing 3.0-3.5's for the last four years now so not much has changed.


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Helghan_Rising said:


> Did anyone ever think that maybe the fact Pittsburgh/San Fransisco was on last night had anything to do with it?
> 
> Of course, Raw's been drawing 3.0-3.5's for the last four years now so not much has changed.


Doesn't matter. If these vanilla midgets were any good, Raw would be getting 4s and 5s right now.


----------



## WWE (Jul 16, 2011)

I have a better one.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

If you can't get behind this you'll be left behind.


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

> The 12/19 edition of Raw did a 2.9 rating with 4.3 million viewers. The show did hours of *3.04* and *2.81*.


After PPV, embarrassing, throw out the indy trash back to the gyms Vince...hopefully he will start on SD.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Carcass said:


> If you can't get behind this you'll be left behind.


U madthee that Rock be bankin on E unlike dem losers, breh breh?


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

You will see, the ratings won't change for weeks, but they will after they have established fudes. Punk/Bryan/Ryder are the future and you all will have to live with them. Even if Bryan, Punk or Ryder have short reigns, they will be higher on the card from now on. You may as well get used to it. This is a transition.

In the future if I'm wrong, I'll admit it--but I believe they are building these guys up for the long haul and there will be a lot of misery the longer you deny that.

The reigns may or may not be long, but the WRESTLERS will be made higher up on the card.


----------



## Josh Parry (Mar 20, 2011)

My god, some of you are pillocks.


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

Cactus said:


> You're right. I for one will definitely not be tuning in because of this mockery of such a prestigious championship and I'm sure 100,000 other viewers will be following me.


Count me in too. Hopefully the loss of that 100,000 viewers will help WWE realize that we feel genuinely insulted when small fries like Daniel Danielson are running around with the championship title that such greats as Goldberg, The Great Khali, and Jack Swagger have held with honor. It's a disgrace to professional wrestling and its fans.


----------



## WWE (Jul 16, 2011)

Put the title back on Big Show and turn him heel, that'll show 'em!


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

What happened with Great Khali? Probably one of the most deserving and best World champions the WWE ever had in recent memory.


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

OH MY GOD

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

I bet the reason Phil hates on The Rock so much is cause Rock did something Punk has never done, sexually satisfy Beth Phoenix. Why else do you think he's called The Rock?


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

:lmao 2.9 for Raw. You would all be bashing the entire product if Cena and Orton were champs. But since Bryan and Punk are the champions...it's okay. :lmao What a bad rating for a post-ppv.


----------



## Josh Parry (Mar 20, 2011)

Carcass said:


> I bet the reason Phil hates on The Rock so much is cause Rock did something Punk has never done, sexually satisfy Beth Phoenix. Why else do you think he's called The Rock?


Do you ever wonder why fans like you get made fun of so much?


----------



## Fanboi101 (Jul 15, 2011)

lol at punk/indy marks masking their dissapointment at the ratings. Just let out boys, you clearly have a large support group here which can help ease your pain.


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

Winning™;10767884 said:


> What happened with Great Khali? Probably one of the most deserving and best World champions the WWE ever had in recent memory.


I think he got frustrated and left after guys like Punk started getting the spotlight over a man of his awesomeness. It truly is a shame because Khali was the ultimate package and probably the biggest draw in the companies history. We could only hope that he has agreed to return and is the man behind It Begins. 

LAWLS


----------



## WWE (Jul 16, 2011)

Tony316 said:


> :lmao 2.9 for Raw. You would all be bashing the entire product if Cena and Orton were champs. But since Bryan and Punk are the champions...it's okay. :lmao What a bad rating for a post-ppv.


Holy shit your right :lmao


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

:lmao If you think this guy can draw.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

LOL that's what I'm saying. These Punk marks clearly don't know what talent and drawing is if the Great Billy Gunn slapped them all across the ass.

And Tony is coming out from the TNA forums? Even more entertainment.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

Fanboi101 said:


> lol at punk/indy marks masking their dissapointment at the ratings. Just let out boys, you clearly have a large support group here which can help ease your pain.


Just imagine how bad they'll freak when The Rock comes back and once again ignores Punk. :lmao


----------



## jimboystar24 (Feb 19, 2007)

Fanboi101 said:


> I guess we are at the point where bad ratings are consistent ratings


I'm glad someone pointed this out. A year ago, they would get mid 3's, and a few years ago 4's were seen as consistent. 

I think it's really sad that if WWE scores a 3.1 and that will be considered a good rating from a company that used to do so much better and it wasn't even that long ago. 

I always joked how a 2.9 would one day be considered a normal and I think we are in that now. I don't blame Punk or any other wrestler. I blame WWE and management. 

Also, further proof Mark Henry equals ratings but I think there are bigger problems here.


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

I don't have a problem with Punk...I think he's good on the mic and in the ring but Daniel Bryan world heavyweight champion? :lmao Come on...


----------



## D17 (Sep 28, 2010)

Cookie Monster said:


> You know most of the best wrestlers of all time are "vanilla midgets"..
> 
> *It's interesting you say Punk, he's the exact same height as Stone Cold*, would you consider Stone Cold a vanilla midget?


He's an inch and a half shorter, actually.


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

The sad part is the rock marks actually think the sarcasm in this thread is serious.

You guys know Stone Cold endorses Punk, right?


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

> vanilla midget
> Vanilla = Boring
> Midget = Small
> 
> ...


No wonder Nash retired. Leaving the sinking ship.


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Fanboi101 said:


> lol at punk/indy marks masking their dissapointment at the ratings. Just let out boys, you clearly have a large support group here which can help ease your pain.


Okay. I'll admit. I am truly devastated. My whole life will be validated the day my favourite wrestlers cause ratings and buyrates to skyrocket. Since this is not happening, I have no reason to live. SaveUsRock


----------



## SpeedStick (Feb 11, 2010)

9pm -9:15pm, 10:00 - 10:20, and 10:50 - 11: 05 only time to watch RAW, WWE does not care about the midcard, To all the RAW marks don't stop complaining CM Punk, Ziggle, Miz, Del Rio, Bryan, will end up on Smackdown after the draft


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

Tony316 said:


> :lmao 2.9 for Raw. You would all be bashing the entire product if Cena and Orton were champs. But since Bryan and Punk are the champions...it's okay. :lmao What a bad rating for a post-ppv.





Fanboi101 said:


> lol at punk/indy marks masking their dissapointment at the ratings. Just let out boys, you clearly have a large support group here which can help ease your pain.


Funny hypocrites, their indy midgets failed again, heart breaking for them, but you can't live in a bubble forever, sometimes you need to face reality even if it hurts. can't wait for next week, they got extra viewers here to see what happened with Kane and the PPV, next week needs to be comedy number.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Beatles123 said:


> The sad part is the rock marks actually think the sarcasm in this thread is serious.
> 
> You guys know Stone Cold endorses Punk, right?


What the fuck are you on about? I'm being as serious as Jericho returning in January.

Punk not only is a sellout and bashed harshly on the GOAT in the Rock but he wants to beg for a reaction now that the crowd knows that he will never be as big as he claims to be.

Fuck Phil Brooks. Ha, how does it feel to get your real first name called?!


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

Raw is actually really lucky to be on a great channel like USA. They would get a 2.0 if they were on Spike. I hope for them USA will renew their contract.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

Beatles123 said:


> The sad part is the rock marks actually think the sarcasm in this thread is serious.
> 
> You guys know Stone Cold endorses Punk, right?


That's irrelevant. I have a lot of respect for Austin, but him endorsing Punk doesn't convert into ratings or buy rates, so I don't see why it matters if legends like Punk.


----------



## LarryCoon (Jul 9, 2011)

A 2.9 rating?

And the IWC wonders why Cena's been on top for so long....


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

> vanilla midget
> Vanilla = Boring
> Midget = Small
> 
> ...


Nash is god.


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

WWE will fall by pleasing the IWC.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life (Sep 19, 2011)

It’s really concerning how the second hour keeps losing viewers every week now. Raw has been on the air for 19 years and it has never done that before until recently.

Until the segment by segment breakdowns comes in you can't really draw any conclusions about specific performers "not being able to draw." Last week the 10 pm slot with Punk’s match drew horriby and lost 150,000 viewers which is almost unheard of for the top of the hour spot. Then the Cena-Henry main event drew big and gained 750,000 viewers. Last night they swapped places with Cena in the 10pm slot and Punk in the main event so we’ll see how they compare this week.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

He's the shit, I'm telling ya!


----------



## Brave Nash (Jul 16, 2011)

Okay I don't support Bryan as WHC neither is Ryder as a US champion but its just permanent. As for Punk he deserves the title he's much better champ than anyone in the wwe right now he just doesnt have somebody in his level, Punk and Cena are the only true believable champions, I hate Cena but what can I do there is no big stars left.


----------



## Theproof (Apr 9, 2009)

Punk and DB are fine in the main event. Ryder however is nothing but jobber material to me.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

It's a shame Nash is gonna be out for 6 weeks. I was hoping he'd win the Rumble and squash the janitor of Waffle House at WM.


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

Who the hell is interested to watch a match between Alicia Fox and Beth Phoenix. Nobody fucking cares.
Who the hell is interested to watch a match between Santino and Cody Rhodes. Nobody fucking cares.

Only the IWC could like this guy.


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

Carcass said:


> It's a shame Nash is gonna be out for 6 weeks. I was hoping he'd win the Rumble and squash the janitor of Waffle House at WM.


He'll enter The Royal Rumble at #1 and just eliminate everyone one by one within seconds of them entering the ring. DIESEL POWER!


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Diesel better win the Rumble and HHH better win the title before Wrestlemania. This feud has been great from the start and WWE were smart using Punk as a pawn to appease the loser smarks that whack off to porn.


----------



## D17 (Sep 28, 2010)

With all the attempted comedy aside. Punk being the champion, fine witht that, Ryder being the US champ, fine with that too. DB is the person who I don't think should have the belt yet. I can't see see his reign being a success at all, I believe they gave him the belt waaaaaaaay too early. Other than smarks/Indy folk, he's not over, his lame ass pops in the non-smarky cities show that. And seeing as most of WWE's audience is not Indy smarks, can't see him drawing any money. As well as getting him over first place I would of atleast have him look much more credible, he could cleanly lose to Swagger next week on Raw and it woulnd't be suprising or anything.


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

Tony316 said:


> Who the hell is interested to watch a match between Alicia Fox and Beth Phoenix. Nobody fucking cares.


SAVEUS.ROCKDIVA


----------



## Boss P (Apr 26, 2008)

This thread is fuckery.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Lil'Jimmy said:


> SAVEUS.ROCKDIVA


poor miley. embarrassed like that by the rock


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

Lil'Jimmy said:


> SAVEUS.ROCKDIVA


Look at that. Rock actually knows how to be funny and doesn't take himself seriously. Where as as Punk thinks he's god and thinks fake puking for 10 minutes is funny.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

You know, with muscles and a beard, Miley and Rock aren't far off.


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

Carcass said:


> It's a shame Nash is gonna be out for 6 weeks. I was hoping he'd win the Rumble and squash the janitor of Waffle House at WM.


Why are you ROOTING for this! Shouldnt you WANT CM Punk to get over? (since you assume he is not.)


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

Carcass said:


> Look at that. Rock actually knows how to be funny and doesn't take himself seriously. Where as as Punk thinks he's god and thinks fake puking for 10 minutes is funny.


Only the IWC laughs at those stupid Punk and Ziggler jokes.


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

Loling at TNA marks saying WWE champs can't draw, oh the irony.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

Beatles123 said:


> Why are you ROOTING for this! Shouldnt you WANT CM Punk to get over? (since you assume he is not.)


I want champs that actually look like Champs. If Nash came up to me I'd be scare shitless, if Punk came up to me I'd give him my loose change.


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

SMH. A 2.9? I don't even know why I watch this shit anymore. The WWE are going to be out of business in five years. They need to cut their losses with these midgets and beg Kevin Nash and everyone else from 10-15 years ago to come back and save this business from the future. This bland, talentless, charismaless, Rockless roster is an absolute disgrace. RIP professional wrestling.



Tony316 said:


> Who the hell is interested to watch a match between Alicia Fox and Beth Phoenix. Nobody fucking cares.
> Who the hell is interested to watch a match between Santino and Cody Rhodes. Nobody fucking cares.
> 
> Only the IWC could like this guy.


My lady parts like this guy. Do they count as part of the IWC?


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Fruity Pebbles is the greatest joke ever told in WWE history. Punk can keeps his unover shoots.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

carcass's signature is one of the gayest things ive ever seen from my time on WF. And i thought rock316ae's douchy rock av was bad


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

Carcass said:


> I want champs that actually look like Champs. If Nash came up to me I'd be scare shitless, if Punk came up to me I'd give him my loose change.


Looks, huh?...how materialistic of you and, honestly, shallow.


----------



## Power_T (Dec 10, 2011)

TankOfRate said:


> SMH. A 2.9? I don't even know why I watch this shit anymore. The WWE are going to be out of business in five years. They need to cut their losses with these midgets and beg Kevin Nash and everyone else from 10-15 years ago to come back and save this business from the future. This bland, talentless, charismaless, Rockless roster is an absolute disgrace. RIP professional wrestling.


One company already did that. it's called TNA, which gets beaten in the ratings by reruns of Golden Girls


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Well, Rock did Get Short so...

But it wasn't his fault since he is one of the greatest actors of all time.


----------



## Bruze (Sep 23, 2006)

id rather see another cena and orton reign then see idiots like punk and bryan hold the big belts. people like punk and bryan belong in the lower division, challenging for the us titles and intercontinental titles. i dont know why there champs, they cant draw for shit, i always have known punk wouldnt be a draw, ive never liked punk, never will like him, he is to cheesy, to boring, people saying cena does the same old shit everyweek chat alot of shit, since the summer punk has done the same shit, each week ! PIPE BOMB !


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

Winning™ said:


> Fruity Pebbles is the greatest joke ever told in WWE history. Punk can keeps his unover shoots.


Exactly. Cena's actually appearing on Fruity Pebbles boxes cause of The Rock. 

LOL @ When Punk was making fun of Nash saying people change the channel when he's on, yet they're doing exactly the same thing when Punk's on.


----------



## lic05 (Jun 30, 2006)

This is what happens when you feature those 3 jobbers instead of your household names like Kevin Nash.



Loudness said:


> Loling at TNA marks saying WWE champs can't draw, oh the irony.


Are you questioning the star power of Robert Roode and Robbie E? UGH, typical IWC.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Carcass said:


> Exactly. Cena's actually appearing on Fruity Pebbles boxes cause of The Rock.
> 
> LOL @ When Punk was making fun of Nash saying people change the channel when he's on, yet they're doing exactly the same thing when Punk's on.


Cena's appearing fruity pebbles because he doesnt take things too seriously and can be part of the joke

you know, the same thing you just praised the rock for. a few posts ago


----------



## D17 (Sep 28, 2010)

Rock316AE said:


> Put Roode and Storm on RAW with the WWE machine behind them and you will get much better results, they actually look like stars,* not like a drug addict homeless on the side of the road*.


This bit actually made me laugh :lmao


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Winning™ said:


> Fruity Pebbles is the greatest joke ever told in WWE history. Punk can keeps his unover shoots.


OHOHOHOHOHOOHOHOHOHOHOHOHO *wipes away tear*

Fruity pebbles. That was so funny. Jesus christ, Rock is so funny. His jokes alone saved the business this year. He's so witty and great.


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

Winning™ said:


> Diesel better win the Rumble and HHH better win the title before Wrestlemania. This feud has been great from the start and WWE were smart using Punk as a pawn to appease the loser smarks that whack off to porn.


Nash winning the title at Wrestlemania would be the best fucking thing since Khali's World Title win. His WWE title reign back in 1995 was the most memorable title run in history. I can't imagine just how high ratings will get when Big Daddy Cool walks out on Raw the next night with the championship held high above his head as he proclaims himself the best wrestler in the world. All the viewers from The NWO WCW era will instantly return to watch their hero.


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

Carcass said:


> I want champs that actually look like Champs. If Nash came up to me I'd be scare shitless, if Punk came up to me I'd give him my loose change.


Go watch some UFC and Strikeforce, then come back and tell about intimidation factor. I'd be scared shitless if I pissed GSP off, however I'd Punk Nash like a bitch, a mans power of the punch HEAVILY depends on your legs, and he has chicken legs of glass. Any decently athletic skinny 6 footer can destroy him, hence why talks about size so much, for compensation. He probably gets beated up by guys two heads smaller than him a lot when he gets drunk at bars.



lic05 said:


> This is what happens when you feature those 3 jobbers instead of your household names like Kevin Nash.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you questioning the star power of Robert Roode and Robbie E? UGH, typical IWC.


I like TNA talent, but the poster I was referring to never says anything good about WWE and praises TNA all the time hence my comment.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7 (Dec 14, 2010)

This thread pleases me.


----------



## Marv95 (Mar 9, 2011)

Cookie Monster said:


> What were ratings like when Eddie and Benoit were champions?


Near 4.0 for Raw, sometimes surpassing it. Highest was 4.5. Smackdown was around a 3.0 or better, highest was 3.6.

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2004-ratings/


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

The best joke Rock ever told was when he called CM Punk BM Punk for bowel movement punk. :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

The Rock is quite a witty man. He should write for the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Or Arrested Development when it returns


----------



## joelfc2005 (Nov 18, 2009)

Another Rock love in I see...


----------



## lic05 (Jun 30, 2006)

TankOfRate said:


> OHOHOHOHOHOOHOHOHOHOHOHOHO *wipes away tear*
> 
> Fruity pebbles. That was so funny. Jesus christ, Rock is so funny. His jokes alone saved the business this year. He's so witty and great.


Also they aren't childish unlike Cena's, I mean he swears and says bitch and ass and all this non-PG stuff AAARGH Rocky is so edgy and brave!


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7 (Dec 14, 2010)

Carcass said:


> The best joke Rock ever told was when he called CM Punk BM Punk for *bowel movement* punk. :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


You find that funny. Wow.


----------



## Rocky541 (Nov 29, 2011)

Haha I told you all these champions are a joke. These ratings prove no one cares about these nerds.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

redeadening said:


> The Rock is quite a witty man. He should write for the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Or Arrested Development when it returns


Hopefully Punk doesn't write for Arrested Development otherwise it'll get cancelled again.


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

OH MY GOD.

ROCK JUST FARTED VIA SATALITE!

PICS INCOMING!


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> You find that funny. Wow.


Yup. Beats the hell out of making fun of Nash for having health problems or about HHH wearing steph's underwear.



Beatles123 said:


> OH MY GOD.
> 
> ROCK JUST FARTED VIA SATALITE!
> 
> PICS INCOMING!


And it would draw more than anything Punk's done.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Carcass said:


> Hopefully Punk doesn't write for Arrested Development otherwise it'll get cancelled again.


Perhaps but atleast the quality shouldnt decline so much.

id rather have a good show last for 2 seasons than a godawful popular one for 8


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7 (Dec 14, 2010)

Rocky541 said:


> Haha I told you all these champions are a joke. These ratings prove no one cares about these nerds.


This is the only thing I'm going to say about the ratings. *The ratings trend of the first quarter hour, and the first hour as a whole, being the highest and the ratings falling throughout the show has been happening for a year now, even before these three guys were champ.*


----------



## Brave Nash (Jul 16, 2011)

Bruze said:


> id rather see another cena and orton reign then see idiots like punk and bryan hold the big belts. people like punk and bryan belong in the lower division, challenging for the us titles and intercontinental titles. i dont know why there champs, they cant draw for shit, i always have known punk wouldnt be a draw, ive never liked punk, never will like him, he is to cheesy, to boring, people saying cena does the same old shit everyweek chat alot of shit, since the summer punk has done the same shit, each week ! PIPE BOMB !


Fuck off than don't watch the show go look for bodybuilders magazines and masterbate.


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

damn this thread blew up.

Can't we wait till the breakdowns


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Dont see how anyone can say anyone else would draw better.

Orton drew like a 2.7 when he was champion on Raw.
Cena has drawn multiple 3.0s. 
The Rock himself got a 3 hour show dedicated to him and it drew a poor 3.2. 

So where is the drawing power?


----------



## Bruze (Sep 23, 2006)

Brave Nash said:


> Fuck off than don't watch the show go look for bodybuilders magazines and masterbate.


nice to see punk fan pop out his shell


----------



## Kabraxal (Jun 14, 2004)

You think all these Rocky marks would understand ratings better given their god benefited from a company that toiled with low numbers at the beginning of his run before the numbers started to rise.

Of course that would assume they actually know anything about wrestling... 

The shows just need to keep building up the new stars, the mid card feuds, and the titles... the WWE has years of damage it has to fix and it will just take time for the numbers to increase with the quality of the product. Just like 97/98.. *gasp* o my! Looking back at prior examples! I better start flinging non sensical bullshit around... no place for evidence and intelligence on teh internetz!


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

Those fart pics are incoming, Rock marks! Hold onto your Jizz!


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

Bruze said:


> id rather see another cena and orton reign then see idiots like punk and bryan hold the big belts. people like punk and bryan belong in the lower division, challenging for the us titles and intercontinental titles. i dont know why there champs, they cant draw for shit, i always have known punk wouldnt be a draw, ive never liked punk, never will like him, he is to cheesy, to boring, people saying cena does the same old shit everyweek chat alot of shit, since the summer punk has done the same shit, each week ! PIPE BOMB !


Nice to see reasonable, objective people here, not just blind indy fanboys, someone can check when was the last time RAW drew 2.8 for the second hour after a PPV? maybe 95-96? lol.


----------



## WWE (Jul 16, 2011)

Give Cena back the title, people may not like but doesn't it work? lol


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

How is what he said objective? It was blatantly against the champions! That's bias.


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

rock316ae has to be trolling
So you must hate guerrero right?


----------



## Brave Nash (Jul 16, 2011)

How much did rock draw besides wm?


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

No, I was a huge Eddie fan.


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

"REASONABLE, OBJECTIVE"


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

eddie was a pretty good draw in his time


----------



## CrystalFissure (Jun 7, 2011)

The Rocky marks here are downright pathetic. So, who do YOU want to be champions at this point in time? Stop whining about everything. By the way, I'm a fan of Punk, Ryder and Bryan and I've never seen much Indy Wrestling, so we are not all "Indy marks". STFU.


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

Cycloneon said:


> Give Cena back the title, people may not like but doesn't it work? lol


No way. Cena couldn't draw during his last two title reigns either. Nash or Khali are the only men capable of saving the ratings.


----------



## Roler42 (Nov 9, 2010)

i would like to contribute but man :lmao too much awesomeness in this thread

plus... hard to be angry with a homoerotic pic of the rock constantly appearing as i scroll down :lmao

keep up the amusement guys


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

THE GOBBLEDYGOOKER OUTDRAWS THE ROCK!


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Roler42 said:


> i would like to contribute but man :lmao too much awesomeness in this thread
> 
> plus... hard to be angry with a homoerotic pic of the rock constantly appearing as i scroll down :lmao
> 
> keep up the amusement guys


Homoerotic? Mah boy Rocky is ALLLLLLL MAN.










MMM. Now THIS is what I what to see. Vanilla midgets and homeless dudes? :lmao Give me Rocky in and around my mouth, any day of the week.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

HGF said:


> No way. Cena couldn't draw during his last two title reigns either. Nash or Khali are the only men capable of saving the ratings.


What if, Nash feuded with Khali.

i know, mind = blown


----------



## Roler42 (Nov 9, 2010)

Nash vs Khali at wrestlemania

MATCH OF THE FUCKING CENTURY!!


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

I hope since they mentioned Nash had serious facial injuries he comes back wearing a mask.

UNDASHING KEVIN NASH.


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

redeadening said:


> What if, Nash feuded with Khali.
> 
> i know, mind = blown


----------



## Cynic (Jan 31, 2010)

Anyone who blames poor ratings on Punk & friends is just as close-minded as anyone who credits Austin and Rock for the high ratings during the Attitude Era. It's a reflection on the overall tone and presentation of the product with regard to booking and execution, not so much the talent on display.

The guys WWE has right now are just fine. It's everything _around_ them that needs to change.


----------



## Cactus (Jul 28, 2011)

redeadening said:


> eddie was a pretty good draw in his time


Eddie asked to drop the title because Smackdown's ratings were dropping...


----------



## lic05 (Jun 30, 2006)

redeadening said:


> What if, Nash feuded with Khali.
> 
> i know, mind = blown


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7 (Dec 14, 2010)

I wonder what the Rock marks are going to do once the Rock's angle with Cena is over and he leaves. They don't like Cena. They don't like Punk. I'm not sure if they like Orton. Are they Sheamus fans? My guess is that they'll bitch about the whole show, says everyone sucks compared to guys from the attitude era, and just end up looking like the stereotype posters that people associate with internet users.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

How is my sig homoerotic? It's not like Rock's wearing eye liner or paints his nails black like Phil does.


----------



## Jepo (Mar 6, 2011)

This thread is fantastic.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7 (Dec 14, 2010)

Carcass said:


> How is my sig homoerotic? It's not like Rock's *wearing eye liner or paints his nails black like Phil does*.


A lot of men in rock bands do this. I guess they all don't like pussy, too.


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

You do realize these Rock comments are sarcastic, right Carcass?


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Anyone got a dollar to spare?


----------



## xerxesXXI (May 15, 2006)

Where are the breakdowns?

And the ratings are significant because the WWE is losing viewers. Will they get they back when these guys are more established? Who knows. But right now people are tuning out.

I think WWE was averaging around 5 million viewers a year/18 months ago. Now they are hovering around 4-4.5 million a show.


----------



## Kamaria (Jun 10, 2009)

Ratings were in the shitter when they put the belt on Cena again, so I don't see how there's a correlation.


----------



## D17 (Sep 28, 2010)

TankOfRate said:


> Anyone got a dollar to spare?


To be fair though, he's gotten damn far based on what he looks like. Especially if you look at the past x years in wrestling.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Cactus said:


> Eddie asked to drop the title because Smackdown's ratings were dropping...


Thats not what i heard. I heard he asked to drop it because he couldnt deal with the pressure

i mean hell, you cant blame him for the ratings, they lost lesnar for gods sake. he WAS smackdown. Even Taker wasnt around as much

And its not like JBL was gonna draw better ratings than Eddie

Eddie like Shawn in 1996 tried his best to hold the brand together, even though it was inevitably going down


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

Supposedly, Punk was doing charity work for the WWE @ a homeless shelter and all other volunteers mistook him for one of the bums.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

i thought punk looked more like a chef at iHop


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7 (Dec 14, 2010)

Carcass said:


> Supposedly, Punk was doing charity work for the WWE @ a homeless shelter and all other volunteers mistook him for one of the bums.


Punk once enter a high class club and most of the women left their sugar daddies in suits and swarmed around him just because they thought he was in a rock band and that Samoa Joe was his security guard.


----------



## D17 (Sep 28, 2010)

redeadening said:


> Thats not what i heard. I heard he asked to drop it because he couldnt deal with the pressure
> 
> i mean hell, you cant blame him for the ratings, they lost lesnar for gods sake. he WAS smackdown. Even Taker wasnt around as much
> 
> ...


Don't know alot about ratings or anything....not my thang. But I suppose Eddie had been thought of as a good draw because of his Mexican heritage, I suppose he drew big ass numbers in Mexico/Latin countries.


----------



## TheWFEffect (Jan 4, 2010)




----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

Carcass said:


> Supposedly, Punk was doing charity work for the WWE @ a homeless shelter and all other volunteers mistook him for one of the bums.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

It's sad when Beth looks more intimidating then any of the current male champs.


----------



## xerxesXXI (May 15, 2006)

They could make this into a storyline.

But why bother when you could do the same old shit.


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

TheWFEffect said:


>


Is Beth the tallest out of those ?.

Damn.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Intimidation isnt the end all be all of champions.

I mean who actually thought Flair could kick anyone's ass?


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7 (Dec 14, 2010)

Lil'Jimmy said:


> Is Beth the tallest out of those ?.
> 
> Damn.


Beth's real height is 5'6". The only person she's taller then is Evan Bourne.


----------



## Shock (Nov 6, 2007)

Wow, disappointing to say the least. Generally after a PPV which is expected to pull a very low number you see a pretty good increase in ratings (if only for one week), so to see it actually drop is very bad. Although I enjoyed the main-event, it's pretty clear that the casuals don't care for the likes of Bryan, Punk and Ryder.


----------



## TheWFEffect (Jan 4, 2010)

Real Draws, real wrestlers fuck vanilla midgets this below is what wrestling should be.


----------



## holycityzoo (Aug 14, 2011)

SimbaTGO said:


> very good ratings for a transition period.


Smartest post in this thread.


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

Shock said:


> Wow, disappointing to say the least. Generally after a PPV which is expected to pull a very low number you see a pretty good increase in ratings (if only for one week), so to see it actually drop is very bad. Although I enjoyed the main-event, it's pretty clear that the casuals don't care for the likes of orton,barret,backstage segments with hornswaggle, divas, indian turban guy, sheamus, usos, colons,cody, santino, cole, twitter.



Fixed your post


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

That nash vs triple h match will go down in history as a modern classic


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

TheWFEffect said:


> Real Draws, real wrestlers fuck vanilla midgets this below is what wrestling should be.


And how many times has Punk botched moves? He's even broken a few noses. He needs to go to FCW train some more, and learn how not to be a liability in the ring. Hell, look at how obvious he makes his spot calling.


----------



## xerxesXXI (May 15, 2006)

Rock-Cena at Wrestlemania will be the finger poke of doom.

Hogan for a run in


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

xerxesXXI said:


> Rock-Cena at Wrestlemania will be the finger poke of doom.
> 
> Hogan for a run in


dont be ridiculous.

everyone knows hogan cant run. especially down the long wrestlemania aisle.

more like a hogan 'drive' in. Or electric scooter in

like this


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

xerxesXXI said:


> Rock-Cena at Wrestlemania will be the finger poke of doom.
> 
> Hogan for a run in


Hogan is contracted with TNA for 2 years. Lets try to keep things logical here.


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

That is just good selling of the knee damage by Nash.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

HGF said:


> Hogan is contracted with TNA for 2 years. *Lets try to keep things logical here.*


Then don't bring up TNA.


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

Zack Ryder is actually pretty tall and bulky. Rhodes is muscular as hell, he has 7-8% bodyfat, I bet he lifts crazy weights in the gym, then again he was cycling recently but still. Kofi and Evan are athletic as hell, they make up for the lack of size with their spots, Beth looks like a man. DB and Punk aren't that big, but bulky enough for guys their size, plus they have the MMA tough guy vibe about them.


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

Carcass said:


> Then don't bring up TNA.


Wow. You got me there. I'm such a fucking hypocrite.


----------



## xerxesXXI (May 15, 2006)

Warrior for the run in.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

warrior cant run either, i saw his last match


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster (Nov 14, 2008)

This thread is horrible as always, and pretty much confirms every negative cliche about wrestling fans. Congrats guys.


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

TheWFEffect said:


> Real Draws, real wrestlers fuck vanilla midgets this below is what wrestling should be.


Yeah, fuck HHH, we need more indy midgets, REAL WREZLERS!!:





Anyway,


> WWE Raw on Monday, December 19 scored a 2.92 rating the night after TLC. It marks the third straight week Raw has scored below a 3.00 rating.
> 
> -- Compared to one year ago, the December 20 Raw following the TLC PPV scored a 3.27 rating against similar NFL and History Channel competition. Also, the key male demographics were one-tenth to three-tenths of a ratings higher in 2010.


That's what happens when you put the Job Squad 2011 in the main event.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Then what are you suggesting rock316ae?


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7 (Dec 14, 2010)

Still not as bad as the Rock's overselling of Stone Cold's stunner.


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

redeadening said:


> Then what are you suggesting rock316ae?


Heel Randy Orton on RAW, seriously.



> Still not as bad as the Rock's overselling of Stone Cold's stunner.


funny because Austin said he sold the best stunner of all time and it's true, check the best stunner in history at WM19.


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Still not as bad as the Rock's overselling of Stone Cold's stunner.


No kidding. The Rock's overall selling is pretty embarrassing.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster (Nov 14, 2008)

Who should be in the main event now? That's what's funny about this. Ok, guys like Ryder, Punk, Bryan, ADR, and Miz shouldn't be on TV. Who fills that time? Is it John Cena in every segment? That's the think with super-ultra-mega-fanz. They never thing things through beyond "GUYS I DON'T LIKE SUX LOL"


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

Wasn't Miz champion after TLC last year?


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Rock316AE said:


> Heel Randy Orton on RAW, seriously.


that doesnt make any sense

for one thing, orton is extremely over as a face. half the reason he turned face is because he could rko a puppy and still get cheered


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7 (Dec 14, 2010)

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> Who should be in the main event now? That's what's funny about this. Ok, guys like Ryder, Punk, Bryan, ADR, and Miz shouldn't be on TV. Who fills that time? Is it John Cena in every segment? That's the think with super-ultra-mega-fanz. They never thing things through beyond "GUYS I DON'T LIKE SUX LOL"


I asked the same thing a few pages back. No response. My only guess is that they like Orton and/or Sheamus.


----------



## Mr Premium (Nov 15, 2011)

I'm guessing Raw will have its first ever below-1.0 rating sometime in April if this situation keeps up.

By July/August, WWE will be up for liquidation and be bought by a consortium led by Dana White and redistribute these "wrestlers" into different UFC divisions.

You're all free to quote me on this by April and July.

Man, can't for CM Punk to whip up that sloppy overhead kick on Anderson Silva with his chicken legs.


----------



## Werb-Jericho (Feb 13, 2009)

sorry guys but i enjoyed TLC and Raw was alright...


----------



## xerxesXXI (May 15, 2006)

More JR raps dammit!


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

Mr Premium said:


> I'm guessing Raw will have its first ever below-1.0 rating sometime in April if this situation keeps up.
> 
> By July/August, WWE will be up for liquidation and be bought by a consortium led by Dana White and redistribute these "wrestlers" into different UFC divisions.
> 
> ...


They would have to make a special comedy division for the likes of Punk and Daniel Bryan cause no one's gonna take those geeks seriously. I kinda wish Rock went into MMA after wrestling. Could you imagine how big it would've gotten with The Great One laying the smack down on Chuck Liddel?


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

id like to see you take on danielson or punk


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

Mr Premium said:


> I'm guessing Raw will have its first ever below-1.0 rating sometime in April if this situation keeps up.
> 
> By July/August, WWE will be up for liquidation and be bought by a consortium led by Dana White and redistribute these "wrestlers" into different UFC divisions.
> 
> ...


cuz mania is april 1
no


----------



## MattayRip (Dec 13, 2011)

Wait...

why do people fucking care about ratings?


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

redeadening said:


> that doesnt make any sense
> 
> for one thing, orton is extremely over as a face. half the reason he turned face is because he could rko a puppy and still get cheered


He could be in a tweener role, similar to January-February 2009, right now he's over big but can't show nothing in terms of personality, you can't be the top star without mic time, give him more freedom on the mic, he's underrated mic worker, he can be natural as hell like he proved in the past(especially 2006). he has the right presentation, big potential there, and I know he's on top, but I mean behind just a WWE main eventer. I hope to see him on RAW after the draft.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

redeadening said:


> id like to see you take on danielson or punk


I'd shine my fists up real nice, turn it sideways and stick it straight up they're candy asses.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

you want to shove your fist up danielson's and punk's asses? oh no, no deeply repressed feelings here

what is it with the rock and the rectum?


----------



## xerxesXXI (May 15, 2006)

= ratings


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7 (Dec 14, 2010)

Carcass said:


> I'd shine my fists up real nice, turn it sideways and stick it straight up they're candy asses.


Wow, I thought the "100 Reasons why Rock fans suck" thread was joking about Rock marks casually using his catch phrase.


----------



## Roler42 (Nov 9, 2010)

redeadening said:


> you want to shove your fist up danielson's and punk's asses? oh no, no deeply repressed feelings here
> 
> what is it with the rock and the rectum?


homoerotic thoughts i tell ya, why else would a man be interested in watching another man all muscular and oily?

there's no homoerotic atractive on indy guys XD


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

redeadening said:


> you want to shove your fist up danielson's and punk's asses? oh no, no deeply repressed feelings here
> 
> what is it with the rock and the rectum?


What's even funnier is that most of the tough guys who hate on Punk and Danielson for beeing skinny are usually 5'4, 100 lbs keyboard warriors. They usually compensate with it by watching muscular bulky oiled up men.


----------



## DrunkHobbit (Sep 1, 2011)

Carcass said:


> I'd shine my fists up real nice, turn it sideways and stick it straight up *they're* candy asses.


Your hero CM Punk would have made fun of you on twitter for your grammar mistake


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

DrunkHobbit said:


> Your hero CM Punk would have made fun of you on twitter for your grammar mistake


Why does Punk even have a twitter when he always made fun of it and called anyone who used it a loser? More hypocrivity as usual.


----------



## LarryCoon (Jul 9, 2011)

^ You mean hypocrisy?

Anyway, the real argument isn't whether small guys can draw or not, its been proven that they can. What I'm wondering is how much potential do small guys have compared to bigger guys. When Bret Hart and HBK were the top guys, WWE wasn't earning much money relative to other eras. There must be a reason why Rock, Austin, Hogan and Cena all have drawn significantly more than other top stars. We'll see how the TLC PPV comes up


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

Carcass said:


> Why does Punk even have a twitter when he always made fun of it and called anyone who used it a loser? More hypocrivity as usual.


You should point that out to him on Twitter. It will be like dropping a molotov cocktail all over his candy ass.


----------



## Mr Eagles (Apr 6, 2011)

A bunch of fucking idiots in this thread. They'll increase, just give it time. For fuck's sake, Punk hasn't been on top for too long and Bryan just got the Championship. You gotta give them all time to build up the fanbase. A lot of kiddies are probably not sneaking up past their bedtime right now since Cena isn't the spotlight. When the ratings go up higher than they have been in a long ass time, all you naysayers can kiss my ass and shut the fuck up


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

what does candy ass even mean?


----------



## WWE (Jul 16, 2011)

redeadening said:


> what does candy ass even mean?


An ass made out of Candy, durrrrr.


At least craplocker makes sense...


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

This RAW is the lowest rated RAW after the December PPV since *96*, the lowest rated in 15 years in this "time slot".


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

HGF said:


> You should point that out to him on Twitter. It will be like dropping a molotov cocktail all over his candy ass.


No point. Any time anyone confronts him on twitter he'll just ignore it or call them an idiot. When The Rock comes back, he should point it out to Punk on live television so the millions...AND MILLIONS of us can watch how speechless Punk would be for looking like an ass in front of the people.


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

Carcass said:


> No point. Any time anyone confronts him on twitter he'll just ignore it or call them an idiot. When The Rock comes back, he should point it to Punk on live television so the millions...AND MILLIONS of us can watch how speechless Punk would be for looking like an ass in front of the people.


PIPEBOMB.


----------



## Starbuck (Apr 11, 2008)

Terrible thread. If you forget who the champions were last night and take the show as a whole then the reason for this rating should come pretty easily to you. It just wasn't that good of a show, simple as that. There's no hype to anything they are doing right now bar the It Begins stuff. They're going through the motions and it shows. Outside the unique opening segment, everything else that happened was really just irrelevant. Even Cena/Kane fell a little flat imo. No matter who was champion the results would have been the same because nothing is happening. It really shouldn't be that hard to understand yet here we once again in the midst of Rock marks spamming the fuck out of Punk marks and Punk marks trying to pass it all off as a joke. Needless to say that if the rating was good then the Punk marks would be the ones gloating and the Rock marks the ones getting spammed. Either way the result is the same; lost brain cells for the rest of us.


----------



## Roler42 (Nov 9, 2010)

@starbuck

at least we're having fun with the thread :lmao


----------



## WWE (Jul 16, 2011)

Rock316AE said:


> This RAW is the lowest rated RAW after the December PPV since *96*, the lowest rated in 15 years in this "time slot".


I blame The Rock, if only he stuck by his word and said he would never leave again this would of never happened. 

xD


----------



## Mister Excitement (Apr 17, 2006)

Carcass said:


> No point. Any time anyone confronts him on twitter he'll just ignore it or call them an idiot. When The Rock comes back, he should point it out to Punk on live television so the millions...AND MILLIONS of us can watch how speechless Punk would be for looking like an ass in front of the people.


What a fucking pansy.

Anyways, realistically I don't really care about how low the ratings are getting because Raw is starting to get really entertaining for the first time in a while. Seeing guys like Punk, Bryan, Ryder, and Rhodes holding championships and Kane coming back with the mask is a dream come true for me. It's such a relief from the horrendous guest host shit and continuous Orton/HHH/Cena title feuds from 2009 or Sheamus as WWE Champion and the repetitive Nexus beatdowns we got in 2010. The only thing I'm worried about is will WWE continue to have faith in this youth movement or with the decreasing ratings make them retreat back into their comfort zone of making Cena/Orton/HHH champions again.


----------



## Brave Nash (Jul 16, 2011)

I'm sorry for loving punk I guess it was a bad idea he cant draw so I have to watch AE and masterbate. 
Well I'm not that guy I enjoy punks work and he's doing just fine its a PG show. There are only two top stars 
Punk and Cena so if you don't like it than get over it. People tone out because there is no enough Main enters or creative storylines or good mid carders. 
Heels always loses and faces always wins and heels don't play against heels or faces don't play against faces which is sad and there is no enough titles, So jobbers will always be jobbers lol.


----------



## Sin_Bias (Aug 9, 2011)

There aren't any captivating storylines going on except maybe for Kane's. Apart from that, everything is just going through the motions. Mark Henry is out now, so the top heel in the WWE is now a vacant position. There are no larger than life characters, no insurmountable heels, no months-long conflicts, and no credible threats.

That and Alicia Fox won clean over Beth, botch and all. I think that pissed off a good 300k fans.


----------



## CrystalFissure (Jun 7, 2011)

Carcass said:


> It's sad when Beth looks more intimidating then any of the current male champs.


Okay, just stop. It's fucking embarrassing. No wonder why people hate Rocky marks; they're only capable of being interested in The Great One. Guys like Rocky316AE are making me hate the Rock. Shut the fuck up.


----------



## Mattyb2266 (Jun 28, 2011)

Rock316AE said:


> This RAW is the lowest rated RAW after the December PPV since *96*, the lowest rated in 15 years in this "time slot".


Leave it to you to find some lame statistics that no one cares about...

Anyways, not a bad rating, considering ratings don't mean shit anymore.


----------



## Starbuck (Apr 11, 2008)

Roler42 said:


> @starbuck
> 
> at least we're having fun with the thread :lmao


The first few times it was funny. Now these threads have become pathetic attempts by both sides to either 'own' the other or be funny themselves. In a sense, I guess it is funny watching both sets of marks getting entangled in an endless game of thinking they are outwitting the other when all they're doing is playing the other side's little game and in most instances coming across as really stupid tbh. I'm over it. I wish everybody else would be too. Rock marks, if you don't care about Punk then don't spam the fuck out of threads talking about him. Punk marks, if you don't care that Punk isn't drawing/can't wrestle/whatever else Rock marks are saying then stop responding to them. But that's never going to happen because whilst both sides endlessly proclaim that they don't care about the other, by constantly spamming the fuck out of _every_ thread on the topic they are clearly indicating that they do.


----------



## hazuki (Aug 3, 2006)

lol Rocky fans are embarrassing. And The Rock is my favorite... smh.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Starbuck said:


> The first few times it was funny. Now these threads have become pathetic attempts by both sides to either 'own' the other or be funny themselves. In a sense, I guess it is funny watching both sets of marks getting entangled in an endless game of thinking they are outwitting the other when all they're doing is playing the other side's little game and in most instances coming across as really stupid tbh. I'm over it. I wish everybody else would be too. Rock marks, if you don't care about Punk then don't spam the fuck out of threads talking about him. Punk marks, if you don't care that Punk isn't drawing/can't wrestle/whatever else Rock marks are saying then stop responding to them. But that's never going to happen because whilst both sides endlessly proclaim that they don't care about the other, by constantly spamming the fuck out of _every_ thread on the topic they are clearly indicating that they do.


no. youre stupid


----------



## Mr Premium (Nov 15, 2011)

Mattyb2266 said:


> Leave it to you to find some lame statistics that no one cares about...
> 
> *Anyways, not a bad rating, considering ratings don't mean shit anymore.*


I swear, that's what WCW management was thinking back in 2000.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Mr Premium said:


> I swear, that's what WCW management was thinking back in 2000.


um. no. wcw thought PPVs were pointless. they were extremely tv ratings heavy


----------



## Starbuck (Apr 11, 2008)

redeadening said:


> no. youre stupid


UR DA STOOPID 1


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

u just mad that triple h iz FAT

dem FAT ASSES


----------



## chronoxiong (Apr 1, 2005)

I really dont know what must the WWE do in order to keep fans from changing the channel at the 10pm slot. I really wish that streak would snap because I always stay tuned to the show no matter what segment is going on at that time.


----------



## Mattyb2266 (Jun 28, 2011)

Mr Premium said:


> I swear, that's what WCW management was thinking back in 2000.


As someone said, they were huge on TV ratings. 

And regardless, it's 2011, not 2000. How many people actually tune in at 9 each week, compared to how many people DVR the show or watch it online? Those options weren't really around back then. Now I bet more than half this forum records it or watches it online.


----------



## Mister Hands (Sep 2, 2008)

chronoxiong said:


> I really dont know what must the WWE do in order to keep fans from changing the channel at the 10pm slot. I really wish that streak would snap because I always stay tuned to the show no matter what segment is going on at that time.


My personal belief is that people have way more channels now to find something more interesting during the ad breaks. I can't count the amount of times I've missed the second half of a show I was watching because I ended up on a Frasier re-run during a commercial.

Admittedly, that's probably due to my early-onset senility, so it's hard to really apply it as a theory.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster (Nov 14, 2008)

Starbuck said:


> The first few times it was funny. Now these threads have become pathetic attempts by both sides to either 'own' the other or be funny themselves. In a sense, I guess it is funny watching both sets of marks getting entangled in an endless game of thinking they are outwitting the other when all they're doing is playing the other side's little game and in most instances coming across as really stupid tbh. I'm over it. I wish everybody else would be too. Rock marks, if you don't care about Punk then don't spam the fuck out of threads talking about him. Punk marks, if you don't care that Punk isn't drawing/can't wrestle/whatever else Rock marks are saying then stop responding to them. But that's never going to happen because whilst both sides endlessly proclaim that they don't care about the other, by constantly spamming the fuck out of _every_ thread on the topic they are clearly indicating that they do.


This thread has become a place where grown men use catchphrases from a fictional character in a deadly serious (for them) attempt to "put down" fans of another fictional character. Think about that for a second. Then cry.


----------



## Billy Kidman (Aug 17, 2008)

hazuki said:


> lol Rocky fans are embarrassing. And The Rock is my favorite... smh.


Mhm.


----------



## Starbuck (Apr 11, 2008)

redeadening said:


> u just mad that triple h iz FAT
> 
> dem FAT ASSES


FAT ASSES? u haz 2 be talkin bout CM Punk n DAT SKINNY FATASS.



SarcasmoBlaster said:


> This thread has become a place where grown men use catchphrases from a fictional character in a deadly serious (for them) attempt to "put down" fans of another fictional character. Think about that for a second. Then cry.


Whatever way you look at it, this thread is the epitome of why internet wrestling fans get a bad rap imo.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII (Jan 31, 2011)

Starbuck said:


> FAT ASSES? u haz 2 be talkin bout CM Punk n DAT SKINNY FATASS.
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever way you look at it, this thread is the epitome of why internet wrestling fans get a bad rap imo.


This. Fuck.


----------



## Mister Hands (Sep 2, 2008)

We just need a "Rock n' Ratings" subforum.


----------



## Brave Nash (Jul 16, 2011)

This thread will exactly end in page 60.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII (Jan 31, 2011)

TankOfRate said:


> OH MY GOD
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


Rock on a Rock. Clever.


----------



## Beatles123 (Jan 26, 2010)

Mods need to step in. The trolling here in this topics inexcusable.


----------



## ChainGang Saluter (Sep 7, 2011)

Wouldn't be surprised if Raw soon becomes WWE's latest edition of .com shows at this rate.


----------



## Bushmaster (Sep 28, 2010)

Man how many ppl on here have a share of wwe's stocks. I have no idea why a Ratings thread gets over 20 pages weekly. What i can assume is just a bunch of haters usually. With a show with Punk, Cena, Orton, HHH etc im surprised only one of those guys gets blamed. Then basically everyone with a Rock pic in their sig or avatar spew the same thing.


----------



## CMojicaAce (Jun 28, 2011)

:hmm:


I blame Punk, Bryan, and Ryder for the Beth/Fox, Wade/Orton etc matches being horrible and boring.


----------



## deatawaits (Sep 25, 2011)

Hell I will join this but with some logic.You know I won't defend punk as he has proven time and time again that he is not a _ratings'_draw.It is a well known fact but what these people(I am not addressing all of them)who call themselves rock fans are trying to do and how the so called punk marks are reacting is beyond pathetic.You know what if you think that vince Mcmahon expects Punk,bryan and ryder to draw then you are an idiot.They have proven in past they can't.What is happening is that the WWE is trying to make the casuals used to see new guys as champs or as the focal point of the show.Rock fans point out punk fans' double standards which is right to a limit.But the so called top guy John cena's matches have lost viewers thrice(perhaps i am wrong)this year and last raw his match with mark henry did just a 3.27 which was lower than both of punk's last Main events.The match which lost viewers at 10 pm slot also had orton the so called 2nd top face.what has happened that Cena and orton's drawing power now doesn't come into play when they aren't involved in a big feud.You want talk buyrates eh? Vengence had just about 70 thousand domestic buys.And it was headlined by None another than your top face John cena.The fact is 2011 has proven that the time of the old guards is up and because WWE hasn't build any stars they are suffering.The E is going through a transitional period when new stars will come to top and it will take time for casuals to swallow that.If there is any sanity left in Vince he understands it that better than anyone and won't panic 

You guys blame punk.And you people are right he is the champ he should take the blame.But ask yourself is this guy supposed to draw?He first feuded with cena the biggest babyface in the biz and then feuded with triple h a mega face who was not even a heel and it was when he just became relevant to ME.And should I mention Kevin fucking Nash?and then he moved on to del rio who garners no heat whatsoever and always loses 800k during his matches when he is a champ.Don't tell me that you actually thought that feud even mattered.And now he is stuck in a feud with two inferior guys.


----------



## WWE (Jul 16, 2011)

Why is he horny


----------



## xerxesXXI (May 15, 2006)

Is rising above the hate is out of the question?


----------



## wwffans123 (Feb 13, 2009)

such a bad news damn,Bring back Cena. and Screw CM Punk,Zack Ryder.


----------



## JuviJuiceIsLoose (Mar 27, 2009)

This is why I never post in the Ratings Thread, because no matter what the number is, the morons come out to say this person's not a draw, that person's not a draw.

Unless you're a WWE Stockholder, why the fuck do you care what the ratings are?

Does anyone here have a Nielsen box? No, so why do you care so much about who's "drawing".


----------



## Mister J (Dec 12, 2008)

RAW needs the Ultimate Warrior. Monday Night RAW should be called the War Zone again.


----------



## Cynic (Jan 31, 2010)

After reading the previous 28 pages I feel a sense of relief that my only natural reaction to this entire topic is that I don't fucking care about anything besides whether or not I was entertained by this show. And I was. So if these three being featured means Raw pulls a 1.5 every week and Mark Madden buys the company then it'll all have been fucking worth it as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## mblonde09 (Aug 15, 2009)

Carcass said:


> I want champs that actually look like Champs. If Nash came up to me I'd be scare shitless, *if Punk came up to me I'd give him my loose change.*


And then, with any luck, he'd kick you in the head.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

They never answer your question, Juvi. Or when I ask it? It's just a natural retardaction.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

mblonde09 said:


> And then, with any luck, he'd kick you in the head.


Calm down, I was kidding when I said all this stuff.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

People still actually bought it?

Challenge completed.


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

Some people bought it when I still had that CM Punk/Daniel Bryan with their belts pic that's all over this place in my sig. LOL


----------



## Mr Premium (Nov 15, 2011)

mblonde09 said:


> And then, with any luck, *he'd kick you in the head*.


You mean that sloppy looking overhead kick?

Tbh, I don't think he can even hit anyone with that in a real fight. Hell, he doesn't even hit any of those in a "sports entertainment" match.

Plus, he doesn't have any muscle mass whatsoever for it to hurt.


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

Product sucks = bad ratings.
End of story.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta (Sep 26, 2004)

Cynic said:


> After reading the previous 28 pages I feel a sense of relief that my only natural reaction to this entire topic is that I don't fucking care about anything besides whether or not I was entertained by this show. And I was. So if these three being featured means Raw pulls a 1.5 every week and Mark Madden buys the company then it'll all have been fucking worth it as far as I'm concerned.


You read the previous 28 pages in a row and survived?

Either this thread isn't as bad as prior weeks rating threads, or you're Jesus Christ.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Tony316 said:


> Product sucks = bad ratings.
> End of story.


Spoken like a true TNA apologist. You would know.


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Tony316 said:


> Product sucks = bad ratings.
> End of story.


Will remember that when TNA does a shitty rating 8*D


I dont get the "Take the title off Punk he aint a draw". Who the fuck is a draw these days? ( Not namned Mark Henry )


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

how come last week losing viewers at the 10 pm slot didn't' cause this much of an uproar


----------



## Striker (Aug 31, 2011)

chronoxiong said:


> I really dont know what must the WWE do in order to keep fans from changing the channel at the 10pm slot. I really wish that streak would snap because I always stay tuned to the show no matter what segment is going on at that time.


It's the result of bed time. Not channel changing.


----------



## snuggiedawg (Nov 29, 2011)

funny very funny. I remember last year when Orton was champ and ratings had these numbers he got blamed for it. Now that its cmpunk its perfectly normal cause of football..

Bet my last dollar if sd gets low ratings DB want to blamed any like orton did


----------



## deatawaits (Sep 25, 2011)

This ratings thread has to be one of the biggest "draw" of all time in non show discussion thread category.With Rock316ae Main eventing his thousandth ratings match against the cm punk stable.And he is one of the biggest reason of rock vs cena thread's success.Any surprise that rock316ae is the biggest Forum draw of all time.Hell the rant on him drew 50 pages.He has single handedly carried the Wrestling section since his debut and is all ready one of the greatest of all time perhaps only bboy could beat him but bboy is an part timer now.He is garnering huge heat with multiple replies on his single posts.He is the next big thing of this forum.He is expert in burying too.The moment when a face goes over him (Winning has beaten him cleanly once in rock vs cena discussion thread)will be huge but do not expect this guy to put over anyone.


----------



## Mcmone3737 (Aug 27, 2007)

Rock316AE said:


> Terrible number, last week for the regular 2 hours:
> Hour 2 - 4.493m
> Hour 3 - 4.161m
> and this is a RAW after PPV, shows that nobody cares about indy hacks celebrate in the ring while nobody knows or cares about their story, I hope the main event did a terrible overrun, this will tell Vince what his fanbase wants to see and what garbage to send to Jim Cornette. and this number got the extra people from the PPV, lol, can't wait for next week.


Have all 3500 of your posts been this garbage???!!??


----------



## Van Hammer (Apr 14, 2009)

Carcass said:


> I want champs that actually look like Champs. If Nash came up to me I'd be scare shitless, if Punk came up to me I'd give him my loose change.


now that is just fuking funny!!


----------



## holycityzoo (Aug 14, 2011)

Why can't people just realize that 2011-early 2012 is a transitional period for the WWE. Much like 1997, ratings are low when you transition your programming. The average rating in 1997 was 2.5

You can't look at ratings on a week to week basis, unless you have a highly promoted show during that week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta (Sep 26, 2004)

kokepepsi said:


> how come last week losing viewers at the 10 pm slot didn't' cause this much of an uproar


I'm not reading through the whole thread, but have the quarter hour numbers already been posted?

I mean, the second hour drop, but no guarantee the 10PM time slot dropped (unless it was indeed posted in this thread somewhere).


----------



## Snothlisberger (Sep 26, 2011)

Carcass is an exceptional troll. Trolled my ass for sure. But your trolly trollin ways won't fool me. 

As for the Great, the Fantastic, Undeniably Awesome Rock316AE, I think he just really is that stupid. Teach me about ratings, brah!!!


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

Obis said:


> I'm not reading through the whole thread, but have the quarter hour numbers already been posted?
> 
> I mean, the second hour drop, but no guarantee the 10PM time slot dropped (unless it was indeed posted in this thread somewhere).


not yet


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

Carcass said:


> Some people bought it when I still had that CM Punk/Daniel Bryan with their belts pic that's all over this place in my sig. LOL


I got sigs turned off. You got me earlier in the thread, I admit it. Well played sir, shame on me though :no:


----------



## -SAW- (Feb 29, 2004)

Wow. Just wow. After reading the mindless rantings of many Rock marks and "vanilla midget" haters alike, I can only come to one conclusion.

You people will never, _never_ be satisfied. Vince has pretty much tried _everything_ to please you at one time or another, but to no avail. He gives big guys like Cena, Batista, Triple H and Sheamus the strap. You then bitch about the idea that he's got a "big guy fetish" and said big guys are nothing but talentless slugs who don't deserve the pushes they are receiving. So, Vince gives in and makes smaller guys like Punk, Bryan and Ryder champions. Now they're "talentless vanilla midgets" who apparently don't deserve the pushes they are receiving.

Seriously, the only way I could ever see these people _possibly_ being satisfied is if Rocky preforms a quadruple People's Elbow on Punk, Ryder, Bryan and Cena all at the same time.

Who seriously uses the ratings as a measuring stick on whether or not someone deserves a title? Ratings haven't been anywhere near the level they were in the late 90's and early 00's. Wrestling was at the highest point it ever has, and ever will be at. It'll never be that popular _ever_ again. Just because CM Punk, Zack Ryder and Daniel Bryan can't preform a 2000-like 6.8 rating in 2011 does _not_ mean they don't deserve the title around their waste.

Either way, I am very glad that these three guys are finally getting what they've worked their asses off for years to earn. Yes, _earn_.

They deserve it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta (Sep 26, 2004)

-SAW- said:


> Wow. Just wow. After reading the mindless rantings of many Rock marks and "vanilla midget" haters alike, I can only come to one conclusion.
> 
> You people will never, _never_ be satisfied. Vince has pretty much tried _everything_ to please you at one time or another, but to no avail. He gives big guys like Cena, Batista, Triple H and Sheamus the strap. You then bitch about the idea that he's got a "big guy fetish" and said big guys are nothing but talentless slugs who don't deserve the pushes they are receiving. So, Vince gives in and makes smaller guys like Punk, Bryan and Ryder champions. Now they're "talentless vanilla midgets" who apparently don't deserve the pushes they are receiving.
> 
> ...


Great post, though not everyone in the IWC is the same person. People are more likely to respond if they don't like something, so it seems like people are just changing their opinions. Some are, but I'm sure it's just the case of people who always hated a guy finally stating what they think as the guy is getting used more and in the spotlight.


The bottom of my sig sums up everything perfectly when looking at the IWC as a whole.


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32 (Aug 18, 2011)

You folks are something else. Then again, that's what I expected from you.


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)

Another ratings slide even for a post-ppv Raw, can't wait for this new golden era of wrestling to fully be upon us 

Also can I just say I love this Rock316 guy, you all try to dismiss him as an idiot but he clearly is getting to you with his ramblings as evidenced by all the posts directed at/mocking him. Epic troll is quite epic


----------



## station0020 (Feb 1, 2010)

I never watched ring of honor or other Indy promotions but I just love Daniel Bryans intensity during his matches. It really makes all his matches really watchable. Too be honest I've watched raw since I was 8 and I'm now 19 and I'm still loving it! I'm sure the wrestling business will fail at one point, I mean nothing lasts forever. I enjoy WWE but its not like my #1 priority in life. You just move on and watch the Simpsons or something. But luckily for me and many other WWE fans, we are gonna still have plenty more years of wrestling ahead of us.


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32 (Aug 18, 2011)

This place is acting like it's the end of the world. Let's see anybody else act that way.


----------



## rkomarkorton (Jul 19, 2011)

-SAW- said:


> Wow. Just wow. After reading the mindless rantings of many Rock marks and "vanilla midget" haters alike, I can only come to one conclusion.
> 
> You people will never, _never_ be satisfied. Vince has pretty much tried _everything_ to please you at one time or another, but to no avail. He gives big guys like Cena, Batista, Triple H and Sheamus the strap. You then bitch about the idea that he's got a "big guy fetish" and said big guys are nothing but talentless slugs who don't deserve the pushes they are receiving. So, Vince gives in and makes smaller guys like Punk, Bryan and Ryder champions. Now they're "talentless vanilla midgets" who apparently don't deserve the pushes they are receiving.
> 
> ...


no i disagree it should be used as a measuring stick....these are the same folks who are quick to bash cena and orton whenever they are champion....


----------



## -SAW- (Feb 29, 2004)

rkomarkorton said:


> no i disagree it should be used as a measuring stick....these are the same folks who are quick to bash cena and orton whenever they are champion....


I don't follow.


----------



## Volantredx (May 27, 2011)

I don't get why people use "vanilla midgets" in 2011. The original "vanilla midgets" were Chris Jericho, Edie Guerrero and Chris [Redacted] and few people would say that they lacked talent or the ability to get over so why do people still use it.


----------



## Bolanboy (May 14, 2009)

Transitional period.
Declining ratings for several years.
General lack of interest in wrestling.
No interesting heel (duckface, eets my destineeeee).
Underdeveloped midcard.
Filler matches.

And [email protected] all the guys saying "LETS SEE HOW RATINGS ON SMACKDOWN JUMP WITH BRYAN NAO LOLOLOL". Yeah, I can't wait to hear 'Hold on der playas, tonight's main event is gonna be a.......tag team match between mark henry and wade barrett against the world heavyweight champion daniel bryan and.............randy orton holla holla" because that creative booking will definitely puts ass to seats.


----------



## joeycalz (Jan 8, 2010)

1. Kids go to bed.

2. People record/DVR the show more because of work/other obligations (like my best friend).

3. There was a good Monday Night Football game on with two 10-3 teams, who are also big-time historical franchises.

That and September to December is probably the weakest time of the year, voila. I should get a medal for that investigative work. BTW Rocky is my favorite superstar of all-time and I see absolutely NO reason for all these arguments. Absolutely ridiculous.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

-SAW- said:


> Wow. Just wow. After reading the mindless rantings of many Rock marks and "vanilla midget" haters alike, I can only come to one conclusion.
> 
> You people will never, _never_ be satisfied. Vince has pretty much tried _everything_ to please you at one time or another, but to no avail. He gives big guys like Cena, Batista, Triple H and Sheamus the strap. You then bitch about the idea that he's got a "big guy fetish" and said big guys are nothing but talentless slugs who don't deserve the pushes they are receiving. So, Vince gives in and makes smaller guys like Punk, Bryan and Ryder champions. Now they're "talentless vanilla midgets" who apparently don't deserve the pushes they are receiving.
> 
> ...


----------



## Hade (Oct 1, 2011)

*That hack, moron, idiot, bitch, phony, hypocrite CM Punk is the CANCER of the WWE. Him, that jobber frog face The Jizz and Mexican JBL. These idiots are destroying your company Vince. Get rid of them ASAP!*


----------



## deadmanwatching (Dec 14, 2011)

And I think a lot of people buy Punk's hype......how is it his theme songs go, "look in my eyes and you will see, waves of hypocrisy"? 
His gimmick is calling others boring and smarking about Cena's moveset but he cuts the same promos each week and the tag match last night had him do the same sequence of moves off the hot tag he always does..

It amazing how Punk fans get their panties bunched up when you are not a fan of his. I would never get mad at a person and called them names just because they are not a fan of my favorite wrestler. Some of Punks fans really need to grow up.


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

People are poor at detecting sarcasm if they think most of the posts in this thread are serious.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

It's actually Cult of Personality, breh. I c wat u did thar, tho.


----------



## The XL (Aug 7, 2006)

2.9? Jesus, that's barely ahead of Smackdown. Punk isn't a draw, but he isn't a ratings killer either. Zero midcard besides Ryder and Ziggler, who's probably on his way to the main event. No credible challengers for Punk. They need to do something fast. I think two of the biggest potential ratings guys and money makers are Sheamus and Henry, so they should move them to Raw and give them serious TV time and development.


----------



## Hade (Oct 1, 2011)

And that moron CM Punk says that is Straight Edge? What the FUCK!? He looks like a fucking JUNKIE!

And another thing... if Eric Bischoff was the chairman of WWE then he would have sent Punk immediately to the midcard. Eric Bischoff was such a genius not like Vince! If you didn't draw he sent you back to the midcard in WCW. WCW was full with megastars back in the 90's not with generic, bland, hacks, morons, glorified midcarders like that fucking junkie CM Punk.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

I'm going to assume people who bitch on these topics every week expect a 5.0-6.0 rating to pop up at anytime and the the WWE would be the Attitude Era reborn.

If so, you deserve all the disappointment you come to expect every week. Take a bow.


----------



## Hade (Oct 1, 2011)

Rock316AE said:


> funny because Austin said he sold the best stunner of all time and it's true, check the best stunner in history at WM19.


What the hell are you talking about?






This is the best Stunner ever! Scott Hall sells like a damn champion!


----------



## Cliffy (Mar 31, 2011)

Why do some fans get so upset so easily ?

None of the guys in that ME are draws, its not their fault tho its the booking thats fucked them over.


----------



## deadmanwatching (Dec 14, 2011)

Cliffy Byro said:


> Why do some fans get so upset so easily ?
> 
> None of the guys in that ME are draws, its not their fault tho its the booking thats fucked them over.


Where Were you When Cena Use to Be the ME ?


----------



## xzeppelinfootx (May 7, 2006)

Ratings lol.



I blame Jinder Mahal, and that is in no way a joke.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle (Dec 10, 2006)

We cant blame anybody yet unil the quarter hour ratings are released but honestly I'm suprised the rating is not lower due to the huge amount of filler Raw had on its show.

And WWE are not dependent on ratings, theres so many diffrent sorces of income so for the people who are saying WWE are "dying" you have no clue what youre talking about.


----------



## Mr. 305 Blaze (May 14, 2009)

Hade said:


> What the hell are you talking about?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You posted the wrong video. This is the correct one.


----------



## deadmanwatching (Dec 14, 2011)

the best one was With Shane mcmahon


----------



## HHH is the GOAT (Jul 19, 2011)

I dont know whats wrong with WWE. You have someone like Cena who is a megastar and the face of the company and you give him 15 minutes on the show? fpalm

I want to see approximately 40 mins of the show dedicated to Cena and his feud.


----------



## PoisonMouse (Jun 20, 2008)

You guys care about ratings way too much. Start worrying once they get into the 1s. It kinda shows how you guys'll argue about anything seeing as how this topic got 33 when it should have gotten 2/3 at the most.

I'm here to watch wrestling, not watch some numbers.


----------



## kennedy=god (May 12, 2007)

I'm delighted they're going in this new direction, i feel like they're pushing the right guys atm but tbh i didn't really enjoy the show that much.

It's all just filler right now, i'm sure if WWE can keep the ratings above 4M then they're content enough. It's the off-season for WWE right now and at this stage all they're doing is trying to make the newer guys as credible as possible for the R2WM.

When "IT BEGINS" is when business will properly pick up, though i still don't encourage people to get this hyped-up over ratings, considering it doesn't particular matter at all to a viewer


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

These threads are becoming worse than TNA rating threads.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

optikk sucks said:


> These threads are becoming worse than TNA rating threads.


lets not say things we cant take back


----------



## wofunkulo (Dec 21, 2011)

WTF? This is the rating for the RAW after a PPV with two new champions? 

What the hell happened?

Embarrassing shit.


----------



## Azuran (Feb 17, 2009)

Gotta love how the ratings don't matter when Punk is the champion. The sad thing is that the SD rating will be lower. The casuals won't tune in because they don't care about Bryan, and the Bryan marks won't watch the show because they think they're too good to be stuck at home on Friday's nights. They'll probably skip the entire show and only watch Bryan boring everyone on Youtube. Those two factors will lead to ratings disaster.


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

Green Light said:


> Also can I just say I love this Rock316 guy, Epic troll is quite epic



Nah, this is the mentality here, when someone don't like "the favorite" he's a troll, and I restrained compared to others here, all the facts I post are 100% true, including that this RAW is the lowest rated RAW after the December PPV since 96. go check it. when people has no more responses they're trying to pull "he's trolling" card, get real and face reality(not talking about you specifically, in general).


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

Not a surprise really, CM Punk and Daniel Bryan are boring champs. They have no lager than life character or in-ring presence. Thats why they don't draw.


----------



## Deebow (Jan 2, 2011)

OHNOEZZZZ!!!!!! GETTTTTTT BRIAN CMPUNK n RYDER OFF TV!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Deebow (Jan 2, 2011)

Fabregas said:


> Not a surprise really, CM Punk and *Daniel Bryan* are boring champs. They have no lager than life character or in-ring presence. Thats why they don't draw.


Yes because you can consider somebody a boring champion after 1 episode of RAW.fpalm


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

Deebow said:


> Yes because you can consider somebody a boring champion after 1 episode of RAW.fpalm


He hasn't entertained me once before he became champ, why the fuck would it be any different now?


----------



## Izual_Rebirth (Feb 20, 2010)

I'm going to ask the same question I always ask in the ratings topics. The same question I never get an answer to.

Does anyone have a comprehensive list of RAW ratings for the last 4 or 5 years? Week in and Week out. I can't stand when people post ratings, say they are crap and never post anything to relate them to. Compared to the AE all ratings suck these days. What I really care about is how todays ratings compare with those earlier this year.

Does anyone know what sort of ratings we were getting during the boring ass Cena\Orton and HHH\Orton feuds?


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

Izual_Rebirth said:


> I'm going to ask the same question I always ask in the ratings topics. The same question I never get an answer to.
> 
> Does anyone have a comprehensive list of RAW ratings for the last 4 or 5 years? Week in and Week out. I can't stand when people post ratings, say they are crap and never post anything to relate them to. Compared to the AE all ratings suck these days. What I really care about is how todays ratings compare with those earlier this year.
> 
> Does anyone know what sort of ratings we were getting during the boring ass Cena\Orton and HHH\Orton feuds?


http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/

Enjoy.


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

Fabregas said:


> http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/
> 
> Enjoy.


I can see this site causing the death of the WWE section.


----------



## Izual_Rebirth (Feb 20, 2010)

Fabregas said:


> http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/
> 
> Enjoy.


Ah my friend 

Average for 2008 was 3.27
Average for 2009 was 3.57
Average for 2010 was 3.28
Average for 2011 (so far) was 3.21

Apart from 2009 doing well which was when we had Orton\HHH and Orton\Cena the ratings seem to have been around the 3.2 mark for the last few years. Don't really see the complaints really.


----------



## Cliffy (Mar 31, 2011)

average for 2007 on raw was 3.6.


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)

Lil'Jimmy said:


> I can see this site causing the death of the WWE section.


+1

For what it's worth over the last few years (according to that site) the average rating across the whole year has been:

2006: 3.90
2007: 3.61
2008: 3.27
2009: 3.57
2010: 3.28
2011: 3.21

Also it says the Raw after Punk's shoot did a 2.4, that is a typo right? 

Edit: Forgot that is independence today so makes sense


----------



## Kabraxal (Jun 14, 2004)

Cliffy Byro said:


> average for 2007 on raw was 3.6.


Which I think actually shows how big an impact a certain event had on the WWE... though to be fair I was one of those that it hit hard and mixed with lackluster shows, I was gone in a few months til HBK/Taker II.


----------



## Deebow (Jan 2, 2011)

Fabregas said:


> http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/
> 
> Enjoy.


Hmm... Interesting. Since 2008, the rating starts to dip to the low 3's-high 2's near the end of the year. Then it bounces back around WM time. But I guess that trend has nothing to do with the ratings dipping near the end of this year, right?


----------



## Cliffy (Mar 31, 2011)

wow.

look at the difference between the hunter show (Raw 2004) to Cena's emergence on Raw(05-06)


thats quite the difference.


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)

2008 ratings really tanked hard, I guess that certain event really did turn people off


----------



## Izual_Rebirth (Feb 20, 2010)

I still think it's the booking rather than the wrestlers though.

Orton\Cena and Orton\HHH got some of the best ratings of the last few years.

Punk got some really good ratings around the time of MITB and just after but then imo WWE dropped the ball on him. Had they continued having Punk feud with Cena or HHH then I think he would have drawn more over those few months. You can't just stick the newcomers (relatively speaking) in the main event and expect them to draw. Punk is good but he's still not good enough to draw on his own. People want to watch him in the main event, I just think they want to see him feud with established stars like Cena and HHH. I know it sounds dumb but he's still not credible in my eyes in terms of being able to beat the best. In my mind, he's there not because he's that damn good (in terms of kayfabe being the best)... he's there because the only people he has to feud with are people like Miz and Del Rio. I get the feeling, whether correct or not, he's there because guys have left. I'm talking Kayfabe here btw. I couldn't see him beating guys like Batista, Edge or Jericho cleanly and because those guys aren't in it he's got the chance to shine. Non kayfabe, He's good but not good enough to put people like Del Rio and Miz over just yet. There is still a place for the veterans in the main event.

Giving Punk a decent title reign is one way of making him more credible but I still don't look at him in the same light as guys like Cena, Orton and HHH because he's just not had that sort of exposure to beating the best in the business. Beating Cena non cleanly twice and putting on a good show against HHH is a very good showing but it takes more than that to make me think he's actually credible enough to be going up against the top of the business. Hopefully he'll get a decent feud going into Mania which will really establish him. He needs to have a decent long feud, and come out looking strong against someone good like a Cena or a Taker or HHH.


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

Cliffy Byro said:


> wow.
> 
> look at the difference between the hunter show (Raw 2004) to Cena's emergence on Raw(05-06)
> 
> ...


It's mainly because of USA Network, not Cena or HHH. they did terrible move with the move to TNN/Spike.


----------



## xerxesXXI (May 15, 2006)

This thread is a draw.

Where are the quarterlies?

Don't know how anyone can deny WWE is losing viewers.


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32 (Aug 18, 2011)

I love it how the people on this forum are treating a drop in ratings on one show as a pandemic.


----------



## Natsuke (Dec 2, 2009)

On the contrary, I used to complain that these rating threads are completely useless and we should just have a stickied thread for all ratings.

But I have officially used this thread to identify trolling assholes, and it miraculously works. Because of this weekly thread, I can now pinpoint people who I can easily ignore all their trolling opinions and identify them as mere filler from here on out.

It's quite the handy thread.


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Ahh. I can't wait until the Survivor Series buyrates thread.


----------



## PoisonMouse (Jun 20, 2008)

Nobody ever replies to this when I ask, so I assume that it's because they have no answer. I will continue to do so unless someone gives me and answer, and in turn will continue to believe rating topics are useless and to be honest should be banned or moved to one big topic.

Why do ratings matter? You know the WWE won't be cancelled, so why does it matter? To see who is a draw? Why do you want to see who is a draw?


----------



## LarryCoon (Jul 9, 2011)

PoisonMouse said:


> Nobody ever replies to this when I ask, so I assume that it's because they have no answer. I will continue to do so unless someone gives me and answer, and in turn will continue to believe rating topics are useless and to be honest should be banned or moved to one big topic.
> 
> Why do ratings matter? You know the WWE won't be cancelled, so why does it matter? To see who is a draw? Why do you want to see who is a draw?


Because people use ratings as a way to defend their favorite wrestlers and to rag on the other ones. Open your eyes, this thread isn't really about the ratings, its about X wrestler vs X wrestler.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

I can. It'll be World War 3 with all the marks there.


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/wwe-ppv/592122-survivor-series-preliminary-buyrate.html

The battle has moved over there folks. I think this is what they call getting a taste of your own medicine


----------



## PoisonMouse (Jun 20, 2008)

I just don't see the big issue if ratings drop down from a .5 to a .3 or a .2 one show and then they're back to a .5 the next, then raise to a .6 the next, It's not like it's dropping from a 4.0 to a 2.5 in one week or anything. Now that'd be something to worry about, or when it starts getting 1.0 ratings. Who gives as shit if Joe down the street stopped watching or some guy in australia tuned out halfway through or some casual didn't watch that week. As long as my buddies keep watching and I have a group of people to discuss wrestling with, then it's fine.

WWE won't be getting a 5.0 again in a long time, no matter who "draws"


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

TankOfRate said:


> Ahh. I can't wait until the Survivor Series buyrates thread.


Me too. If it's high, it's cause of the Rock, if it's low it's cause of Punk.


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

The biggest issue is the 2nd hour dropping
That never ever used to happen, hasn't happened in 13 years and is happening every week know for months.
It seems that the people who watch out of habit keep tuning in at the start, finding the show boring and tune out + the casuals who would tune in at the 2nd hour have decreased.


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Carcass your sig is making me want to kill myself.


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

Carcass said:


> Me too. If it's high, it's cause of the Rock, if it's low it's cause of Punk.


Well its actually true.

Every time Rock returns to RAW there is a ratings spike; Punk on the other hand does not effect ratings much at all. So therefore, if the Survivor Series butyrate is high we can assume it was because of Rock. It's just common sense.


----------



## Cliffy (Mar 31, 2011)




----------



## sideon (Sep 18, 2008)

> WWE has released a preliminary Survivor Series PPV figure of 280,000 total buys. The buy total for The Rock's big return match teaming with John Cena will likely grow by the time WWE reports fourth quarter earnings result, as the preliminary total is only through the end of November.
> 
> The estimate compares to 244,000 official buys for Survivor Series 2010 and 235,000 buys for Survivor Series 2009, which nearly got Survivor Series scrapped from the PPV line-up.


*Pretty good number considering the shitty build up for all the matches, in reality unless it's Royal Rumble WrestleMania or SummerSlam im not ordering their ppvs.*


----------



## WrestlingforEverII (Jan 31, 2011)

TankOfRate said:


> Carcass your sig is making me want to kill myself.


----------



## Azuran (Feb 17, 2009)

Green Light said:


> +1
> 
> For what it's worth over the last few years (according to that site) the average rating across the whole year has been:
> 
> ...


Cena = ratings. No wonder Vince always gives the title to him.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Sup with the **** Rock pics?


----------



## D17 (Sep 28, 2010)

sideon said:


> *Pretty good number considering the shitty build up for all the matches, in reality unless it's Royal Rumble WrestleMania or SummerSlam im not ordering their ppvs.*


Punk marks = Below £300k, therefore Rock can't draw. Also ignoring the fact it's not the final number/that it's expected to rise.
Rock marks = Below £300k, well....it's not the final number, plus it had poor build, and watered down the build up to The Rock's in-ring return. Also how SVS buyrates have, in the last x amount of years, traditionally done poor next to the Mania, Rumble and Summerslam buyrates.


----------



## Christiangotcrewed (May 4, 2011)

I would not call ryder a vanilla midget. Hes taller than cena.He also has decent bodymass, punk and bryan on the other hand....


----------



## WWE (Jul 16, 2011)

Then Cena's the vanilla midget!


----------



## Kennt 160711 (Jul 17, 2011)

No, no, no. Big Show IS _the_ Vanilla Midget!


----------



## wb1899 (Dec 1, 2011)

In the demos, male teens did a 2.8 (up 12%), Males 18-49 did a 2.5 (same as last week), 
Women teens did a 0.8 (down 27%) and Women 18-49 did a 1.3 (same as last week). 
It was 66.7% male viewers.

The big story here was the main event. The overrun for the C.M. Punk & Zack Ryder & Daniel
Bryan vs. Alberto Del Rio & The Miz & Dolph Ziggler match gained 59,000 viewers. That’s almost
impossible given people tune in to see the following show, which basically meant wrestling fans
must have been tuning out in droves (they were during the first half of the match but then
started gaining at 11 p.m., but hardly gained anything). The main event did a 2.67 rating (2.55
for the first half of the match) which had to be, probably by far, the lowest rated main event on
Raw of this year and maybe the lowest since 1997 for a non-holiday show in the regular time
slot.

In the key demos, teenagers males from start to finish (and this includes whatever gain the next
show is getting in the last few minutes) went from 3.0 to 3.0, Males 18-49 from 2.5 to 2.6,
Women teenagers from 0.8 to 0.6 and Women 18-49 from 1.1 to 1.0.

The show opened at a strong 3.36 rating so there was the bump at the top that you would
expect for the show after a PPV. 

Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett fell 721,000 viewers. 

Beth Phoenix vs. Alicia Fox 277,000 viewers so it was a rare women’s match that did well. 

Sheamus vs. Jinder Mahal lost 247,000 viewers. 

The John Cena promo which also included Mark Henry and Kane gained 428,000 viewers and did a 3.18 quarter.
The gain is about normal for that timeslot.

Primo & Epico vs. Usos and Santino Marella vs. Cody Rhodes lost 719,000 viewers.

Backstage segments with the Bella Twins and John Laurinaitis, Hornswoggle kissing Vickie
Guerrero and a Show interview lost 56,000 viewers.


----------



## Hade (Oct 1, 2011)

Cycloneon said:


> Then Cena's the vanilla midget!


Cena can draw. Can't wait for the TLC buyrate to see how that number shows again that CM Punk is not a draw and never be one.


----------



## Notrealz (Nov 25, 2011)

wb1899 said:


> The big story here was the main event. The overrun for the C.M. Punk & Zack Ryder & Daniel Bryan vs. Alberto Del Rio & The Miz & Dolph Ziggler match gained 59,000 viewers. That’s almost impossible given people tune in to see the following show, which basically meant *wrestling fans must have been tuning out in droves* (they were during the first half of the match but then started gaining at 11 p.m, but hardly gained anything).
> 
> 
> The main event did a 2.67 rating (2.55 for the first half of the match) which had to be, probably by far, the lowest rated main event on Raw of this year and maybe the lowest since 1997 for a non-holiday show in the regular time
> slot.



:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

CM PUNK : _I am going to make this shit cool again._ 


There is your Next Top face of the company folks. Looks like they even drove the wrestling fans out. Poor Daniel Bryan though.



John Cena said it right - CM Punk is nothing but a loud mouth One hit wonder.


Kelly Kelly drew more than this Indy schmuck. LMFAO!



VINCE, WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!!!!!


----------



## PunkDrunk (Jul 23, 2011)

The big story here was the main event. The overrun for the C.M. Punk & Zack Ryder & DanielBryan vs. Alberto Del Rio & The Miz & Dolph Ziggler match gained 59,000 viewers. That?s almostimpossible given people tune in to see the following show, which basically meant wrestling fansmust have been tuning out in droves (they were during the first half of the match but thenstarted gaining at 11 p.m., but hardly gained anything). The main event did a 2.67 rating (2.55for the first half of the match) which had to be, probably by far, the lowest rated main event onRaw of this year and maybe the lowest since 1997 for a non-holiday show in the regular timeslot.

this is why the iwc marks should care about ratings. this little indy freakshow isnt going to happen again for a loooooooing time


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Sup capat.


----------



## Hade (Oct 1, 2011)

wb1899 said:


> In the demos, male teens did a 2.8 (up 12%), Males 18-49 did a 2.5 (same as last week),
> Women teens did a 0.8 (down 27%) and Women 18-49 did a 1.3 (same as last week).
> It was 66.7% male viewers.
> 
> ...


Another proof... that hack, moron, idiot, hypocrite, bitch, fucker, junkie, glorified midcarder CM Punk can't draw shit.


----------



## Cliffy (Mar 31, 2011)

Damn those numbers are bad.


----------



## Batz (Apr 5, 2008)

I was watching NBA Preseason games...


----------



## Hade (Oct 1, 2011)




----------



## Notrealz (Nov 25, 2011)

CM PUNK : _If you're out, you'll be left behind. _

*Actually WE ARE ALL GOING DOWN, THANKS TO YOU PUNKASS BITCH*!


----------



## deatawaits (Sep 25, 2011)

On a side note _*barret vs orton lost 721,000*_ but this is pretty darn bad numbers but the show did started strong.Pretty bad for ME worser than anything I have seen for that slot.


_*I AM NOT SAYING THAT THE ME WAS ANY GOOD.THAT IS ACTUALLY WORSER THAN ANYTHING.BUT WHAT IS MORE CONCERNING IS THE FACT THAT NOTHING,NOTHING DREW.APART FROM CENA WHICH WAS STILL NOT THAT GREAT.WHATEVER PEOPLE SAY PUNK CAN'T DRAW AND THAT IS COMPLETELY TRUE.BUT WHAT SHOULD BE NOTICED THAT ORTON LOST 721,000 CENA COULDN'T EVEN CRACK 3.2S ON 10PM SLOT IT IS VERY VERY CONCERNING AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL ACTUALLY SAVE THEM*_


----------



## D.M.N. (Apr 26, 2008)

Breakdown:

Q1 - 3.36 rating / 4.89 million
Q2 - 2.86 rating / 4.17 million
Q3 - 3.05 rating / 4.45 million
Q4 - 2.88 rating / 4.20 million
Q5 - 3.12 rating / 4.63 million
Q6 - 2.64 rating / 3.91 million
Q7 - 2.55 rating / 3.85 million
Q8 - 2.67 rating / 3.91 million

Looking at the breakdown, one has to assume that there were quite a few people just waiting around to see Kane because the last 3 quarters were all under 4 million. The first 5 quarters did respectably and then it plummeted as soon as the Kane bit happened.

(although to be fair, no one that tuned in just because of Kane was going to stick around for Usos vs Primo and Epico which followed it...)


----------



## deatawaits (Sep 25, 2011)

I don't know what is wrong with punk.The guy is getting the biggest pops on a consistent basis and is over as fuck.His Merch is selling like crazy.But what about ratings what is going wrong?lack of good opponents?what?It is not like they can take the belt off him it will probably do nothing cause even cena is not drawing that big.I am a huge mark of punk but there is something that is going too wrong and has to be fixed NOW.


----------



## Cosmic Gate (Nov 2, 2011)

Terrible numbers again and this pretty much shows the current main event scene on Raw is not interesting casuals, hopefully WWE realise they need to actually have *INTERESTING STORYLINES* for people to care


----------



## Notrealz (Nov 25, 2011)

Why do you guys keep saying lack of opponents? 

What about his main event feuds with Taker, Jeff hardy, edge in Smackdown? What about the Wrestlemania feud with Randy Orton? What about the feud with John cena & Triple h? 4 Time world champion, 2 time MITB winner. 

Fucking Fail 'Nuff Said.

This guy has been handed too many opportunities. Lot of guys on the roster would have killed to have those oppurtunities Punk had. 

Whats going Wrong? The product has suddenly shifted towards Internet Fans, thats whats going wrong. If i were a casual fan, i wouldnt give two shits about Ryder's youtube show or the R.O.H Pride. I just want to be entertained. But Somehow, Vince has forgotten this. 

The fault lies with Punk. He is so full of himself, he thinks he is above WWE. He uses Twitter yet criticizes WWE pushing Twitter on raw? He is sent to promote RAW, do the weather on a news channel, but he does even care. 

No one wants to get behind a prick(character) like Punk. Thats why the ratings are tanking. People cant connect with this Asshole character.


----------



## #1Peep4ever (Aug 21, 2011)

Storylines....


Nuff said


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

The fact is, there is no one else to hold the title. People say "Take the title off Punk", and give it to who??
Show me anyone on Raw that actually draws outside of Cena.

Give it to Cena again?
Give it to Triple H?


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)

That main event overrun is embarrasingly bad, honestly. I hate to say it because I like him but every segment Ryder is in seems to do terribly in the ratings


----------



## Chocolate Soup (Oct 29, 2011)

Hade said:


>


:lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)




----------



## A-C-P (Jan 5, 2010)

God Damn Vanilla Midget Indy Hacks, TNA will buy out WWE by the end of 2012.

:lmao you know we probably care more about the ratings on this site than the WWE actually does. Wow i was way off on the 20 page shitstorm comment to, It was doublt that!


----------



## krai999 (Jan 30, 2011)




----------



## Tedious (Feb 8, 2011)

CM Punk didn't draw? Shit. No longer a fan of him or anything he's ever done.


----------



## rkomarkorton (Jul 19, 2011)

wb1899 said:


> In the demos, male teens did a 2.8 (up 12%), Males 18-49 did a 2.5 (same as last week),
> Women teens did a 0.8 (down 27%) and Women 18-49 did a 1.3 (same as last week).
> It was 66.7% male viewers.
> 
> ...


hahahahahahahahahahahaha


----------



## yoseftigger (Mar 18, 2008)

Cena is the only true consistent draw left. Even the 10 pm slot usually doesn't get the 400K boast it normally should anymore. I don't know what that report meant. The usually gain is about 200K.

Every Cena segment = a lot more viewers

Ergo, put the title back on Cena so we can have Cena vs Rock for the title.


----------



## DoubleDeckerBar (Aug 10, 2011)

Why do you people care about the ratings so much? how does it affect how you watch the product?

Just sit back, shut up and try to enjoy it, if you hate it as much as some on here seem then just stop watching, go on youtube, type raw 1999 part 1, find your hand cream, unzip, knock yourself out.


----------



## LarryCoon (Jul 9, 2011)

JasonLives said:


> The fact is, there is no one else to hold the title. People say "Take the title off Punk", and give it to who??
> Show me anyone on Raw that actually draws outside of Cena.
> 
> Give it to Cena again?
> Give it to Triple H?


Cena and HHH were doing decent numbers when they were champion


----------



## Hade (Oct 1, 2011)

DoubleDeckerBar said:


> Why do you people care about the ratings so much? how does it affect how you watch the product?
> 
> Just sit back, shut up and try to enjoy it, if you hate it as much as some on here seem then just stop watching, go on youtube, type raw 1999 part 1, find your hand cream, unzip, knock yourself out.


If Cena or Orton were WWE champs and the ratings would have been shit then you Punk marks would have said that the ratings matter. Punk marks are the worst!


----------



## Starbuck (Apr 11, 2008)

59,000? Fucking ouch is all that can be said about that and when you consider the fact that it was the supposed future of the WWE in the match, well, it certainly doesn't bode well. Horrible number.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta (Sep 26, 2004)

And as usual, Punk draws people in on the mic, with the highest rating of the show... but his matches lose a shitload... now even worse in the overrun... and it's way below average. Punk's likeability stems all the way from his mic work... people don't care to see him wrestle.


----------



## Notrealz (Nov 25, 2011)

yoseftigger said:


> Cena is the only true consistent draw left. Even the 10 pm slot usually doesn't get the 400K boast it normally should anymore. I don't know what that report meant. The usually gain is about 200K.
> 
> Every Cena segment = a lot more viewers
> 
> Ergo, put the title back on Cena so we can have Cena vs Rock for the title.



Wasnt all cena this time though. KANE! 

The entire segment was promoted as "Cena will address the universe regarding Kane's attack." 

But yes i do agree, Cena is the only consistent draw. You can hate him but cant deny the fact he deserves the title more than anyone on the current roster.





DoubleDeckerBar said:


> Why do you people care about the ratings so much? how does it affect how you watch the product?
> 
> Just sit back, shut up and try to enjoy it, if you hate it as much as some on here seem then just stop watching, go on youtube, type raw 1999 part 1, find your hand cream, unzip, knock yourself out.



Lol Where were posts like these when Randy orton or john Morrison were consistently being a ratings killer every week?

If it comes to punk, suddenly the ratings dont matter huh?


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

:lmao The rating for the main-event! HAHAHAHAHA


----------



## DoubleDeckerBar (Aug 10, 2011)

Hade said:


> If Cena or Orton were WWE champs and the ratings would have been shit then you Punk marks would have said that the ratings matter. Punk marks are the worst!


I don't care about how the ratings are, if they do a good show with Orton or Cena as Champion and it draws terrible numbers I wouldn't give a fuck, because i'd still watched a good show.


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

Obis said:


> And as usual, Punk draws people in on the mic, with the highest rating of the show... but his matches lose a shitload... now even worse in the overrun... and it's way below average. Punk's likeability stems all the way from his mic work... people don't care to see him wrestle.


Almost any fucking guy on the mic will draw. Nobody cares about wrestling.


----------



## Amsterdam (Mar 8, 2010)

Carcass said:


> "If you can't behind this, you'll be left behind"
> 
> Looks like a lot of people couldn't get behind this. :lmao












I fucking LOVE this weekly ratings threads. They never get old.


----------



## LarryCoon (Jul 9, 2011)

Notrealz said:


> Wasnt all cena this time though. KANE!
> 
> The entire segment was promoted as "Cena will address the universe regarding Kane's attack."
> 
> But yes i do agree, Cena is the only consistent draw. You can hate him but cant deny the fact he deserves the title more than anyone on the current roster.


Well duh. Every Rock segment had him addressing an important storyline angle, every Austin segment had Vince Mcmahon. And Kane isn't pulling much viewers nowadays even with his new vintage gimmick.


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Im not suprised the ME bombed. There is no real heat between the faces and the heels.


----------



## Notrealz (Nov 25, 2011)

Obis said:


> *And as usual, Punk draws people in on the mic, with the highest rating of the show*... but his matches lose a shitload... now even worse in the overrun... and it's way below average. Punk's likeability stems all the way from his mic work... people don't care to see him wrestle.


Apparently thats not true either. 

The Show opened with 3.36 with fallout from Last night's PPV. Thats not good at all.

Punk is yet to prove that he can draw on his own.


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

Carcass 1 - IWC 0


----------



## DoubleDeckerBar (Aug 10, 2011)

Who gives a fuck if Punk can't draw?

The only proven draws atm are The Rock, Cena & Mark Henry.


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

JasonLives said:


> Im not suprised the ME bombed. There is no real heat between the faces and the heels.


:lmao


----------



## Notrealz (Nov 25, 2011)

This carcass dude is fucking failed Troll. 

Most of the facts he posted about Punk in this thread are true. If you going to Pretend as a rocky mark and be sarcastic, dont be posting true facts idiot.


----------



## A-C-P (Jan 5, 2010)

Tony316 said:


> Carcass 1 - IWC 0


What a minute last time i checked Carcass is prat of the IWC so that would mean Carcass 1 - IWC 1 then.


----------



## Fanboi101 (Jul 15, 2011)

Notrealz said:


> This carcass dude is fucking failed Troll.
> 
> Most of the facts he posted about Punk in this thread are true. If you going to Pretend as a rocky mark and be sarcastic, dont be posting true facts idiot.



Yea he is definitely hurting his cause


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Putting the title on Cena is retarded. The ratings would go up by 0.1 maybe.
Sure he is a draw, but its the WHOLE show that is the problem. Doesnt matter if his quarter does good when the Divas, Tag team and undercard matches draw poorly.

This is why putting the blame on one wrestler is stupid. That person aint on 24/7. 

The apparently great draw himself, The Rock, his 3 hour show did a 3.2. So if The Rock cant spike the overall ratings by himself. How can Punk do it by himself?

Its down to storylines, thats what will draw in viewers.


----------



## Kennt 160711 (Jul 17, 2011)

WWE need to build stars up. They have guys like Dolph Ziggler who's great in the ring and is good on the mic, with more work he could be a solid draw overall. I feel sorry for him being stuck in a main event with Punk, Ryder, Bryan, ADR and Miz. It's like putting Triple H in a main event with Santino, Goldust, Yoshi Tatsu, Jinder Mahal and Health Slater. Actually to casuals seeing the latter would probably be more entertaining as they could see Triple H bury them 5 guys.


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

JasonLives said:


> Putting the title on Cena is retarded. The ratings would go up by 0.1 maybe.
> Sure he is a draw, but its the WHOLE show that is the problem. Doesnt matter if his quarter does good when the Divas, Tag team and undercard matches draw poorly.
> 
> This is why putting the blame on one wrestler is stupid. That person aint on 24/7.
> ...


3 hours shows always does bad in the ratings because no one tunes in for the first hour. Thank god The Rock was advertise because Raw would of made a 2.5 rating.


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Tony316 said:


> 3 hours shows always does bad in the ratings because no one tunes in for the first hour. Thank god The Rock was advertise because Raw would of made a 2.5 rating.


The orgininal 2 hours did 3.4. Nothing special at all. Hey, even CM Punk being champion shows has been able to do 3.2s.


Even if Cena was champion and this weeks ME had done a 3.0 rating for example compared to the 2.7 it now got. The overall rating would have still been a 2.9.


----------



## Starbuck (Apr 11, 2008)

Tony316 said:


> *Casuals* 1 - IWC 0


Fixed.


----------



## Notrealz (Nov 25, 2011)

JasonLives said:


> Putting the title on Cena is retarded. The ratings would go up by 0.1 maybe.
> Sure he is a draw, but its the WHOLE show that is the problem. Doesnt matter if his quarter does good when the Divas, Tag team and undercard matches draw poorly.
> 
> This is why putting the blame on one wrestler is stupid. That person aint on 24/7.
> ...



Dude did you even look at the ratings? its not the undercard with poor ratings.

Its the fucking main event that bombed Brutally. 59,000 with Overrun is downright awful.

Cena closing the show usually gains over a million viewers with overrun.


----------



## Heel (Feb 11, 2006)

Punk doesn't draw? I guess I'll stop liking him then. Who cares if he's the best at what he does and the most entertaining guy in the company? I base all my opinions on ratings.


----------



## SPCDRI (Mar 15, 2010)

I look to these viewers and it is indicative of what the fans want and what the WWE needs to improve. WWE is doing sub 3 ratings and 2.5 overruns on RAW going into Royal Rumble is unacceptable, particularly when you consider what that main event was.

The two heavyweight champs were in a match with two previous heavyweight champs with the new midcard babyface champ and heel as a kicker and they did a 2.5 overrun. 

These guys need to be booked and spotlighted much better.

Unfortunately I think the company is going to lose its mind and balls and take titles off of most of these guys shortly.


----------



## Heel (Feb 11, 2006)

When did people start caring about ratings so much? Honestly it's bizarre that some people put so much emphasis on ratings to enjoy a show. Imagine if you only liked TV shows that got big ratings, all we'd watch is NCIS. It's so weird that people can't just like who they like and dislike who they dislike based on their performance and not some figures.


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

That number is unbelievable 59k?
HOW?


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

Well the current champs are two indy favourites with very little personality or in ring presence, so no wonder ratings suck.

The casual fans want larger than life characters, drama and good storylines.


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Notrealz said:


> Dude did you even look at the ratings? its not the undercard with poor ratings.
> 
> Its the fucking main event that bombed Brutally. 59,000 with Overrun is downright awful.
> 
> Cena closing the show usually gains over a million viewers with overrun.


Of course it the undercard. It was dropping threwout the show.

When the ME started they were down to a 2.55 rating, Q7. And the ME then drew a 2.67 rating, Q8. So the ME did DRAW, it just drew weaker then normal.
It didnt lose viewers like the undercard did.

But lets say Cena had closed the show, the ME rating maybe would have been a 3.0 other then a 2.7. Congratulations, the overall rating for the show have then been a.......2.9. Same overall rating.


----------



## Heel (Feb 11, 2006)

Fabregas said:


> Well the current champs are two indy favs with very little personality or in ring presence, so no wonder ratings suck.
> 
> The casual fans want larger than life characters, drama and good storylines.


CM Punk has little personality or presence? You have got to be kidding me?


----------



## SPCDRI (Mar 15, 2010)

Lots of people didn't watch the main event or turned off the beginning portion of it. They might have disliked Barrett/Orton or the Divas "match" or the 7 minute Tribute to the Troops video package or the kind of mediocre tag match or Sheamus squashing Mahal _again_.

There just wasn't much going on for 90 minutes.

I like that main event, but 10 years ago that main event would have had Austin, The Rock, Triple H, Foley, Undertaker, and Chris Benoit.

There is no comparison. I am not some rabid Attitude Era mark and I really do like Bryan, Ziggler, Ryder and Punk but come on. You can see that difference, there is no hiding it.

There isn't any there there.


----------



## Hade (Oct 1, 2011)

Heel said:


> CM Punk has little personality or presence? You have got to be kidding me?


Brooklyn Brawler & Barry Horowitz have more presence than that hack.


----------



## FITZ (May 8, 2007)

Fabregas said:


> Well the current champs are two indy favourites with very little personality or in ring presence, so no wonder ratings suck.
> 
> The casual fans want larger than life characters, drama and good storylines.


CM Punk doesn't have a personality? Even if you don't like the guy I don't see how you can say that.


----------



## Heel (Feb 11, 2006)

We will NEVER have a roster like the Attitude Era ever again, there will never be crowds like that again and never ratings that high again and the sooner people get the fuck over that the better. If people are going to compare everything to the Attitude Era then you'll never enjoy WWE ever again.




Hade said:


> Brooklyn Brawler & Barry Horowitz have more presence than that hack.


----------



## NikkiSixx (Jun 24, 2006)

Fanboi101 said:


> I guess we are at the point where bad ratings are consistent ratings...welcome to the CM Punk era everybody


No, we're at a point where these are GOOD ratings, especially for a basic cable network with a niche (and wrestling is not it). Welcome to the 21st century, everybody.


----------



## Rocky541 (Nov 29, 2011)

Ratings tell you want the general audience want to see. They have made it clear that they don't care about small guys like CM Punk and Danial Bryan as champs. HHH said before that the "WWE Universe" decides who gets a push or not. That's definitely not the case anymore with these indy nerds being champion.


----------



## Olympus (Jan 3, 2011)

I've decided that from now on anyone who can't form a proper sentence is a shithead whose opinion means less than their lives and therefore should be excommunicated from the forum. This applies to about 92% of the posters in this thread. Please leave.


----------



## Heel (Feb 11, 2006)

Rocky541 said:


> Ratings tell you want the general audience want to see. They have made it clear that they don't care about small guys like CM Punk and Danial Bryan as champs. HHH said before that the "WWE Universe" decides who gets a push or not. That's definitely not the case anymore with these indy nerds being champion.


This is fucking ridiculous. MODS are you ever going to do anything about these trolls?


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Rocky541 said:


> Ratings tell you want the general audience want to see. They have made it clear that they don't care about small guys like CM Punk and Danial Bryan as champs. HHH said before that the "WWE Universe" decides who gets a push or not. That's definitely not the case anymore with these indy nerds being champion.


Well the ratings dropped threwout the show, so that means the general audience dont want to see anyone. Might aswell shut down the company, Vince!


----------



## Notrealz (Nov 25, 2011)

Heel said:


> When did people start caring about ratings so much? Honestly it's bizarre that some people put so much emphasis on ratings to enjoy a show. Imagine if you only liked TV shows that got big ratings, all we'd watch is NCIS. *It's so weird that people can't just like who they like and dislike who they dislike based on their performance and not some figures.*


Who said we dont? WE do, everyone does. 

Chris jericho for example is unanimously loved on the internet but the guy barely drew any money in his career.

I consider threads & posts like these to be more of a reaction than troll attempts. You see when people overrate CM punk like some kind of a GOD on the internet, but he fails to deliver in reality.. These threads are what you get as a result. 

I have seen few John cena marks in this board and obviously 90% of forum hates Cena. So when Punk marks bash cena in every thread saying Punk is ten times more talented than cena so he deserves to be the champion, Obviously cena fans are going to use the DRAW argument. 

Simple really.





JasonLives said:


> Of course it the undercard. It was dropping threwout the show.
> 
> When the ME started they were down to a 2.55 rating, Q7. And the ME then drew a 2.67 rating, Q8. So the ME did DRAW, it just drew weaker then normal.
> It didnt lose viewers like the undercard did.
> ...


:hmm:....................................................fpalm


----------



## Hade (Oct 1, 2011)

So... we're trolls because we say the fucking *TRUTH*? Punk marks are the WORST!


----------



## vanboxmeer (Aug 27, 2007)

The big story here was the main event. The overrun for the C.M. Punk & Zack Ryder & Daniel Bryan vs. Alberto Del Rio & The Miz & Dolph Ziggler match gained 59,000 viewers. That’s almost impossible given people tune in to see the following show, which basically meant wrestling fans must have been tuning out in droves (they were during the first half of the match but then started gaining at 11 p.m., but hardly gained anything). The main event did a 2.67 rating (2.55 for the first half of the match) which had to be, probably by far, the lowest rated main event on Raw of this year and maybe the lowest since 1997 for a non-holiday show in the regular time slot. 


What a bunch of jobbers, reaching Diesel levels. CM Punk is one of the worst drawing WWE champions of all time.


----------



## ScrewYou (Jun 7, 2011)

Good ol' ratings thread. Everyone blames CM Punk yet again. It kinda ironic, i used to blame Orton for the ratings as he was the champion.
How the tables turned for me.


----------



## Starbuck (Apr 11, 2008)

Heel said:


> When did people start caring about ratings so much? Honestly it's bizarre that some people put so much emphasis on ratings to enjoy a show. Imagine if you only liked TV shows that got big ratings, all we'd watch is NCIS. It's so weird that people can't just like who they like and dislike who they dislike based on their performance and not some figures.


This place has always cared about ratings. Things seem to have experienced a jump because of the endless Punk/Rock wars going on atm but it's always been this way. Just look at the Orton marks vs. Orton hater wars that were going on when he was champion. Just look at everybody slating ADR when he was champion. Just look at the rejoicing that occurred when a Raw featuring WWE Champion HHH vs. John Cena as the main feud only got a 2.9 in 2008 or whenever it was. This isn't an issue central to Punk because it happens to everybody. Can it reach ridiculous levels very quickly? Yes. But is there something to be taken from the ratings reports every week? Absolutely. There are some silly people that like/dislike a wrestler based on their ability to pull in big numbers but those people tend to be haters. There are also other people who come in here to see what's making fans tune in and what isn't because this is the best indicator we have. Without all the incessant trolling in this thread there is something there for discussion. Not everybody is acting like children. It's just unfortunate that those who are are taking away from what is being reported here.


----------



## Rocky541 (Nov 29, 2011)

LOL we are trolls because we look at the facts and Punk marks cant accept the proof that no one cares about champions like Punk. okay, whatever you say.


----------



## Mattyb2266 (Jun 28, 2011)

It's so amusing that this many people really think ratings matter THAT much in 2011.


----------



## SPCDRI (Mar 15, 2010)

Just like nobody really gave a roody poo candy ass or whatever the hell silly sing song horseshit the Rock says about the Rock's 39th birthday.

Mother of God. A 20 minute Dwayne promo makes me pine for Twenty Minute Trips.

See? Different strokes for different folks.


----------



## ScrewYou (Jun 7, 2011)

Starbuck said:


> This place has always cared about ratings. Things seem to have experienced a jump because of the endless Punk/Rock wars going on atm but it's always been this way. Just look at the Orton marks vs. Orton hater wars that were going on when he was champion. Just look at everybody slating ADR when he was champion. Just look at the rejoicing that occurred when a Raw featuring WWE Champion HHH vs. John Cena as the main feud only got a 2.9 in 2008 or whenever it was. This isn't an issue central to Punk because it happens to everybody. Can it reach ridiculous levels very quickly? Yes. But is there something to be taken from the ratings reports every week? Absolutely. There are some silly people that like/dislike a wrestler based on their ability to pull in big numbers but those people tend to be haters. There are also other people who come in here to see what's making fans tune in and what isn't because this is the best indicator we have. Without all the incessant trolling in this thread there is something there for discussion. Not everybody is acting like children. It's just unfortunate that those who are are taking away from what is being reported here.


Wise words buddy. +rep. I feel weird cuz i took part in it and bashed Orton. Now they bashing one of my favorites.


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

ScrewYou said:


> Good ol' ratings thread. Everyone blames CM Punk yet again. It kinda ironic, i used to blame Orton for the ratings as he was the champion.
> How the tables turned for me.


You can still put some blame on Orton, his match lost 800,000 viewers. Not even Punk is able to do that 



Rocky541 said:


> LOL we are trolls because we look at the facts and Punk marks cant accept the proof that no one cares about champions like Punk. okay, whatever you say.


No you are trolls because you put ALL blame on CM Punk. Like the ratings would magically reach 3.5 if Punk lost the belt. 
Instead of looking at the quarterhours and seeing that pretty much everything is losing viewers. 

And just using logic, its not a CM Punk problem its a overall product problem. But thats something you and others dont do.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta (Sep 26, 2004)

Notrealz said:


> Apparently thats not true either.
> 
> The Show opened with 3.36 with fallout from Last night's PPV. Thats not good at all.
> 
> Punk is yet to prove that he can draw on his own.


Still was the highest point of the show by quite a bit, and considering what WWE is getting now, and has been for the past few months that's a good number. Not a great number, but a good number.

But some people (and I'm not necessarily saying the person I quoted) will only always focus on the negatives, that being the main event.



> Almost any fucking guy on the mic will draw. Nobody cares about wrestling.


Not necessarily ANY guy will draw well on the mic, but they'll do better on the mic than in the ring ratings wise. In this day and age people seem to only care about segments and storylines, not matches. It's unfortunate, but that's just the way the business is.

But Punk seems to do especially poor in the ring for some reason, where his mic work does really well ratings wise, only usually just under what the big draws would do.


----------



## ScrewYou (Jun 7, 2011)

JasonLives said:


> You can still put some blame on Orton, his match lost 800,000 viewers. Not even Punk is able to do that


Reality hurts bro.


----------



## A-C-P (Jan 5, 2010)

Starbuck said:


> This place has always cared about ratings. Things seem to have experienced a jump because of the endless Punk/Rock wars going on atm but it's always been this way. Just look at the Orton marks vs. Orton hater wars that were going on when he was champion. Just look at everybody slating ADR when he was champion. Just look at the rejoicing that occurred when a Raw featuring WWE Champion HHH vs. John Cena as the main feud only got a 2.9 in 2008 or whenever it was. This isn't an issue central to Punk because it happens to everybody. Can it reach ridiculous levels very quickly? Yes. But is there something to be taken from the ratings reports every week? Absolutely. There are some silly people that like/dislike a wrestler based on their ability to pull in big numbers but those people tend to be haters. There are also other people who come in here to see what's making fans tune in and what isn't because this is the best indicator we have. Without all the incessant trolling in this thread there is something there for discussion. Not everybody is acting like children. It's just unfortunate that those who are are taking away from what is being reported here.


+1 will rep you as soon as I can again.

There are people here who "get-it" when it comes to ratings but the sad thing is hardly any of them post seriosuly in the ratings threads b/c they know it is futile.

Ratings thread is Ratings thread.


----------



## deadmanwatching (Dec 14, 2011)

Hade said:


> So... we're trolls because we say the fucking *TRUTH*? Punk marks are the WORST!


(Y)


----------



## Notrealz (Nov 25, 2011)

If the Ratings dont matter at all, why push punk as the top face? 

Hell why is john cena the 10 time WWE champion?


----------



## FITZ (May 8, 2007)

Honestly I'm not sure how the Nielson ratings can even measure such a small change like 50,000 people. They way it's set up is that there is about 1 Nielson Box per 5,000 people. So that drop of 50,000 is literally just 10 people changing the channel. 

I understand the statistics behind the rating and for getting a rough estimate I think the Nielson rating system is pretty accurate in giving you a rough representation of how many people tune in. However if we're talking about much smaller numbers I think the standard deviation would be huge that a change like that would be considered statistically insignificant. 

The same goes for the differences in ratings for the last few Raws. They are all so close together that they are essentially the same as there is a margin of error in this and all 3 episodes probably fall within each others range. Anyone arguing aboout numbers in this thread is essentially arguing about nothing.


----------



## Rocky541 (Nov 29, 2011)

JasonLives said:


> No you are trolls because you put ALL blame on CM Punk. Like the ratings would magically reach 3.5 if Punk lost the belt.
> Instead of looking at the quarterhours and seeing that pretty much everything is losing viewers.
> 
> And just using logic, its not a CM Punk problem its a overall product problem. But thats something you and others dont do.


So your telling me its just a coincidence that every match or segment featuring Punk usually gets the lowest ratings on the show. sure....


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)

The main event was announced early during the show. There is no excuse for the awful overrun other than people simply weren't interested in seeing it, don't forget that number includes people tuning in to see the next show


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

Alicia fox more over than orton and barret
Horrible overrun with guys holding the top 2 straps. 
Disappointing Survivor Series buyrate.
Merry Christmas Vince.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life (Sep 19, 2011)

Remember Punk's comment to Kevin Nash about how everyone changed the channel when he (Nash) came on TV because he was so boring? Now with these numbers Punk is on course to become the worst drawing WWE World Champion since Diesel in 1995. Oh, the irony.

In all seriousness, despite the horrible numbers for his matches, there is no reason to take the title off him. If it was May or June, then yeah, but the road to Wrestlemania is coming up. Rock, Cena, HHH, Undertaker, Jericho, etc will all be carrying Raw for the next few months. Then can afford to keep the title on Punk without having to rely on him to be "the man."


----------



## TheSupremeForce (Jul 15, 2011)

I doubt the WWE cares all that much about the ratings anyway. The system is flawed to begin with, so as long as the network is happy, the WWE doesn't care. 
They haven't pushed Cena for years because he "draws" ratings. They push him because he moves merchandise. They're pushing Punk and Ryder now because they move merchandise.


----------



## LarryCoon (Jul 9, 2011)

TheSupremeForce said:


> I doubt the WWE cares all that much about the ratings anyway.


:lmao which is why they quickly put the title back onto Cena after Del Rio won it?


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Rocky541 said:


> So your telling me its just a coincidence that every match or segment featuring Punk usually gets the lowest ratings on the show. sure....


But thats the thing, thats not the case.

The two big losers this week was Q2 and Q6 ( Orton Vs. Barret and Epico/Promo Vs. The Uso Brothers. Both lost 700,000 viewers.
Punk was ( other then one of two short backstage appearances ) in the start of the show and the end of the show.
The end of the show drew poorly, but it was still higher then its previous quarter.

Like ive said before, the problem is the overall show. Not one single wrestler. 

There was no hook for the ME other then "watch these 6 guys wrestle". Switch Punk with Cena and the ME wouldnt have done so much better.


----------



## deadmanwatching (Dec 14, 2011)

Jerichoholic4Life said:


> Remember Punk's comment to Kevin Nash about how everyone changed the channel when he (Nash) came on TV because he was so boring? Now with these numbers Punk is on course to become the worst drawing WWE World Champion since Diesel in 1995. Oh, the irony.
> 
> In all seriousness, despite the horrible numbers for his matches, there is no reason to take the title off him. If it was May or June, then yeah, but the road to Wrestlemania is coming up. Rock, Cena, HHH, Undertaker, Jericho, etc will all be carrying Raw for the next few months. Then can afford to keep the title on Punk without having to rely on him to be "the man."


Punk title region won't last for long, they are planing for cena vs kane for title match

but, I doubt these guys will give credit for ratings to any of the names you mention especially the hollywood sellout, When they return


----------



## The XL (Aug 7, 2006)

They need credible heels. They should move Henry over when he gets healthy and have him feud with CM Punk over the WWE Title. They should book Kane strongly in this program with Cena. They need to demote unover, boring, shitty heels like Del Rio to the midcard. Ziggler is okay as a upper midcarder/fringe main eventer, but that's it at this point.


----------



## Arya Dark (Sep 8, 2006)

Heel said:


> This is fucking ridiculous. MODS are you ever going to do anything about these trolls?


*I don't see what's wrong with that post. I don't necessarily agree with the guy's opinion but it's his to make. There's nothing ridiculous in what he said. 

My suggestion is if you don't like the guy put him on ignore. 


As for ratings, I couldn't care less. *


----------



## Chihuahua10 (May 6, 2011)

This raw was very bad.
I didn't care about the promo of Punk with Ryder and Bryan.
And I don't like the woo woo ..... and fist pumping or Ryder, I find it ridiculous.

And disappointed of the little mic time of John Laurinaitis.
I think he's my favourite mic worker, he was especially funny the raw before, way more than Punk.

I dindn't his straight edge stable and promo and I don't like his promo's as a champion by trying to be funny and taking so many dig at the wwe even for ridiculous things just to be "different".


----------



## IHaveTillFiveBitch (Nov 11, 2010)

There's one things I've learned from this thread, I'm never going to take the people who bash punk and danielson serious anymore. anyway, as for the ratings, I watch wrestling for my entertainment, not for company's profit, ratings and how many number of people are watching it. As for drawing goes, the rock and john cena were at some point shoved down peoples throat and people hated their guts at the start of their ME carrier and it took them a long fucking time to actually become a draw, where danielson has only been a champion for like 4 days, It's obviously gonna take a long time and a proper buildup to make him or any other superstar a draw.


----------



## FITZ (May 8, 2007)

kokepepsi said:


> *Alicia fox more over than orton and barret*
> Horrible overrun with guys holding the top 2 straps.
> Disappointing Survivor Series buyrate.
> Merry Christmas Vince.


It's reasons like why I think that these numbers really don't mean anything. You can't possibly believe that more people tune in to see Alicia Fox then Randy Orton. I think it has more to do with what time a segment airs and what else is happening on TV then what is specifically on Raw at a given time. I mean if a segment is bad it will lose viewers but when it comes to gaining viewers I don't think what the segment has on it means a thing. DO you know that at the 10:15 quarter hour the Big Show will be cutting a promo? No, you just turn on Raw at 10:15 and say, "Hey, I know that guy" and maybe watch the show for a little bit and when a commercial hits change the channel. 

In fact when it comes to "losing viewers" I think what everyone should really be blaming is commercials. Just from my viewing habits and those of just about everyone I know I often go channel surfing and will watch a show for a few minutes and when a commercial comes on I change the channel and forget about the show. 

Look I'm not saying that the ratings are meaningless but when it comes to the really small differences between two segments I don't think they are particularly valuable. And I doubt the WWE does or else we would be seeing Kelly Kelly and Alicia Fox having the 15 minute matches and Orton and Barrett having the 1 minute match. When it comes to losing and gaining viewers and blaming someone for that I don't think that can be done. Just because someone shows up on the TV and then more people watch or less people watch doesn't mean that person is the reason why there was a change. That's overly simple logic and doesn't take into account anything else about the viewers.


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

I was kidding
Forgot to put the 8*D


----------



## Fanboi101 (Jul 15, 2011)

SPCDRI said:


> Just like nobody really gave a roody poo candy ass or whatever the hell silly sing song horseshit the Rock says about the Rock's 39th birthday.
> 
> Mother of God. A 20 minute Dwayne promo makes me pine for Twenty Minute Trips.
> 
> See? Different strokes for different folks.


This argument fails because there hasn't been a raw rating as high as the rating for Rock's bday since

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2011-ratings/


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

Heel said:


> CM Punk has little personality or presence? You have got to be kidding me?


Yes you heard correct, he has little personality or presence.

Look at this CM Punk promo from RAW.






He comes out and cuts a very generic promo which could have been said by anyone. Where is the personality? Theres no distinguishing words that only CM Punk would use, theres no body language that separates CM Punk from anyone else, he doesn't have a unique or interesting look, he just comes out wearing a WWE CM Punk shirt which does not compliment his character in any way. It's dull and lifeless, like most of the current WWE roster.

Every now and again he makes a joke to try and be entertaining but it just comes off as forced due to his lack of personality. When someone like The Rock was cutting a promo during the attitude era it didn't feel as though his joke was there specifically to make everyone laugh, it just felt like that was a part of his personality.

Now look at this Rock and Austin promo from 1999






Listen to the language Austin uses when he's talking; even if you were just reading Austins promo on a piece of paper you would know it was Austin talking because of the personality that goes into his promos. Look at the body language and facial expressions of The Rock while Austin is talking, look at the way they stare at each other, look at what they're wearing, THIS is character. Look at the excitement that them standing in the ring together generates, that is PRESENCE.

Do you see the difference now???


----------



## Notrealz (Nov 25, 2011)

TaylorFitz said:


> Honestly I'm not sure how the Nielson ratings can even measure such a small change like 50,000 people. They way it's set up is that there is about 1 Nielson Box per 5,000 people. So that drop of 50,000 is literally just 10 people changing the channel.
> 
> I understand the statistics behind the rating and for getting a rough estimate I think the Nielson rating system is pretty accurate in giving you a rough representation of how many people tune in. However if we're talking about much smaller numbers I think the standard deviation would be huge that a change like that would be considered statistically insignificant.
> 
> The same goes for the differences in ratings for the last few Raws. They are all so close together that they are essentially the same as there is a margin of error in this and all 3 episodes probably fall within each others range. Anyone arguing aboout numbers in this thread is essentially arguing about nothing.


None of this matters when it comes to advertisements, Sponsors and profits. 

Nielson Ratings have become the standard to judge the popularity of a TV show. Whether its accurate or not is irrelevant. 

This presented ratings is what a investor or a WWE stock holder will be concerned about. This pretty much shows if the business model is working or not. 

From a business standpoint, WWE Title is just a prop. SO WWE needs a marketable champion not someone like Punk.


----------



## Mr.S (Dec 21, 2009)

Good ratings. I prefer a Heel Punk to a Face Punk.But Rock marks comparing last nights promo against some of Rock & Austin's real good ones is a huge jokes.

Why dont the Maivia comparison begin??? 


Anyways as I said Very good ratings. Ratings will be around 3 I guess. So No TNA level ratings with Indy marks around.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta (Sep 26, 2004)

Fabregas said:


> Yes you heard correct, he has little personality or presence.
> 
> Look at this CM Punk promo from RAW.
> 
> ...


What you're seeing is WWE Face PG-syndrome... something every face in WWE has minus legends like Taker, Rock, and HHH. It turns them from what their personality as heel was to the cookie-cutter babyface personality. It's a shame Punk couldn't be the exception, but he can only do so much before Vince and creative step in.

But Punk has shown he has plenty of personality in the past.


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

Mr.S said:


> Good ratings. I prefer a Heel Punk to a Face Punk.But Rock marks comparing last nights promo against some of Rock & Austin's real good ones is a huge jokes.
> 
> Why dont the Maivia comparison begin???
> 
> ...


I wasn't comparing how good the promos were, I was comparing the amount of personality in CM Punk's character with that of The Rock and Austin.


----------



## Mr.S (Dec 21, 2009)

Anyways I just saw the adult 16-49 demographic has 1.6 million viewers for both buyers. SO no sensible adults went away. So it's the kids.

What are the stupid Rock marks bitching about?? That 0.2 Million kids did not watch the 2nd hour after seeing their Superhero choked & bloodied by Kane.

Seriously I dont get any reason for Attitude Era fans to be bitching about why 0.2 Million kid did not watch the 2nd half.


----------



## Mr.S (Dec 21, 2009)

Carcass said:


> This is Your Life with The Rock got 8.4 in the ratings, that means he's twice the wrestler that the crack addict fry cook is.


This is your Life was as much about Mick Foley as the Rock. So stop sucking upto him.

That also makes Foley twice a wrestler Taker is,seeing Taker barely ever drew more than 4.2 on his own.Or even Angle or Eddie.

Ratings might mean profitability but quality wise they mean SHIT. ABSOLUTE piece of shit. The Rock was if you compare with a Danielson a shitty wrestler. I mean Danielson wrestling a pile of hay is better than watching the Rock wrestle about anybody.

Wrestling & being a star or being a draw,selling seats & drawing ratings & profitability are different things. Profitability & quality have no linear relationship. Neither was Edge & Lita's sex celebration a great piece of wrestling.


----------



## Mr.S (Dec 21, 2009)

Fabregas said:


> I wasn't comparing how good the promos were, I was comparing the amount of personality in CM Punk's character with that of The Rock and Austin.


ROFL. When I see Punk's heel promos last year or his worked Shoot Promo I see him going head to head with either of Stone Cold or Rock & being just as good as either of them.

Drawing has no relation to personality. Orton drew shit & he has loads of personality. That & Stone Cold's heel character flopped too & Punk as a huge face in the long run will not be a Huge Success. He will turn back heel & will be these generation's Flair,probably not as good as Flair but will atleast go pass Hunter.


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32 (Aug 18, 2011)

Mr.S said:


> This is your Life was as much about Mick Foley as the Rock. So stop sucking upto him.
> 
> That also makes Foley twice a wrestler Taker is,seeing Taker barely ever drew more than 4.2 on his own.Or even Angle or Eddie.
> 
> ...


Exactly! Ratings do not equal quality. I don't care if the ratings were bad. I was still entertained by them on Monday.


----------



## Mr.S (Dec 21, 2009)

HGF said:


> Last weeks SD rating was like a 1.9 so this week it will probably sink to 1.8 now that Bryan has reduced the World Title into a Cruiserweight Title.


That will be very good. It will still be better than Undertaker's 91 & last reign,two of the worst Championship reigns ever in WWE history. Mysterio as Champion drew a 2.6 while Taker's reign throughout had average reigns,shitty quality matches he looked like a carcass & a pale shadown of himself. A bruised up Undertaker even N0-Showed Smackdown.

I'd rather have a hungrier & better champion even with a slightly lower ratings. Besides I & a I am sure many other prefer talented guys to slow immobile giants like Henry or beefed up goofs like Ryan.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta (Sep 26, 2004)

Mr.S said:


> That will be very good. It will still be better than Undertaker's 91 & last reign,two of the worst Championship reigns ever in WWE history. Mysterio as Champion drew a 2.6 while Taker's reign throughout had average reigns,shitty quality matches he looked like a carcass & a pale shadown of himself. A bruised up Undertaker even N0-Showed Smackdown.
> 
> I'd rather have a hungrier & better champion even with a slightly lower ratings. Besides I & a I am sure many other prefer talented guys to slow immobile giants like Henry or beefed up goofs like Ryan.


Thing is though, in 91, he had the title for a week, and in 09-10, he had it during the worst period as far as ratings go generally in the year.

But I get what you're saying, and that's that ratings do not equal how entertaining or how great someone is. I mean, like you said, if that Foley/Rock segment did draw an 8.4 and guys like Taker, HHH, HBK, etc. struggles to get a 4.2, does that make them worse than Foley and Rock?

I agree as well I'd rather see new guys now with the belt than older guys, especially since those older guys, like Taker and HHH who can draw in the goods (with the right storyline), won't be around most likely for more than another 2-3 years, and even then they probably won't be there for most of it. If WWE doesn't establish new stars, where's the company gonna be in the future?


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

Mr.S said:


> ROFL. When I see Punk's heel promos last year or his worked Shoot Promo I see him going head to head with either of Stone Cold or Rock & being just as good as either of them.


You are getting promos mixed up with personality/character. This is not a debate about cutting promos, this is about about personality and character; that is what makes fans care about you.

If someone has good mic skills then they are probably capable of cutting a good promo, but if they have no character then most people still won't care about them or pay to see them.



Mr.S said:


> Drawing has no relation to personality.


That is one of the stupidest things I've ever read.

Do you really think Austin and Rock became megastars because of their wrestling ability?

Most fans choose their favourite wrestlers BECAUSE on their personality/character, and thats the person they will pay to see.


----------



## Cactus (Jul 28, 2011)

Fabregas said:


> You are getting promos mixed up with personality/character. This is not a debate about cutting promos, this is about about personality and character; that is what makes fans care about you.
> 
> If someone has good mic skills then they are probably capable of cutting a good promo, but if they have no character then most people still won't care about them or pay to see them.
> 
> ...


Talent really has no relation to ratings. The Rock could of debut this year and the ratings would still be low. It's all about being at the right place at the right time.


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

> The big story here was the main event. The overrun for the C.M. Punk & Zack Ryder & Daniel
> Bryan vs. Alberto Del Rio & The Miz & Dolph Ziggler match gained 59,000 viewers. That’s almost
> impossible given people tune in to see the following show, which basically meant wrestling fans
> must have been tuning out in droves (they were during the first half of the match but then
> ...







:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao


Punk is making shit cool again!, already breaking records, and he can do it with his vanilla friend, the midget that he met in some black hole with 15 people and they were playing grappling together, touching. nobody cares about this cheap, shameless imitation of a real great moment with Eddie and Benoit. thank god for this number, the indy celebration was more than embarrassing and this should wake Vince up. people want to see larger than life presence, larger than life personality, not two midgets, one as a forced smartass, desperate to be cool, the other is more bland than curds.


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

Cactus said:


> Talent really has no relation to ratings. The Rock could of debut this year and the ratings would still be low. It's all about being at the right place at the right time.


A) Thats purely an opinion. There is nothing to prove or disprove that.

B) Your probably right, if The Rock debuted this year, ratings probably wouldn't be much better; and thats because the WWE is terrible these days. If the writing is poor it doesn't matter how much talent you have.


----------



## Habanos (Apr 8, 2010)

Rock316AE said:


> Punk is making shit cool again!, already breaking records, and he can do it with his vanilla friend, the midget that he met in some black hole with 15 people and they were playing grappling together, touching. nobody cares about this cheap, shameless imitation of a real great moment with Eddie and Benoit. thank god for this number, the indy celebration was more than embarrassing and this should wake Vince up. people want to see larger than life presence, larger than life personality, not two midgets, one as a forced smartass, desperate to be cool, the other is more bland than curds.


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

As a fan of Punk, I gotta somewhat agree with Fabregas. Personality is something few people have, it's what makes them instantly different to others and makes them stand out as a result. Jake the Snake, Dusty Rhodes, Scott Steiner, Ric Flair, Austin, Rock and Hogan are prime examples for this. The way they talk is what seperates them from others, regardless how good their promos are. They have a distinct style and it doesn't even have to do with the content of their promos, their *voice, intonation and sentence structure* is unique. CM Punk cuts good promos pretty much always, but he has no standout features. He talks like everybody else, just better and more pleasing to the ear. Have you ever heard another guy with the voice of Scott Steiner, Rock, Austin or Ric Flair building phrases like they do? 

That said I still don't think that's the reason Punk doesn't draw, he is still very new as a face of the WWE, Austin wasn't drawing 5-6.0 ratings from the ratings either, it was the opposite, the best rating in 1997 after looking wikipedia was 3.5 while the lowest was 2.2, so basically it was lower than today. But once Austin got established, among others and WWE generally becoming a better product, the ratings skyrocketed.

Basically, Punk + a good supporting cast + good storylines = ratings. Punk with a mediocre supporting cast (if you check ratings they dropped for almost everyone not named Cena) and uninteresting storylines (for the casuals) = low ratings. I like WWEs direction right now, but I can understand if non smarks don't think the same, it's mostly basic wrestling storylines without any bigtime feel bar Cena vs Rock.

Then again, based on the numbers of marks/haters I doubt this post will get noticed since I actually applied some logic instead of mindless hating/fanboyism.


----------



## _CodyRhodes_ (Jun 6, 2011)

Rock316AE said:


> :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao
> 
> 
> Punk is making shit cool again!, already breaking records, and he can do it with his vanilla friend, the midget that he met in some black hole with 15 people and they were playing grappling together, touching. nobody cares about this cheap, shameless imitation of a real great moment with Eddie and Benoit. thank god for this number, the indy celebration was more than embarrassing and this should wake Vince up. people want to see larger than life presence, larger than life personality, not two midgets, one as a forced smartass, desperate to be cool, the other is more bland than curds.


You do know more people use Twitter than have Nielsen Boxes (credit to Lagana for pointing that out). And people buy CM Punk's shirt more than any other wrestler on the roster. He also gets the loudest pops quite a lot. So what do you think Vince cares about the most? Twitter/Money or ratings based on something like 50,000 Nielsen boxes(correct me if I'm wrong)? Its the pops, the merchandise and these days it seems to be Twitter that decides if the WWE Universe is interested in someone, not ratings. But I'm sure if Punk was drawing ratings and selling nothing you'd pick on that.


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Rock316AE said:


> :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao
> 
> 
> Punk is making shit cool again!, already breaking records, and he can do it with his vanilla friend, the midget that he met in some black hole with 15 people and they were playing grappling together, touching. nobody cares about this cheap, shameless imitation of a real great moment with Eddie and Benoit. thank god for this number, the indy celebration was more than embarrassing and this should wake Vince up. people want to see larger than life presence, larger than life personality, not two midgets, one as a forced smartass, desperate to be cool, the other is more bland than curds.


You keep saying "nobody cares", yet you rant endlessly and incessantly about Punk and Bryan and midgets this and indies that. If I didn't know any better, I'd say you care a _little_ bit too much.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life (Sep 19, 2011)

The rating for that main event really is an anti IWC/Punk/Bryan fan’s dream. I mean, I’m sure there were some waiting for the number to come in and expecting/hoping it to do poorly but for it to end up being the worst drawing Raw main event in 14 years? Damn.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)




----------



## urca (Aug 4, 2011)

It's normal..
Lemme put it this way:
You've got Punk,a main-eventer but not established as a top face,why?
Look at the roster,any credible heels?
Other than Mark Henry (on SD),no one else is credible,how can you make a good storyline with that for Punk?
You want the people to care,they dont give a damn with a mediocre storyline


----------



## TankOfRate (Feb 21, 2011)

Winning™;10776249 said:


>


Nobody cares about these bland vanilla midget talentless jabronis. In fact, I care so little about these bland vanilla midget talentless jabronis that I'll tell you just how much I don't care every chance I get.


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

Damn, what's going on with this marketable pic? see, this is change. 
and about the indy celebration, if they were not taking the main event and the majority of the show, I wouldn't talk about them. simple.


----------



## Cliffy (Mar 31, 2011)

im pretty sure vince does care about the lowest rated ME in 14 years.


And people who like punk should definitely care about ratings because Punk might end up dropping the title if things don't improve.


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

Meh, so I guess I was right :/


----------



## FITZ (May 8, 2007)

Notrealz said:


> None of this matters when it comes to advertisements, Sponsors and profits.
> 
> Nielson Ratings have become the standard to judge the popularity of a TV show. Whether its accurate or not is irrelevant.
> 
> ...


And from the perspective of the sponsors I don't think 59,000 people makes that much of a difference. Over 4 million people are watching the show and 59,000 is less than 2% of the total viewers. Again, the total viewers is just an estimate and those 59,000 viewers gained could just as easily be 59,000 lost or no gain, or 100,000 gained. There is a margin of error. And with all polls there is something like 2% chance that the number they found isn't representative of the total population at all.

I understand that number matters a lot but the relatively small changes that people are arguing over literally has no value or importance to anyone.


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)

Winning™ said:


>


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Cliffy Byro said:


> And people who like punk should definitely care about ratings because Punk might end up dropping the title if things don't improve.


Drop it to who?

Nobody else draws.

The Miz? No
Del Rio? No
Ziggler? No
Cena? Draw but wont be near the title until Elimination Chamber at the earliest.

So that leaves no one...


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Funny how Rocky marks want to call Punk and Bryan bland when the Rock was fucking Rocky Maivia and Flex Kavana.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII (Jan 31, 2011)

Goodness. Seeing that Rock pic everywhere has me dying. :lmao


----------



## A-C-P (Jan 5, 2010)

Winning™;10776249 said:


>


I am starting to feel like this is the 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies when Agent Smith was going around and turning everybody into himself


----------



## The Cynical Miracle (Dec 10, 2006)

A-C-P said:


> I am starting to feel like this is the 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies when Agent Smith was going around and turning everybody into himself



"WHY MR BROOKS? WHY, WHY DO YOU PERSIST?"


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

Cliffy Byro said:


> im pretty sure vince does care about the lowest rated ME in 14 years.
> 
> 
> And people who like punk should definitely care about ratings because Punk might end up dropping the title if things don't improve.


Good point, and from the breakdown it's obvious that people wanted to see Kane, stupid move to put him in the top of the hour segment when he's more hot and relevant since 2003, especially with who you put in the main event segment. they should give Kane the belt now when he has the momentum of the mask, you see that the indy celebration is not working.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)




----------



## Cliffy (Mar 31, 2011)

JasonLives said:


> Drop it to who?
> 
> Nobody else draws.
> 
> ...


Triple H ?

Maybe then Punk can be put over properly.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Unless they start the buildup now, which is late but better than never, a Punk/HHH isn't going to happen and won't be as effective as it should.


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

Thanks A-C-P, I really don't get why people will rather flame each other instead of just discussing the topic a bit more seriously, I yet have to see a Punk hater refute my comments, but it's nice to see at least someone agrees. Then again, I guess your explanation was spot on.


----------



## Grubbs89 (Apr 18, 2008)




----------



## holycityzoo (Aug 14, 2011)

Rock316AE said:


> Good point, and from the breakdown it's obvious that people wanted to see Kane, stupid move to put him in the top of the hour segment when he's more hot and relevant since 2003, especially with who you put in the main event segment. they should give Kane the belt now when he has the momentum of the mask, you see that the indy celebration is not working.


Why take the belt off of a emerging star and put it on a guy who's making, what some call, his last run?? 

You need to build stars, you can't just put them out there and expect them to draw. You need to give them intriguing story lines to work off of, and great opponents to over come.

This idea that Punk should be drawing like the Rock or Cena is ridiculous. The dude just got his push this summer.

I feel like everyone in this thread is nothing more than the retarded offspring of Eric Bischoff.


----------



## Kingofstuff (Mar 14, 2010)

While very funny, I don't get the heat and troll allegations that Rock316AE is receiving. So what if he shits on Punk 24/7 I see people do my favorite wrestler "Duh-wane" the same way, yet I don't loose sleep over. The ratings argument isn't completely fallacious. In fact I see the same thing done to Randy Orton and the forum pretty much unanimously agrees. I think people are trying to defend their favorite wrestler the same way a fan of an indi muscian, would defend them. They dismiss the masses by calling them "stupid" or a "poor manner to measure quality". 

First problem with that type of mindset is that most independent muscians, movies, etc, whatever it may be don't have the hype machine behind them like Punk does right now, hence why inferior acts get ahead. Secondly, a major aspect of the wrestling business is to "draw an audience" and elicit emotion from the fans. That's why wrestlers like Hogan, Warrior, Goldberg, and others of the similar mold are legends in the industry, regardless of the IWC's opinion on them. They managed to spark excitement in their respected companies, and create an atmosphere unlike any other(See Hogan vs Warrior Wm, Goldberg vs Hogan WWC).

Another argument see thrown around here is that it took guys like Austin a while to draw, so Punk should be given the same test of time. Problem with that argument is that Austin if I'm not mistaken, was still an upper midcarder when he didn't draw that much. The day after he won the WWE championship, the ratings shot way up and they went from a 3.8(which was the highest for Raw at the time) to steadily scoring a 4.0 or higher. And this was with WCW as competition...... Punk has been champ for weeks now and the ratings have gone down a bit from when Cena is champ. Don't see the problem? 

I'm not saying this makes Punk shit, but that there's a degree of legitimacy to the ratings thing.....and yet you see a bunch of butthurt marks(whom unsurprisingly have Punk in their signature) rage at teh "Rocky mark" for using it and label him troll. Come on guys seriously? You certainly no better for acting out in such petulant manner. 

I get that on any website you go to, there will be a degree of bias. Everyone in this thread needs to evaluate themselves and stop employing double standards.


----------



## ScrewYou (Jun 7, 2011)

Winning™ said:


>


The motherfuck LOL.


----------



## 20083 (Mar 16, 2011)

Carcass said:


> "If you can't behind this, you'll be left behind"
> 
> Looks like a lot of people couldn't get behind this. :lmao


:lmao


----------



## holycityzoo (Aug 14, 2011)

Kingofstuff said:


> While very funny, I don't get the heat and troll allegations that Rock316AE is receiving. So what if he shits on Punk 24/7 I see people do my favorite wrestler "Duh-wane" the same way, yet I don't loose sleep over. The ratings argument isn't completely fallacious. In fact I see the same thing done to Randy Orton and the forum pretty much unanimously agrees. I think people are trying to defend their favorite wrestler the same way a fan of an indi muscian, would defend them. They dismiss the masses by calling them "stupid" or a "poor manner to measure quality".
> 
> First problem with that type of mindset is that most independent muscians, movies, etc, whatever it may be don't have the hype machine behind them like Punk does right now, hence why inferior acts get ahead. Secondly, a major aspect of the wrestling business is to "draw an audience" and elicit emotion from the fans. That's why wrestlers like Hogan, Warrior, Goldberg, and others of the similar mold are legends in the industry, regardless of the IWC's opinion on them. They managed to spark excitement in their respected companies, and create an atmosphere unlike any other(See Hogan vs Warrior Wm, Goldberg vs Hogan WWC).
> 
> ...


Good post, but I have a couple rebuttal points.

I think the competition with WCW, helped Austin. The monday night wars made wrestling big again, and that gave Austin more of an audience to play too and thus giving him more fans to gather.

The "give Punk time" argument does hold water in my opinion, because he is a transition champion. In the sense, that he is the champion that is supposed to bring us into this new era. When this happens, you are going to lose viewers and gain some viewers. Right now, we are probably losing a lot of Cena fans. He is featured less on the show, his boos are getting louder, and he's been out of the title picture. Some of his younger fans, who may have just started watching with in the last year or two, might have said "ahh no Cena? I'm out" And that's expected, because the idea is that this new era will bring in a new audience that has deserted the WWE or only watched smaller promotions due to the lack of support younger talent got in the WWE. This new audience can not be expected to be solidified in just 6 months. It takes at least a year, and a solid wrestlemania to fully transition into a new era, and to bring in new fans.

All you have to do is look at 1997.


----------



## Cliffy (Mar 31, 2011)

Kingofstuff said:


> While very funny, I don't get the heat and troll allegations that Rock316AE is receiving. So what if he shits on Punk 24/7 I see people do my favorite wrestler "Duh-wane" the same way, yet I don't loose sleep over. The ratings argument isn't completely fallacious. In fact I see the same thing done to Randy Orton and the forum pretty much unanimously agrees. I think people are trying to defend their favorite wrestler the same way a fan of an indi muscian, would defend them. They dismiss the masses by calling them "stupid" or a "poor manner to measure quality".
> 
> First problem with that type of mindset is that most independent muscians, movies, etc, whatever it may be don't have the hype machine behind them like Punk does right now, hence why inferior acts get ahead. Secondly, a major aspect of the wrestling business is to "draw an audience" and elicit emotion from the fans. That's why wrestlers like Hogan, Warrior, Goldberg, and others of the similar mold are legends in the industry, regardless of the IWC's opinion on them. They managed to spark excitement in their respected companies, and create an atmosphere unlike any other(See Hogan vs Warrior Wm, Goldberg vs Hogan WWC).
> 
> ...




This ^^^^^^^^


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

Kingofstuff said:


> While very funny, I don't get the heat and troll allegations that Rock316AE is receiving. So what if he shits on Punk 24/7 I see people do my favorite wrestler "Duh-wane" the same way, yet I don't loose sleep over. The ratings argument isn't completely fallacious. In fact I see the same thing done to Randy Orton and the forum pretty much unanimously agrees. I think people are trying to defend their favorite wrestler the same way a fan of an indi muscian, would defend them. They dismiss the masses by calling them "stupid" or a "poor manner to measure quality".
> 
> First problem with that type of mindset is that most independent muscians, movies, etc, whatever it may be don't have the hype machine behind them like Punk does right now, hence why inferior acts get ahead. Secondly, a major aspect of the wrestling business is to "draw an audience" and elicit emotion from the fans. That's why wrestlers like Hogan, Warrior, Goldberg, and others of the similar mold are legends in the industry, regardless of the IWC's opinion on them. They managed to spark excitement in their respected companies, and create an atmosphere unlike any other(See Hogan vs Warrior Wm, Goldberg vs Hogan WWC).
> 
> ...


This is quite wrong, Austin didn't draw 4s from the get go as soon as he got the title, he drew the same numbers as Punk does now or marginally higher as I said before, but in 1997 he drew about the same or even less than Punk, he had some higher rated shows and after time it went permanent, but when it turned permanent, he was fully established hence why the ratings kept going up. However you could see the pattern of the ratings steadily increasing but it also had to do with the support cast and storylines becoming better and better aswell, it's simply not possible to compare a WWF, that was battling for even staying on TV to a WWE of now, where no real competition exists. 

On another note, Punk isn't established yet. Unlike Austin in 1997, Punk went from a guy that jobbed to Big Show in multi man matches and not winning around 9-11 PPVs in a row (don't know the exact number but it was something around that mark) to suddenly becoming a guy who beat Cena. Austin would have taken much longer to become as popular as he was if he went from getting jobbed out to upper midcarders to suddenly mainevent the show.


----------



## rcc (Dec 16, 2009)

_CodyRhodes_ said:


> You do know more people use Twitter than have Nielsen Boxes (credit to Lagana for pointing that out). And people buy CM Punk's shirt more than any other wrestler on the roster. He also gets the loudest pops quite a lot. So what do you think Vince cares about the most? Twitter/Money or ratings based on something like 50,000 Nielsen boxes(correct me if I'm wrong)? Its the pops, the merchandise and these days it seems to be Twitter that decides if the WWE Universe is interested in someone, not ratings. But I'm sure if Punk was drawing ratings and selling nothing you'd pick on that.


Fucking hell, why are people so damn stupid over things they don't understand? Nielsen is statistically significant (ie any further boxes wouldn't change the result). Nielsen has a brilliant sample as well. Every single demographic is represented proportionally in that sample. 

:lmao Twitter money. The fuck is that? WWE don't make a cent off twitter and news flash, broadcast TV revenue is their biggest revenue stream. You think USA are happy about these ratings?


----------



## Lastier (Sep 19, 2009)

D.M.N. said:


> Breakdown:
> 
> Q1 - 3.36 rating / 4.89 million
> Q2 - 2.86 rating / 4.17 million
> ...


That's a pretty horrible rating for the main event.

The divas are outdrawing Punk. 8*D


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

The WWF were competing with WCW for ratings in 1997 and Austin wasn't even the star of the show. Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels were the main stars in 1997.

There is no comparison.


----------



## PunkDrunk (Jul 23, 2011)

punk isnt an emerging talent. hes a 6 (?) time champ, 2x mitb winner etc.
can we stop comparing him to jobber ringmaster circa 96?

thank you


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

What you said has been covered in my post actually if you were directing that comment to me.


----------



## Rock316AE (Aug 12, 2011)

Kingofstuff said:


> While very funny, I don't get the heat and troll allegations that Rock316AE is receiving. So what if he shits on Punk 24/7 I see people do my favorite wrestler "Duh-wane" the same way, yet I don't loose sleep over. The ratings argument isn't completely fallacious. In fact I see the same thing done to Randy Orton and the forum pretty much unanimously agrees. I think people are trying to defend their favorite wrestler the same way a fan of an indi muscian, would defend them. They dismiss the masses by calling them "stupid" or a "poor manner to measure quality".
> 
> First problem with that type of mindset is that most independent muscians, movies, etc, whatever it may be don't have the hype machine behind them like Punk does right now, hence why inferior acts get ahead. Secondly, a major aspect of the wrestling business is to "draw an audience" and elicit emotion from the fans. That's why wrestlers like Hogan, Warrior, Goldberg, and others of the similar mold are legends in the industry, regardless of the IWC's opinion on them. They managed to spark excitement in their respected companies, and create an atmosphere unlike any other(See Hogan vs Warrior Wm, Goldberg vs Hogan WWC).
> 
> ...


Agreed, and like I said, this is the mentality here, when someone don't like "the favorite" he's a troll, and I restrained compared to others here, all the facts I post are 100% true, including that this RAW is the lowest rated RAW after the December PPV since 96 and this is the lowest main event overrun since 97. when people has no more responses they're trying to pull "he's trolling" card, get real and face reality. also [email protected] Austin/Punk comparisons like it's even comparable, Austin was mega star in the making at that time, Punk is just a indy darling who is in this position right now by default because the roster is embarrassingly bad. you know that the indy fanboys here are desperate when they're going to Austin for a comparison.

next week after Punk fails again: "b b b b but Hogan wasn't a draw in 81!!"


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

http://www.ring-rap.com/2011/09/23/steve-austin-comments-on-punk-orton-del-rio-and-more/
_
Austin on CM Punk: “Well, I love CM Punk. *That guy is already a star*, and he’s just breathed a much-needed breath of fresh air into the wrestling business,” Austin said. “He’s been working for over 10 years. I’m a big fan of his—love his skills, love his promos."_

So much for the comparision beeing irrational.


----------



## ecabney (Dec 9, 2011)

holycityzoo said:


> Good post, but I have a couple rebuttal points.
> 
> I think the competition with WCW, helped Austin. The monday night wars made wrestling big again, and that gave Austin more of an audience to play too and thus giving him more fans to gather.
> 
> ...


this, but the blind Rock marks will overlook it tbh


----------



## CP89 (Apr 7, 2011)

like I said in another thread put the title on Masked Kane(and off of that ratings killer cm punk) then have kane lose it in the chamber to Cena and setting up Rock vs Cena for the title.


----------



## "Dashing" CJ (Apr 3, 2011)

These threads are aggravating. Who gives a shit about the ratings and who can and who can't draw? All I care about is what I watch on TV as it happens. 

So what if the main event did disappointing numbers? I was entertained by it and that's really all that matters.


----------



## Punk29 (Nov 19, 2011)

Rock316AE said:


> Agreed, and like I said, this is the mentality here, when someone don't like "the favorite" he's a troll, and I restrained compared to others here, all the facts I post are 100% true, including that this RAW is the lowest rated RAW after the December PPV since 96 and this is the lowest main event overrun since 97. when people has no more responses they're trying to pull "he's trolling" card, get real and face reality. also [email protected] Austin/Punk comparisons like it's even comparable, Austin was mega star in the making at that time, Punk is just a indy darling who is in this position right now by default because the roster is embarrassingly bad. you know that the indy fanboys here are desperate when they're going to Austin for a comparison.
> 
> next week after Punk fails again: "b b b b but Hogan wasn't a draw in 81!!"


Just keep doing what you do best man,owning punk marks, if you were a troll you wouldn't have a 602 thread about you in the rants section.


----------



## holycityzoo (Aug 14, 2011)

Fabregas said:


> The WWF were *competing* with WCW for ratings in 1997 and Austin wasn't even the star of the show. Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels were the main stars in 1997.
> 
> There is no comparison.


No, they were being DOMINATED. The average rating for raw was a 2.5. They had a lot of shows in the high 1's!! Terrible ratings and Austin was an emerging star at that time. His feud with McMahon started in September of that year and they didn't beat WCW until April of 98. The ratings did increase towards the end of the year, but that was partly because the the monday night wars made wrestling so popular within the mainstream of society. I'm not taking anything away from Austin, but it's a fact that ratings were amazing because of the wars along with the actual talent.

Like I said 97 was a transition year. It went from Hart and Michaels to Stone Cold, but that took time and the ratings took time as well.


----------



## Punk29 (Nov 19, 2011)

Lastier said:


> That's a pretty horrible rating for the main event.
> 
> The divas are outdrawing Punk. 8*D


How pathetic "If you can't get behind this, you will be left behind" he was right after all.


----------



## roadkill_ (Jan 28, 2010)

Man WWE is shit. They're now at WCW 00 level ratings. Sad fact, WCW 2000 was superior.


----------



## Kingofstuff (Mar 14, 2010)

Loudness said:


> This is quite wrong, Austin didn't draw 4s from the get go as soon as he got the title, he drew the same numbers as Punk does now or marginally higher as I said before, but in 1997 he drew about the same or even less than Punk, he had some higher rated shows and after time it went permanent, but when it turned permanent, he was fully established hence why the ratings kept going up.


 Actually.......
September 8, 1997 2.2

September 15, 1997 2.6

September 22, 1997 2.4

September 29, 1997 2.7

October 6, 1997 3.0

October 13, 1997 2.3

October 20, 1997 2.9

October 27, 1997 2.3

November 3, 1997 2.6

November 10, 1997 3.4

November 17, 1997 3.1

November 24, 1997 3.0

December 1, 1997 3.0

December 8, 1997 3.0

December 15, 1997 2.7

December 22, 1997 3.1

December 29, 1997 3.6

January 5, 1998 3.3

January 12, 1998 3.4

January 19, 1998 4.0

January 26, 1998 3.5

February 2, 1998 3.5

February 9, 1998 3.2

February 16, 1998

---

February 23, 1998 3.2

March 23, 1998 3.6

March 30, 1998 3.8(Austin won his first title ever on March 29, 1998

April 6, 1998 4.7

April 13, 1998 4.6

April 20, 1998 4.4 

April 28, 1998 5.7

May 4, 1998 5.5

May 11, 1998 4.3

May 18, 1998 5.3

May 25, 1998 4.2

June 1, 1998 4.4

June 8, 1998 4.3

June 15, 1998 4.3

June 22, 1998 4.3

June 29, 1998 5.4

July 6, 1998 4.0

July 13, 1998 4.7

July 20, 1998 5.0

July 27, 1998 4.9

August 3, 1998 4.9

August 10, 1998 4.5

August 17, 1998 4.2

August 24, 1998 4.7



> However you could see the pattern of the ratings steadily increasing but it also had to do with the support cast and storylines becoming better and better aswell, it's simply not possible to compare a WWF, that was battling for even staying on TV to a WWE of now, where no real competition exists.


 Not quite true. The only main eventers the WWF had at the time where Hart, Michaels, Takers and Sid. Austin was the first man built up to set the attitude era in motion and *his* story lines are the ones did so. 



> On another note, Punk isn't established yet. Unlike Austin in 1997, Punk went from a guy that jobbed to Big Show in multi man matches and not winning around 9-11 PPVs in a row (don't know the exact number but it was something around that mark) to suddenly becoming a guy who beat Cena. Austin would have taken much longer to become as popular as he was if he went from getting jobbed out to upper midcarders to suddenly mainevent the show.


Hard to disagree with this though.


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

holycityzoo said:


> No, they were being DOMINATED. The average rating for raw was a 2.5. They had a lot of shows in the high 1's!! Terrible ratings and Austin was an emerging star at that time. His feud with McMahon started in September of that year and they didn't beat WCW until April of 98. The ratings did increase towards the end of the year, but that was partly because the the monday night wars made wrestling so popular within the mainstream of society. I'm not taking anything away from Austin, but it's a fact that ratings were amazing because of the wars along with the actual talent.
> 
> Like I said 97 was a transition year. It went from Hart and Michaels to Stone Cold, but that took time and the ratings took time as well.


Agreed. And that was my point, it would have been hard for Austin to draw big ratings in 1997 when WWF were getting destroyed by WCW and Austin wasn't even the main star of the show.


----------



## ecabney (Dec 9, 2011)

6 man tag matches where it's obvious what the outcome of the match is gonna be are huge draws. I am shocked at the low ratings the main event received. Tag matches=ratings


----------



## Loudness (Nov 14, 2011)

Kingofstuff said:


> Actually.......
> September 8, 1997 2.2
> 
> September 15, 1997 2.6
> ...


Just checked it, you're actually right, I was concentrating mostly on the 1997 side of things when Austin was still beeing built up.



Kingofstuff said:


> Not quite true. The only main eventers the WWF had at the time where Hart, Michaels, Takers and Sid. Austin was the first man built up to set the attitude era in motion and *his* story lines are the ones did so.


You forgot Vader, Kane and Mankind imo. I don't deny his storylines beeing the primary reason, but he had quite a backbone to fall back on support wise, that's 7 guys right behind him. Another thing I'd like to mention is that WWF went all out to create the said storylines and make them as entertaining as they could be, on the other hand in CM Punks case creative stopped the momentum of his very soon after MITB for unexplainable reasons (except maybe playing it safe I guess). You can't honestly say that CM Punk has the same quality of material to work with as Austin had imo.

As you can see by my explanations, there were a lot of factors besides own talent that made Austin become as big of a draw as he was. I am in no way beeing a CM Punk apologist though, I personally consider Austin one of the best of all time and I'm unsure if CM Punk can match his charisma, but I am very sure that Punk can nevertheless become a big draw instead of a guy who gets blamed for bad ratings.


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)

That jump in the ratings when Austin won the title is pretty impressive, never knew it was such a drastic surge. No wonder he gets called the biggest draw of all time


----------



## Notrealz (Nov 25, 2011)

*ALICIA FOX* outdrawing all the Main Eventers/Champions/Top heels on the company's flagship show.


Merry MotherF*Cking Christmas Vince.

Its actually Rihanna 8*D


----------



## Kingofstuff (Mar 14, 2010)

Loudness said:


> Just checked it, you're actually right, I was concentrating mostly on the 1997 side of things when Austin was still beeing built up.
> 
> 
> 
> You forgot Vader, Kane and Mankind imo.


 None of these guys were legitimate main eventers. Kane and Mankind weren't established till after Austin's run. 



> I don't deny his storylines beeing the primary reason, but he had quite a backbone to fall back on support wise, that's 7 guys right behind him. Another thing I'd like to mention is that WWF went all out to create the said storylines and make them as entertaining as they could be, on the other hand in CM Punks case creative stopped the momentum of his very soon after MITB for unexplainable reasons (except maybe playing it safe I guess). You can't honestly say that CM Punk has the same quality of material to work with as Austin had imo.


True in some ways, but Punk has had the benefit of going over an established Main event face. Though I admit Silencio and Miz, aren't a good duo to follow up on. Austin really only had two legitimate main eventers to work with and yet he still became the companies biggest draw in a short span of time. Austin wasn't much better of tbh, especially when having to deal with WCW.



> As you can see by my explanations, there were a lot of factors besides own talent that made Austin become as big of a draw as he was. I am in no way beeing a CM Punk apologist though, I personally consider Austin one of the best of all time and I'm unsure if CM Punk can match his charisma, but I am very sure that Punk can nevertheless become a big draw instead of a guy who gets blamed for bad ratings.


Fair, fair.


----------



## CP89 (Apr 7, 2011)

I now like to take back when I said CM Punk could be the #1 Guy in WWE cause after seeing those numbers he be lucky to still be Main Eventing come WM28.


----------



## John Cena is God (Dec 22, 2011)

The lowest main event rating in 14 years. Damn!


----------



## Revil Fox (Mar 16, 2010)

I'm sure I'm going to regret even getting involved, but you can't compare WWE's ratings today to it's ratings ten, or even five years ago. People don't watch TV the same way they used to and TV ratings are down across the board. The only thing you can do is compare it to other shows from that day and it's relative spot on the list to how it was doing five to ten years ago.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Also a 3.0 now doesn't mean a 3.0 back in 1998.

Again, another reason why *true *wrestling fans don't care for ratings. They're not experts in them.


----------



## _CodyRhodes_ (Jun 6, 2011)

rcc said:


> Fucking hell, why are people so damn stupid over things they don't understand? Nielsen is statistically significant (ie any further boxes wouldn't change the result). Nielsen has a brilliant sample as well. Every single demographic is represented proportionally in that sample.
> 
> :lmao Twitter money. The fuck is that? WWE don't make a cent off twitter and news flash, broadcast TV revenue is their biggest revenue stream. You think USA are happy about these ratings?


I clearly put a "/" there and how you failed to see that is beyond me. Vince clearly favours Twiiter and merchandise sales over ratings and obviously USA Network won't be happy with that. 

Also, 54 pages arguing over whether or not Punk is a draw and its obvious it isn't even his fault:

Daniel Bryan- Only been relevant for a month (if even that)
Miz and Alberto del Rio- Shown to be incapable of hanging with the big boys in WWE in the past couple of months
Zack Ryder- Never draws well but sells so he's there
Dolph Ziggler- Not established enough


----------



## The Hardcore Show (Apr 13, 2003)

Winning™ said:


> Also a 3.0 now doesn't mean a 3.0 back in 1998.
> 
> Again, another reason why *true *wrestling fans don't care for ratings. They're not experts in them.


Because many feel the only people who WWE should build a show around are Miz & Cena.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Well, Cena's drawing power is starting to dwindle and Miz's momentum was never capitalized after losing the WWE championship earlier in the year.

Again, threads like this always prove to me that these same people would have bashed and effectively killed the Attitude Era is ever possible.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7 (Dec 14, 2010)

Winning™ said:


> Also a 3.0 now doesn't mean a 3.0 back in 1998.


Facts don't penetrate their heads. Pointing this out often goes unheard.


----------



## Kingofstuff (Mar 14, 2010)

Let the butthurt flow through you Punk marks.8*D


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

I'm not butthurt. I just know ratings don't mean shit to me and they don't factor into WWE's business like the 90's. By the way, very talented and creative John Cena/Wonder Woman picture.



JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Facts don't penetrate their heads. Pointing this out often goes unheard.


My logic tends to slip in my posts a lot. Apologies.


----------



## Kingofstuff (Mar 14, 2010)

^
In the words of the guy that works at my 7 eleven "Thank you very much".


----------



## Terminator GR (Oct 3, 2007)

Punk has become boring, bryan is the definition of blandness, ryder is one of the most overrated characters in recent history and a complete joke at the same time. This new future/face of the WWE is as bad as cena or miz.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Huh?


----------



## Roler42 (Nov 9, 2010)

Terminator GR said:


> Punk has become boring, bryan is the definition of blandness, ryder is one of the most overrated characters in recent history and a complete joke at the same time. This new future/face of the WWE is as bad as cena or miz.


thanks for posting Michael Cole


----------



## GillbergReturns (Aug 9, 2011)

Punk, Bryan, and Ryder all appeal to the same niche market. You have to separate them. They'll do fine on their own if they're feuding with a Masked Kane or Triple H or Jericho or Cena or Orton but the 3 musketeers against 3 bland heels. Not going to work.

What percentage of wrestling viewers do you honestly feel have watched ROH? Nobody cared about that feel good moment because nobody knows their history together.

Pushing Punk and Bryan is great, but you gotta do it mainstream.


----------



## Fabregas (Jan 15, 2007)

Terminator GR said:


> Punk has become boring, bryan is the definition of blandness, ryder is one of the most overrated characters in recent history and a complete joke at the same time. This new future/face of the WWE is as bad as cena or miz.


Someone with some sense.


----------



## Terminator GR (Oct 3, 2007)

Roler42 said:


> thanks for posting Michael Cole


Mock all you want my friend, but the ratings tell the undeniable truth. This champion trio is uninteresting, at least for now. Not that I enjoy more seeing cena as champion of course. The product absolutely sucks right now.


----------



## krai999 (Jan 30, 2011)

Terminator GR said:


> Punk has become boring, bryan is the definition of blandness, ryder is one of the most overrated characters in recent history and a complete joke at the same time. This new future/face of the WWE is as bad as cena or miz.


----------



## Azuran (Feb 17, 2009)

wb1899 said:


> The big story here was the main event. The overrun for the C.M. Punk & Zack Ryder & Daniel
> Bryan vs. Alberto Del Rio & The Miz & Dolph Ziggler match gained 59,000 viewers. That’s almost
> impossible given people tune in to see the following show, which basically meant wrestling fans
> must have been tuning out in droves (they were during the first half of the match but then
> ...


Nothing more needs to be said. Get the belt off Punk and Bryan before USA and Syfy drop the shows from their programming. Hopefully Vince is in panic mode now after seeing those pathetic numbers.


----------



## Cactus (Jul 28, 2011)

Azuran said:


> Nothing more needs to be said. Get the belt off Punk and Bryan before USA and Syfy drop the shows from their programming. Hopefully Vince is in panic mode now after seeing those pathetic numbers.


If that really was an issue, Vince wouldn't of done it in the first place. Stop acting like you know more than Vince. You know jack shit.


----------



## ecabney (Dec 9, 2011)

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2011-ratings/

poor ratings aren't Punk's fault. They've actually gone up


----------



## Mister Hands (Sep 2, 2008)

I wonder how some people in this thread respond to a drop in temperature. "FUCK, ICE AGE AGAIN"


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

Or your gas tank.

"What, it dropped a third! This car, I bet, isn't over with the other owners."


----------



## ecabney (Dec 9, 2011)

Orton lost 720,000 viewers. He should be de-pushed imo


----------



## Azuran (Feb 17, 2009)

ecabney said:


> http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2011-ratings/
> 
> poor ratings aren't Punk's fault. They've actually gone up


Seriously? That's like being proud of improving a 40% mark in school to 45%. No matter what, you're still gonna fail despite the "improvement".


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT (Sep 21, 2004)

But it went up regardless. Up means progressing aka moving forward. You are in a much better position now then you were.

The hell?


----------



## ecabney (Dec 9, 2011)

Azuran said:


> Seriously? That's like being proud of improving a 40% mark in school to 45%. No matter what, you're still gonna fail despite the "improvement".


the point is, it still went up. Putting the title on Cena or anybody else isn't gonna do anybody any good if there is no compelling angles.


----------



## rcc (Dec 16, 2009)

Winning™ said:


> I'm not butthurt. I just know ratings don't mean shit to me a*nd they don't factor into WWE's business like the 90's. *


Yet again you spurt absolute BS and no one calls you out on it. Considering I work in marketing, it pisses me off that you talk this rubbish on a daily basis and pass it off as fact. 

Ratings are still the most important thing to any TV business. You and your fellow indy wrasslin' smarks seem to think that Nielsen is antiquated. I've proven time and time again it's still a great system and it's what the TV networks and advertisers use every day. If it were so bad, why wouldn't the power brokers ditch it? Believe me, they analyse every single statistic so that their advertising dollar goes to the right place.

Which is WWE's largest revenue stream? Is it live events, is it Punk's ugly ass TV shirt? No, it's TV revenue. How the fuck do you think they're going to gain revenue from their new TV network? Advertising. How do you get money from advertisers? Ratings. 

I bet you'll say, "the internet is changing the world" blah blah blah. Twitter doesn't make the WWE any money whatsoever and money is all that matters (funny, I read one of you say WWE doesn't care about money). Ratings are still vitally critical and it's no surprise their growth has been slow in this period of TV decline. 

ttp://corporate.wwe.com/documents/Q32011EarningsCallAdvisory_FINAL.pdf

Just to help you out, a bit of reading there for you, maybe you'll come back with some sort of idea (unlikely, but try nonetheless).


----------



## Punk29 (Nov 19, 2011)

rcc said:


> Yet again you spurt absolute BS and no one calls you out on it. Considering I work in marketing, it pisses me off that you talk this rubbish on a daily basis and pass it off as fact.
> 
> Ratings are still the most important thing to any TV business. You and your fellow indy wrasslin' smarks seem to think that Nielsen is antiquated. I've proven time and time again it's still a great system and it's what the TV networks and advertisers use every day. If it were so bad, why wouldn't the power brokers ditch it? Believe me, they analyse every single statistic so that their advertising dollar goes to the right place.
> 
> ...


----------



## kokepepsi (Mar 22, 2011)

WWE marks like winning are the worst
Thought they all died out in 2005
Nice too see them still going


----------



## The Tony (Dec 11, 2009)

rcc said:


> Yet again you spurt absolute BS and no one calls you out on it. Considering I work in marketing, it pisses me off that you talk this rubbish on a daily basis and pass it off as fact.
> 
> Ratings are still the most important thing to any TV business. You and your fellow indy wrasslin' smarks seem to think that Nielsen is antiquated. I've proven time and time again it's still a great system and it's what the TV networks and advertisers use every day. If it were so bad, why wouldn't the power brokers ditch it? Believe me, they analyse every single statistic so that their advertising dollar goes to the right place.
> 
> ...


^^^ THIS.


----------



## WeWantRyder (Jun 20, 2011)

The higher viewing at the start was obviously due to when the lights went out at Candlestick Park :flip


----------



## Carcass (Mar 12, 2010)

WeWantRyder said:


> The higher viewing at the start was obviously due to when the lights went out at Candlestick Park :flip


You should make a new account under then name NoOneWantsRyder, it's more accurate judging by this ratings and previous breakdowns.


----------



## WeWantRyder (Jun 20, 2011)

Carcass said:


> You should make a new account under then name NoOneWantsRyder, it's more accurate judging by this ratings and previous breakdowns.



You should change your signature so it isn't a dude posing topless, or is that what turns you on


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32 (Aug 18, 2011)

You can't become a draw overnight. Punk is on his way though.


----------



## LarryCoon (Jul 9, 2011)

ecabney said:


> Orton lost 720,000 viewers. He should be de-pushed imo


Actually, it looks more like that was Barret's fault. I still don't see the Barret barrage gaining any sort of traction. He's still got a bit of leftover heat from the big Nexus angle, but other than that, he's been booked into limbo and I don't think people care about him


----------



## Arya Dark (Sep 8, 2006)

*




yeah this thread has ran it's course. 

And btw, I'm going to start banning people from threads that post picture responses outside of Rants. I'll also give infractions for it instead of warnings. 

Don't do that shit. *


----------

