# **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here**



## Starbuck

*THE RATINGS WAR: Part III*

A long time ago, the :rock4 marks came and made the unk3 marks so butthurt it forced the mighty mods of WF to create a special ratings thread to contain the madness. The endless battle continued through the ages with both sides refusing to give up until it finally sunk into the delusional minds of the unk3 marks, that their hero would never come close to touching the supreme drawing ability of :rock4. Then the holy draw himself left the WWE Universe and unk3 was left alone to carry the ratings load...or so his marks would have you believe. For 434 days he carried the title and for 434 days he was outdrawn by the golden boys :cena4 :trips2 :brock :taker and even his own best friend :heyman. 

And then, on August 18th 2013, a moment occurred that would change the ratings thread forever. A new star was born and all the prior unk3 marks had a new hero. This man's name was Daniel Bryan and he would come to change the world as we know it. This man :dazzler, with his golden mane and shaggy beard, fought the ratings battle for the common man, drawing upon the strength of nostalgic ratings hero :austin and leading the people in a battle against THE EVIL AUTHORITY. The :yes Movement was born and the ratings tide turned in his favour. 

Now, the :rock4 marks are nowhere to be found, the :taker marks are crying about the streak, :brock marks are revelling in his advocate :heyman advocating for *HIS CLIENT BRRRAACCCKKK LESNAR WHO BEAT THE UNDERTAKERS UNDEFEATED STREAK AT WRESTLEMANIA THE 1 IN 21 AND 1*, the few :trips3 marks are marking in his heel glory and his ratings dominance, the few :cena6 marks are clinging to the stagnant CeNation philosophy of Never Give Up even though it seems like some fans are tapping out on JAWN and the :bryan marks are shitting their pants over the wave of momentum behind their boy. Daniel Bryan has come to save us, to save WF and win the ratings battle once and for all. 

And who can forget the unk3 marks, slinking away with their tails tucked between their legs and still butthurt over his inability to do what :bryan3 has so effectively done. 

*CHANGE THE WORLD 

And so I present to you, humble plebs of WF...

THE RATINGS WAR: PART III.

LET IT BEGIN*

:vince3 :yes :vince3​


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

^^^^

:clap All your post needed was that tv voiceover guy saying :" PREVIOUSLY IN THE RATINGS THREAD."


----------



## Born of Osiris

:lmao


----------



## NastyYaffa

:lmao:clap


----------



## teddygamer

Oh my GOD :lmao:lmao:lmao

:clap


----------



## Loudness

Haven't been in a ratings thread in months and wondered what happened with the old one. OP is full of win.

On a serious note, can anybody link me to a site who has comprensive RAW ratings and breakdowns from RAW in the last 3-6 months or so or even the last 2 months. I have absolutely no idea whatsoever who is a draw and who isn't right now. Even general infos about talents would be appreciated as long as they're not from marks from these guys and hold unbiased views, which is unlikely to happen so I'd prefer posts from the old thread (if any collection of QHs/weekly ratings was posted there) or just some website, cba browing 24-60 links on PWtorch. Will rep for good responses.

Just wanna know who's popular and not by the general audiences.


----------



## JamesK

GOAT OP :clap :clap



Loudness said:


> Haven't been in a ratings thread in months and wondered what happened with the old one. OP is full of win.
> 
> On a serious note, can anybody link me to a site who has comprensive RAW ratings and breakdowns from RAW in the last 3-6 months or so or even the last 2 months. I have absolutely no idea whatsoever who is a draw and who isn't right now. Even general infos about talents would be appreciated as long as they're not from marks from these guys and hold unbiased views, which is unlikely to happen so I'd prefer posts from the old thread (if any collection of QHs/weekly ratings was posted there) or just some website, cba browing 24-60 links on PWtorch. Will rep for good responses.
> 
> Just wanna know who's popular and not by the general audiences.



Just search the pwtorch...It has it all... Bryan is on the top when it comes to ratings draw..Shield draws well every week and Triple H's segments draw well in the road to Mania..All the others not so much..


----------



## Reaper

Starbuck ... I'm gonna take your shovel and ... 

I don't think I'm a main eventer yet, so I'm just gonna go back to jobber hell for now. That said, I've had my WF moment where my closing posts inspired the creation of a new thread 

You can't bury me!


----------



## Jammy

Quality OP, condensed the past 2 years in one post. Although the Punk marks vs Bryan marks wars were quite more protracted than just one line in your post


----------



## Loudness

JamesK said:


> GOAT OP :clap :clap
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just search the pwtorch...It has it all... Bryan is on the top when it comes to ratings draw..Shield draws well every week and Triple H's segments draw well in the road to Mania..All the others not so much..


It's too much work, gotta browse 2 links per weeks (QHs and overall) + do that 12-24 times over and honestly I'd be lost, how would I remember the QHs and see who actually draws or not unless I was just looking at segments from a single wrestler? I'm sure somebody in the hundreds of pages of the old ratings thread has already made a comprehensional post regarding this. I saw a draw/no draw year-long overall post from wrestlers individual QH ratings for example showing how many viewers a wrestler has won or lost overall per year, resulting in seeing the actual biggest ratings draws and killers in one simple text. I want something like this if possible. 

Maybe OP can help out since he mods this section and is pretty active in these threads. Something like that has to be there somewhere.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DAT PUNK HATE! unk


----------



## THANOS

_You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Starbuck again._

Damn, but :lmao :lmao :lmao :clap just beautiful.


----------



## Chrome

Well, that was great. :lol


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Beautiful :lmao


----------



## Reaper

IDONTSHIV said:


> ^^^^
> 
> :clap All your post needed was that tv voiceover guy saying :" PREVIOUSLY IN THE RATINGS THREAD."


Lol. There's a guy on youtube who does Honest Trailers in the epic hollywood trailer voice. Maybe if someone knows him they could get him to do a voice over of Starbuck's post.


----------



## Loudness

THANOS said:


> _You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Starbuck again._
> 
> Damn, but :lmao :lmao :lmao :clap just beautiful.


Thanks for answers via comments. So Bryan is a great draw? Considering it's you I trust you in that statement and I'm glad he made it this far.


----------



## MaybeLock

Epic OP. Never believe mark wars are done, though. Right now it's all shit and giggles with all the good ratings coming, but when we enter another ratings crysis, you guys better have your anti-troll shields prepared, because the mark wars are going to run wild in this thread again. Not sure who can offer a fair fight against Bryan marks this time, though. With the leader of the Punk marks gone, I´m afraid we might have to live under the Bryan marks tyranny. unk2


----------



## THANOS

Loudness said:


> Thanks for answers via comments. So Bryan is a great draw? Considering it's you I trust you in that statement and I'm glad he made it this far.


No problem, it's actually quite surreal and I still have a hard time believing it. Week after week, whether he's wrestling Orton in a random quarter for the zillionth time or ringside for a Brie Bella match (like this past Monday), he still either tops the night or is second in peek viewership. I honestly can't really even explain it, I guess there's just something about the guy that connects with people more than anyone else. I have my theories but we'll never really know for sure what it is about him that makes him so damn captivating for people.


----------



## Happenstan

OMG! Starbuck, I SO love you right now.





MaybeLock said:


> Not sure who can offer a fair fight against Bryan marks this time, though. With the leader of the Punk marks gone, I´m afraid we might have to live under the Bryan marks tyranny. unk2


Who was their leader again? Anyway, Punk fans always have Sonnen Says to back them up.


----------



## Loudness

THANOS said:


> No problem, it's actually quite surreal and I still have a hard time believing it. Week after week, whether he's wrestling Orton in a random quarter for the zillionth time or ringside for a Brie Bella match (like this past Monday), he still either tops the night or is second in peek viewership. I honestly can't really even explain it, I guess there's just something about the guy that connects with people more than anyone else. I have my theories but we'll never really know for sure what it is about him that makes him so damn captivating for people.


What do you mean with theories? It's simple as hell.

Bryan has gotten the "IT-Factor". He is short, stocky and aesthetically only above average looking compared to most of society, by those terms he was nothing special to begin with however he has developed a sort of "peoples persona" that goes perfectly along with his look and presence. However, even before that, people always appreciated him for his in-ring ability and that's the true reason he started off as he did, and made himself succeed.

He is like a mix of Bret Hart/Steve Austin/Bob Backlund in that way. He doesn't really have the look just like Bob Backlund didn't however he got the personality that would make him easy to get into just like him, he has Bret Harts ring-skills and natural likeability and he showed shades of Austin when he fought the authority and when he made fans cheer for him, no matter what WWE itself wanted.

Put all these individual skills that have been used by the past from greats and combine them with his very flashy catchphrase "Yes" and his tremendous ring-work aswell as his look that fits his persona perfectly and you got your answer. Look + character (in his case catchphrase) + talent (ringskills here) = Marketabillity. This is what I call the It-Factor. I have gotten a lot of flack here because some people were appaled by me calling Roman Reigns that (and he indeed possesses it if you think about it) and thinking I wouldn't given the credit to Bryan, because for some reason you can't be a fan of Wyatt, Reigns and Bryan at the same time but for all these guys I see the same thing, IT.

IT isn't related to having a simple trait or talent, it's a mix of talents and even if you don't look like a typical Superstar like Bryan you can still tune your character in a way that even the most common man could stand out like a megastar, and that is what Bryan did. That is why he is a star, because he has the presence of a star, the movements of a star, the expressions of a star, and of course the skills of a star. He has effectively managed to make his physical faults (height/stockyness) to his advantage and when you do that you create the larger than life, star image that everybody wants to follow. This is why the casuals love him, he is not a random indy guy to them, he is Daniel Bryan.


----------



## Londrick

Apollo = Phil and his marks Drago = Starbuck




























RIP Phil Brooks


----------



## THANOS

Loudness said:


> What do you mean with theories? It's simple as hell.
> 
> Bryan has gotten the "IT-Factor". He is short, stocky and aesthetically only above average looking compared to most of society, by those terms he was nothing special to begin with however he has developed a sort of "peoples persona" that goes perfectly along with his look and presence. However, even before that, people always appreciated him for his in-ring ability and that's the true reason he started off as he did, and made himself succeed.
> 
> He is like a mix of Bret Hart/Steve Austin/Bob Backlund in that way. He doesn't really have the look just like Bob Backlund didn't however he got the personality that would make him easy to get into just like him, he has Bret Harts ring-skills and natural likeability and he showed shades of Austin when he fought the authority and when he made fans cheer for him, no matter what WWE itself wanted.
> 
> Put all these individual skills that have been used by the past from greats and combine them with his very flashy catchphrase "Yes" and his tremendous ring-work aswell as his look that fits his persona perfectly and you got your answer. Look + character (in his case catchphrase) + talent (ringskills here) = Marketabillity. This is what I call the It-Factor. I have gotten a lot of flack here because some people were appaled by me calling Roman Reigns that (and he indeed possesses it if you think about it) and thinking I wouldn't given the credit to Bryan, because for some reason you can't be a fan of Wyatt, Reigns and Bryan at the same time but for all these guys I see the same thing, IT.
> 
> IT isn't related to having a simple trait or talent, it's a mix of talents and even if you don't look like a typical Superstar like Bryan you can still tune your character in a way that even the most common man could stand out like a megastar, and that is what Bryan did. That is why he is a star, because he has the presence of a star, the movements of a star, the expressions of a star, and of course the skills of a star. He has effectively managed to make his physical faults (height/stockyness) to his advantage and when you do that you create the larger than life, star image that everybody wants to follow. This is why the casuals love him, he is not a random indy guy to them, he is Daniel Bryan.


:clap beautiful Loudness! My theories are basically the same with the additional points on his likability and relatability. I've always said in the past that Bryan is the living embodiment of Rocky Balboa.


----------



## Mr. Yes

What makes Bryan very appealing is his never-say-die nature and humble personality that makes it virtually impossible to not like the guy. Everything he does in the ring is so smooth and never looks "planned" in effect. It basically looks effortless to him, like he could work a main event match in his sleep and it'd still be **** baseline.

His tremendous ring presence coupled with look and drive make him a star in my eyes. I've never watched a match of his indy career so it's not as if I have some sort of odd anti-WWE desire to see him succeed, there's just something about him that's hard to describe. He has "it". Whatever it is.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Bryan is such a huge rating draw that we can dub this the Second Daniel Bryan Discussion Thread... Since any ratings talk would relate to the one and only Daniel Bryan (even though some will argue it's mostly the Yes chant and his very catchy name and how "You Deserve it" just rolls off the tongue).


----------



## RabidCrow

Starbuck....


----------



## KingLobos

The Rock coming back single handily created the idea of this thread. True GOAT.


----------



## RabidCrow

Talking about rocky, i was re-watching the match vs Punk on EC and it surprised me how many people were chanting "rocky sucks" while Cm Punk had more adult male fans chanting for him even when he was heel.

And i was like... Dammit Dwayne.. You were a face of the attitude era, this is embarrasing. unk3


----------



## Darkness is here

IDONTSHIV said:


> ^^^^
> 
> :clap All your post needed was that tv voiceover guy saying :" PREVIOUSLY IN THE RATINGS THREAD."


dbz's voiceover immediatly came to my mind, lol.

Btw great post starbuck.


----------



## bmtrocks

The thing with Bryan that I think it resonating with the fans is really the same reason why Cena resonated with the fans when he became a big deal. Back then the ideal everyman was very military oriented (either in it, or supporting it), had a good build, told stupid jokes all the time, etc. Cena fit that role. Now you transition to an era where the every man likes to shop at places like Whole Foods, keeps himself in shape but not muscle bound, loves his family, has a more unique perspective on things like the environment, etc. Bryan fits that role that Cena can't quite feel.

I also think a lot of people watching stuff like Total Divas kind of see John Cena in a bad light now, since the show makes him look like an artificial robot and makes Bryan look like he's cool as shit. This doesn't help whatosever with the massive negative feedback Cena gets from adult male audiences already. Now the ladies are kind of backing off from Cena hence why the dude didn't even get much of a reaction at Wrestlemania this year.

Also Bryan has been booked as being an anti-establishment character...by being screwed so much by the establishment, resonates with how people at large feel that Government screws over the common man. With a guy like Cena he's never been booked that way, in fact he's been booked to help Vince on multiple occasions (when Vince was a face, but still, this means he's generally supportive at establishments) and was even booked this one when they were setting up Orton vs. Cena where Cena was just talking to the top heels in the company in a business meeting.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

The potential in responses that we might see just because of the OP...oh man, I don't think my body is ready.


----------



## WWE

Hey, Punk marks...


----------



## Osize10

This explains why Rocky hugged D Bry backstage at WM. Rocky was like "oh hey it's GOAT." So Rocky walked over over and hugged GOAT, but only b/c Rocky knew he himself was already GOAT. So it was just two GOATs hugging b/c they can.


----------



## Tardbasher12

CM Punk marks just did the job. :banderas


----------



## Londrick

:buried


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

I feel like this could become a thing...


----------



## Choke2Death

Awesome opening post by Starbuck. It's amazing that it took Bryan 1/10th of what Punk got to surpass him. :buried


----------



## WWE

This thread is great so far.​


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Holy sheet, two pages of loling at Punk. The poor guy can't catch a break in this thread, even when he's fucked off. unk3


----------



## Sonnen Says

Choke2Death said:


> Awesome opening post by Starbuck. *It's amazing that it took Bryan 1/10th of what Punk got to surpass him.* :buried


Would have been funny if it was true. But it isn't unk


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE




----------



## Chrome

Hasn't Punk suffered enough? unk3


----------



## StraightYesSociety




----------



## THANOS

SonnanSays has entered the arena! unk


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

StraightYesSociety said:


>


:lmao 

Holy jack rabbit shit. Who is this guy. He's my new favorite poster (sorry Choked2Death you've been replaced).

And really sonnen? That's your best response? Ugh.


----------



## krai999

Chrome said:


> Hasn't Punk suffered enough? unk3


----------



## WWE

CM Punk's stupid skinny fat ass had to go and break the fucking table​


----------



## ecabney

Punk stans lose again


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE




----------



## #Mark




----------



## RabidCrow

Left the company.

Still the most talked wrestler in the world to the point to have the entire "TV Ratings thread" only about his persona.










THE G.O.A.T. :lol


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

RabidCrow said:


>


Daniel Bryan on Colt Cabana's Art of Wrestling podcast... "C.M. Punk's beard is weak."


----------



## e1987p

RabidCrow said:


> Left the company.


fpalm
This is the problem.
He has not left the company,he is refusing to work despite being under contract.


----------



## RabidCrow

Soul Man Danny B said:


> Daniel Bryan on Colt Cabana's Art of Wrestling podcast... "C.M. Punk's beard is weak."


D.Bryan said that? :shiiit
Cm Jesus is the GOAT.
Cm Jesus invented the beard :yes












e1987p said:


> fpalm
> This is the problem.
> He has not left the company,he is refusing to work despite being under contract.


He have like 4 months out of television, he already left the company. Do you guys are really so affected of Cm Punk choosing his life above us? :jordan5


----------



## D.M.N.

YouTube hits - Raw (28/04/14)
- 396k - Roman Reigns vs. Randy Orton
- 377k - Bray Wyatt and a children's choir serenade John Cena
- 341k - Raw guest star Hugh Jackman is confronted by "Magneto"
- 313k - Ric Flair addresses Evolution and The Shield
- 245k - Paige vs. Brie Bella (Divas Championship match)
- 183k - RVD vs. Bad News Barrett (Intercontinental Title Tournament Finals)
- 124k - The Usos vs. RybAxel
- 84k - Sheamus vs. Titus O'Neil
- 80k - Los Matadores vs. Heath Slater & Drew McIntyre
- 79k - Jack Swagger vs. Cesaro
- 73k - Xavier Woods vs. Alexander Rusev
- 67k - Cody Rhodes vs. Alberto del Rio


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DMN, what're you doing? This is no time to be talking about guys/things that haven't left the company.


----------



## MaybeLock

#BadNewsSanta said:


> DMN, what're you doing? This is no time to be talking about guys/things that haven't left the company.


Yeah, what a way to derail a thread about CM Punk unk5


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

RabidCrow said:


> Left the company.
> 
> Still the most talked wrestler in the world to the point to have the entire "TV Ratings thread" only about his persona.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE G.O.A.T. :lol


This post will draw about as much ratings as Punk did during his championship reign.


----------



## Choke2Death

D.M.N. said:


> YouTube hits - Raw (28/04/14)
> - 396k - Roman Reigns vs. Randy Orton


rton2 :batista3 :hhh2 :reigns :ambrose :rollins

To be fair to Punk, him and the meltdown of his marks was what made this thread entertaining. With him and some of his biggest marks gone, topped with the lack of breakdowns - this thread is kinda deserted.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

I bet Phillip Jack Brooks is using his "sabbatical" to spend a lot of quality time with his friends and fam-

Oh wait


----------



## Tardbasher12

I wonder what CM Punk told those children in his pep talk.


----------



## e1987p

RabidCrow said:


> He have like 4 months out of television, he already left the company. Do you guys are really so affected of Cm Punk choosing his life above us? :jordan5


:side:

He choose nothing.He can't make a decision like a man.He is an hesitant whinig child who hasn't the ball to even quit.


----------



## WWE

Punk invented the big beard?










What?






Now someone is going to post a picture of a bearded wrestler from the 90s/80s :side:


----------



## Londrick

Tardbasher12 said:


> I wonder what CM Punk told those children in his pep talk.


Oh look Kofi's there too.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Tardbasher12 said:


> I wonder what CM Punk told those children in his pep talk.


Here's a report I found on the details:



> As previously reported, CM Punk had spoken to the Holy Trinity High School baseball team in Chicago after one of their games back in April. One of the team members spoke to one of our colleagues about what Punk said.
> 
> "He basically told us to never quit, never give up on the team no matter how dire things get. He said there's nothing worse in this world than up and leaving a team."
> 
> The interview can be listened to on youtube here:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

#BadNewsSanta said:


> "He basically told us to never quit, never give up on the team no matter how dire things get. He said there's nothing worse in this world than up and leaving a team."


dat irony :lol


----------



## Happenstan

^^^

:lmao Too funny. Never quit a team but legally binding contracts and fans who've always supported you you can piss all over.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Starting to wish that neck injury in the indies had been career ending, what a hypocritical piece of SHIT.


----------



## LilOlMe

Wow, you guys really don't click links, do you?

That post was a joke. The video was that Rick Roll'd video. 

The bs meter should have been high anyway, considering the timing.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Soul Man Danny B said:


> dat irony :lol





Happenstan said:


> ^^^
> 
> :lmao Too funny. Never quit a team but legally binding contracts and fans who've always supported you you can piss all over.





AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> Starting to wish that neck injury in the indies had been career ending, what a hypocritical piece of SHIT.


:lmao holy crap you guys got played hard.


----------



## RabidCrow

e1987p said:


> :side:
> 
> He choose nothing.He can't make a decision like a man.He is an hesitant whinig child who hasn't the ball to even quit.


Well he walked out of the company he worked hard for more than 8 years thinking on his life and health, it sounds like a decision to me... A forceful one..

I mean, i accept people criticizing athletes like Robinson Cano for leave the franchise that gave them everything just for money, but being butthurt over a man only because he choose to put his personal life above the show?... ^ Look at these guys up there, wrestling fans love to act like bitches. unk2


----------



## Reaper

TheGMofGods said:


> :lmao holy crap you guys got played hard.


I'm guessing none of them even bothered to click the link. It's like reading some of the comments people leave on the Onion website.

And I can't believe that I got rick rolled in 2014 :side:


----------



## DoubtGin

> Last Friday's episode of WWE SmackDown averaged 2.271 million viewers, which was a big 15% drop from last week's episode, which drew 2.670 million viewers. It was the least watched episode since last June.


.-.


----------



## WWE

^Without CM Punk :lel


----------



## DoubtGin

:lmao


----------



## JY57

Total Divas Drop below 1 million going up against Extreme Rules 

Viewership: 965,000 (down from 1,141,000 previous week and down from 1,395,000 two weeks ago)


----------



## Born of Osiris

The tables have turned in this thread. 

Punk haters confirmed for being ignorant sheep that believe everything they read without proof.

BLOWN THE FUCK OUT unk


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Point goes to the punk marks.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

TheGMofGods said:


> :lmao holy crap you guys got played hard.


I'm Kofi Kingstons bro in the second row, I heard him say it then and there you fucking bigot.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The first hour of Raw tanked this week.


----------



## Mr. Yes

RAW

8PM: 3.963 million
9PM: 4.414 million
10PM: 4.451 million


----------



## Loader230

Hour 1 - 3.963 1.3
Hour 2 - 4.414 1.5 
Hour 3 - 4.451 1.5

Overrun appears to have drawn 18-49 peak.


----------



## Mr. I

First hour went up against a basketball game I believe. Got sucker punched.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

I'd be shocked if Shield vs Wyatts didn't peak the show. I'm betting Bryan did rather well in H2 also... in spite of the cringeworthy angle.



Ithil said:


> First hour went up against a basketball game I believe. Got sucker punched.


Right, but that game was at halftime around 8:15 or so. Also, we should've seen a ratings plunge as Clippers-OKC started at 9:30 but the second hour was fine.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

It's good that hour 3 did well. That tells me this Shield/Evolution angle is drawing.


----------



## Bushmaster

Soul Man Danny B said:


> dat irony :lol





Happenstan said:


> ^^^
> 
> :lmao Too funny. Never quit a team but legally binding contracts and fans who've always supported you you can piss all over.





AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> Starting to wish that neck injury in the indies had been career ending, what a hypocritical piece of SHIT.


:jordan4 :ti :duck :lol :lmao :


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hope we get an actual breakdown on at least the male 18-49. Without that, let the conjecture fly!!! Bryan appeared in both the 9:00pm and 10:00pm hours. DAT DOUBLE HOUR DRAW!!! :bryan


----------



## THANOS

Expecting Shield/Wyatt to top the show, but I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Bryan/Del Rio or the Bryan/Kane/Brie car angle top the night.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Put the belts on Kane.


----------



## Fissiks

who do we blame for the first hour?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Well, the main angles seem to be consistent, which is a good sign (Shield stuff and Bryan stuff). Hope to see a breakdown to shed some light. What was in the 9PM quarter?


----------



## funnyfaces1

How did the first hour fail when :henry1 was in it? How did you guys get fooled by a Philistine?


----------



## kokepepsi

That's how the ratings should be
Growth throughout the show, its how it was in the attitude era until shit started going wack a couple years ago.

Nice


----------



## StraightYesSociety

funnyfaces1 said:


> How did the first hour fail when :henry1 was in it? How did you guys get fooled by a Philistine?


I assume his drawing power stemmed from his hair like Sampson. Once he cut it he wasn't able to draw as much anymore.


----------



## Y2Joe

"24" ended at 9 CT, so that probably helps account for the viewership increase into Hour 3.


----------



## jocknerd94

The viewership for this week are up compared to the same time last year.


----------



## Waffelz

What was the first hour other than the battle royal?


----------



## O Fenômeno

Thuganomics said:


> Hey, Punk marks...


:lmao :lmao

:floyd1


----------



## Londrick

Wonder how bad Devolution would be drawing if it wasn't for The Shield?


----------



## Randy Lahey

I dont know how posters can get in pissing contests over ratings that are terrible whether Punk is the head of the show or Bryan or someone else. These ratings arent even close to the Attitude Era. Why even debate varying degrees of awfulness?


----------



## Fissiks

Randy Lahey said:


> I dont know how posters can get in pissing contests over ratings that are terrible whether Punk is the head of the show or Bryan or someone else. These ratings arent even close to the Attitude Era. Why even debate varying degrees of awfulness?


stfu


----------



## Loader230

Randy Lahey said:


> I dont know how posters can get in pissing contests over ratings that are terrible whether Punk is the head of the show or Bryan or someone else. These ratings arent even close to the Attitude Era. Why even debate varying degrees of awfulness?


:duck True.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Randy Lahey said:


> I dont know how posters can get in pissing contests over ratings that are terrible whether Punk is the head of the show or Bryan or someone else. These ratings arent even close to the Attitude Era. Why even debate varying degrees of awfulness?


I was thinking the same thing a few weeks ago. I mean people are getting all excited for ratings that are not even close to the Attitude Era levels. Hell, the ratings today aren't even at the levels from 2005.


----------



## THANOS

Randy Lahey said:


> I dont know how posters can get in pissing contests over ratings that are terrible whether Punk is the head of the show or Bryan or someone else. These ratings arent even close to the Attitude Era. Why even debate varying degrees of awfulness?


You do realize TV has changed right? Very few things currently draw high ratings all across television due to the advancements of technology and full accessibility that users have from internet streaming sites, and packages like Netflix. Viewers no longer have to stay home and watch shows when they can easily watch them online at their convenience.

Do you know why Vince McMahon is on the verge of getting a ginormous TV contract package with a new network once his current deal with Universal is up? It's because of his ratings, which, believe it or not, are considered amazing and very consistent compared to most shows. WWE has higher ratings than Nascar which is saying something, since that's a fairly mainstream form of entertainment.


----------



## Volantredx

Randy Lahey said:


> I dont know how posters can get in pissing contests over ratings that are terrible whether Punk is the head of the show or Bryan or someone else. These ratings arent even close to the Attitude Era. Why even debate varying degrees of awfulness?


You do realize that there isn't a single show on cable that gets close to the numbers Raw pulled in the Attitude Era? Like not even in the ball park. Raw peaked at an 8.4 back then. The highest rated show on Monday was the Playoff at 5.4.


----------



## Loader230

Meh...Attitude Era peak is like 10.5 million viewers. Lot of popular TV shows these days outdraw that figure on a regular basis. Wrestling is just not "it" anymore, ultimately cheesy character like Cena or goofy character like Bryan being the face of the product can only sustain viewers at best, they are not going to revolutionize the business as nWo/Austin did in 90s or as Hogan did in the 80s. 

What WWE needs is a game changing true mega-star whose character is actually a serious one and something that caters to a broader adult fanbase.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Volantredx said:


> You do realize that there isn't a single show on cable that gets close to the numbers Raw pulled in the Attitude Era? Like not even in the ball park. Raw peaked at an 8.4 back then. The highest rated show on Monday was the Playoff at 5.4.


Walking Dead averaged over 13 million viewers this season and was the highest rated show in the demo except for Sunday Night Football. Higher than the Big Ban Theory, The Voice or any other show on cable or network tv, even higher than those halcyon days of the Attitude Era.


----------



## THANOS

Loader230 said:


> Meh...Attitude Era peak is like 10.5 million viewers. *Lot of popular TV shows these days outdraw that figure on a regular basis.* Wrestling is just not "it" anymore, ultimately cheesy character like Cena or goofy character like Bryan being the face of the product can only sustain viewers at best, they are not going to revolutionize the business as nWo/Austin did in 90s or as Hogan did in the 80s.
> 
> What WWE needs is a game changing true mega-star whose character is actually a serious one and something that caters to a broader adult fanbase.












Please watch and educate yourself.






The fact that Bryan has generated so much interest leading up to his Mania win, and especially since then, is exceptional, and will most certainly make Vince McMahon a lot of money.


----------



## #Mark

The Rock, Brock Lesnar, and The Undertaker were on TV on a weekly basis last year and the WWE didn't even get a fraction of the ratings they got during the AE. I think it's silly to even try to compare numbers to any year besides the year directly before it. That's the only way you can accurately and fairly gauge interest levels.


----------



## Happenstan

Randy Lahey said:


> I dont know how posters can get in pissing contests over ratings that are terrible whether Punk is the head of the show or Bryan or someone else. These ratings arent even close to the Attitude Era. Why even debate varying degrees of awfulness?


And yet WWE will make 10 times the amount of money this year alone they made during the AE years combined. :genius


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*WWE NEWS: Raw TV quarter-hour ratings - details on Daniel Bryan retaining top position, how other segments fared *



> WWE World Hvt. champion Daniel Bryan retained his position as WWE's top draw in the males 18-49 demographic Monday night on Raw.
> 
> During the main three hours of Raw (pre-overrun), Bryan's match with Alberto Del Rio included the most-watched minute of the show and delivered the highest quarter-hour rating.
> 
> The other top draw of the night was The Shield vs. The Wyatts six-man tag main event extending from Q12 to the overrun.
> 
> The overall show was down considerably from last week's Extreme Rules lead-in episode. By comparison, last week's Q1 scored a 2.28 rating and this week's Q1 scored a 1.65 rating the night after a PPV.
> 
> Raw Break Down - m18-49 demographic
> 
> - Overall: 1.89 rating / 1.187 million viewers
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened with a 1.65 rating for the first-half of the U.S. Title battle royal and one mid-match commercial.
> 
> - Q2: Raw increased to a 1.77 rating for the conclusion of the battle royal and one commercial. The peak audience was 1.330 million viewers at 8:18 p.m. just before the finish of the match.
> 
> - Q3: Raw fell back to a show-low 1.64 rating for two commercial breaks and the first-half of Rob Van Dam vs. Cesaro.
> 
> - Q4: Raw inched up to a 1.69 rating for the second-half of RVD-Cesaro, one commercial, and the first-half of Bray Wyatt's monologue.
> 
> - Q5: Raw got a slight top-of-the-hour bump to a 1.79 rating for the second-half of Bray's monologue, one commercial, and a full Cody Rhodes vs. Ryback singles match.
> 
> The match actually fared better than the end of Bray's monologue, as Bray peaked with 1.211 million viewers at 9:02 p.m. and five minutes of Cody-Ryback were above Bray's peak. The match peaked with 1.291 million viewers at the conclusion.
> 
> - Q6: Raw began a steady incline to a 1.81 rating for two full commercial breaks and Los Matadores & El Torito celebrating Cinco De Mayo.
> 
> The peak audience was 1.339 million viewers at 9:23 p.m. in-between two commercials.
> 
> - Q7: Raw increased to a 1.97 rating for Rusev's latest squash match, one commercial, and the continuation of Daniel Bryan & Brie Bella terrorized by Kane.
> 
> The match grazed 1.3 million viewers, then Bryan & Brie backstage hit 1.364 million viewers heading to break.
> 
> - Q8: Raw hit a show-high 2.10 rating for Daniel Bryan vs. Del Rio in the ring, plus one commercial. Included was Raw touching 1.4 million viewers for the first time in the show at 9:58 p.m.
> 
> - Q9: Raw slipped to a 2.01 rating at the top of the hour.
> 
> This was the product of the Bryan-Kane feud spilling over to the third hour, which included a show-high audience of 1.542 million viewers at 10:03 p.m. Raw then cut to break at 10:04 p.m. and lost a significant chunk of viewers on the other side of the break for the first-half of Wade Barrett vs. Big E.
> 
> - Q10: Raw fell to a 1.77 rating for two full commercials and the second-half of Barrett vs. Big E. The match's peak was 1.212 million viewers at 10:22 p.m.
> 
> - Q11: Raw re-built to a 1.91 rating for Zeb Colter setting up Adam Rose's debut, plus one commercial before the main event. The peak was 1.310 million viewers at 10:35 p.m. at the end of the debut.
> 
> - Q12: Raw jumped to a 2.09 rating for the first-half of Shield vs. Wyatts, plus one commercial. The peak was 1.414 million viewers at 10:56 p.m.
> 
> - Over-run: Raw finished strong - for this week - with a 2.35 rating for the end of the six-man tag main event and post-match beat down from Evolution.
> 
> The segment peaked at 11:03 p.m. with 1.562 million viewers when the match ended. During the post-match involving Evolution, Raw went down one stair-step, finishing with 1.451 million viewers at 11:06 p.m.
> 
> Caldwell's Analysis: Bryan is over, The Shield vs. The Wyatts is over, there's a gap in starpower when John Cena is off the show, and long-form matches that build to a conclusion are a draw if there is an established issue or something on the line. Unless it's Big E. vs. Wade Barrett for the IC Title, which suffered from audience indifference toward Big E. and WWE quickly trying to heat up Barrett and waiting for the audience to catch on.



GOAT'S gotta Goat. The male 18-34 like Brie's screams apparently. :bryan


----------



## Starbuck

Hokey acting is a draw. Damn lol. I personally hate Brie's involvement but it doesn't seem to be affecting the general viewing audience. WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU AMERICA? Y U NO CHANGE CHANNEL WHEN BRIE IS THERE?

But this is a common trend now. 

:bryan3 & :trips2 are the ratings kings of 2014 and :ambrose :rollins :reigns rton2 :batista4 are all helping carry the load.

DAT ADAM ROSE 0.2 OFF THE TOP RATED SEGMENTS 

DONT BE A LEMON BE A ROSEBUD

[insert Rose smiley here]


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Even in an odd quarter, Bryan does peak of the show outside the overrun. Man is a drawing machine. Overrun is significantly down from last week, but still good. However, after the peak, looks like a good portion of the people tuned out. Evolution/Shield is getting old. Not completely worn out yet, but it's getting there.

There's only one ratings king right now and it's :bryan


----------



## THANOS

IDONTSHIV said:


> *WWE NEWS: Raw TV quarter-hour ratings - details on Daniel Bryan retaining top position, how other segments fared *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *WWE World Hvt. champion Daniel Bryan retained his position as WWE's top draw in the males 18-49 demographic Monday night on Raw.
> 
> During the main three hours of Raw (pre-overrun), Bryan's match with Alberto Del Rio included the most-watched minute of the show and delivered the highest quarter-hour rating.*
> 
> The other top draw of the night was The Shield vs. The Wyatts six-man tag main event extending from Q12 to the overrun.
> 
> The overall show was down considerably from last week's Extreme Rules lead-in episode. By comparison, last week's Q1 scored a 2.28 rating and this week's Q1 scored a 1.65 rating the night after a PPV.
> 
> Raw Break Down - m18-49 demographic
> 
> - Overall: 1.89 rating / 1.187 million viewers
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened with a 1.65 rating for the first-half of the U.S. Title battle royal and one mid-match commercial.
> 
> - Q2: Raw increased to a 1.77 rating for the conclusion of the battle royal and one commercial. The peak audience was 1.330 million viewers at 8:18 p.m. just before the finish of the match.
> 
> - Q3: Raw fell back to a show-low 1.64 rating for two commercial breaks and the first-half of Rob Van Dam vs. Cesaro.
> 
> - Q4: Raw inched up to a 1.69 rating for the second-half of RVD-Cesaro, one commercial, and the first-half of Bray Wyatt's monologue.
> 
> - Q5: Raw got a slight top-of-the-hour bump to a 1.79 rating for the second-half of Bray's monologue, one commercial, and a full Cody Rhodes vs. Ryback singles match.
> 
> The match actually fared better than the end of Bray's monologue, as Bray peaked with 1.211 million viewers at 9:02 p.m. and five minutes of Cody-Ryback were above Bray's peak. The match peaked with 1.291 million viewers at the conclusion.
> 
> - Q6: Raw began a steady incline to a 1.81 rating for two full commercial breaks and Los Matadores & El Torito celebrating Cinco De Mayo.
> 
> The peak audience was 1.339 million viewers at 9:23 p.m. in-between two commercials.
> 
> *- Q7: Raw increased to a 1.97 rating for Rusev's latest squash match, one commercial, and the continuation of Daniel Bryan & Brie Bella terrorized by Kane.
> 
> The match grazed 1.3 million viewers, then Bryan & Brie backstage hit 1.364 million viewers heading to break.
> 
> - Q8: Raw hit a show-high 2.10 rating for Daniel Bryan vs. Del Rio in the ring, plus one commercial. Included was Raw touching 1.4 million viewers for the first time in the show at 9:58 p.m.
> 
> - Q9: Raw slipped to a 2.01 rating at the top of the hour.
> 
> This was the product of the Bryan-Kane feud spilling over to the third hour, which included a show-high audience of 1.542 million viewers at 10:03 p.m. Raw then cut to break at 10:04 p.m. and lost a significant chunk of viewers on the other side of the break for the first-half of Wade Barrett vs. Big E.*
> 
> - Q10: Raw fell to a 1.77 rating for two full commercials and the second-half of Barrett vs. Big E. The match's peak was 1.212 million viewers at 10:22 p.m.
> 
> - Q11: Raw re-built to a 1.91 rating for Zeb Colter setting up Adam Rose's debut, plus one commercial before the main event. The peak was 1.310 million viewers at 10:35 p.m. at the end of the debut.
> 
> - Q12: Raw jumped to a 2.09 rating for the first-half of Shield vs. Wyatts, plus one commercial. The peak was 1.414 million viewers at 10:56 p.m.
> 
> - Over-run: Raw finished strong - for this week - with a 2.35 rating for the end of the six-man tag main event and post-match beat down from Evolution.
> 
> The segment peaked at 11:03 p.m. with 1.562 million viewers when the match ended. During the post-match involving Evolution, Raw went down one stair-step, finishing with 1.451 million viewers at 11:06 p.m.
> 
> *Caldwell's Analysis: Bryan is over, The Shield vs. The Wyatts is over*, there's a gap in starpower when John Cena is off the show, and long-form matches that build to a conclusion are a draw if there is an established issue or something on the line. Unless it's Big E. vs. Wade Barrett for the IC Title, which suffered from audience indifference toward Big E. and WWE quickly trying to heat up Barrett and waiting for the audience to catch on.
> 
> 
> 
> GOAT'S gotta Goat. The male 18-34 like Brie's screams apparently. :bryan
Click to expand...

:lmao :lmao This is just comical now. I still can't believe how huge of a draw Bryan has become, it's unreal. WWE need to do a Bryan/Henry feud right after Payback! 

:bryan3 + :henry2 = :vince$

Outside of Bryan, It's great to see that Wyatts vs Shield is still a huge draw, as it should, and that overrun shows that people are still loving Evolution/Shield which is also great to see! 

As Starbuck touched upon, it's great to see Adam Rose's debut doing well, and I see it being a huge hit once WWE go to England in a couple weeks. They really need to hammer home the Russel Brand traits though, to get this character off the ground. I don't want to see a Fandango who only says his name in every promo, I want to see depth and hilarity out of Adam Rose and hopefully we see it!


----------



## Loader230

Rather weak increases overall.

Q8 -> Q9 - 6% increase
Q11 -> Q12 - 8% increase
Overrun - 11% increase

As expected viewership peaked at the end in the overrun with 1.56m. Nothing "great" here really.


----------



## Choke2Death

Yep, Vince should definitely sign Thierry Henry. He would be a ratings machine too. :henry


----------



## NastyYaffa

:bryan


----------



## THANOS

Choke2Death said:


> Yep, Vince should definitely sign Thierry Henry. He would be a ratings machine too. :henry


:lol I guess Mizzark Henry :henry2 is getting outdrawn by another in smiley form, quite the accomplishment :henry.


----------



## Loader230

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Even in an odd quarter, Bryan does peak of the show outside the overrun. Man is a drawing machine.


That's all well and good but what exactly was he competing with? lol If you look at the report again, overrun obviously excluded, the key quarters throughout the show were all terribly weak. 

Q1 - Show starts with the overplayed battle royal gimmick with jobbers in the ring 

Q5 - second half of Bray rambling about Cena(this feud isn't drawing to begin with), Cody vs Ryback

Q9 - Bryan/Brie/Kane top main event angle delivering the peak 

Q12 - Shield Vs Wyatts, yet another typical no-heat random 6 man tag ME.

The rest of show is even worse. Essentially, without John Cena and Evolution placed in the Overrun, Bryan was the only star who even mattered all night, in this jobber/filler episode. 

I'd been shocked if he _didn't_ manage to peak such a weak ass show.


----------



## THANOS

Loader230 said:


> That's all well and good but what exactly was he competing with? lol If you look at the report again, overrun obviously excluded, the key quarters throughout the show were all terribly weak.
> 
> Q1 - Show starts with the overplayed battle royal gimmick with jobbers in the ring
> 
> Q5 - second half of Bray rambling about Cena(this feud isn't drawing to begin with), Cody vs Ryback
> 
> Q9 - Bryan/Brie/Kane top main event angle delivering the peak
> 
> Q12 - Shield Vs Wyatts, yet another typical no-heat random 6 man tag ME.
> 
> The rest of show is even worse. Essentially, without John Cena and Evolution placed in the Overrun, Bryan was the only star who even mattered all night, in this jobber/filler episode.
> 
> I'd been shocked if he _didn't_ manage to peak such a weak ass show.


Nice try, but Bryan has been dominating whether Cena or any other star is on the show or not, dating back to post-Rumble. It would make no differen if Cena was on the show or Evolution/Shield were out of the Overrun, we've seen that Bryan will still outdraw them, even in the most ridiculous segments and storylines. 

You are right that the show as a whole was certainly a filler episode, but the fact that the weird angle with Kane/Bryan/Brie did so well deserves praise since everyone here felt it was difficult to watch, and yet..


----------



## Choke2Death

THANOS said:


> :lol I guess Mizzark Henry :henry2 is getting outdrawn by another in smiley form, quite the accomplishment :henry.


That's the magic of HENRY. Wouldn't be surprised if the Raw shows that do good in ratings owe that to somebody in the audience who's last name is that. I will legally change my last name to HENRY and will confirm it if I ever attend Raw and the ratings skyrocket.

THE POWER OF HENRY IS RUNNING WILD, BROTHERS! :henry :henry1


----------



## JamesK

Bryan is not a draw... Del Rio/Brie and Kane are..

Some Bryan marks can't understand this.. :duck


----------



## THANOS

Choke2Death said:


> That's the magic of HENRY. Wouldn't be surprised if the Raw shows that do good in ratings owe that to somebody in the audience who's last name is that. I will legally change my last name to HENRY and will confirm it if I ever attend Raw and the ratings skyrocket.
> 
> THE POWER OF HENRY IS RUNNING WILD, BROTHERS! :henry :henry1


:lmao :lol You should, we must see for sure!!


----------



## Mr. Yes

How in the everloving fuck did a Del Rio/Bryan match draw viewers in a quarter that traditionally loses viewers? Are people that into the *G*(reatest) *O*(f) *A*(ll) *T*(ime)?

:bryan


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

If Seth Rollins changed his name to Henry Rollins, would he be a bugger draw or a bigger dick/douche?


----------



## LilOlMe

Mr. Yes said:


> How in the everloving fuck did a Del Rio/Bryan match draw viewers in a quarter that traditionally loses viewers?


'Cause the WWE did a nice job of building up to the fact that something would happen after the match, as hokey as it was.

Cliffhangers tend to work, more often than not.

This is a lesson that the WWE should invest more in storylines, rather than just having random matches (same reason why the Orton/Cody/Goldust matches did incredibly well. Shame they just had Cody randomly flounder since then). 

They have a gigantic production and writing staff, it seems. Don't know why they're incapable of juggling multiple, _good_, storylines.


----------



## THANOS

Mr. Yes said:


> How in the everloving fuck did a Del Rio/Bryan match draw viewers in a quarter that traditionally loses viewers? Are people that into the *G*(reatest) *O*(f) *A*(ll) *T*(ime)?
> 
> :bryan


Not only did it gain viewers in a generally low drawing quarter but it generated the highest quarter and highest peek minute in the show outside of the overrun.

GOATing indeed, it seems :bryan!



IDONTSHIV said:


> If Seth Rollins changed his name to Henry Rollins, would he be a bugger draw or a bigger dick/douche?


He would exclipse his Jeff Hardy comparisons in one week flat :banderas. Hardy's drawing power would look like Spike Dudley's in comparison!


----------



## #Mark

Loader230 said:


> That's all well and good but what exactly was he competing with? lol If you look at the report again, overrun obviously excluded, the key quarters throughout the show were all terribly weak.
> 
> Q1 - Show starts with the overplayed battle royal gimmick with jobbers in the ring
> 
> Q5 - second half of Bray rambling about Cena(this feud isn't drawing to begin with), Cody vs Ryback
> 
> Q9 - Bryan/Brie/Kane top main event angle delivering the peak
> 
> Q12 - Shield Vs Wyatts, yet another typical no-heat random 6 man tag ME.
> 
> The rest of show is even worse. Essentially, without John Cena and Evolution placed in the Overrun, Bryan was the only star who even mattered all night, in this jobber/filler episode.
> 
> I'd been shocked if he _didn't_ manage to peak such a weak ass show.


The peak of the Bryan/Del Rio/Kane stuff had 1.542 million viewers.. The Evolution post match attack had 1.451 million viewers. So Bryan's odd segment drew a higher rating than the closing angle. The start (and peak) of the overrun during the finish of Wyatts/Shield was 1.562.. Only 20,000 more viewers than Bryan's segment. The start of the overrun should draw a hell of a lot more than 20,000 viewers than the Q9 segment.


----------



## THANOS

#Mark said:


> The peak of the Bryan/Del Rio/Kane stuff had 1.542 million viewers.. The Evolution post match attack had 1.451 million viewers. So Bryan's odd segment drew a higher rating than the closing angle. The start (and peak) of the overrun during the finish of Wyatts/Shield was 1.562.. Only 20,000 more viewers than Bryan's segment. The start of the overrun should draw a hell of a lot more than 20,000 viewers than the Q9 segment.


Holy shit I didn't even notice that point about the peak spots :bryan2, Bryan really did own the show after all. When did the peak of the overrun happen btw? Did it happen right at 11pm when people are tuning in for the next show, or did it happen a bit later than that?


----------



## Mr. Yes

THANOS said:


> Holy shit I didn't even notice that point about the peak spots :bryan2, Bryan really did own the show after all. When did the peak of the overrun happen btw? Did it happen right at 11pm when people are tuning in for the next show, or did it happen a bit later than that?


I think the peak was when Evolution came out. They have to throw the kitchen sink out there to beat the SUPERGOAT


----------



## #Mark

THANOS said:


> Holy shit I didn't even notice that point about the peak spots :bryan2, Bryan really did own the show after all. When did the peak of the overrun happen btw? Did it happen right at 11pm when people are tuning in for the next show, or did it happen a bit later than that?


The peak was the finish to the match at 11:03.


----------



## vanboxmeer




----------



## The Boy Wonder

*


LilOlMe said:



'Cause the WWE did a nice job of building up to the fact that something would happen after the match, as hokey as it was.

Click to expand...

*

Yeah they did a good job with that on RAW.


----------



## JY57

> As far as total Internet interest in characters the day after WrestleMania, Undertaker blew away everyone, with triple the interest level of Lesnar, six times that of Bryan and ten times that of Cena.


via WON


----------



## Loader230

#Mark said:


> The peak of the Bryan/Del Rio/Kane stuff had 1.542 million viewers.. The Evolution post match attack had 1.451 million viewers.


1.56m was the show peak, when Evolution came out to run interference before the finish. Ofcourse heel beatdowns rarely ever hold consistent viewership.



> So Bryan's odd segment drew a higher rating than the closing angle.


Bryan vs Del rio was the odd quarter which drew 2.1, kane stuff was top of the hour.



> The start (and peak) of the overrun during the finish of Wyatts/Shield was 1.562.. Only 20,000 more viewers than Bryan's segment. The start of the overrun should draw a hell of a lot more than 20,000 viewers than the Q9 segment.


I already noted both had average increase, nothing "great" about it. How many times has the 10Pm quarter outdrawn overruns? I can remember plenty when Punk was main eventing with Orton. When there is sufficient interest, it happens. 

Ultimately, overall average viewership of the month is about the same as last year indicating that the fan interest resulting from the push of a new star, Daniel Bryan hasn't generated any extra viewer interest, compared to that of a status quo product we've had to endure last couple of years. So I don't exactly understand why Bryan marks in this thread are partying over average numbers. 

Don't get me wrong, Bryan has done well for himself. Infact significantly well when compared to Punk who couldn't even main event PPVs but long-term I don't think he is a main event star. That's why they already started pushing Reigns for that spot(although I think they don't intend to place him as a top face atleast until next mania).


----------



## Loader230

JY57 said:


> via WON


Is Meltzer talking about google trends post mania?


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Loader230 said:


> Ultimately, overall average viewership of the month is about the same as last year indicating that the fan interest resulting from the push of a new star, Daniel Bryan hasn't generated any extra viewer interest, compared to that of a status quo product we've had to endure last couple of years. So I don't exactly understand why Bryan marks in this thread are partying over average numbers.


But this clearly isn't the case considering how Bryan has been pushed as a new star since team hell no disbanded and he beat Randy Orton. And these are in no way average numbers. 

And lol at Bryan not generating any extra viewers, explain the night after Wrestlemania. 

And don't say Taker. It's already been proven that this wasn't the case.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

TheGMofGods said:


> But this clearly isn't the case considering how Bryan has been pushed as a new star since team hell no disbanded and he beat Randy Orton. And these are in no way average numbers.
> 
> And lol at Bryan not generating any extra viewers, explain the night after Wrestlemania.
> 
> *And don't say Taker. It's already been proven that this wasn't the case.*


I'm not so sure about this. Let's look at the numbers since WM:

RAW 4/7 - 5.146 million viewers (average)
RAW 4/14 - 4.770 million viewers (average)
RAW 4/21 - 4.139 million viewers (average)
RAW 4/28 - 4.610 million viewers (average)
RAW 5/5 - 4.276 million viewers (average)

The numbers greatly increased after WM 30. But in the last three weeks those viewers didn't seem to stick around.


----------



## funnyfaces1

:lmao at how bitter the guys trying to discredit Bryan are. Starbuck should make a part II to the narrative talking about people that doubt :dazzler


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

funnyfaces1 said:


> :lmao at how bitter the guys trying to discredit Bryan are. Starbuck should make a part II to the narrative talking about people that doubt :dazzler


Need to coin the term "bitter tear face" for the non-believers.

Bryan had the most viewed moment of the 9:00pm *and* 10:00pm hours. Take that fact to the bank.


----------



## JamesK

The Boy Wonder said:


> I'm not so sure about this. Let's look at the numbers since WM:
> 
> RAW 4/7 - 5.146 million viewers (average)
> RAW 4/14 - 4.770 million viewers (average)
> RAW 4/21 - 4.139 million viewers (average)
> RAW 4/28 - 4.610 million viewers (average)
> RAW 5/5 - 4.276 million viewers (average)
> 
> The numbers greatly increased after WM 30. But in the last three weeks those viewers didn't seem to stick around.


I think it's Bryan's fault..


----------



## kurtmangled

vanboxmeer said:


>


Bryan remind me of an injured camel after an attack buy a hyena in that GIF lol


----------



## #Mark

JamesK said:


> I think it's Bryan's fault..


Agreed. Bryan's responsible for the natural viewer drop that happens after every WM season. Just ignore the fact that the numbers this year are better than they were last year and that Bryan consistently tops the night.. But yeah, it's Bryan's fault!


----------



## JamesK

#Mark said:


> Agreed. Bryan's responsible for the natural viewer drop that happens after every WM season. Just ignore the fact that the numbers this year are better than they were last year and that Bryan consistently tops the night.. But yeah, it's Bryan's fault!


Of course it's Bryan's fault man.. 

He is responsible for the writing and booking of the show and the drawing ability of the others...


----------



## Sonnen Says

*People bought more merchandise for The Ultimate Warrior on the internet in the month of April than anyone else, including John Cena. The internet merchandise numbers were Warrior first, followed by Cena, CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, The Wyatt Family, The Shield, Evolution and Hulk Hogan. At live events, Cena's sales are far beyond everyone else's. At the arenas, the latest best-sellers have been Cena, Bryan, Randy Orton, Warrior, Rob Van Dam, Brock Lesnar, The Wyatts and Batista. Sin Cara has broke into the #9 spot. 
*
_Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter_

Bryan is such a big draw it's crazy...


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Sonnen Says said:


> *People bought more merchandise for The Ultimate Warrior on the internet in the month of April than anyone else, including John Cena. The internet merchandise numbers were Warrior first, followed by Cena, CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, The Wyatt Family, The Shield, Evolution and Hulk Hogan. At live events, Cena's sales are far beyond everyone else's. At the arenas, the latest best-sellers have been Cena, Bryan, Randy Orton, Warrior, Rob Van Dam, Brock Lesnar, The Wyatts and Batista. Sin Cara has broke into the #9 spot.
> *
> _Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter_
> 
> Bryan is such a big draw it's crazy...


Yeah I love watching him on my TV every Monday.


----------



## kokepepsi

vanboxmeer said:


>


Guy can't stop corpsing :maury


I was in doubt of the ratings ability of bryan but he drew in a non top segment with del rio:|

Damn

Then again Mason Ryan did that too once :ti

Gonna need to fix my sig soon


----------



## #Mark

Loader230 said:


> 1.56m was the show peak, when Evolution came out to run interference before the finish. Ofcourse heel beatdowns rarely ever hold consistent viewership.
> 
> 
> 
> Bryan vs Del rio was the odd quarter which drew 2.1, kane stuff was top of the hour.
> 
> 
> 
> I already noted both had average increase, nothing "great" about it. How many times has the 10Pm quarter outdrawn overruns? I can remember plenty when Punk was main eventing with Orton. When there is sufficient interest, it happens.
> 
> Ultimately, overall average viewership of the month is about the same as last year indicating that the fan interest resulting from the push of a new star, Daniel Bryan hasn't generated any extra viewer interest, compared to that of a status quo product we've had to endure last couple of years. So I don't exactly understand why Bryan marks in this thread are partying over average numbers.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, Bryan has done well for himself. Infact significantly well when compared to Punk who couldn't even main event PPVs but long-term I don't think he is a main event star. That's why they already started pushing Reigns for that spot(although I think they don't intend to place him as a top face atleast until next mania).


There's already a pre-conceived bias here because I'm certain if Reigns was consistently topping the night despite what quarter he's in the lot would be heralding him the next top star. It's okay if you aren't a fan of Bryan but you can't deny that he's pulling in ME caliber numbers. He's been consistently topping the night since WM season despite what segment he's in. When he's in the overrun it is significantly greater than any segment during the rest of the show, when he's in the 10PM hour his segment is comparable to or even surpasses the overrun. This trend has been going on for months on end now. 

There's a viewership drop on a yearly basis and that'll continue to happen no matter what. Actually, ratings this year are marginally higher than the ratings this time last year (If you ignore the week Cena vs. Wyatts main evented) so that's a victory in itself. It's impossible to expect the WWE to maintain the viewers from the RTWM. There's naturally going to be a lull period and a decrease in ratings after Mania. History has shown us that. The only way to accurately gauge fan interest is to see how A. viewership holds up compared to last year and B. The breakdowns. Both factors show us that the interest in Bryan despite being involved in a shitty angle with Kane is higher than any interest in Cena's program and the "hot" Shield/Evolution program. He definitely deserves credit for that.


----------



## CookiePuss

:lel @ Bryan marks every week in this thread


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

JY57 said:


> via WON


No surprise that Taker, by far, had the most (internet) interest, and it should've been obvious with how all the talk was on his streak ending after Mania was all said and done, and pretty much until Warrior passed away.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

It's good for WWE if Bryan can keep putting up relatively high ratings. Hopefully HHH can confer some of his drawing power to The Shield so they can produce without him. Like to see The Wyatts become big ratings grabbers too. It can only benefit WWE to get as many acts as over as they can.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

The Boy Wonder said:


> I'm not so sure about this. Let's look at the numbers since WM:
> 
> RAW 4/7 - 5.146 million viewers (average)
> RAW 4/14 - 4.770 million viewers (average)
> RAW 4/21 - 4.139 million viewers (average)
> RAW 4/28 - 4.610 million viewers (average)
> RAW 5/5 - 4.276 million viewers (average)
> 
> The numbers greatly increased after WM 30. But in the last three weeks those viewers didn't seem to stick around.


And this proves anything in regards to Bryan's drawing ability because....???



Sonnen Says said:


> *People bought more merchandise for The Ultimate Warrior on the internet in the month of April than anyone else, including John Cena. The internet merchandise numbers were Warrior first, followed by Cena, CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, The Wyatt Family, The Shield, Evolution and Hulk Hogan. At live events, Cena's sales are far beyond everyone else's. At the arenas, the latest best-sellers have been Cena, Bryan, Randy Orton, Warrior, Rob Van Dam, Brock Lesnar, The Wyatts and Batista. Sin Cara has broke into the #9 spot.
> *
> _Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter_
> 
> Bryan is such a big draw it's crazy...


:lmao you're trying way too hard buddy. Just let it go.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

TheGMofGods said:


> And this proves anything in regards to Bryan's drawing ability because....???


Well you are saying that the high numbers after WM have nothing to do with Taker and more to do with Bryan. Right? So if that's the case where did those viewers go? 5.1 million viewers on average for the show after WM compared to 4.2 million viewers this week on RAW. That guys point was that Bryan was not necessarily bringing in new viewers.


----------



## Sonnen Says

TheGMofGods said:


> And this proves anything in regards to Bryan's drawing ability because....???
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao you're trying way too hard buddy. Just let it go.


That's the thing I'm not even trying. A lot of reports have been made and none of them says Bryan is drawing as much as you guys think. Your boy cant even outdrew a guy who's not even in the company and a guy WWE is trying to bury, it's pretty laughable.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Sonnen Says said:


> That's the thing I'm not even trying. A lot of reports have been made and none of them says Bryan is drawing as much as you guys think. Your boy cant even outdrew a guy who's not even in the company and a guy WWE is trying to bury, it's pretty laughable.


I think Bryan gets more TV ratings because well he's there


----------



## Waffelz

Bryan is a drawing machine!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Sonnen Says said:


> That's the thing I'm not even trying. A lot of reports have been made and none of them says Bryan is drawing as much as you guys think. Your boy cant even outdrew a guy who's not even in the company and a guy WWE is trying to bury, it's pretty laughable.


Punk is a going out of business sale and has 28 more items available, none of which have a stupid goat affixed to then. Try harder


----------



## #Mark

IDONTSHIV said:


> Punk is a going out of business sale and has 28 more items available, none of which have a stupid goat affixed to then. Try harder


Exactly. There's a reason his merch is only selling online. They are no longer producing Punk merch and are trying to unload the remainder they have while his fans are buying his items before they are out of stock. It's common business sense.


----------



## Sonnen Says

IDONTSHIV said:


> Punk is a going out of business sale and has 28 more items available, none of which have a stupid goat affixed to then. Try harder


Punk was selling this much or more before he even left, and this excuse that Bryan doesn't have enough items doesn't work because UW doesn't either but he outsold Cena the king of merch. All this talk about Bryan not having good items is BS, he has a lot of good ones, kids buy anything it's not always about how the items looks. Punk was still selling hot with that ugly yellow shirt. Also just to know Punk outsold Cena in online orders before he left or shortly after he left either ways, he's still above everyone else but Cena and if he was still here he would have been #2 still behind Cena in merch (overall). No matter how hard they push Bryan it doesn't reflect into those numbers. I laugh out loud at how much hate Bryan gets in FB and all those hilarious comments is very casual point of view.


----------



## Waffelz

Bryan is still more of a draw than Punk has ever been. YOUMAD?


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Sonnen Says said:


> That's the thing I'm not even trying. A lot of reports have been made and none of them says Bryan is drawing as much as you guys think. Your boy cant even outdrew a guy who's not even in the company and a guy WWE is trying to bury, it's pretty laughable.


No one here is talking about merchandise sales. Hell you're probably the first one to bring it up.

And actually he can. In fact he currently is. You seem to have a hard time understanding what drawing and merchandise selling is. They aren't the same thing. Again, you are trying way too hard and your desperation is showing.


----------



## CookiePuss

TheGMofGods said:


> Actually he can. In fact he currently is. You seem to have a hard time understanding what drawing and merchandise selling is. *They aren't the same thing.*


That doesn't make any sense. If people aren't interested in someone, they are not going to be one of the top merchandise movers in the company. This goes for all the people that were said to be the top merchandise movers in the company.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

whoa wait...Cara is good merch seller?

I mean Hunico :agree:


----------



## Waffelz

I prefer Punk over Bryan, like, but his 'marks' are so embarrassing.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

cookiepuss said:


> That doesn't make any sense. If people aren't interested in someone, they are not going to be one of the top merchandise movers in the company. This goes for all the people that were said to be the top merchandise movers in the company.


People will still buy merchandise for a certain person if they like them. Doesn't mean they're the main reason they watch. Right now Cena isn't leading the charge here in the ratings and yet last I heard his merchandise is outselling the current ratings leader by 5x.



The Boy Wonder said:


> Well you are saying that the high numbers after WM have nothing to do with Taker and more to do with Bryan. Right? So if that's the case where did those viewers go? 5.1 million viewers on average for the show after WM compared to 4.2 million viewers this week on RAW. That guys point was that Bryan was not necessarily bringing in new viewers.


I never said that the ratings had nothing to do with Taker. I said not to use Taker as the main reason because he clearly wasn't the main reason for the high amount of ratings that night. Your reading comprehension needs work.


----------



## THANOS

TheGMofGods said:


> I never said that the ratings had nothing to do with Taker. I said not to use Taker as the main reason because he clearly wasn't the main reason for the high amount of ratings that night. Your reading comprehension needs work.


Not only that but ratings as a whole for this post-Mania season are much higher than last year, and that CAN'T be attributed to Taker since the streak interest peaked the first week after Mania 31. Therefore, it can be attributed to interest brought in from Bryan as the Champion, the Shield, and Evolution. The reason I mention them is because the breakdown has proven it every single week. In the first RAW after Mania for instance, according to the PWTORCH breakdown, Bryan's segments topped the night, and the Lesnar/Heyman streak segment wasn't even in the top 5 quarters I believe.


----------



## Sonnen Says

TheGMofGods said:


> No one here is talking about merchandise sales. Hell you're probably the first one to bring it up.
> 
> And actually he can. In fact he currently is. You seem to have a hard time understanding what drawing and merchandise selling is.* They aren't the same thing.* Again, you are trying way too hard and your desperation is showing.


Plz stop, you're just too damn clueless. Also desperation my ass, what is it that I'm wrong here, reports doesn't say Bryan is #1 draw it's not my problem if you have a hard time believing it mark. 

....

@waffelz Punk numbers is shown, outsold Cena but yet people call Bryan a bigger draw. Punk had bigger buys yet that's not enough. Ratings doesn't mean any damn thing anymore it's the same numbers we see every year, Bryan didn't bring back any extra fans it's the same people that watch the show every damn year since 2010. The network helped not him. Bryan appearance in Raw did a 2.97 rating just 3 weeks ago which is bad and also the same number in WM season which never happened because it doesn't happen this early in any year but people call it great or whatever lol and also wanted to give most of the credit to Bryan for the fallout of WM show when it's clearly because of the streak ending, which can be proved since there is a report that says Taker or Brock/Paul was the peak of the show by Meltzer and also another recent report that Says Takers gathered more attention in the internet than any wrestler big time (which means he brought a lot of eyes to the product) but that's of course not good enough. No report is good enough to proof it, we can only see it in Bryan marks point of view... I don't see any reports that says Bryan is drawing those numbers. Having one of the highest of the night is not that big of a deal since he's the champ and the center focus of the show and is feuding with the authority and HHH all this time. He's not a long term plan he's gonna be depushed some time this year which means he will be in Cenas place right now.


----------



## #Mark

Sonnen Says said:


> Punk was selling this much or more before he even left, and this excuse that Bryan doesn't have enough items doesn't work because UW doesn't either but he outsold Cena the king of merch. All this talk about Bryan not having good items is BS, he has a lot of good ones, kids buy anything it's not always about how the items looks. Punk was still selling hot with that ugly yellow shirt. Also just to know Punk outsold Cena in online orders before he left or shortly after he left either ways, he's still above everyone else but Cena and if he was still here he would have been #2 still behind Cena in merch (overall). No matter how hard they push Bryan it doesn't reflect into those numbers. I laugh out loud at how much hate Bryan gets in FB and all those hilarious comments is very casual point of view.


Talk to me when this happens during Bryan's reign:



> The low point of the show was the advertised main event as WWE Champion CM Punk’s match against The Miz lost 139,000 additional viewers to draw a 2.77 quarter hour rating.





> The Randy Orton vs. CM Punk main event gained 48,000 viewers, which is terrible for an overrun segment





> In the segment breakdown, CM Punk vs. Big Show opened with a 2.60 quarter rating – the lowest quarter for RAW in months





> A big tag team match featuring Randy Orton and WWE champion CM Punk vs. The Miz and Alberto Del Rio lost 146,000 viewers.





> Punk vs. Darren Young and the post-match happenings lost 598,000 viewers.





> Raw slipped a little with a 1.75 rating for CM Punk vs. Big E Langston match





> CM Punk vs. Tensai and Bryan in the overrun Lost 105,000 Viewers





> CM Punk and Curtis Axel vs. Darren Young and Titus O’Neil gained 21,000 viewers for a 3.00 rating, which is bad growth for the 10pm segment.





> Raw then hit 1.832 million viewers at 10:15 p.m. for the end of the Punk-Axel brawl to conclude the segment but the most-watched segment of the second hour was a combination of the Prime Time Players and Ryback's latest locker room bullying skit.





> CM Punk vs. Jack Swagger to kick off the Gauntlet match lost 367,000 viewers while Punk vs. Ziggler only gained 172,000 back





> A Paul Heyman and C.M. Punk backstage interview loses 80,000 viewers





> The first half of *CM Punk vs. John Cena* lost *313,000* viewers and did a 2.42 quarter hour rating





> CM Punk vs. Kane in a No DQ main event gained 153,000 viewers for a 3.18 quarter rating, which is a very weak overrun gain


One quick CM Punk ratings google search and you find this goldmine :ti


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Sonnen Says said:


> Plz stop, you're just too damn clueless. Also desperation my ass, what is it that I'm wrong here, reports doesn't say Bryan is #1 draw it's not my problem if you have a hard time believing it mark.


Drawing and selling merchandise are two different things. If you can't understand the difference, then you are just proving to us all how clueless and desperate you are. You're trying your absolute hardest to discredit Bryan and make Punk look like a bigger star than he actually was. At first, it was hilarious. But it's gotten really sad. The desperation levels for you are just off the charts right now. You can deny it all you want, it'll just give us more reasons to shake our heads at you.

And we don't need the reports to say that Bryan is the number one draw, the proof is here in the pudding. For the past five weeks, Bryan has been the number one draw for WWE. You can't dispute that. We have the ratings breakdowns right here literally proving that to us and stating that to us. You can throw out all the irrelevant bullshit you want, but at the end of the day you will continue to be wrong whether you like it or not. And you can continue to sit here and act like every idiotic thing you say is right, but when people on these boards continue to make a mockery out of you for your blind markdom, don't question them on why they do it and think any less of them for it, because you're bringing it upon yourself by continuing to be an embarrassment to Cm Punk and his fan base.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

#Mark said:


> Talk to me when this happens during a Bryan's reign:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One quick CM Punk ratings google search and you find this goldmine :ti


DAT PIPEBOMB!!! I just witnessed this happen in this thread!


----------



## Sonnen Says

^ :lmao you think I can't find the same numbers for Bryan. Most of those happened in Q4 if not all. Bryan didn't face those irrelevant names like Miz or Darren Young. He gained a million views and near that twice with Big show in 2012 during SS time. Nit picking numbers is retarded since it's not complete.


----------



## THANOS

#Mark said:


> Talk to me when this happens during a Bryan's reign:
> 
> One quick CM Punk ratings google search and you find this goldmine :ti


:lol I like Punk but damn. Ever. Since Bryan's big single push began after he left Team Hell No I think he may have had only a single bad quarter, and every other one, especially since the Rumble have been dominant gains that dwarf the rest of the show. It's one thing to look at a single show's breakdown and proclaim someone a ratings God, and it's another all together to look a long consistent stretch of gains and proclaim someone a ratings draw. The later is what Bryan did leading to Mania with much less of a push than Punk took to accomplish. Punk didn't start pulling good consistent numbers until his heel turn on the Rock half way into his Reign. Bryan was doing it before he even began his legitimate reign.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Sonnen Says said:


> ^ :lmao you think I can't find the same numbers for Bryan.


Go ahead. We'll wait.


----------



## Sonnen Says

TheGMofGods said:


> Drawing and selling merchandise are two different things. *If you can't understand the difference, then you are just proving to us all how clueless and desperate you are. You're trying your absolute hardest to discredit Bryan and make Punk look like a bigger star than he actually was. *At first, it was hilarious. But it's gotten really sad. The desperation levels for you are just off the charts right now. You can deny it all you want, it'll just give us more reasons to shake our heads at you.
> 
> And we don't need the reports to say that Bryan is the number one draw, the proof is here in the pudding. For the past five weeks, Bryan has been the number one draw for WWE. You can't dispute that. We have the ratings breakdowns right here literally proving that to us and stating that to us. You can throw out all the irrelevant bullshit you want, but at the end of the day you will continue to be wrong whether you like it or not. And you can continue to sit here and act like every idiotic thing you say is right, but when people on these boards continue to make a mockery out of you for your blind markdom, don't question them on why they do it and think any less of them for it, because you're bringing it upon yourself by continuing to be an embarrassment to Cm Punk and his fan base.


:lmao. So all those money Cena brings from merch in live events or overall is not part of the word drawing. Get a clue. All the top merch sellers back then were top draws at their time and you think that doesn't make sense. There is already a guy who called you out on that one so I don't need to waste my time with you. Prove that he's the number one draw or else no need to talk back with no facts. That 2.96 rating is why he is right? Those merch or ticket sells don't mean shit and has nothing to do with the word drawing. If that's the case Curtis Axel would have been the top 10 merch seller since his shirt is so cool.


----------



## funnyfaces1

If Undertaker was the most popular thing on the internet yet Bryan was the ratings draw, then does that make :taker a measly internet darling and :bryan3 a legitimate non-vanilla non-midget giant megastar?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This thread has turned into this video. Go to 2:40.


----------



## THANOS

Sonnen Says said:


> *^ :lmao you think I can't find the same numbers for Bryan.* Most of those happened in Q4 if not all. Bryan didn't face those irrelevant names like Miz or Darren Young. He gained a million views and near that twice with Big show in 2012 during SS time. Nit picking numbers is retarded since it's not complete.


I welcome you to try .

Also, since all of the ones posted are after Punk's big moment at MITB'11 you have to start from Bryan's big moment at Summerslam'13. Let's see you find more than maybe 1 :lol.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Sonnen Says said:


> :lmao. So all those money Cena brings from merch in live events or overall is not part of the word drawing.


No, it isn't. It never was. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Get a clue. All the top merch sellers back then were top draws at their time and you think that doesn't make sense.


Sin Cara and Rey Mysterio for a very long time were both excellent merchandise sellers. They were in no way big ratings draws (discounting of course Sin Cara's time as Mistico in Mexico where he was an incredibly huge draw and Mysterio's early time in WWE). Zack Ryder was doing great in terms of merchandise selling at one point, but he was by no means a ratings draw. Same can be said for Cm Punk.



Sonnen Says said:


> There is already a guy who called you out on that one so I don't need to waste my time with you.


Who?



Sonnen Says said:


> Prove that he's the number one draw or else no need to talk back with no facts.


...okay. 



> WWE World Hvt. champion Daniel Bryan retained his position as WWE's top draw in the males 18-49 demographic Monday night on Raw.
> 
> During the main three hours of Raw (pre-overrun), Bryan's match with Alberto Del Rio included the most-watched minute of the show and delivered the highest quarter-hour rating.
> 
> The other top draw of the night was The Shield vs. The Wyatts six-man tag main event extending from Q12 to the overrun.
> 
> The overall show was down considerably from last week's Extreme Rules lead-in episode. By comparison, last week's Q1 scored a 2.28 rating and this week's Q1 scored a 1.65 rating the night after a PPV.
> 
> Raw Break Down - m18-49 demographic
> 
> - Overall: 1.89 rating / 1.187 million viewers
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened with a 1.65 rating for the first-half of the U.S. Title battle royal and one mid-match commercial.
> 
> - Q2: Raw increased to a 1.77 rating for the conclusion of the battle royal and one commercial. The peak audience was 1.330 million viewers at 8:18 p.m. just before the finish of the match.
> 
> - Q3: Raw fell back to a show-low 1.64 rating for two commercial breaks and the first-half of Rob Van Dam vs. Cesaro.
> 
> - Q4: Raw inched up to a 1.69 rating for the second-half of RVD-Cesaro, one commercial, and the first-half of Bray Wyatt's monologue.
> 
> - Q5: Raw got a slight top-of-the-hour bump to a 1.79 rating for the second-half of Bray's monologue, one commercial, and a full Cody Rhodes vs. Ryback singles match.
> 
> The match actually fared better than the end of Bray's monologue, as Bray peaked with 1.211 million viewers at 9:02 p.m. and five minutes of Cody-Ryback were above Bray's peak. The match peaked with 1.291 million viewers at the conclusion.
> 
> - Q6: Raw began a steady incline to a 1.81 rating for two full commercial breaks and Los Matadores & El Torito celebrating Cinco De Mayo.
> 
> The peak audience was 1.339 million viewers at 9:23 p.m. in-between two commercials.
> 
> - Q7: Raw increased to a 1.97 rating for Rusev's latest squash match, one commercial, and the continuation of Daniel Bryan & Brie Bella terrorized by Kane.
> 
> The match grazed 1.3 million viewers, then Bryan & Brie backstage hit 1.364 million viewers heading to break.
> 
> - Q8: Raw hit a show-high 2.10 rating for Daniel Bryan vs. Del Rio in the ring, plus one commercial. Included was Raw touching 1.4 million viewers for the first time in the show at 9:58 p.m.
> 
> - Q9: Raw slipped to a 2.01 rating at the top of the hour.
> 
> This was the product of the Bryan-Kane feud spilling over to the third hour, which included a show-high audience of 1.542 million viewers at 10:03 p.m. Raw then cut to break at 10:04 p.m. and lost a significant chunk of viewers on the other side of the break for the first-half of Wade Barrett vs. Big E.
> 
> - Q10: Raw fell to a 1.77 rating for two full commercials and the second-half of Barrett vs. Big E. The match's peak was 1.212 million viewers at 10:22 p.m.
> 
> - Q11: Raw re-built to a 1.91 rating for Zeb Colter setting up Adam Rose's debut, plus one commercial before the main event. The peak was 1.310 million viewers at 10:35 p.m. at the end of the debut.
> 
> - Q12: Raw jumped to a 2.09 rating for the first-half of Shield vs. Wyatts, plus one commercial. The peak was 1.414 million viewers at 10:56 p.m.
> 
> - Over-run: Raw finished strong - for this week - with a 2.35 rating for the end of the six-man tag main event and post-match beat down from Evolution.
> 
> The segment peaked at 11:03 p.m. with 1.562 million viewers when the match ended. During the post-match involving Evolution, Raw went down one stair-step, finishing with 1.451 million viewers at 11:06 p.m.
> 
> Caldwell's Analysis: Bryan is over, The Shield vs. The Wyatts is over, there's a gap in starpower when John Cena is off the show, and long-form matches that build to a conclusion are a draw if there is an established issue or something on the line. Unless it's Big E. vs. Wade Barrett for the IC Title, which suffered from audience indifference toward Big E. and WWE quickly trying to heat up Barrett and waiting for the audience to catch on.


Woah, that was easy!



Sonnen Says said:


> That 2.96 rating is why he is right? Those merch or ticket sells don't mean shit and has nothing to do with the word drawing. If that's the case Curtis Axel would have been the top 10 merch seller since his shirt is so cool.


You really have no idea what being a ratings draw means do you?


----------



## THANOS

Sonnen Says said:


> :lmao. So all those money Cena brings from merch in live events or overall is not part of the word drawing. Get a clue. All the top merch sellers back then were top draws at their time and you think that doesn't make sense. There is already a guy who called you out on that one so I don't need to waste my time with you. Prove that he's the number one draw or else no need to talk back with no facts. That 2.96 rating is why he is right? Those merch or ticket sells don't mean shit and has nothing to do with the word drawing. If that's the case Curtis Axel would have been the top 10 merch seller since his shirt is so cool.


You're forgetting that merchandise is the smallest revenue stream for WWE. The largest if you're wondering are tv contract rights revenue, live event revenue, and I believe ppv buyrates/network subscriptions. The first one is very crucial to Vince because it depends solely on his ratings average. Bryan has proven so far in 2014 that his drawing power is so huge that it has been elevating the ratings average across the board. If Bryan continues to help that rating average increase than it will lead to a monetary drawing figure that can be contributed to Bryan if he's still the top dog and largest ratings mover. This will lead to Vince getting a higher contract once his current one with Universal is up.


----------



## Sonnen Says

THANOS said:


> I welcome you to try .
> 
> Also, since all of the ones posted are after Punk's big moment at MITB'11 you have to start from Bryan's big moment at Summerslam'13. Let's see you find more than maybe 1 :lol.


You think showing numbers against guys like Miz and Darren Young is fair when you're comparing those numbers with guys like HHH and the authority this whole time since SS :lmao. Tell me when did Bryan face anyone irrelevant since SS? The Shield, Cena, HBK, HHH, Orton (which he lost viewers with), The authority, Punk, Shield, etc. He was seriously protected he didn't have to face guys like Miz or ADR or Young or any irrelevant name like Punk did, if losing to HHH in a dumb way means more pushed then good luck with your awesome logic. Lets ignore all those facts. Any way don't worry tomorrow I will bring the list of times he lost viewers and I might not find many because I don't see Bryan facing Miz or Young it's great logic you guys have.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Sonnen Says said:


> You think showing numbers against guys like Miz and Darren Young is fair when you're comparing those numbers with guys like HHH and the authority this whole time since SS :lmao. Tell me when did Bryan face anyone irrelevant since SS? The Shield, Cena, HBK, HHH, Orton (which he lost viewers with), The authority, Punk, Shield, etc. He was seriously protected he didn't have to face guys like Miz or ADR or Young or any irrelevant name like Punk did, if losing to HHH in a dumb way means more pushed then good luck with your awesome logic. Lets ignore all those facts. Any way don't worry tomorrow I will bring the list of times he lost viewers and I might not find many because I don't see Bryan facing Miz or Young it's great logic you guys have.


He just drew the highest ratings on Raw while facing Del Rio, so you can stop claiming that he's being protected. He's clearly the biggest ratings draw.

And that's okay, you don't have to find as many. Just find one moment where Bryan's facing JOHN CENA and still manages to lose 300,000+ viewers. 



THANOS said:


> You're forgetting that merchandise is the smallest revenue stream for WWE. The largest if you're wondering are tv contract rights revenue, live event revenue, and I believe ppv buyrates/network subscriptions. The first one is very crucial to Vince because it depends solely on his ratings average. Bryan has proved so far in 2014 that his drawing power is so huge that it has been elevating the ratings average across the board. If Bryan continues to help that rating average increase than it will lead to a monetary drawing figure that can contributed to Bryan if he's still the top dog and largest ratings mover. This will lead to Vince getting a higher contract once his current one with Universal is up.


HITS HIM WITH A RIGHT HOOK AND HE'S DOWN, HE'S DOWWWWWNNNNNNN!!!!! unk:dazzler


----------



## THANOS

Sonnen Says said:


> You think showing numbers against guys like Miz and Darren Young is fair when you're comparing those numbers with guys like HHH and the authority this whole time since SS :lmao. Tell me when did Bryan face anyone irrelevant since SS? The Shield, Cena, HBK, HHH, Orton (which he lost viewers with), The authority, Punk, Shield, etc. He was seriously protected he didn't have to face guys like Miz or ADR or Young or any irrelevant name like Punk did, if losing to HHH in a dumb way means more pushed then good luck with your awesome logic. Lets ignore all those facts. Any way don't worry tomorrow I will bring the list of times he lost viewers and I might not find many because I don't see Bryan facing Miz or Young it's great logic you guys have.


Bryan wrestled matches and/or feuded with Cesaro, Swagger, the Shield when they weren't ratings movers, and Wyatt who's still lackluster in the ratings department. I would say that's pretty comparable to Miz and Darren Young. A ratings loser is a ratings loser and Cesaro, Swagger, the Shield(then), and the Wyatt's are ratings losers. You can also look at the ratings Bryan pulled when he was wrestling Wade Barrett on Smackdown after Summerslam'13.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

THANOS said:


> Bryan wrestled matches and/or feuded with Cesaro, Swagger, the Shield when they weren't ratings movers, and Wyatt who's still lackluster in the ratings department. I would say that's pretty comparable to Miz and Darren Young. A ratings loser is a ratings loser and Cesaro, Swagger, the Shield(then), and the Wyatt's are ratings losers. You can also look at the ratings Bryan pulled when he wwas wrestling Wade Barrett on Smackdown after Summerslam'13.


Don't forget that Bryan actually drew a million viewers in a gaunlet match against the Shield at the time when they were ratings losers.


----------



## Sonnen Says

TheGMofGods said:


> No, it isn't. It never was.
> 
> 
> 
> Sin Cara and Rey Mysterio for a very long time were both excellent merchandise sellers. They were in no way big ratings draws (discounting of course Sin Cara's time as Mistico in Mexico where he was an incredibly huge draw and Mysterio's early time in WWE). Zack Ryder was doing great in terms of merchandise selling at one point, but he was by no means a ratings draw. Same can be said for Cm Punk.
> 
> 
> 
> Who?
> 
> 
> 
> ...okay.
> 
> 
> 
> Woah, that was easy!
> 
> 
> 
> You really have no idea what being a ratings draw means do you?


Sin Cara was/is a big draw in mexico, and the market itself is big for WWE in mexico that's why they focus a lot in there they have a rich wrestling history. Rey Mysterio is very popular dummy, selling merch and being top 10 is no surprise. Being a ratings draw which is dumb to even start with doesn't mean you're bring a lot of money. Merch brings a lot more money. Ratings are just numbers to sustain viewers not to draw money because they are not paying to watch and ratings aren't any higher than last year it's the same shit. We are notin the AE or RA era to talk about who can draw it's far more complicated and it needs a strong roster to have good ratings but it seems you think Bryan is only reason for it :lmao. Raw did a 3.26 rating without even Bryan so what does that mean. 

Ticket sales, merch, subscribers (WWE network), buys, etc. determines a major draw get a clue plz you don't know shit. Hogan, Austin, Rock, and Cena are the top merch draws of all time it's a way of proving the guy is a mega star or a big name that brings a lot of money, you bring more money in merch than showing fucking ratings. Some people get pushed because their merch gets high, there reports that says Sin Cara was pushed because his merch is doing so well. Ratings don't mean shit anymore if it did they would have made a lot more effort in making it a lot higher but they don't care as much since it's the same audience every year. It's all about having a strong roster, you can't have good ratings without it so it doesn't necessary reflect on buys or merch. You can have high (Truth it it's average) ratings but low buys which is what we got since Bryan got pushed (despite the big names and rising stars he had at his time) apart from WM of course since it's well WM.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

THANOS said:


> Bryan wrestled matches and/or feuded with Cesaro, Swagger, the Shield when they weren't ratings movers, and Wyatt who's still lackluster in the ratings department. I would say that's pretty comparable to Miz and Darren Young. A ratings loser is a ratings loser and Cesaro, Swagger, the Shield(then), and the Wyatt's are ratings losers. You can also look at the ratings Bryan pulled when he was wrestling Wade Barrett on Smackdown after Summerslam'13.


Remember when everyone thought Bryan got the short end when he got The Wyatts and Punk got The Shield. The Bryan program helped make The Wyatts into bigger stars. He even put over Bray clean. When was the last time Phillatio did that?


----------



## THANOS

Let's throw some more coal on the fire for anyone else that wants to argue that WWE doesn't see Bryan as a huge draw.



> The idea of giving WWE talents time off to recharge and heal up has been talked about as a strategy down the line. The feeling right now is that may be a good thing but the weak roster depth doesn’t allow it. *There is concern right now about the idea of consistently running shows without* either John Cena or *Daniel Bryan as the advertised headliner.*
> 
> Source: lordsofpain.net


WWE is telling us that Bryan is such a huge draw that can't run live event shows without HIM or Cena as the headlining act. Normally it would just be Cena they would be that concerned about.



> WWE has changed other plans going forward. WWE, right now, is looking at the top four singles babyfaces for down the line to be John Cena, *Daniel Bryan*, Cesaro and Sheamus. This was the plan as of a little more than a week ago. The last time an internal list was made, Orton, Batista and Roman Reigns were near the top, right behind Cena and Bryan, with Sheamus as the big names planned as the top faces for down the line.
> 
> Source: lordsofpain.net


Again, WWE themselves see Bryan as their #2 babface going forward which means they value him as a draw.


----------



## #Mark

Sonnen Says said:


> You think showing numbers against guys like Miz and Darren Young is fair when you're comparing those numbers with guys like HHH and the authority this whole time since SS :lmao. Tell me when did Bryan face anyone irrelevant since SS? The Shield, Cena, HBK, HHH, Orton (which he lost viewers with), The authority, Punk, Shield, etc. He was seriously protected he didn't have to face guys like Miz or ADR or Young or any irrelevant name like Punk did, if losing to HHH in a dumb way means more pushed then good luck with your awesome logic. Lets ignore all those facts. Any way don't worry tomorrow I will bring the list of times he lost viewers and I might not find many because I don't see Bryan facing Miz or Young it's great logic you guys have.


Bryan never lost viewers with Orton.. They had the highest rating of the night a month ago in the middle of the 9 PM hour (something Punk was never able to do with Orton). I'd love to see your proof of them losing ratings or Bryan losing ratings since his big push last summer. Bryan gained with Kane, Swagger, Cesaro, Del Rio, and Big Show. All guys Punk (excluding Cesaro) has lost numbers with. So please, post one Bryan segment that lost viewers since last summer.

Also, you're acting as if Miz was a jobber when Punk was losing viewers with him. That was after Miz's run as champ and shortly after his Awesome Truth run. Miz was still protected then. Miz/Punk/Del Rio was a ME program heading into TLC and was losing a significant amount of viewers. 

Face it, Punk was never a ratings mover. He has never been able to top the night unless he's involved in the main event program with a top star, a problem Bryan does not have. Put Punk with someone lower than him or at his level and you're getting a terrible number. You'd never see him do what Bryan did this past week with Kane and Del Rio. In fact, they put him with Kane during the build to his match with Taker at Mania and he gained one of the weakest overruns of the year.


----------



## Sonnen Says

THANOS said:


> Bryan wrestled matches and/or feuded with Cesaro, Swagger, the Shield when they weren't ratings movers, and Wyatt who's still lackluster in the ratings department. I would say that's pretty comparable to Miz and Darren Young. A ratings loser is a ratings loser and Cesaro, Swagger, the Shield(then), and the Wyatt's are ratings losers. You can also look at the ratings Bryan pulled when he was wrestling Wade Barrett on Smackdown after Summerslam'13.


He lost viewers with Cesaro and Swagger in the overrun didn't I show you that @TheGMofGods already . Also Bryan was with Punk when he was feuding with Wyatt last year. Wyatt/Shield is a legit group they don't fucking compare with Miz or Young, they are much much much higher in the card than any of them :lol. 

By the way Kane/Punk didn't do so well because they went way over time which explains why it gained that much. I will show you those numbers tomorrow. Funny thing is @mark he showed the first half of Punk/Cena match not the overall match number and Punk/Cena have gained million views a lot of times they almost never lost viewers when they go one on one or are in the same segment or match, it happens very rarely.


----------



## Sonnen Says

#Mark said:


> Bryan never lost viewers with Orton.. They had the highest rating of the night a month ago in the middle of the 9 PM hour (something Punk was never able to do with Orton). I'd love to see your proof of them losing ratings or Bryan losing ratings since his big push last summer. Bryan gained with Kane, Swagger, Cesaro, Del Rio, and Big Show. All guys Punk (excluding Cesaro) has lost numbers with. So please, post one Bryan segment that lost viewers since last summer.
> 
> Also, you're acting as if Miz was a jobber when Punk was losing viewers with him. That was after Miz's run as champ and shortly after his Awesome Truth run. Miz was still protected then. Miz/Punk/Del Rio was a ME program heading into TLC and was losing a significant amount of viewers.
> 
> Face it, Punk was never a ratings mover. He has never been able to top the night unless he's involved in the main event program with a top star, a problem Bryan does not have. Put Punk with someone lower than him or at his level and you're getting a terrible number. You'd never see him do what Bryan did this past week with Kane and Del Rio. In fact, they put him with Kane during the build to his match with Taker at Mania and he gained one of the weakest overruns of the year.


Ok just don't make excuses or cry about it when I show you those numbers of Bryan and how much he gained compared to Punk. Miz is a jobber didn't look legit and he fucking sucked and wasn't even pulling half of what the Shield or Wayatt are pulling who are far more interesting and are generally bigger draws than him.



THANOS said:


> Let's throw some more coal on the fire for anyone else that wants to argue that WWE doesn't see Bryan as a huge draw.
> 
> 
> 
> WWE is telling us that Bryan is such a huge draw that can't run live event shows without HIM or Cena as the headlining act. Normally it would just be Cena they would be that concerned about.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, WWE themselves see Bryan as their #2 babface going forward which means they value him as a draw.


Of course they are because Bryan is the champ and yeah he might not be a big of a draw but compared to Orton or Sheamus he is :lmao. I mean he's been pushed as a top face isn't that clear, I don't think they will even be concerned if there is Punk now who can place him easily.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

So one could say Daniel Bryan is a Ratings... MONSTER millhouse


----------



## #Mark

Sonnen Says said:


> Sin Cara was/is a big draw in mexico, and the market itself is big for WWE in mexico that's why they focus a lot in there they have a rich wrestling history. Rey Mysterio is very popular dummy, selling merch and being top 10 is no surprise. Being a ratings draw which is dumb to even start with doesn't mean you're bring a lot of money. Merch brings a lot more money. Ratings are just numbers to sustain viewers not to draw money because they are not paying to watch and ratings aren't any higher than last year it's the same shit. We are notin the AE or RA era to talk about who can draw it's far more complicated and it needs a strong roster to have good ratings but it seems you think Bryan is only reason for it :lmao. Raw did a 3.26 rating without even Bryan so what does that mean.
> 
> Ticket sales, merch, subscribers (WWE network), buys, etc. determines a major draw get a clue plz you don't know shit. Hogan, Austin, Rock, and Cena are the top merch draws of all time it's a way of proving the guy is a mega star or a big name that brings a lot of money, you bring more money in merch than showing fucking ratings. Some people get pushed because their merch gets high, there reports that says Sin Cara was pushed because his merch is doing so well. Ratings don't mean shit anymore if it did they would have made a lot more effort in making it a lot higher but they don't care as much since it's the same audience every year. It's all about having a strong roster, you can't have good ratings without it so it doesn't necessary reflect on buys or merch. You can have high (Truth it it's average) ratings but low buys which is what we got since Bryan got pushed (despite the big names and rising stars he had at his time) apart from WM of course since it's well WM.


WWE is set to sign their most lucrative TV rights deal that is contingent on consistent ratings. The entire argument that merchandise sales is more important than ratings is laughable. The order of importance is Subscribers/buys, ratings, ticket sales, live events, and then merchandise sales. I understand you're compensating because the only aspect of business that Punk is successful in is merch sales but still. Low ratings means that the WWE is in serious jeopardy regarding their TV rights deal. Daniel Bryan is their highest ratings mover currently. So logic dictates that Bryan is one of the most important pieces for WWE's business currently. That doesn't even include the house show tour Bryan is headlining, the fact that he's second in arena merch sales, the fact that he he opened/headlined a successful Wrestlemania and the fact that the PPVs he headlined while Cena was on the shelf did very well.


----------



## THANOS

#Mark said:


> WWE is set to sign their most lucrative TV rights deal that is contingent on consistent ratings. The entire argument that merchandise sales is more important than ratings is laughable. The order of importance is Subscribers/buys, ratings, ticket sales, live events, and then merchandise sales. I understand you're compensating because the only aspect of business that Punk is successful in is merch sales but still. Low ratings means that the WWE is in serious jeopardy regarding their TV rights deal. Daniel Bryan is their highest ratings mover currently. So logic dictates that Bryan is one of the most important pieces for WWE's business currently. That doesn't even include the house show tour Bryan is headlining, the fact that he's second in arena merch sales, the fact that he he opened/headlined a successful Wrestlemania and the fact that the PPVs he headlined while Cena was on the shelf did very well.


Couldn't have said it better myself. Well done! :clap


----------



## funnyfaces1

IDONTSHIV said:


> Remember when everyone thought Bryan got the short end when he got The Wyatts and Punk got The Shield. The Bryan program helped make The Wyatts into bigger stars. He even put over Bray clean. When was the last time Phillatio did that?


Phil actually lost to Reigns cleanly in one of the Shield tags in that feud. Don't forget that Phil even let Bryan pin him cleanly in an elimination match in 2012. And don't forget that he gained over one million viewers in a match against an anti draw named Sheamus.


----------



## Happenstan

God, this gang rape of Sonnen Says is hilarious. And some of you thought the ratings thread was gonna die off. HA!


----------



## CookiePuss

Also, loved that I was pretty much called stupid/bashed for having the notion that The Streak ending coming out of Wrestlemania had bigger interest than DBryan's title win and low and behold, the report comes out that it was actually true lol. I can appreciate the love people have for their favorites and they will go to bat for them through thick and thin, but some of you Bryan marks are ridiculous.


----------



## Fissiks

why does Sonnen like to make himself look like an ass lol


----------



## Starbuck

SONNEN DA GOAT. Every freaking week, it's hilarious lol. Selling PPV's > selling shirts, Sonnen. But never stop trying. This thread would be shit without you. 

*CM SONNEN *clap clap clap clap clap* CM SONNEN *clap clap clap clap clap**

Edit:



> *As previously reported, WWE has been discussing the possibility of giving Ric Flair a regular role on television. One of the reasons the talk has started up is because the quarter hour that Flair was part of popped the biggest rating on the show, as well as the fact that the show as a whole drew a big number on a week where nobody was expecting a big number.
> 
> As noted previously, there is talk that Flair needs to get some personal issues situated before he could potentially return on a regular basis.
> 
> (Credit: Wrestling Observer Newsletter)*


:flair3


----------



## DoubtGin

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


----------



## WWE

Flair gonna draw more than punky boy :ti

Sent from the Vertical Sports app on my sexy ass Nexus 5 cellular phone


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

cookiepuss said:


> Also, loved that I was pretty much called stupid/bashed for having the notion that The Streak ending coming out of Wrestlemania had bigger interest than DBryan's title win and low and behold, the report comes out that it was actually true lol. I can appreciate the love people have for their favorites and they will go to bat for them through thick and thin, but some of you Bryan marks are ridiculous.


What report came out saying that was true? Google searches on the internet and tuning in to watch Raw are two different things. The ratings reports still show that Bryan was the main attraction, not taker. Nice try though. 

Expect a response to sonnen soon. Didn't look at the 19th page but from what it sounds like he made a response or two and they were most likely hilarious. 

AND THE GOD STILL PROVING HIS WORTH, THE UNDISPUTED GOAT AMONG GOATS!!!



Sonnen Says said:


> Sin Cara was/is a big draw in mexico, and the market itself is big for WWE in mexico that's why they focus a lot in there they have a rich wrestling history. Rey Mysterio is very popular dummy, selling merch and being top 10 is no surprise.


And yet from a ratings standpoint Rey Mysterio hasn't been relevant for a long time. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Being a ratings draw which is dumb to even start with doesn't mean you're bring a lot of money. Merch brings a lot more money. Ratings are just numbers to sustain viewers not to draw money because they are not paying to watch and ratings aren't any higher than last year it's the same shit. We are notin the AE or RA era to talk about who can draw it's far more complicated and it needs a strong roster to have good ratings but it seems you think Bryan is only reason for it :lmao. Raw did a 3.26 rating without even Bryan so what does that mean.


Do you even understand how important ratings are? Ratings are what the Monday Night Wars were fought over. Ratings are what gives you hope for the future. Ratings or lack there of is the reason why TNA's future is in trouble. It's the kind of thing that ended up making ECW go out of business. Hell why do you think WCW failed?. Ratings are one of, if not, the most important aspect of a television/entertainment industry. This is common knowledge. I can't believe you're actually trying to argue that merchandise sales are more important than ratings. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Ticket sales, merch, subscribers (WWE network), buys, etc. determines a major draw get a clue plz you don't know shit.


No they don't. I don't know where you get this idea from or what kind of fantasy world you live in right now, but in the real world, the only thing that determines if you're a major draw or not is ratings and PPV buys/subscribers. That's it. Merchandise sales and net worth all deal with the amount of money you make for the company, which is an entirely different concept. That alone doesn't make nearly as much money for the WWE as PPV buys/subscribers and ratings do. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Hogan, Austin, Rock, and Cena are the top merch draws of all time it's a way of proving the guy is a mega star or a big name that brings a lot of money, you bring more money in merch than showing fucking ratings.


And yet merchandise sales didn't beat WCW, having better ratings did. You really need to freshen up and do your research on this because it's obvious you don't know shit. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Some people get pushed because their merch gets high, there reports that says Sin Cara was pushed because his merch is doing so well.


Cara's merchandise is still selling well. And yet he's not doing anything right now. There's a reason for that. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Ratings don't mean shit anymore if it did they would have made a lot more effort in making it a lot higher but they don't care as much since it's the same audience every year.


How are you coming to these conclusions? Are you even reading your posts? Ratings were always one of the most important aspects in WWE's history. Everything they do, whether it was the idiotic guest host era or go as far as to bring back Ric Flair, they did so to bring in attraction, aka RATINGS (and to build onto a storyline, but that's irrelevant right now). 

And it's clearly not the same audience every year, considering how last year the average audience was lower than what we have this year so far. 



Sonnen Says said:


> It's all about having a strong roster, you can't have good ratings without it so it doesn't necessary reflect on buys or merch. You can have high (Truth it it's average) ratings but low buys which is what we got since Bryan got pushed (despite the big names and rising stars he had at his time) apart from WM of course since it's well WM.


You're not making any sense. You're claiming that we've had low buys and average ratings and yet that hasn't been the case. The proof is literally sitting here in front of your face. The buyrates and ratings have both been great, especially when you consider the weak roster depth right now. How much longer are you going to continue to deny facts?


----------



## validreasoning

a few numbers...

average raw ratings 5 weeks removed from wrestlemania (a little unfair to compare 2012 with 2013-14 seeing as those shows were only two hours but alas)

2012 with punk as champion = 3.2 rating and 4.6 million viewers 
2013 with cena as champion = 3.12 rating and 4.27 million viewers 
2014 with bryan as champion = 3.24 rating and 4.59 million viewers


buyrates
*summerslam *
2013 = 332k 
2012 = 392k 
2011 = 311k

*noc *
2013 = 196k 
2012 = 207k 
2011 = 169k

*hiac *
2013 = 228k 
2012 = 207k 
2011 = 182k

*rumble *
2014 = 467k 
2013 = 512k 
2012 = 443k

*chamber *
2014 = 183k (dish which supplies roughly 14% of homes didn't carry ppv)
2013 = 213k 
2012 = 178k

_note: rumble and chamber are the first reported numbers by wwe at the time (not the final tallies) _

house show paid attendance (north america)
*fourth quarter*
2012 = 5,700 (average $44.64 per ticket)
2013 = 5,900 (average $44.59 per ticket)

*first quarter*
2012 = 6,200 (average $38.50 per ticket) 
2013 = 6,400 (average $39.40 per ticket)
2014 = 6,400 (average $41.82 per ticket)


----------



## Loader230

^ Unfair to Punk? isn't two hours an advantage for him? 

HIAC '13 impressive buys, a returning Cena and Shawn Michaels obviously.

Rumble '14 buys is preliminary number, right?


----------



## JY57

^ yes the final numbers will be out in August when the next quarter results are out


----------



## Choke2Death

Holy fuck @ what I have missed. :lmao

I hope Sonnen wore plenty of body armor covering him from head to toe because he'd need that to survive all the bullets fired at him from every angle.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Guys, Punk's a draw. Anyone saying otherwise is being idiotic/trolling.

Bryan's a bigger draw. Anyone saying otherwise is being idiotic/trolling.


...


Henry is the biggest draw. Anyone saying otherwise is an idiot, or an idiot for trolling. :henry1


----------



## THANOS

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Guys, Punk's a draw. Anyone saying otherwise is being idiotic/trolling.
> 
> Bryan's a bigger draw. Anyone saying otherwise is being idiotic/trolling.
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> Henry is the biggest draw. Anyone saying otherwise is an idiot, or an idiot for trolling. :henry1


I can agree to that :.

This is why it should be a priority for WWE to book a Bryan/Henry feud after Payback:

:bryan3 vs :henry2 = :vince$


----------



## DoubtGin

was Henry really drawing?


----------



## Starbuck

:cena4 vs. :henry2 @ MITB13 drew more buys than :cena4 vs. unk3 @ MITB11.


----------



## JY57

Starbuck said:


> :cena4 vs. :henry2 @ MITB13 drew more buys than :cena4 vs. unk3 @ MITB11.


Punk vs Bryan with AJ Lee as Guest Ref (along with Cena in the MITB match) in 2012 also outdrew Cena vs Punk 2011.


----------



## THANOS

DoubtGin said:


> was Henry really drawing?


Yep lol. At first it was a joke, because the ratings went up and stayed up after he beat Orton for the title on Smackdown but we didn't really have a breakdown to prove it. Then he came to RAW, and we finally did , and the rest is history.

This is why Daniel "viewers" Bryan vs Mark "ratings" Henry needs to happen this year and for the title.


----------



## Starbuck

JY57 said:


> Punk vs Bryan with AJ Lee as Guest Ref (along with Cena in the MITB match) in 2012 also outdrew Cena vs Punk 2011.


DAT REVOLUTIONARY SUMMER OF PUNK

:ti


----------



## THANOS

JY57 said:


> Punk vs Bryan with AJ Lee as Guest Ref (along with Cena in the MITB match) in 2012 also outdrew Cena vs Punk 2011.


I think MITB'11 had lower buys for the same reason SS'13 had low buys, and it's not because Punk or Bryan are/were bad draws or anything, it's because no one thought Punk or Bryan could actually beat Cena so they decided not to waste their money.

The fact that buys slowly began to increase in the months following those launching pad feuds show that once they beat Cena, the fans bought into the fact that WWE was actually going to run with them. That's my take on it anyway.

But screw logic unk3 can't draw .


----------



## Loader230

> *it's because no one thought Punk or Bryan could actually beat Cena so they decided not to waste their money.*


:maury :maury :maury 




This has got to be the most delusional mark post I've seen in all of ratings' threads existence in this forum. Unbelievable. And the worst part is, you're not even joking.


----------



## JY57

THANOS said:


> I think MITB'11 had lower buys for the same reason SS'13 had low buys, and it's not because Punk or Bryan are/were bad draws or anything, it's because no one thought Punk or Bryan could actually beat Cena so they decided not to waste their money.
> 
> The fact that buys slowly began to increase in the months following those launching pad feuds show that once they beat Cena, the fans bought into the fact that WWE was actually going to run with them. That's my take on it anyway.
> 
> But screw logic unk3 can't draw .


MITB 2011 did well with 205,000 BUYS its just 2012 (206, 000) and 2013 (223,000) did better. MITB has been increasing PPV in buys each year since that awful 2010 PPV numbe (which ironically was the first MITB PPV)r


----------



## Starbuck

Henry's fake retirement > Punk's attempt at a real one tbh.

EDIT - And I still don't understand why everybody is saying SS13 had a bad number anyway. Bryan was still unproven back then and Punk/Brock was all about Punk and Heyman. As great as the feud was, Lesnar was the clear third wheel in that thing and it obviously had an impact. Also, both those matches combined don't come close to touching the appeal of Lesnar/HHH for the first time ever which was a genuine dream match for near 10 years for a lot of people. All in all, I don't get why so many bag on the SS13 buys, especially in comparison to SS11 which really did shit the bed given all the supposed hype going in. Then again, when you see the MITB11 numbers it quickly becomes apparent that there was no hype to begin with really.


----------



## Londrick

Wasn't the final number for SS13 good?


----------



## Starbuck

I think so but people are still fighting over it so I don't know. Ah well, let them fight. Much more entertaining that way.


----------



## THANOS

Loader230 said:


> :maury :maury :maury
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This has got to be the most delusional mark post I've seen in all of ratings' threads existence in this forum. Unbelievable. And the worst part is, you're not even joking.


Ah so what you're saying is my post puts me on your level now? 

It feels great to sit at the kiddies table once again :mark:. I feel young again .


----------



## RabidCrow

So Punk's brand still top seller even when he's not there? GOAT. unk4


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Fuck. Starbuck has a black belt in passive aggressive karate towards Punk.


----------



## Starbuck

The Cynical Miracle said:


> Fuck. Starbuck has a black belt in passive aggressive karate towards Punk.


More than your boy has from the Gracie's friend .


----------



## kokepepsi

Remember all those times HHH lost viewers in the overrun segment
:ti


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> More than your boy has from the Gracie's friend .














kokepepsi said:


> Remember all those times HHH lost viewers in the overrun segment
> :ti


----------



## Sonnen Says

#Mark said:


> WWE is set to sign their most lucrative TV rights deal that is contingent on consistent ratings. The entire argument that merchandise sales is more important than ratings is laughable.* The order of importance is Subscribers/buys, ratings, ticket sales, live events, and then merchandise sales.* I understand you're compensating because the only aspect of business that Punk is successful in is merch sales but still. Low ratings means that the WWE is in serious jeopardy regarding their TV rights deal. *Daniel Bryan is their highest ratings mover currently. So logic dictates that Bryan is one of the most important pieces for WWE's business currently. That doesn't even include the house show tour Bryan is headlining, the fact that he's second in arena merch sales, the fact that he he opened/headlined a successful Wrestlemania and the fact that the PPVs he headlined while Cena was on the shelf did very well.*


When did any report say Bryan was the top in merch, live events, buys, mainstream, ticket sales :lmao. Ratings is more important than merch since it's a WWE main show but in terms of making money out of somebody then merch, buys, live events, MS makes a big draw. You're telling me WWE is making more money from Bryan than Cena because of ratings :lol. Bad ratings doesn't mean bad buys or low ticket sales. Again WWE don't make money from Bryan because of ratings, they already get weekly profit despite what the ratings is. If ratings is all you gonna show than you have nothing here. Explain exactly how WWE is making money from Bryan because of ratings that makes no sense because they don't, ratings aren't even that high nor higher than the previous year or years it's the same shit. Giving credit for WM fallout Raw to Bryan and not mostly Taker despite reports proving it, if it was because of Bryan than Raw would have got the same ratings every week but that's not the case isn't (2.96). Punk in terms of buys, merch, mainstream attention, live events he drew more in 2012 than Bryan now. Vince seems to value Punk more than Bryan. If you think people subscribed for the WWE network because of Bryan than you're one delusional mark. You guys are embarrassing, you want to give Bryan credit for the WWE network subscribes when it didn't even reach what WWE expected fpalm. 

Raw did a better rating without Bryan, they don't need him, they already have a strong roster. When he was in Raw it did a 2.96 rating so he didn't help, it was lower than the previous. I don't see Bryan facing guys like Miz or Young because he would have lost viewers with them no doubt. Trying to compare ratings in time when the roster is stronger than before isn't fair. Lets see who were the top guys in 2012 Q3/Q4 compared to 13 and 14 Punk/Cena/Ryback/Show/ADR/Sheamus/? < 13/14 Cena/Punk/Bryan/HHH/HBK/Batista/Authority/Shield/Wyatts/Cesaro

So you're telling me thats fair! :lmao. Bryan was/is massively protected. He's consistently part of the authority and is part of the main angles, when did Punk get that treatment, ever since he lost to HHH he got shoved down the card and went against upper/low midcarders like Ziggler, Bryan, Miz, ADR, and all those random jobbers who had zero credibility compared to guys like Wyatts/Shield/Cesaro/Batista/HHH now. You guys are just trying to justify it blindly. Ratings in Q1, Q2 in all years before got higher than this year. In fact WM season got the lowest ratings since 97 for a WM season. Bryan is a draw but nowhere near the draw you guys think he is. 

Anyways as for the list of times Bryan lost viewers or had weak gains her it is. 



> Rollins vs. Bryan at 10pm gained 223,000 viewers for a 3.20 quarter rating. The Bryan vs. Rollins post-match lost 62,000 viewers.


Weak gain for that timeslot.



> Randy Orton vs. Bryan gained 248,000 viewers for a 3.13 quarter rating in the 9pm time slot.


Weak gain for that timeslot. 



> The opener with Daniel Bryan and Randy Orton did a 2.82 quarter rating, which is very weak.
> 
> The Orton vs. Bryan street fight gained 104,000 viewers – one of the lowest main event gains of the whole year, finishing at a 2.92 overrun.


It explains itself :lol. Plus Punk/Orton did a 3.13 quarter which is better despite the weak gain. It also didn't have a stipulation.



> Kane vs. Randy Orton with Bryan as the referee gained 217,000 viewers for a 2.98 quarter rating in the 9pm.


Again very weak gain for that timeslot. 



> the opener with Daniel Bryan and Randy Orton did a 2.82 quarter rating, which is very weak.





> Daniel Bryan vs. Jack Swagger in the beginning of the Gauntlet Match lost 295,000n viewers.
> 
> Bryan vs. Antonio Cesaro gained 150,000 viewers. Bryan vs. Ryback in the end of the Gauntlet Match plus John Cena coming out and the backstage segment with Vince McMahon and Maddox gained 331,000 viewers, a weak gain, for a 3.20 overrun rating.





> Kane vs. Daniel Bryan at 10pm gained 60,000 viewers for a 2.90 quarter rating – a horrible gain for that timeslot.





> Daniel Bryan’s pre-match promo, the Rhodes attacking The Shield during their entrance, one commercial, and the start of the handicap main event registered a peak audience of 1.515 million viewers at 10:35pm for a 1.96 quarter rating


Weak number. In the same night Punk promo got a 2.47 quarter rating with Axel/Ryback which is close to a 1 million gain. 



> Raw closed with a 1.367 million viewers at 11:09pm with a 2.05 rating for Bryan-Orton face-off.


Very weak for a closing segment.



> Raw rebounded to a 1.87 rating in the twelve quarter for the Daniel Bryan, Cody Rhodes & Goldust vs. The Shield main event, plus one mid-match commercial.



This was the last one only because there aren't any ratings breakdown anymore. Last one was in october of 2013. Again Bryan was/is protected hes been having top tier matches since he got pushed. 

...

Cm Punk with guys like Orton, Sheamus, Kane, Show, Axel/Ryback, and ADR.



> -The show opened at a 3.04 for the Alberto Del Rio, CM Punk and Paul Heyman segment.





> -Alberto Del Rio vs. CM Punk in the main event plus the post-match attacks from Dolph Ziggler and Brock Lesnar gained 636,000 viewers for a 3.42 overrun rating.


Very strong numbers for Punk/ADR even better than Bryan/ADR.



> CM Punk’s promo with Paul Heyman and the brawl with Curtis Axel gained around 400,000 viewers for a strong 3.6 quarter rating.





> CM Punk vs. Curtis Axel in the 9pm timeslot gained around 683,000 viewers for a 3.4 quarter rating, which are very good numbers.


Very strong gains.



> CM Punk’s return to his hometown, promo with promo, Ryback brawl gained 364,000 for a huge 2.47 quarter rating in the ninth quarter.





> The Lumberjacks main event with CM Punk vs. Sheamus gained 1,058,000 viewers for a 2.89 quarter rating.





> Kane vs. CM Punk in the 10pm timeslot gained 340,000 viewers.





> CM Punk vs. Jerry Lawler in a steel cage main event match gained 479,000 viewers for a 3.35 overrun rating.





> Vince McMahon vs. CM Punk in the main event gained 1,233,000 viewers for a 3.46 overrun rating.


Amazing gain, Bryan never gained this much.



> The final segment with Vince, Ryback, Punk and John Cena gained 766,000 viewers for a 3.10 overrun rating





> The final segment with Team Punk and Team Foley gained 708,000 viewers for a 3.26 overrun rating.





> Sheamus and John Cena vs. CM Punk and Alberto Del Rio in the main event gained 823,000 viewers for a 3.14 overrun rating.





> CM Punk vs. Randy Orton gained 555,000 viewers at 9pm. The tag match with Punk and Dolph Ziggler vs. Orton and Jerry Lawler gained 7,000 viewers.





> Ryback vs. CM Punk in the TLC Match gained 515,000 viewers, a very good growth for 10pm right now. The first part of the match did a 3.52 quarter rating and the second part did a 3.44 quarter rating.





> CM Punk vs. John Cena picked up with a 2.99 quarter rating after gaining 528,000 viewers.


The one where you showed Punk/Cena losing fist half which rebounded second half, Punk/Cena matches usually gain million views and get high ratings quarters.



> John Cena vs. Big Show in the main event with CM Punk on commentary and him ending the show gained 1,181,000 viewers for a *3.86* overrun.





> The main event with CM Punk vs. Big Show and John Cena teasing a Money in the Bank cash in gained 719,000 viewers for a *3.99* quarter rating.


Those are huge numbers

Wanna see how horrible *Show*/Cena did 



> John Cena vs. Big Show gained 11,000 viewers in the main event, doing a 2.52 quarter rating.


----------



## kokepepsi

:maury at these marks

Just gotta quote this


> That’s because simply using skewed viewership numbers without context is just yelling into a vacuum. You can prove or disprove whatever you want based on whatever narrative you have. If you don’t control for who is in the overrun segment (which is key because it’s such a disproportionate viewership swell) you are just going to prove that whomever was in the big angle that week, is the big draw. It’s a self-fulfilling prophesy.


Aka I could make big show look like the biggest ratings draw if I wanted

You guys are bitching about nothing :ti


----------



## Waffelz

Why does this guy use numbers for when everyone would agree Bryan wasn't a draw?


----------



## RabidCrow

If you look this thread closely, you will realize that Bryan marks do the same... Or at least they try.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Starbuck said:


> :cena4 vs. :henry2 @ MITB13 drew more buys than :cena4 vs. unk3 @ MITB11.


But :cena4 :henry1 wasn't the main event. unk4 :bryan3 :rko2 :sheamus :christian :rvd outdrew :cena2 unk5


----------



## krai999

Sonnen Says said:


> When did any report say Bryan was the top in merch, live events, buys, mainstream, ticket sales :lmao. Ratings is more important than merch since it's a WWE main show but in terms of making money out of somebody then merch, buys, live events, MS makes a big draw. You're telling me WWE is making more money from Bryan than Cena because of ratings :lol. Bad ratings doesn't mean bad buys or low ticket sales. Again WWE don't make money from Bryan because of ratings, they already get weekly profit despite what the ratings is. If ratings is all you gonna show than you have nothing here. Explain exactly how WWE is making money from Bryan because of ratings that makes no sense because they don't, ratings aren't even that high nor higher than the previous year or years it's the same shit. Giving credit for WM fallout Raw to Bryan and not mostly Taker despite reports proving it, if it was because of Bryan than Raw would have got the same ratings every week but that's not the case isn't (2.96). Punk in terms of buys, merch, mainstream attention, live events he drew more in 2012 than Bryan now. Vince seems to value Punk more than Bryan. If you think people subscribed for the WWE network because of Bryan than you're one delusional mark. You guys are embarrassing, you want to give Bryan credit for the WWE network subscribes when it didn't even reach what WWE expected fpalm.
> 
> Raw did a better rating without Bryan, they don't need him, they already have a strong roster. When he was in Raw it did a 2.96 rating so he didn't help, it was lower than the previous. I don't see Bryan facing guys like Miz or Young because he would have lost viewers with them no doubt. Trying to compare ratings in time when the roster is stronger than before isn't fair. Lets see who were the top guys in 2012 Q3/Q4 compared to 13 and 14 Punk/Cena/Ryback/Show/ADR/Sheamus/? < 13/14 Cena/Punk/Bryan/HHH/HBK/Batista/Authority/Shield/Wyatts/Cesaro
> 
> So you're telling me thats fair! :lmao. Bryan was/is massively protected. He's consistently part of the authority and is part of the main angles, when did Punk get that treatment, ever since he lost to HHH he got shoved down the card and went against upper/low midcarders like Ziggler, Bryan, Miz, ADR, and all those random jobbers who had zero credibility compared to guys like Wyatts/Shield/Cesaro/Batista/HHH now. You guys are just trying to justify it blindly. Ratings in Q1, Q2 in all years before got higher than this year. In fact WM season got the lowest ratings since 97 for a WM season. Bryan is a draw but nowhere near the draw you guys think he is.
> 
> Anyways as for the list of times Bryan lost viewers or had weak gains her it is.
> 
> 
> 
> Weak gain for that timeslot.
> 
> 
> 
> Weak gain for that timeslot.
> 
> 
> 
> It explains itself :lol. Plus Punk/Orton did a 3.13 quarter which is better despite the weak gain. It also didn't have a stipulation.
> 
> 
> 
> Again very weak gain for that timeslot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weak number. In the same night Punk promo got a 2.47 quarter rating with Axel/Ryback which is close to a 1 million gain.
> 
> 
> 
> Very weak for a closing segment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This was the last one only because there aren't any ratings breakdown anymore. Last one was in october of 2013. Again Bryan was/is protected hes been having top tier matches since he got pushed.
> 
> ...
> 
> Cm Punk with guys like Orton, Sheamus, Kane, Show, Axel/Ryback, and ADR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very strong numbers for Punk/ADR even better than Bryan/ADR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very strong gains.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazing gain, Bryan never gained this much.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The one where you showed Punk/Cena losing fist half which rebounded second half, Punk/Cena matches usually gain million views and get high ratings quarters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those are huge numbers
> 
> Wanna see how horrible *Show*/Cena did


----------



## CHIcagoMade

Sonnensays giving GMofGods a run for his money with that post.

I know you're not gonna let him get at you like that?


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

People let typeless because they can't deal with SS DEFINITIVELY proving that PJ Brooks outdraws Cryin' Waaaahnieldaughter :ti


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Keep it going guys. Reminds of the times when RockAE316 was making things entertaining in these ratings threads


----------



## NastyYaffa

This is the most entertaining thread here. Gotta love it! Keep it up guys


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

CHIcagoMade said:


> Sonnensays giving GMofGods a run for his money with that post.
> 
> I know you're not gonna let him get at you like that?


Your obsession with me is getting a little concerning. I know you're kidding and all, but it's getting weird now. I don't do dinner with strangers bro. 



Sonnen Says said:


> When did any report say Bryan was the top in merch, live events, buys, mainstream, ticket sales :lmao. Ratings is more important than merch since it's a WWE main show but in terms of making money out of somebody then merch, buys, live events, MS makes a big draw. You're telling me WWE is making more money from Bryan than Cena because of ratings :lol. Bad ratings doesn't mean bad buys or low ticket sales. Again WWE don't make money from Bryan because of ratings, they already get weekly profit despite what the ratings is. If ratings is all you gonna show than you have nothing here. Explain exactly how WWE is making money from Bryan because of ratings that makes no sense because they don't, ratings aren't even that high nor higher than the previous year or years it's the same shit.


I really recommend that you do some research on this subject before ever talking about it again. It's just really sad watching you try to argue about something you clearly don't understand.

Have you ever heard of advertising? Do you understand what commercials are? The shows with the highest ratings are the ones that companies will pay networks big money for just to advertise their product. The higher your ratings are, the more money you can charge the advertisers. 

For example, during the Superbowl, just one commercial time slot of around *20-30 seconds can cost more than a million dollars* to the advertisers by the networks. The same thing applies with the USA Channel and Sci Fi (fuck their changed name) channel (even though the viewership is obviously not as high). And a good fraction of this money goes to the WWE. And this is accounting for EVERY COMMERCIAL TIME SLOT.

That's why WWE's shows are never commercial free. Remember the saying Vince McMahon said on his commercial free Raw?

"I can't do commercial free Raws every week, if I did then in six months I'd be bankrupt."

There's a reason for that. It's not a kayfabe gimmick. That's literally how it is. And it all falls back on ratings. I'll say it again. The higher your ratings are, the more money you can charge advertisers. Think about that for a moment. And again, think about the fact that every single commercial time slot is taken into account out of a total of five hours of viewership programming every week. 

So if merchandise sales, PPV buys, and stuff like that are so important, then why would WWE suddenly go bankrupt if they stopped doing commercials? Because that's where the most money comes from here. 

I just want you to understand right now that you are the only person on this website who thinks being a draw doesn't involve actually drawing in viewers. You are either really desperate, a troll, very biased, or really are as unintelligent as we all have thought. 

P.S. What is this bullshit about being top in ticket sales? Does each wrestler have their own mini concerts on the side? You're just making shit up aren't you? 



Sonnen Says said:


> Giving credit for WM fallout Raw to Bryan and not mostly Taker despite reports proving it,


Haha what? What report proved this? The google search one? That doesn't prove that at all. All that proves is that the thing people looked up the most after Wrestlemania was over with was Undertaker, which no one was denying. The only thing that could prove who was the main reason for the big ratings for the Raw after Mania would be the ratings breakdown, which specifically show both of the segments that involved Bryan being at the highest points, so it was clearly Bryan, not Taker. No bullshit reports that don't exist proved otherwise. Quit making shit up.



Sonnen Says said:


> if it was because of Bryan than Raw would have got the same ratings every week but that's not the case isn't (2.96).


No they wouldn't. Because there's a lot of things to take into account here. First off you're completely ignoring the fact that Raw this year so far compared to last year at around this time has had a significantly larger amount of viewers on average. And Bryan has continued to be the main ratings draw here and the numbers have been impressive. So it goes without saying that Bryan brought in a good amount of interest here and they're staying because the ratings are higher. That says a lot right there.

No one is saying Bryan is the only reason for the big ratings after Wrestlemania. A lot of things, including Taker, were involved. But those viewers went away, as you've stated. But just by looking at the breakdowns, you can see that the main interest was in Bryan, not in Taker or anyone else for that matter. So it's clearly obvious that the number one reason was Bryan, and he still is the number one interest at the moment. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Punk in terms of buys, merch, mainstream attention, live events he drew more in 2012 than Bryan now. Vince seems to value Punk more than Bryan. If you think people subscribed for the WWE network because of Bryan than you're one delusional mark. You guys are embarrassing, you want to give Bryan credit for the WWE network subscribes when it didn't even reach what WWE expected fpalm.


No one is saying Bryan's the main reason for the WWE network subscribers. Hell I don't even think anyone here has posted about this. When they say what numbers the Network has, not a single person here said "BRYAN DRAWING IN NETWORK VIEWERS". So stop making shit up already. It's getting old.

And no he didn't. You're once again failing to take into account many other factors that were happening in 2012 such as the fact that interest was still a lot higher then overall than it is in 2014. This has been the case since 2001, Pro Wrestling has been on a steady decline in terms of ratings, and that will continue to be the case. But in terms of just going off of Bryan vs Punk, so far Bryan has had Punk beat in just about everything besides merchandise sales. Just going off of PPV buys is not a very accurate way to see just how good of a ratings draw someone is. But it should be noted that so far, Bryan after his rise to fame dating back to Summerslam is the first time we've seen the steady decline in just about everything from a buys and ratings standpoint come to a halt and somewhat increase (except for events that involved the Rock or had HHH/Lesnar). 



Sonnen Says said:


> Raw did a better rating without Bryan, they don't need him, they already have a strong roster.


No they didn't. Again, stop making things up and stop going entirely off of numbers and actually think for a second before you post.



Sonnen Says said:


> When he was in Raw it did a 2.96 rating so he didn't help, it was lower than the previous.


The reason they got that rating to begin with was due to a horrible first hour in terms of ratings, which Bryan wasn't even on. In the time slot that Bryan was on, Raw had one of its highest peak viewership's of that night. Just the fact that you're trying to argue that Bryan didn't help just based off of one show that was going up against the NBA playoffs resulting in their first hour viewership being terrible is just retarded. I don't know how you are managing to come to these conclusions. 



Sonnen Says said:


> So you're telling me thats fair! :lmao. Bryan was/is massively protected. He's consistently part of the authority and is part of the main angles, when did Punk get that treatment, ever since he lost to HHH he got shoved down the card and went against upper/low midcarders like Ziggler, Bryan, Miz, ADR, and all those random jobbers who had zero credibility compared to guys like Wyatts/Shield/Cesaro/Batista/HHH now.


Ziggler, Bryan, Miz and ADR were not jobbers by any means at that time. Ziggler was a rising star who eventually won the Money in the Bank that year and went on to beat John Cena that year, Bryan had just got done being world champion for four months and actually went into Wrestlemania 28 as the WHC, and his 18 second match was what arguably ignited his yes movement as that's where the chants first started. The Miz was still a relatively big name and main evented the last Wrestlemania that WWE had at that time so he was definitely a big name (assuming I've got the dates right here), and while Del Rio was hardly relevant in terms of how much of a shit fans gave about him, he was still one of the bigger names. 

If you're a big draw in the WWE, it shouldn't matter who you're facing. Most people will want to watch that person because they want to see him perform. It goes without saying that those four guys I just mentioned were much more relevant and well known than the Shield in mid 2013, a faction that Bryan faced in a gaunlet match and gained a million viewers against. And again, Bryan isn't as big as Punk was in 2012 at this point, so don't tell me he's being protected because that clearly isn't the case, and there's many more instances like this.



Sonnen Says said:


> You guys are just trying to justify it blindly. Ratings in Q1, Q2 in all years before got higher than this year. In fact WM season got the lowest ratings since 97 for a WM season. Bryan is a draw but nowhere near the draw you guys think he is.


Again, overall ratings don't prove a thing in this case when Bryan is continuing to draw the highest amounts of ratings and very impressive ratings might I add during this day and age. And not to mention this only proves that you're overrating how big of a draw guys like Evolution, Shield, Cesaro, Wyatts and Cena are. Stop looking at overall ratings and focus more on the areas that actually matter here. I tell the same thing to the idiots who continue to bring up the 2.2 rating from when Punk was champion. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Anyways as for the list of times Bryan lost viewers or had weak gains her it is.


Keep in mind not to just include Bryan, something you certainly love doing but then call others out for when they appear to do it with Punk.

And holy shit at your ratings examples :lmao this will be fun.



Sonnen Says said:


> Weak gain for that timeslot.
> 
> Weak gain for that timeslot.
> 
> It explains itself :lol. Plus Punk/Orton did a 3.13 quarter which is better despite the weak gain. It also didn't have a stipulation.


All I'm getting out of this is that Bryan is bringing viewers in.

And Punk/Orton also only gained 48,000. What you just provided me isn't a very big number, but it's still more than 48,000 unless you are referring to a different date, so nice try.




Sonnen Says said:


> Again very weak gain for that timeslot.


:lmao you're using a match where Bryan was the guest referee? Good lord you are indeed desperate. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Weak number. In the same night Punk promo got a 2.47 quarter rating with Axel/Ryback which is close to a 1 million gain.


Two things.

1. Your very first line here is the same one that you just used above. Nice job.
2. Your last one here is only judging by audiences from ages 18-49. So is the 2.47 rating going off of the 18-49 audience or just overall?



Sonnen Says said:


> Very weak for a closing segment.


Agreed.



Sonnen Says said:


> This was the last one only because there aren't any ratings breakdown anymore. Last one was in october of 2013. Again Bryan was/is protected hes been having top tier matches since he got pushed.


The only person who even fits that description that you just provided here was Randy Orton and Ryback. The rest aren't top tier match ups by any means. 

John Cena, The Miz, Big Show, Alberto Del Rio and Ziggler are all much more well known and bigger named talent than the Shield and Cesaro are at this time. were at this time.



Sonnen Says said:


> Very strong numbers for Punk/ADR even better than Bryan/ADR.


Fucking :lmao

1. This match was in the main event, Bryan's match with Del Rio wasn't.
2. Ziggler and Brock Lesnar both played a significant role in this moment and Lesnar without a doubt was a big factor in the viewership increasing here. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Very strong gains.


Won't deny that. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Amazing gain, Bryan never gained this much.


:kobe

A main event match against VINCE MCMAHON? And you're attributing the main reason for this to Punk :lmao everyone knows the interest was in the match up itself, not just because Punk was there. 

And again, Bryan gained over a million viewers by just facing the much less big named and lesser known Shield. That is a lot more impressive than gaining a million viewers by facing Vince McMahon. 

Hell I'm surprised you didn't say this about the Punk/Sheamus match that also apparently gained over a million viewers. That one is more impressive than the McMahon/Punk one if anything. 



Sonnen Says said:


> The one where you showed Punk/Cena losing fist half which rebounded second half, *Punk/Cena matches usually gain million views* and get high ratings quarters.


So why haven't the Punk/Cena matches ever gained a million viewers then? 

Out of all the ones you just showed there the only one that actually provides any kind of credible evidence in regards to Punk's drawing power is his match with Orton, which according to what you posted, gained 550,000 viewers (which is impressive). Showing a tag team match with three other well known people doesn't tell us anything, a segment that Punk is in that involves John Cena, Vince McMahon and Ryback, who was hot at this time, in the final segment on the show doesn't tell us anything, A TLC MATCH doesn't tell us anything (you can certainly say that Punk being in it definitely added more viewers than what you could expect or what would happen if it were just two random people, but just a TLC match alone will draw in viewers no matter what), and a segment between two teams filled with numerous people and a famous name in Mick Foley as well (not even going to take into account who the people on the teams are) doesn't prove anything either.

When #mark posted his ratings, they all involved Punk in singles action and two instances where he was in tag team action where in one instance, he is paired with other people who were, again, much bigger at the time than they are now, and in the other he's with a bunch of other people no one cares about at the time. So far all you're showing me here is that Punk is involved in segments with high ratings where he's being protected by having other big names involved as well. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Those are huge numbers


Good fucking lord :lmao

A match where John Cena teased a cash in and instead made a huge announcement and you're using this as an instance that Punk draws? Huh? 



Sonnen Says said:


> Wanna see how horrible *Show*/Cena did


Won't hear any argument from me on this particular instance.

Regardless, nice try, but really all you did was just show us a lot of instances where Bryan drew small amounts of audiences but against weak adversaries. In many of the instances where you showed Punk drawing big numbers, it was in the same instances where you were just claiming before only applied to Bryan where Punk had other big names involved or a big time stipulation involved (such as the TLC match) apart from his matches with Kane and Axel, which are both very impressive numbers.

Now onto the ones about Bryan. Again, all I was getting out of this was that Bryan can draw viewers. Never once apart from a Bryan/Swagger match that did lose viewers (only for viewers to gained back later) did I see anything there that showed Bryan turning away viewers. And not to mention all of this is easily countered by many of the strong ratings gains Bryan has had not only in just the past two months but during his time from Summerslam all the way from now. 

Again, when #mark posted the ratings that Punk achieved, he was able to give us instances where Punk not only had bad numbers against actual big named talent, but actually lost viewers. Even with the ratings breakdowns ending, so far this has not been the case with Bryan. Just in that instance alone you are wrong. And the fact that you kept pointing out the quarter rating for each category pretty much shows that you're once again only paying attention to the main number and aren't taking into consideration the other things on the show as well. If it's a big number for a certain time slot=it's gotta be because of Punk. If it's low=it's Bryan's fault. This is basically what you are doing. Again, nice try, but all you accomplished here was show us how incredibly biased you are just due to the high amount of times you contradicted yourself with each ratings segment you made. And if you didn't keep making these claims that Bryan was much more protected than Punk was, and then suddenly show us high segments gains where he's involved with guys like Cena, Orton, Sheamus, Big Show, Miz, Del Rio, and claim Bryan is being protected despite the fact he drew viewers against the Shield when they were in no way big, Cesaro, Ryback, The Wyatts, and even Del Rio today when he's completely irrelevant. So Bryan clearly doesn't need the authority to draw big numbers. Punk hasn't done the same.

So moral of the story is: You still have no clue what you're talking about, you lack a very vague and simple understanding of how ratings work, you have no idea what a draw is, you're still biased, and you continue to make excuses for Punk but don't do the same in instances that involve Bryan. And most importantly, you're wrong, again. Hopefully you're used to it by now.


----------



## THANOS

TheGMofGods said:


> Now onto the ones about Bryan. Again, all I was getting out of this was that Bryan can draw viewers. Never once apart from a Bryan/Swagger match that did lose viewers (only for viewers to gained back later) did I see anything there that showed Bryan turning away viewers. And not to mention all of this is easily countered by many of the strong ratings gains Bryan has had not only in just the past two months but during his time from Summerslam all the way from now.
> 
> Again, when #mark posted the ratings that Punk achieved, he was able to give us instances where Punk not only had bad numbers against actual big named talent, but actually lost viewers. Even with the ratings breakdowns ending, so far this has not been the case with Bryan. Just in that instance alone you are wrong. And the fact that you kept pointing out the quarter rating for each category pretty much shows that you're once again only paying attention to the main number and aren't taking into consideration the other things on the show as well. If it's a big number for a certain time slot=it's gotta be because of Punk. If it's low=it's Bryan's fault. This is basically what you are doing. Again, nice try, but all you accomplished here was show us how incredibly biased you are just due to the high amount of times you contradicted yourself with each ratings segment you made. *And if you didn't keep making these claims that Bryan was much more protected than Punk was, and then suddenly show us high segments gains where he's involved with guys like Cena, Orton, Sheamus, Big Show, Miz, Del Rio, and claim Bryan is being protected despite the fact he drew viewers against the Shield when they were in no way big, Cesaro, Ryback, The Wyatts, and even Del Rio today when he's completely irrelevant. So Bryan clearly doesn't need the authority to draw big numbers. Punk hasn't done the same.*
> 
> So moral of the story is: You still have no clue what you're talking about, you lack a very vague and simple understanding of how ratings work, you have no idea what a draw is, you're still biased, and you continue to make excuses for Punk but don't do the same in instances that involve Bryan. And most importantly, you're wrong, again. Hopefully you're used to it by now.


Great response post :clap, I commend you for taking the time to actually do it, that wall of text was too daunting for me lol. The bold part in particular was very "hammer meets nail" :lol.


----------



## Born of Osiris

Jesus Christ, this thread is like fucking a textbook now.


----------



## RabidCrow

So you just take random numbers and use them to your advantage, trying to justify stupidly gains or loss of viewers in every segment like desperate fools.

This thread is fucking pointless. unk2


----------



## joeycalz

Both Punk and Bryan are draws but because Bryan has more appeal to the casuals, it's evident he may end up becoming the bigger star in the end. Not even sure why there are arguments anymore. There are numbers that support that Punk/Bryan could bring in viewers. Punk, at times, could have some bleh numbers, but some of his segments with Heyman did absurd numbers. Bryan/Shield/Authority did some AWESOME numbers immediately after Summerslam last year and on the road to and just after Wrestlemania.

Keep being you guys. This is still hilarious.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

KuroNeko said:


> Jesus Christ, this thread is like fucking a textbook now.


I'm waiting for the audiobook version of this thread,


----------



## Loader230

joeycalz said:


> Both Punk and Bryan are draws but because Bryan has more appeal to the casuals, *it's evident he may end up becoming the bigger star in the end.* Not even sure why there are arguments anymore. There are numbers that support that Punk/Bryan could bring in viewers. Punk, at times, could have some bleh numbers, but some of his segments with Heyman did absurd numbers. Bryan/Shield/Authority did some AWESOME numbers immediately after Summerslam last year and on the road to and just after Wrestlemania.
> 
> Keep being you guys. This is still hilarious.


Isn't he already? Considering, he main evented wrestlemania, was the focus of RAW for months and months, the unified champion, beat Cena, HHH, Orton clean and all that?


----------



## CHIcagoMade

IDONTSHIV said:


> I'm waiting for the audiobook version of this thread,


With Morgan Freeman as the narrator. :mark:


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

RabidCrow said:


> So you just take random numbers and use them to your advantage, trying to justify stupidly gains or loss of viewers in every segment like desperate fools.
> 
> This thread is fucking pointless. unk2


What's sad is that this post is more entertaining to read than my own  My material needs work.



THANOS said:


> Great response post :clap, I commend you for taking the time to actually do it, that wall of text was too daunting for me lol. The bold part in particular was very "hammer meets nail" :lol.


I sort of fucked up on my words there but regardless yes.

And I'm sorry but Sonnen deserves a lot of credit if he actually reads that entire post.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

Been busy lately, but just caught up with the last few weeks.

Jesus, Bryan is a beast.


----------



## Sonnen Says

TheGMofGods said:


> I really recommend that you do some research on this subject before ever talking about it again. It's just really sad watching you try to argue about something you clearly don't understand.
> 
> Have you ever heard of advertising? Do you understand what commercials are? The shows with the highest ratings are the ones that companies will pay networks big money for just to advertise their product. The higher your ratings are, the more money you can charge the advertisers.
> 
> For example, during the Superbowl, just one commercial time slot of around *20-30 seconds can cost more than a million dollars* to the advertisers by the networks. The same thing applies with the USA Channel and Sci Fi (fuck their changed name) channel (even though the viewership is obviously not as high). And a good fraction of this money goes to the WWE. And this is accounting for EVERY COMMERCIAL TIME SLOT.


The advertisement has nothing to do with Bryan, and my point was ratings aren't any higher (Not even as good as 2010) so that won't change any damn thing, they still get the same ratings as last year + Raw has an extra hour which means extra money (that means WWE wont care how low this hour gets since the money they are getting is worth it). The show isn't about Bryan. The only way your saying will matter is if WWE get above 3.5/4 ratings in weekly basis because that's when WWE will make serious money since the demand will rise tremendously by media or whatever. Right now they aren't even close to that and wont ever it seems. Again you think Raw is just Bryan? :lmao with or without him WWE will still make money out of their TV deals he isn't in Rock or Austin level nor will the channel demand Bryan :lol. Bryan isn't a long term plan he's not gonna stay champ forever and he will be shoved down the card and as always ratings will stay the same as it is until WWE has a very appealing product and roster. 



> That's why WWE's shows are never commercial free. Remember the saying Vince McMahon said on his commercial free Raw?
> 
> "I can't do commercial free Raws every week, if I did then in six months I'd be bankrupt."


What does this have to do with Bryan? :lmao WWE will never get rid off commercials they will rather get rid off Bryan instead. Commercials has nothing to do with Bryan get a damn clue. WWE isn't making money out of Bryan because of ratings or commercials he isn't bringing Austin level ratings nor is he bringing that much viewers, it fucking gets below 3 or just a bit higher every damn week so take ratings out of your head. Nowadays they can only judge somebody's drawing by how much buys/merch/MS attention he or she brings to WWE. 



> There's a reason for that. It's not a kayfabe gimmick. That's literally how it is. And it all falls back on ratings. I'll say it again. The higher your ratings are, the more money you can charge advertisers. Think about that for a moment. And again, think about the fact that every single commercial time slot is taken into account out of a total of five hours of viewership programming every week.


Again WWE doesn't have commercials because of Bryan it always have existed even with low ratings so they get that money out of commercials either ways. 



> So if merchandise sales, PPV buys, and stuff like that are so important, then why would WWE suddenly go bankrupt if they stopped doing commercials? Because that's where the most money comes from here.


Ratings exist because they have a TV show. They use those shows to promote or advertise those wrestlers thats why Buys and Merch are so important to them because it shows how much money a wrestler is bringing to the company. If WWE doesn't have media attention they wont thrive so they need to impress with their storylines and talent. Bryan isn't the only talent if it was only him the business will have died with him. Again WWE doesn't need him, he's an asset for sure but they wont be in decline without him he's not Cena who isn't Rock or Austin. Bryan is just one of the draws that have credibility. 



> *I just want you to understand right now that you are the only person on this website who thinks being a draw doesn't involve actually drawing in viewers*. You are either really desperate, a troll, very biased, or really are as unintelligent as we all have thought.


You're really clueless. I didn't say that, I said you can't judge a draw just because he draws viewers, it doesn't mean he's bringing the most or a lot of money, that's what you don't understand. He could have the highest quarter but the overall rating can be low. Without a strong roster you will have low ratings and low ratings doesn't mean low buys or merch. It just means the overall fans aren't into the product not necessarily not into the wrestler, some people just watch for few wrestlers and pay money for those few guys or even just one guy. It seems that not enough people who watches his segment care enough to buy his merch or the PPVs that he's part of. They are lower than the previous years so not enough money.



> No they wouldn't. Because there's a lot of things to take into account here. First off you're completely ignoring the fact that Raw this year so far compared to last year at around this time has had a significantly larger amount of viewers on average. And Bryan has continued to be the main ratings draw here and the numbers have been impressive. So it goes without saying that Bryan brought in a good amount of interest here and they're staying because the ratings are higher. That says a lot right there.


Impressive my ass do you even check the ratings. Do you wanna see how far WWE declined in ratings. Last year WM season didn't get anywhere below 3 but in 2014 it did which is one of the reason why it's the lowest WM season since 97 and again big names like Hogan, UW, Batista, HHH, Taker, Brock, etc. happens to be there so it's not a big deal since you have this much star power in your side when guys before Bryan didn't have that pleasure. http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/



> No one is saying Bryan is the only reason for the big ratings after Wrestlemania. A lot of things, including Taker, were involved. But those viewers went away, as you've stated. But just by looking at the breakdowns, you can see that the main interest was in Bryan, not in Taker or anyone else for that matter. So it's clearly obvious that the number one reason was Bryan, and he still is the number one interest at the moment.


Bryan will remain one of the most interesting things since he's the champ and is getting those major roles, it doesn't mean shit, what will happen when he gets shoved down the card do you think he will be able to draw as much nope. 



> No one is saying Bryan's the main reason for the WWE network subscribers. Hell I don't even think anyone here has posted about this. When they say what numbers the Network has, not a single person here said "BRYAN DRAWING IN NETWORK VIEWERS". So stop making shit up already. It's getting old.


@mark brought it up as part of the drawing process to judge some wrestler drawing not my problem if he's this delusional. How is it getting old when I only said it once to make a point out of him. 



> And no he didn't. You're once again failing to take into account many other factors that were happening in 2012 such as the fact that interest was still a lot higher then overall than it is in 2014. This has been the case since 2001, Pro Wrestling has been on a steady decline in terms of ratings, and that will continue to be the case. But in terms of just going off of Bryan vs Punk, so far Bryan has had Punk beat in just about everything besides merchandise sales. Just going off of PPV buys is not a very accurate way to see just how good of a ratings draw someone is. But it should be noted that so far, Bryan after his rise to fame dating back to Summerslam is the first time we've seen the steady decline in just about everything from a buys and ratings standpoint come to a halt and somewhat increase (except for events that involved the Rock or had HHH/Lesnar).


Again live events numbers in 2012 was/is higher than this year or last year. Punk did better buys than Bryan from 2009 to now he has. The only good ones for Bryan were SS (At least for today's standards) and HIAC. Each one of them have a reason for instance SS did well because it also had Brock/Punk which Meltzer said it was the true ME, and HIAC because it had a returning HBK and Cena. 



> No they didn't. Again, stop making things up and stop going entirely off of numbers and actually think for a second before you post.


Just because you don't know about it doesn't mean I'm making up shit.



> The reason they got that rating to begin with was due to a horrible first hour in terms of ratings, which Bryan wasn't even on. In the time slot that Bryan was on, Raw had one of its highest peak viewership's of that night. Just the fact that you're trying to argue that Bryan didn't help just based off of one show that was going up against the NBA playoffs resulting in their first hour viewership being terrible is just retarded. I don't know how you are managing to come to these conclusions.


Talk about excuses. All hours were low anyway it wont make a big difference if people are interested in seeing Bryan comeback they would have tuned in from start. 



> Ziggler, Bryan, Miz and ADR were not jobbers by any means at that time. Ziggler was a rising star who eventually won the Money in the Bank that year and went on to beat John Cena that year, Bryan had just got done being world champion for four months and actually went into Wrestlemania 28 as the WHC, and his 18 second match was what arguably ignited his yes movement as that's where the chants first started. The Miz was still a relatively big name and main evented the last Wrestlemania that WWE had at that time so he was definitely a big name (assuming I've got the dates right here), and while Del Rio was hardly relevant in terms of how much of a shit fans gave about him, he was still one of the bigger names.


Oh fpalm. All the ones you mentioned were losing left and right against guys like Sheamus/orton and every top star. They didn't get any credibility to matter. The question is if you think they can draw than where are they now ha except for Bryan they are jobbers and ADR almost always have been a failure in ratings. Also they have lost a lot of viewers most of the time in 2012 because WWE refused to give them any momentum against a top guy. 



> If you're a big draw in the WWE, it shouldn't matter who you're facing. Most people will want to watch that person because they want to see him perform. It goes without saying that those four guys I just mentioned were much more relevant and well known than the Shield in mid 2013, a faction that Bryan faced in a gaunlet match and gained a million viewers against. And again, Bryan isn't as big as Punk was in 2012 at this point, so don't tell me he's being protected because that clearly isn't the case, and there's many more instances like this.


Would like to see Bryan face the ones I mentioned the same way Punk did. Because if your opponent doesn't have any credibility you wont gain much. I already showed you how poor Bryan/Orton did. nit picking is dumb since everybody loses viewers once in awhile it's not a big deal especially if there is no interest. 



> Again, overall ratings don't prove a thing in this case when Bryan is continuing to draw the highest amounts of ratings and very impressive ratings might I add during this day and age. And not to mention this only proves that you're overrating how big of a draw guys like Evolution, Shield, Cesaro, Wyatts and Cena are. Stop looking at overall ratings and focus more on the areas that actually matter here. I tell the same thing to the idiots who continue to bring up the 2.2 rating from when Punk was champion.


Ratings shouldn't judge who's a draw because ratings aren't as high as before so there is no point in arguing about it. 



> And Punk/Orton also only gained 48,000. What you just provided me isn't a very big number, but it's still more than 48,000 unless you are referring to a different date, so nice try.


Punk/Orton had a better quarter rating despite the gain read plz.




> :lmao you're using a match where Bryan was the guest referee? Good lord you are indeed desperate.


So what you need to look at one of the examples of @mark first before saying that. Bryan was still in the segment him being a ref means something is up which adds interest and don't remember how it ended maybe with him.



> Two things.
> 
> 1. Your very first line here is the same one that you just used above. Nice job.
> 2. Your last one here is only judging by audiences from ages 18-49. So is the 2.47 rating going off of the 18-49 audience or just overall?


It's a quarter rating like from 1.78 to 2.47. which gained about a million from the previous segment.



> The only person who even fits that description that you just provided here was Randy Orton and Ryback. The rest aren't top tier match ups by any means.
> 
> John Cena, The Miz, Big Show, Alberto Del Rio and Ziggler are all much more well known and bigger named talent than the Shield and Cesaro are at this time. were at this time.


fpalm. Did I mention Cena (He's the biggest star lol) and why Cena they always gain high with each other way higher than anything Bryan gained with Cena or any other. All the rest you mentioned didn't even gain half of what the shild or hell even Cesaro is gaining apart og Show at times which are with Punk and Cena only and maybe other few times. Plus nice try ignoring the rest like HHH/Batista/Wyatts/Authority because those guys are the ones who are Bryan been facing ever since he got pushed no one else. Not fucking Miz, ADR, Ziggler, Sheamus, Axel/Ryback,etc.



> 1. This match was in the main event, Bryan's match with Del Rio wasn't.
> 2. Ziggler and Brock Lesnar both played a significant role in this moment and Lesnar without a doubt was a big factor in the viewership increasing here.


So? the match Bryan was included at had an anticipation of something happening which the number included with the backstage brawl they had (Kane/Brie/Steph). That ME didn't, it was just a surprise Brock only showed up for few minutes lol. Ziggler is not a draw so I don't know what you're talking about. Either ways it's very good, the opening segment which you ignored was about making Punk/ADR in the ME if I'm not mistaken, and it had a strong number. 



> A main event match against VINCE MCMAHON? And you're attributing the main reason for this to Punk :lmao everyone knows the interest was in the match up itself, not just because Punk was there.


My point was that nobody have gained this much viewers since 2011 (Rock) which means nothing in 14/13 have gained this much and I'm not talking about the quarter rating just the fact how much viewers it gained. 



> And again, Bryan gained over a million viewers by just facing the much less big named and lesser known Shield. That is a lot more impressive than gaining a million viewers by facing Vince McMahon.


Punk gained a million views with fucking Axel/Ryback in the 10pm. They are far less credible than The Shield which is the most dominant team since Evolution. It's The shield not 3mb. 



> Hell I'm surprised you didn't say this about the Punk/Sheamus match that also apparently gained over a million viewers. That one is more impressive than the McMahon/Punk one if anything.


Because I have mentioned it numerous times I though people know that already. 



> So why haven't the Punk/Cena matches ever gained a million viewers then?


It did most of them did. The ones I responded with was because of Mark showing first half of the match number which is something he wanted to take advantage of. I just mentioned the ones who are against the midcarders or anti draws (I named them already) to prove a point. Tho I showed Punk/Vince match because it's a huge gain nothing more just a find. I could show you Punk/Cena numbers but it's easy to find you can google it. 



> Out of all the ones you just showed there the only one that actually provides any kind of credible evidence in regards to Punk's drawing power is his match with Orton, which according to what you posted, gained 550,000 viewers (which is impressive). Showing a tag team match with three other well known people doesn't tell us anything, a segment that Punk is in that involves John Cena, Vince McMahon and Ryback, who was hot at this time, in the final segment on the show doesn't tell us anything, *A TLC MATCH doesn't tell us anything (you can certainly say that Punk being in it definitely added more viewers than what you could expect or what would happen if it were just two random people, but just a TLC match alone will draw in viewers no matter what)*, and a segment between two teams filled with numerous people and a famous name in Mick Foley as well (not even going to take into account who the people on the teams are) doesn't prove anything either.


Well gimmick matches do well often but the Street fight match between Orton/Bryan didn't do well you can see the terrible number in the same post. You just nit picked 3 of them not all of them. Also you sound very hypercritical Bryan gains are against guys who are supposed to be top tier guys so either ways you're not proving anything here.




> A match where John Cena teased a cash in and instead made a huge announcement and you're using this as an instance that Punk draws? Huh?


So what you mean is that you should have no story behind anything to say it's impressive. Every impressive number has a story behind it, you can't just gain that much with no hype. Plus teasing is different than doing it just shows people are interested that much 3.99 is huge you're so clueless despite what it was about. Also you just ignored the other big rating Punk/Show had. 



> Regardless, nice try, but really all you did was just show us a lot of instances where Bryan drew small amounts of audiences but against weak adversaries. In many of the instances where you showed Punk drawing big numbers, it was in the same instances where you were just claiming before only applied to Bryan where Punk had other big names involved or a big time stipulation involved (such as the TLC match) apart from his matches with Kane and Axel, which are both very impressive numbers.


And what part of Bryan numbers screams midcard feuds like Punk had with those guys. I could show you the numbers Punk/Bryan had in 2012 since it was a midcard feud and I can already says it's impressive numbers. Difference between Bryan numbers and Punks is that Punks are against much lower opponents in terms of credibility and starpower. He was just midcarding the whole time since the third half of 2013 and still got the highest of the night most of the time even higher than the ones Bryan had with Cena and Orton or the other ones he feuded with till October which was the end of ratings breakdown 



> Now onto the ones about Bryan. Again, all I was getting out of this was that Bryan can draw viewers. *Never once apart from a Bryan/Swagger match that did lose viewers (only for viewers to gained back later) did I see anything there that showed Bryan turning away viewers.* And not to mention all of this is easily countered by many of the strong ratings gains Bryan has had not only in just the past two months but during his time from Summerslam all the way from now.


That's because I didn't show what he did before SS. Because ever since then he was part of the authority angles, and was consistently with guys like HHH, HBK, Orton (champ and gained/lost bad numbers with anyway), Cena, Steph, Punk, etc. That's the only reason why, but also because there were no more ratings breakdown since October of 2013. So we couldn't see the rest lol. Also I didn't show all the great numbers of Punk, if so I would have added his numbers with Brock, Cena, Taker, Rock, etc. or just his own segments which destroys anything Bryan gained or had this whole year. But I only showed how much he gained with guys like Axel/Ryback, ADR, Orton, Kane, Sheamus, etc. to prove a point and the fact Bryan couldn't because he never had those kind of midcard matches well he did in Q1/Q2 of 2013 but since some asked to just show Bryan numbers since he got pushed because it wouldn't be fair if I didn't. I couldn't show you the RAW 11 numbers because it's hard to find and can't be found anymore. 



> Again, when #mark posted the ratings that Punk achieved, he was able to give us instances where Punk not only had bad numbers *against actual big named talent, but actually lost viewers.* Even with the ratings breakdowns ending, so far this has not been the case with Bryan. Just in that instance alone you are wrong. And the fact that you kept pointing out the quarter rating for each category pretty much shows that you're once again only paying attention to the main number and aren't taking into consideration the other things on the show as well. If it's a big number for a certain time slot=it's gotta be because of Punk. If it's low=it's Bryan's fault. This is basically what you are doing. Again, nice try, but all you accomplished here was show us how incredibly biased you are just due to the high amount of times you contradicted yourself with each ratings segment you made. And if you didn't keep making these claims that Bryan was much more protected than Punk was, and then suddenly show us high segments gains where he's involved with guys like Cena, *Orton, Sheamus, Big Show, Miz, Del Rio*, and claim Bryan is being protected despite the fact he drew viewers against *the Shield when they were in no way big, Cesaro, Ryback, The Wyatts,* and even Del Rio today when he's completely irrelevant. So Bryan clearly doesn't need the authority to draw big numbers. Punk hasn't done the same.


Do you fucking read, he mentioned Miz,Orton (Bryan can't draw shit with him either nor he gained as much as Punk/Orton anyway), Show (Did you see the number Cena/Show pulled it was even lower I already did in the previous post but Punk/Show gained 3.99 and 3.86 quarter rating as I already mentioned those are huge and bigger than anything Bryan pulled in 2013), Darren Young :lol, ADR, Swagger (Bryan lost viewers with I already showed you that), and Tensai. Cena/Punk rebounded second half of the match @mark played it to his advantage :lol.

Punk gaining that much with guys like Axel/Ryabck/ADR/Sheamus is far more impressive than gaining against guys who are far more credible than them like Wayyats (had clean wins and is having quality feuds), Shield (same with Wyatts), Cesaro (getting there already), and why did you add Ryback? It isn't even half as much what Punk/Ryback pulled together. Fact you think otherwise is just sad. 



> So moral of the story is: You still have no clue what you're talking about, you lack a very vague and simple understanding of how ratings work, you have no idea what a draw is, you're still biased, and you continue to make excuses for Punk but don't do the same in instances that involve Bryan. And most importantly, you're wrong, again. Hopefully you're used to it by now.


You just don't read and you're clearly biased. You already admitted before that you don't know shit about ratings yet you're pretending that you do. You're making excuses out of interest nothing more, trying to say Shield and Waytts are as credible as Young, Miz, etc which is beyond stupid. When Bryan gets shoved down the card you will see how he will lose viewers with Miz, Young and all those irrelevant guys. The only reason Bryan is gaining all those ratings is again because he's extremely protected and properly booked nothing more. Thinking a random match with Big E should get the highest of the nigh even tho it has no story behind it is something you really don't understand and you basically ignore. If Bryan faced Big E for no reason with no story or title on the line, it would have lost or gained few viewers if you don't admit it then thats your problem you're just too biased to know it.


----------



## Chrome

Holy shit are some of you guys writing novels in here? :lol


----------



## FITZ

I'm just going to agree with whoever has the longest post.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

TaylorFitz said:


> I'm just going to agree with whoever has the longest post.


Size doesn't matter... or does it?


----------



## JamesK

I demand a book to be made from this thread...

I am waiting for TheGMofGods to respond with a three page post! :mark: :mark:


----------



## Vyer

*looks in thread*


----------



## RabidCrow




----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

JamesK said:


> I demand a book to be made from this thread...
> 
> I am waiting for TheGMofGods to respond with a three page post! :mark: :mark:


Do you want me to start working on it now? I'll call it 

"The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Marks."



Sonnen Says said:


> The advertisement has nothing to do with Bryan, and my point was ratings aren't any higher (Not even as good as 2010) so that won't change any damn thing, they still get the same ratings as last year + Raw has an extra hour which means extra money (that means WWE wont care how low this hour gets since the money they are getting is worth it). The show isn't about Bryan. The only way your saying will matter is if WWE get above 3.5/4 ratings in weekly basis because that's when WWE will make serious money since the demand will rise tremendously by media or whatever. Right now they aren't even close to that and wont ever it seems. Again you think Raw is just Bryan? :lmao with or without him WWE will still make money out of their TV deals he isn't in Rock or Austin level nor will the channel demand Bryan :lol. Bryan isn't a long term plan he's not gonna stay champ forever and he will be shoved down the card and as always ratings will stay the same as it is until WWE has a very appealing product and roster.


Lol.

Okay, I'm going to spell it out again for you. PAY ATTENTION THIS TIME.

The higher the ratings, THE MORE YOU PAY to advertisers. Right now, BRYAN is WWE's biggest ratings draw. So far he has brought in better ratings this year than Cena did as champion last year. There for, Bryan right now is their most valuable draw because he is clearly the main attraction. There are other things to keep in mind here to, such as other draws on the show as well including Cena and Evolution, but right now Bryan is their biggest draw and this can't be disputed. 

WWE's objective is to make as much money as possible. The fact that you are continuing to bring up the past ratings is just stupid because you're acting like the blame is to be placed on Bryan. That isn't the case. Right now Bryan is one of the main reasons (not the only reason like you're suggesting I'm saying) that the ratings are better this year and again, there is no denying this. 

So, with that said, why does the WWE need Bryan? Because the less ratings they have, the less money they can charge for advertisers who want to promote their product on highly rated shows. Every ratings point counts. That's how ratings work. If you weren't so clueless in this regard you would understand this. I just got done taking a class on this in college, I know what I'm talking about. Do some research and stop acting like you know everything when that clearly isn't the case. 

What does this have to do with Bryan? :lmao WWE will never get rid off commercials they will rather get rid off Bryan instead. Commercials has nothing to do with Bryan get a damn clue. WWE isn't making money out of Bryan because of ratings or commercials he isn't bringing Austin level ratings nor is he bringing that much viewers, it fucking gets below 3 or just a bit higher every damn week so take ratings out of your head. Nowadays they can only judge somebody's drawing by how much buys/merch/MS attention he or she brings to WWE. [/quote]

It doesn't matter what level of ratings he's bringing in. The fact of the matter is he's bringing in the best ratings for WWE right now. What part of this are you not understanding? 



Sonnen Says said:


> Again WWE doesn't have commercials because of Bryan it always have existed even with low ratings so they get that money out of commercials either ways.


Again, WWE's goal is to make as much money as possible, which is, again, why Bryan is such a valuable asset to them right now. 

And WWE DOES have commercials. You might want to re write your sentence there.



Sonnen Says said:


> Ratings exist because they have a TV show. They use those shows to promote or advertise those wrestlers thats why Buys and Merch are so important to them because it shows how much money a wrestler is bringing to the company.


It shows them where some of the interest is and who the fans want to get behind. The amount of money that they make off of merchandise sales and PPV buys isn't anywhere close to the amount they make off of ratings. 



Sonnen Says said:


> If WWE doesn't have media attention they wont thrive so they need to impress with their storylines and talent. Bryan isn't the only talent if it was only him the business will have died with him. Again WWE doesn't need him, he's an asset for sure but they wont be in decline without him he's not Cena who isn't Rock or Austin. Bryan is just one of the draws that have credibility.


Bryan isn't just "one of the draws", he's their biggest draw right now. Again, stop ignoring this fact. 



Sonnen Says said:


> You're really clueless. I didn't say that,


Yes you did.



Sonnen Says said:


> I said you can't judge a draw just because he draws viewers, it doesn't mean he's bringing the most or a lot of money


...yea it kind of does.



Sonnen Says said:


> He could have the highest quarter but the overall rating can be low. Without a strong roster you will have low ratings and low ratings doesn't mean low buys or merch.


And if they didn't have Bryan at all, then suddenly you don't have that higher quarter rating and the ratings drop, and there for you make less money. Again, WWE's goal=make as much money as possible.

Connect the dots. You're a big boy (I think) you can figure it out.



Sonnen Says said:


> It just means the overall fans aren't into the product not necessarily not into the wrestler, some people just watch for few wrestlers and pay money for those few guys or even just one guy. It seems that not enough people who watches his segment care enough to buy his merch or the PPVs that he's part of. They are lower than the previous years so not enough money.


What the hell are you talking about? He's at number 2 right now on merchandise sales, and the PPV numbers in 2013 are noticeably better than they were in 2011 and in most parts of 2012. Again, stop making things up. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Impressive my ass do you even check the ratings. Do you wanna see how far WWE declined in ratings.


You just contradicted yourself, again. 

You were just saying in the previous part that I quoted that the way the ratings work is some fans tune in for a particular wrestler and they tune out for others. So why are you focusing on the overall rating when I'm referring to just the parts that involve Bryan?



Sonnen Says said:


> Last year WM season didn't get anywhere below 3 but in 2014 it did which is one of the reason why it's the lowest WM season since 97 and again big names like Hogan, UW, Batista, HHH, Taker, Brock, etc. happens to be there so it's not a big deal since you have this much star power in your side when guys before Bryan didn't have that pleasure. http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/


Your point is absolutely irrelevant because WWE was still missing the Rock and Punk which were both crucial parts of the ratings from last year. WWE put themselves in a tough spot by pushing someone that no one wanted to see and had to involve Bryan in two major programs, which in the end ended generating a lot of interest. You can keep pointing out the ratings being the lowest since 97, but all you need is common sense to realize that they don't really mean anything here. We aren't arguing which era drew more we're talking about an individual vs an individual, there is no logical reason for you to be bringing up the ratings from 97. 

And Ultimate Warrior didn't appear until the WWE Hall of Fame so mentioning him doesn't make any sense. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Bryan will remain one of the most interest since he's the champ and is getting those major roles, it doesn't mean shit, what will happen when he gets shoved down the card do you think he will be able to draw as much nope.


He was drawing very well before when he was shoved down the card, I see no reason why that would change here. 



Sonnen Says said:


> @mark brought it up as part of the drawing process to judge some wrestler drawing not my problem if he's this delusional. How is it getting old when I only said it once to make a point out of him.


Wanna show me the post? Because odds are you probably read it wrong yet again.

And what's getting old is your tendency to make up bullshit regarding something happening that clearly never happened. I've already spotted you doing it at least five times in this post alone.



Sonnen Says said:


> Again live events numbers in 2012 was/is higher than this year or last year. Punk did better buys than Bryan from 2009 to now he has. The only good ones for Bryan were SS (At least for today's standards) and HIAC. Each one of them have a reason for instance SS did well because it also had Brock/Punk which Meltzer said it was the true ME, and HIAC because it had a returning HBK and Cena.


There's so many things wrong with this post I don't even know where to begin. 

First off, SS and HIAC weren't the only good ones. Second, as I stated before, SS did good because there were two big main events for this PPV. I won't deny that Punk/Lesnar was a huge drawing card for this event, but don't sit there and act like that was the only thing that drew at this PPV. Third, Night of Champions managed to do better than NOC from 2011 where HHH/Punk was headlining it (or was that Vengeance? Fuck it don't care). Even if it didn't beat out the one that had CENA vs PUNK, it still had good buyrates, as did Payback and Money in the Bank, which beat out Money in the Bank 2012. Fourth, Punk was not the main drawing attraction for most of the 2012 events because ratings were basically showing that no one gave a shit about him. Luckily for Punk there were other people around that people actually cared about (I already discussed this before) that people actually DID care about. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Just because you don't know about it doesn't mean I'm making up shit.


That's not why I said you're making up shit. I said you're making up shit because you're making shit up. Don't twist what happened around and try to make it sound like something else happened with a different reason. No one is going to fall for it.

I know all about it, they didn't produce better numbers. There's a difference between viewers increasing because someone isn't on a show and a shitload of viewers still being interested in what's going on and someone not being there unexpectedly (seriously, a lot of people were surprised he wasn't there, despite the fact he had just got married. Apparently common sense escaped those people's minds.)



Sonnen Says said:


> Talk about excuses. All hours were low anyway it wont make a big difference if people are interested in seeing Bryan comeback they would have tuned in from start.


Lol. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Would like to see Bryan face the one I mentioned the same way Punk did. Because if your opponent doesn't have any credibility you want gain much. nit picking is dumb since everybody loses viewers once in awhile it's not a big deal especially if there is not interest.


Nitpicking is dumb, but when you are losing viewers or are making very weak gains against the bigger names in the company like Punk was then there's a big problem here. Bryan wasn't doing this, and if you're going to try to argue that Punk was a bigger draw than Bryan is now, I am going to point this out because it pretty much tells the whole story on why you're wrong on the matter.



Sonnen Says said:


> Ratings shouldn't judge who's a draw because ratings aren't as high as high as before so there is no point in arguing about it.


And this right here is your biggest problem.

The rest of your post doesn't even matter. This is once again where your problem lies. It basically sums up why you are so clueless on the matter. Ratings from the past DON'T MATTER. Times have changed. As time goes on, wrestling's popularity continues to go on a decline. Despite this, so far that hasn't been the case this year, and it might stay that way. Only time will tell. Regardless, you are once again continuing to look at the ratings as a whole and you are failing to understand the concept of drawing viewers in. If a large some of people out of average are tuning in to see you, then clearly you are a draw. There is no disputing this. 

But for what ever reason, you are looking at overall ratings, where EVERYONE is taken into account here, and are trying to tell me that a high rating on a show that Punk was involved with where a segment he was involved in didn't even have much of a ratings gain ended up being higher on a show that Bryan was on where he had the highest amount of viewers watching in a segment he was involved in somehow means that Punk is the bigger draw. This is your mindset and I'm sorry to tell you this, but that's not how it works. That doesn't mean in any possible way that Punk is a bigger draw than Bryan. And only an idiot is going to think otherwise. Hell, you just got done pointing out to me that Punk/Orton had a better quarter rating than Bryan/Orton. Do you even understand how stupid you sound just for bringing that up? That doesn't matter at all. All that means is that there were more people on average watching at that time than there were more people on average watching at the time Bryan/Orton occurred. In other words, the average audience numbers decreased.

You want to know who I can blame that on? Punk. Because he had his time of being on top for a very long time before Bryan did. Do I think that's the case? No, it's stupid to think otherwise. But I have a very logical reason to do so. You for what ever reason are continuing to try to make it sound like the ratings being the lowest since 97 somehow takes away from Bryan's drawing power. It doesn't, and all you need is common sense to realize this. 

You want to prove me wrong? Provide me with times where segments involving PUNK where he plays a SIGNIFICANT ROLE that people care about (still laughing about you using a match where Bryan was a referee as proof that he couldn't draw), and where he's doing this on a CONSISTENT basis. Bryan has been doing what I just described for a good 2-3 months now, and he did this numerous times before hand, and so far from what I've seen, much more times than Punk ever did. Prove us wrong and show us this. All you've shown us so far was instances where Punk was heavily protected. 

The rest of your post I've read, and I'd basically be repeating myself if I responded to all of it. Regardless, it's all just as idiotic as what you just posted here so there's no real difference.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Oh my god... walls of texts... walls of text everywhere!

Can't we all just laugh at Smackdown's most recent viewership number and be all LOLZ and getting along?


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Crap, yeah there is no way in hell I am reading all that.


----------



## RabidCrow

TOO MANY LINES!
TOO MANY LINES!


----------



## Bob the Jobber

You guys put more effort into arguing ratings than Creative does in storylines.


----------



## KingLobos

Vyer said:


> *looks in thread*


This. lol the hilarity is out of control.


----------



## Sonnen Says

TheGMofGods said:


> Okay, I'm going to spell it out again for you. PAY ATTENTION THIS TIME.
> 
> The higher the ratings, THE MORE YOU PAY to advertisers. Right now, BRYAN is WWE's biggest ratings draw. So far he has brought in better ratings this year than Cena did as champion last year. There for, Bryan right now is their most valuable draw because he is clearly the main attraction. There are other things to keep in mind here to, such as other draws on the show as well including Cena and Evolution, but right now Bryan is their biggest draw and this can't be disputed.
> 
> 
> 
> Again how many times should I tell you ratings aren't that high they wont make any differenct they still make the same profit as last year in terms of advertising and commercials those aren't a one time deal. If it gets below 3 and slightly above, then it's the same as last year, nothing is gonna change. Yeah when ratings gets higher like 3.5 demand will rise but that isn't the case again 2.96 is a proof ratings aren't as constant it's the same as last year, not a huge improvement like you think. Bryan is one of the draws but if he had a weak or thin roster do you think the overall rating will be the same? No.
> 
> WWE's objective is to make as much money as possible. The fact that you are continuing to bring up the past ratings is just stupid because you're acting like the blame is to be placed on Bryan. That isn't the case. Right now Bryan is one of the main reasons (not the only reason like you're suggesting I'm saying) that the ratings are better this year and again, there is no denying this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, with that said, why does the WWE need Bryan? Because the less ratings they have, the less money they can charge for advertisers who want to promote their product on highly rated shows. Every ratings point counts. That's how ratings work. If you weren't so clueless in this regard you would understand this. I just got done taking a class on this in college, I know what I'm talking about. Do some research and stop acting like you know everything when that clearly isn't the case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Raw despite the low ratings they still get the top rated shows in monday so that doesn't matter, just understand that, Raw isn't gonna get 2.5 rating without Bryan they will still manage to get the same ratings they are getting now since they have a strong roster and a lot of future stars are debuting now which means the roster will get stacked the more they come since I believe some of them will make a big impact. Do they need Bryan Yes but do they need in the top in the long run? No because again their is guys that are ready for that spot. The Shield edibility isn't the same as last year they are a big deal and they are strongly booked and the fans connect with them, so if you deny the fact that they're way more credible than any midcarder in the last 3 years than you're clearly trying to ignore it and the same thing goes to The Wyatts they're all strongly booked and are as legit as any top star can get. So the roster is more stacked than any former year except maybe no Punk or Rock but either ways overall the roster is much stronger than 13/12.
> 
> What does this have to do with Bryan? :lmao WWE will never get rid off commercials they will rather get rid off Bryan instead. Commercials has nothing to do with Bryan get a damn clue. WWE isn't making money out of Bryan because of ratings or commercials he isn't bringing Austin level ratings nor is he bringing that much viewers, it fucking gets below 3 or just a bit higher every damn week so take ratings out of your head. Nowadays they can only judge somebody's drawing by how much buys/merch/MS attention he or she brings to WWE.
Click to expand...




> It doesn't matter what level of ratings he's bringing in. The fact of the matter is he's bringing in the best ratings for WWE right now. What part of this are you not understanding?


One of the best not the best, considering he's part of the major storylines than I'm not surprised. He draws with top tier guys I don't see why it's a surprised. When you put him with Orton, Brodus, Miz, Ziggler, Big E, Axel, Young, ADR, etc. than he will be drawing far less because he will be shoved down the card and not be part of the major storylines. All the ones Bryan faced has credibility and are considered top tier talents and some are future of this business. I don't know how many times I should say it but those guys I mentioned aren't as half as over as them just admit the truth. They are far bigger at this point than they will ever be and ever was. 



> Again, WWE's goal is to make as much money as possible, which is, again, why Bryan is such a valuable asset to them right now.
> 
> And WWE DOES have commercials. You might want to re write your sentence there.


So at this point only ratings should be taken seriously not the buys, merch, live events sales, ME, etc. Because that's the only thing you Bryan marks talk about and ignore the fact that Cena is selling 5x more than Bryan in merch even tho Bryan is cheered massively and also the fact that the media don't talk about Bryan as much as Cena or even Punk. Bryan haven't been in any major show, he's not a big deal to them yet. Bryan live events aren't as high as Cena isn't there a thread showing how much Cena draws audiences compared to Bryan in live events. Bryan isn't even outdrawing Punk in online orders yet UW is. It's all part of the word Draw, because again WWE wont just accept Bryan to have high rated segment they won't, the fact UW sold more merch than Cena and not Bryan is really sad just shows how much people could careless about Bryan, they don't buy his stuff and they don't care enough to pay money to see him in PPVs. Punk again have been top merch seller for a long time and stayed there even tho he left the company, his buys is still higher than Bryan's just because Bryan has one PPV buy over the other one doesn't mean a damn thing overall Punk have had a lot more higher buys than Bryan in different PPVs.

Oh really I didn't know WWE have commercials fpalm. Anyway I don't see Bryan commercials or the fact that he isn't in any commercial like Cena is despite you thinking Bryan is the top ratings draw. Ce



> It shows them where some of the interest is and who the fans want to get behind. The amount of money that they make off of merchandise sales and PPV buys isn't anywhere close to the amount they make off of ratings.


Maybe but that's not always the case, Punk have got higher ratings than Bryan in 2013 alone than Bryan did since he got pushed. I don't care if you think Punk facing those big names is the reason because he's been consite;y drawing great ratings for his segment like with Axel/Ryback and he didn't lose viewers since WM very few he did because he was directionless third half of 2013 so that's not his fault since that's hard to do. If you bring Rock and have him face Young and Axel and all those guys down the card than he won't be as credible because that will be a huge step down. Tho despite that Punk have produced some big numbers with Axel/Ryback at that time it trumps any number Bryan got in 2013. It's very impressive since you can't compare Axel/Ryback credibility with Shield or Orton to them they are just guys to be fed to. 



> Bryan isn't just "one of the draws", he's their biggest draw right now. Again, stop ignoring this fact.


Nope, overall he's nowhere near Cena. Seriously in terms of buys, ticket sales, live events and merch he trumps him, also Bryan never produced the same numbers Cena produced when he was in the top last year. All you have to show is ratings when he wad with the Authority, lets see Bryan in Cena position now and see if he's gonna get the biggest of the night, its all about the booking and were is his place in the card nothing more. WWE doesn't make money out of one person because of ratings that's dumb. 




> Yes you did.


No I didn't, read the rest. All I said is that WWE isn't making money because of one person because the overall ratings matter and if you wanna have a strong overall rating than you need a strong roster not just Bryan. Take off Shield and Wyatts out of the show than ratings will go down, Bryan alone wouldn't do shit be honest with yourself, if Bryan had the thin roster of 2012 then ratings will get just as bad if not worse but I wont blindly blame Bryan for it because I'm not you trying to think it's all about him. If WWE thinks ratings will be as good they wont be bringing Hogan or Batista back because they need starpower if that doesn't make sense than nothing will.



> And if they didn't have Bryan at all, then suddenly you don't have that higher quarter rating and the ratings drop, and there for you make less money. Again, WWE's goal=make as much money as possible.


Not really Raw got 3.25 rating without him and with him they got 2.96 so either ways some guy will because he will be pushed for it and be major part of the show and that doesn't mean push Santino but like one of the shield members or Cesaro/Bray or even one of the guys in NXT so either ways WWE always finds their top rated segments when they book their stars properly. Punk was drawing top notch since 2013 and have been part of the highest of the night most of the time, and so he was in 2012 even when overall ratings were bad his segments almost always draws the most.



> What the hell are you talking about? He's at number 2 right now on merchandise sales, and the PPV numbers in 2013 are noticeably better than they were in 2011 and in most parts of 2012. Again, stop making things up.


Yeah only the fact that Cena is selling 5x more than him. Bryan selling more than Orton isn't any good. Even in online order by last month UW have outsold Cena even when has far less items than him and Bryan too. So if Bryan is truly a bigger draw why isn't he able to do that and why did Punk do. WWE gets a lot of money from merch and I mean a lot. Vince knows Punk makes more money for him than Bryan that's why he wants him back because a huge asst to the company. No 2012 got higher buys and 11 are almost pretty much the same. Also half of 2013 buys isn't because of Bryan as he was pushed later in the year. I don't make things up the fact you don't have a source to question that is really sad.



> You were just saying in the previous part that I quoted that the way the ratings work is some fans tune in for a particular wrestler and they tune out for others. So why are you focusing on the overall rating when I'm referring to just the parts that involve Bryan?


So why are you telling me Bryan is making them money because of ratings, it's just not what you think dude. Overall rating is what matters.



> Your point is absolutely irrelevant because WWE was still missing the Rock and Punk which were both crucial parts of the ratings from last year. WWE put themselves in a tough spot by pushing someone that no one wanted to see and had to involve Bryan in two major programs, which in the end ended generating a lot of interest. You can keep pointing out the ratings being the lowest since 97, but all you need is common sense to realize that they don't really mean anything here. We aren't arguing which era drew more we're talking about an individual vs an individual, there is no logical reason for you to be bringing up the ratings from 97.


It's the lowest just deal with it since you want to be the guy who thinks Bryan is a bigger draw because of ratings and nit picking old numbers to prove. They are not excuses they are just common sense. When we get to the end of this year, you will see ups and down like last year so nothing is changing unless the roster improves and that doesn't mean we should have Bryan in every segment :lmao. 



> And Ultimate Warrior didn't appear until the WWE Hall
> ll of Fame so mentioning him doesn't make any sense.


I mentioned him because he had a tribute show and the week before it he had a segment which got one of the highest of the night. Either ways he was part of two major shows.



> He was drawing very well before when he was shoved down the card, I see no reason why that would change here.


Now he wasn't I didn't mention the ones before he got pushed because some said it wont be fair will it be fair now if I show those numbers? He did well very few times but a lot of times he didn't.



> Wanna show me the post? Because odds are you probably read it wrong yet again.


No I don't I'm sick of it, if you have time go read his posts again it's in few pages back. 



> And what's getting old is your tendency to make up bullshit regarding something happening that clearly never happened. I've already spotted you doing it at least five times in this post alone.


Knowledge is all you need.



> First off, SS and HIAC weren't the only good ones. Second, as I stated before, SS did good because there were two big main events for this PPV. I won't deny that Punk/Lesnar was a huge drawing card for this event, *but don't sit there and act like that was the only thing that drew at this PPV.* Third, Night of Champions managed to do better than NOC from 2011 where HHH/Punk was headlining it (or was that Vengeance? Fuck it don't care). Even if it didn't beat out the one that had CENA vs PUNK, it still had good buyrates, as did Payback and Money in the Bank, which beat out Money in the Bank 2012. Fourth, Punk was not the main drawing attraction for most of the 2012 events because ratings were basically showing that no one gave a shit about him. Luckily for Punk there were other people around that people actually cared about (I already discussed this before) that people actually DID care about.


You're really confusing me. I didn't say it was the only thing that drew just that it was the biggest match and Meltzer approves that. Ok NOC 13 did better than NOC 11 so what? It only got higher because it had higher international buys but in terms of domestic 11 got higher. Also NOC 09 and 12 got higher that's what matters. Punk/Ryback in HIAC 12 without Cena did 200k buys which is good for a B level PPV and mostly because Cena and HBK HIAC in 13 got higher because Bryan/Orton got horrible buys in BG and NOC compared to it. Anything below the 200k shouldn't be called good buys because it's still one of the lowest ever for the PPV. Not true at all he was getting one of the highest if not the highest after WM, didn't just say you can't blame one guy for the overall rating well you just did. Punk ratings in 2012 from Q1 and Q2 got higher than this year. It only got low by the end of the year but that's not because Punk wasn't getting the highest of the night it's actually because Raw had zero starpower outside of him and Cena. ADR, Orton, and Sheamus were losing half million views almost every damn week and there weren't enough stars like now. I don't know if you watched the show back then because if you did you will know what I mean. 



> Nitpicking is dumb, *but when you are losing viewers or are making very weak gains against the bigger names in the company like Punk was then there's a big problem here.* Bryan wasn't doing this, and if you're going to try to argue that Punk was a bigger draw than Bryan is now, I am going to point this out because it pretty much tells the whole story on why you're wrong on the matter.


Like who? plz get a clue. Stop making up shit. Miz, Ziggler, ADR, etc. aren't big names. 

And this right here is your biggest problem.



> The rest of your post doesn't even matter. This is once again where your problem lies. It basically sums up why you are so clueless on the matter. Ratings from the past DON'T MATTER. Times have changed. As time goes on, wrestling's popularity continues to go on a decline. Despite this, so far that hasn't been the case this year, and it might stay that way. Only time will tell. Regardless, you are once again continuing to look at the ratings as a whole and you are failing to understand the concept of drawing viewers in. If a large some of people out of average are tuning in to see you, then clearly you are a draw. There is no disputing this.


Time have changed indeed but ratings have been the same for years that's all I have to say about that.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Didn't read his post yet, should I keep going guys?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

TheGMofGods said:


> Didn't read his post yet, should I keep going guys?


Keep going. All he can answer you with is a *PHIL*ibuster.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

SonnenSays is IN THE POCKET THROWING BOMBS, but will he fail and thus break the promise made to his dying father like the REAL Sonnen has, several times?????


----------



## funnyfaces1

Sonnen Says actually makes valid points.


----------



## #Mark

funnyfaces1 said:


> Sonnen Says actually makes valid points.


The one point that can refute the million word essays he's writing is that the quarter Punk was pushed the hardest is the lowest quarter since Diesel was champ.


----------



## robertdeniro

RabidCrow said:


>


:lmao :lmao :lmao

Keep it up guys (Y).


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Well alright shiv, I shall continue.

Looking at Sonnen's post now, this may very well be one of his dumbest posts here on this site. LONG POST INCOMING!



Sonnen Says said:


> Again how many times should I tell you ratings aren't that high they wont make any differenct they still make the same profit as last year in terms of advertising and commercials those aren't a one time deal.


Where the hell do you get your facts from? That's not how advertising and commercials work. A network can easily cut off advertisements from their time slots anytime they want to, especially if the advertisers don't pay them the price that they are demanding. 

With that said, no, they are not making the same money from last year off of commercials and advertisements. You have no idea how incredibly stupid you sound right now just by saying this, and not to mention you have no sources or proof or anything for that matter that proves that. Right now the ratings on average are higher, so WWE is making much more money off of ratings this year than they were last year. This isn't disputable, and if you think otherwise then you had better do some digging. 



Sonnen Says said:


> If it gets below 3 and slightly above, then it's the same as last year, nothing is gonna change. Yeah when ratings gets higher like 3.5 demand will rise but that isn't the case again 2.96 is a proof ratings aren't as constant it's the same as last year, not a huge improvement like you think.


???

Do you not understand how much a ratings point is? 1.0=roughly around a million viewers, which means that a .1 is around 100,000 viewers. You're seriously telling me that they're only going to increase prices if they reach the next .5 mark? 

Again, where are you getting your facts from? It goes without saying that what you just said isn't true at all. If a show's ratings increase by .1, the demand is going to increase. If it actually went by what you just said, then a lot of shows would charge much, much more for advertisements because going from 3.0 on a consistent basis to 3.5 on a consistent basis in a short amount of time is very difficult to do. The idea that you're trying to say that the prices Networks charge advertisers only increases if their ratings go from 3.0 to 3.5 or anywhere from that range is both idiotic and laughable. The advertisers don't make the decisions on how much money they have to pay to advertise products, the Networks do. All the advertisers can do is decide whether or not they want to pay the money, and they understand that the higher the ratings=the higher the demand.

And why do you keep bringing up the 2.96 rating? The first hour was horrible and there was a reason for that, and it wasn't because of WWE. Other events happening at that time were the reason. The fact you're bringing up the 2.96 rating at this point is, again, laughable and idiotic.



Sonnen Says said:


> Raw despite the low ratings they still get the top rated shows in monday so that doesn't matter, just understand that


Yes they do matter. Again, the higher your ratings, the more money you make. WWE's objective: Make as much money as possible. If there's a chance to make more, they will make more. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Raw isn't gonna get 2.5 rating without Bryan they will still manage to get the same ratings they are getting now since they have a strong roster and a lot of future stars are debuting now which means the roster will get stacked the more they come since I believe some of them will make a big impact. Do they need Bryan Yes but do they need in the top in the long run? No because again their is guys that are ready for that spot.


No there isn't. Do you understand where Bryan is at right now? He got to the top due to overwhelming fan support. That's incredible. Do you know the last time that happened? I sure as hell don't. Bryan is in an incredible place right now with WWE, he's gotten to the point where he's become so valuable for them that he can't be replaced at this point, both from a talent standpoint and value standpoint. 



Sonnen Says said:


> The Shield edibility isn't the same as last year they are a big deal and they are strongly booked and the fans connect with them, so if you deny the fact that they're way more credible than any midcarder in the last 3 years than you're clearly trying to ignore it and the same thing goes to The Wyatts they're all strongly booked and are as legit as any top star can get. So the roster is more stacked than any former year except maybe no Punk or Rock but either ways overall the roster is much stronger than 13/12.


Today? Yes, that is true about the Wyatts and Shield. In most of 2013? No, they weren't, and the ratings prove this. 



Sonnen Says said:


> What does this have to do with Bryan? WWE will never get rid off commercials they will rather get rid off Bryan instead. Commercials has nothing to do with Bryan get a damn clue. WWE isn't making money out of Bryan because of ratings or commercials he isn't bringing Austin level ratings nor is he bringing that much viewers, it fucking gets below 3 or just a bit higher every damn week so take ratings out of your head.


These are the ratings so far for this year after Wrestlemania. In order: 3.7, 3.2 (A big drop and Bryan wasn't on this show), 2.97 (the lowest rating of 2014 and so far the only time this year they've gone below a 3, and since the segments involving Bryan had, once again, the highest amount of total viewers, this was clearly not Bryans fault, which again makes me ask the question of why you keep bringing up that rating, you're sounding more and more like the people who bring up the 2.2 rating in regards to Punk), 3.3, and a 3.02. So for every damn week, the ratings have been way above a three, and were only barely above it once and only went below it once. So again, you're wrong. 

Now, compared to last year after Wrestlemania? In order, 3.43, 3.07, 3.13, 3.06, 2.89. The ratings are noticeably better. So no, Bryan isn't bringing in Austin level ratings. But the thing is, he doesn't need to. He's bringing in better ratings than they were last year. There are of course other reasons as well, but when looking at the ratings breakdowns, the main focus from audiences is on him. So yes, WWE is making more money off of commercials and advertisements because thanks to Bryan and a few others as well, WWE's ratings are better this year and there for are charging higher prices. This is how commercials and advertisements work. 



Sonnen Says said:


> One of the best not the best, considering he's part of the major storylines than I'm not surprised. He draws with top tier guys I don't see why it's a surprised. When you put him with Orton, Brodus, Miz, Ziggler, Big E, Axel, Young, ADR, etc. than he will be drawing far less because he will be shoved down the card and not be part of the major storylines.


So then why the hell is Bryan still drawing the highest numbers when he is put with Orton and ADR? He did it twice with Orton leading into Wrestlemania and he just got done doing it with Del Rio this past week. So where is your argument here? 



Sonnen Says said:


> So at this point only ratings should be taken seriously not the buys, merch, live events sales, ME, etc. Because that's the only thing you Bryan marks talk about and ignore the fact that Cena is selling 5x more than Bryan in merch even tho Bryan is cheered massively and also the fact that the media don't talk about Bryan as much as Cena or even Punk.


We're talking about ratings because THIS IS A RATINGS THREAD. The ratings are the only thing that matter at this point, and at the end of the day the ratings are the most important aspect of the WWE, so why should we talk about anything else? We know how much more merchandise Cena is selling than Bryan is, and we know how much more Cena and Punk are talked about by the media. But here's the thing, no one gives a shit. Because we know where Bryan's stance is on that. But do you want me to talk about those things? Okay.

Bryan is currently number 2 in merchandise sales, opened and main evented what was most likely the most successful Wrestlemania of all time financially, if he's not at a house show then fans are given REFUNDS, and in this day and age PPV's he was involved in did pretty well in buys. Nothing great except for a few here and there (summerslam, HIAC, etc), but you get the point. 

But again, none of those matter, because we are not discussing those. Bringing them up constantly at this point is just grasping for straws, especially considering how we've already now proven to you numerous times that ratings are the most important aspect when it comes to being a draw. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Bryan haven't been in any major show, he's not a big deal to them yet.


...He just main evented his third PPV in a row. Bryan hasn't been in any major show? What the hell are you talking about? And not a big deal to them yet?? What?! He fucking headlined Wrestlemania 30 and WON. He's beaten Cena, Orton, Triple H, Batista, and Sheamus all clean in the middle of the ring, and you're telling me Bryan isn't a big deal to them yet? Are you high?



Sonnen Says said:


> Bryan live events aren't as high as Cena isn't there a thread showing how much Cena draws audiences compared to Bryan in live events. Bryan isn't even outdrawing Punk in online orders yet UW is. It's all part of the word Draw, because again WWE wont just accept Bryan to have high rated segment they won't, the fact UW sold more merch than Cena and not Bryan is really sad just shows how much people could careless about Bryan, they don't buy his stuff and they don't care enough to pay money to see him in PPVs. Punk again have been top merch seller for a long time and stayed there even tho he left the company, his buys is still higher than Bryan's just because Bryan has one PPV buy over the other one doesn't mean a damn thing overall Punk have had a lot more higher buys than Bryan in different PPVs.


This might be one of the worst parts of your post.

You're saying people in general could care less about Bryan and don't buy his stuff.

If this is the case, then why is Bryan currently number 2 in merchandise sales and why is he drawing the most viewers in? Again, your logic is full of holes and is filled with a lot of bullshit. 

And Punk didn't have higher buys than Bryan did in different PPVs, PPVs involving Punk in a major role had higher buys than Bryan did in PPV's involving him in a major role. I can easily reverse that around and say PPV's involving Bryan in a major role had more buys than PPV's involving Punk in a major role. Because both are true. The fact that you're saying this based off of a time where the PPV's on average had higher buy rates and the buy rates kept steadily decreasing over time for a very long period of time is once again grasping for straws.

And of course you are once again showing how big of a hypocrite you are by trying to make it sound like those PPV's where all Punk when in the past you have complained about people claiming that good PPV buys were all Bryan (like Summerslam for example). 



Sonnen Says said:


> Oh really I didn't know WWE have commercials fpalm. Anyway I don't see Bryan commercials or the fact that he isn't in any commercial like Cena is despite you thinking Bryan is the top ratings draw. Ce


:lmao 

1. You must not know that WWE has commercials, because if you did you would know that Bryan was in the promotional commercials for Extreme Rules on a daily basis this past month. He was also the main feature in a commercial WWE had thanking the fans that aired on a weekly basis after Wrestlemania where he pretended to be in an empty arena. So either you don't pay much attention to the actual commercials, or you are, like always, full of shit.
2. WWE doesn't put people in a commercial because they draw viewers. Kofi Kingston and The Miz both had their own commercials at one point. Kofi Kingston can't even draw a fucking straight line. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Maybe but that's not always the case, Punk have got higher ratings than Bryan in 2013 alone than Bryan did since he got pushed.


On average, no he hasn't. If we're talking about segments that involve that particular person and just one other performer, then on average Bryan has Punk easily beat out. And all of the segments where Punk lost viewers immediately takes the amount he drew down big time. If we're talking individual segments and comparing them then yes, Punk had bigger gains. But that's not a very good argument. 



Sonnen Says said:


> I don't care if you think Punk facing those big names is the reason because he's been consite;y drawing great ratings for his segment like with Axel/Ryback and he didn't lose viewers since WM very few he did because he was directionless third half of 2013 so that's not his fault since that's hard to do.


How am I supposed to take you seriously at this point when you just spelled out point blank to me why Punk isn't as big of a ratings draw as you claim? I don't give a shit if he was directionless, I'm not going to deny that was the case, but if you're a major ratings draw, then fans are tuning in to see YOU, they don't give a shit what you're doing at this point, especially the casuals. Especially when you consider the fact that Punk was actually involved in a lot of great programs through out 2013. Yea there were dark moments (the build up to HIAC with Punk vs Ryback/Heyman), but for the most part he was still able to put on a lot of great promos through out that year and had entertaining matches. I don't care what he was doing and most people who want to watch someone don't care either. If they're waiting for him to do something exciting with someone, then you're basically telling me that it's the match up or the other person that draws, not Punk.



Sonnen Says said:


> If you bring Rock and have him face Young and Axel and all those guys down the card than he won't be as credible because that will be a huge step down. Tho despite that Punk have produced some big numbers with Axel/Ryback at that time it trumps any number Bryan got in 2013. It's very impressive since you can't compare Axel/Ryback credibility with Shield or Orton to them they are just guys to be fed to.


In terms of name, no I can't. But in terms of drawing power? Yes, I can definitely compare the Shield with Axel/Ryback, without a doubt. Because in 2013, the Shield weren't drawing anything. In fact there were a lot of times where they were losing viewers because there was a very long stretch where the simply weren't doing anything. They were the bodyguards for the authority and that was it. Orton however? No, I can't compare them with Orton. But guess what? Punk struggled to gain ratings with Orton, so what does that tell you?



Sonnen Says said:


> Nope, overall he's nowhere near Cena. Seriously in terms of buys, ticket sales, live events and merch he trumps him, also Bryan never produced the same numbers Cena produced when he was in the top last year. All you have to show is ratings when he wad with the Authority, lets see Bryan in Cena position now and see if he's gonna get the biggest of the night, its all about the booking and were is his place in the card nothing more. WWE doesn't make money out of one person because of ratings that's dumb.


It's not dumb, it's literally the way it is. You can't just say something that is in fact happening isn't happening because it's dumb. Not everything you say happens is happening Sonnen. In fact barely any of the things you have claimed happened actually happened. You need to start living in the real world (which is ironic given that we're talking about a scripted sport). Ratings are what the WWE makes a shitload of money off of, the fact that you're still trying to deny this after it has been explained to you and pointed out to you with countless amounts of evidence is only proving how biased you are. And so far you still have yet to show us any proof as to why we are wrong in this regard. 

And overall he's doing better than Cena right now. Again, we are talking about drawing power. Buys, ticket sales, live events and merchandise have nothing to do with this because buys are no longer a factor, and merchandise as we've stated before is not a determining factor in your drawing abilities. We've gone over this numerous times now. Right now, according to ratings breakdowns, Bryan's segments are drawing much bigger amounts of viewers than Cena's are. 



Sonnen Says said:


> No I didn't, read the rest. All I said is that WWE isn't making money because of one person because the overall ratings matter and if you wanna have a strong overall rating than you need a strong roster not just Bryan.


But the thing you keep on forgetting is that Bryan is currently their HIGHEST RATINGS DRAW. So if your highest ratings draw is gone all of a sudden for a good amount of time, then your overall ratings suffer. This is very simple math dude, I shouldn't need to explain this to you, you're not a baby. 

With that said, yes you did say that. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Take off Shield and Wyatts out of the show than ratings will go down, Bryan alone wouldn't do shit be honest with yourself, if Bryan had the thin roster of 2012 then ratings will get just as bad if not worse but I wont blindly blame Bryan for it because I'm not you trying to think it's all about him. If WWE thinks ratings will be as good they wont be bringing Hogan or Batista back because they need starpower if that doesn't make sense than nothing will.


I never said it was all about Bryan, don't put words in my mouth. I said that Bryan is their highest ratings draw, therefor from an individual aspect, Bryan has had the biggest impact on the ratings. I'm not sorry if you can't understand that. It's not a very hard concept to understand, so there's no reason why you shouldn't have been able to figure this out by now.

The only one making this about one person here is you, because you are continuing to put the blame solely on Bryan in times where ratings were low. Want proof? Here's your next post.



Sonnen Says said:


> Not really Raw got 3.25 rating without him and with him they got 2.96 so either ways some guy will because he will be pushed for it and be major part of the show and that doesn't mean push Santino but like one of the shield members or Cesaro/Bray or even one of the guys in NXT so either ways WWE always finds their top rated segments when they book their stars properly. Punk was drawing top notch since 2013 and have been part of the highest of the night most of the time, and so he was in 2012 even when overall ratings were bad his segments almost always draws the most.


Not only are you now acting like it's one person here but you're making things up again. You just said that Punk has been their top notch draw since 2013. This was never the case, at all. You tried to make it sound like this was the case as well in 2012. Again, this was never the case. Punk was never consistently drawing in the most viewers for his segments in both 2012 and 2013. You're not fooling anyone.



Sonnen Says said:


> Yeah only the fact that Cena is selling 5x more than him. Bryan selling more than Orton isn't any good. Even in online order by last month UW have outsold Cena even when has far less items than him and Bryan too. So if Bryan is truly a bigger draw why isn't he able to do that and why did Punk do. WWE gets a lot of money from merch and I mean a lot. Vince knows Punk makes more money for him than Bryan that's why he wants him back because a huge asst to the company. No 2012 got higher buys and 11 are almost pretty much the same. Also half of 2013 buys isn't because of Bryan as he was pushed later in the year. I don't make things up the fact you don't have a source to question that is really sad.


1. You just contradicted yourself once again. You're saying being a bigger merchandise seller than Orton isn't any good and yet before you were saying that Orton is a top tier guy. 
2. A major star from the past dying is going to most likely outsell anyone in merchandise sales dude. You're grasping for straws again at this point.
3. Why isn't Bryan able to do that? Because he didn't die yet. Why do I need to point this out to you?
4. WWE does make a lot of money from Merchandise sales. But the fact is, they make a lot more money off of ratings. 
5. Bryan wasn't pushed later in the year of 2013. He basically started being pushed after Extreme Rules where he was on a hot streak and beat just about everyone he faced. He beat Orton, Kane, was the first person to beat the Shield, Sheamus, Christian, and beat John Cena at Summerslam to become WWE Champion. So he clearly wasn't pushed "later" in 2013.
6. Bryan definitely was a factor in a lot of the 2013 PPV's in terms of buys. I'm not going into how big of an effect because I don't need to. 



Sonnen Says said:


> So why are you telling me Bryan is making them money because of ratings, it's just not what you think dude. Overall rating is what matters.


Jesus Christ man. I could talk to a brick wall and would probably get more accomplished with that then talk to you. 

It's not about what I think, it's about what I know.

What I know is right now Bryan is their biggest draw. There for, he is having the biggest impact on the overall ratings. Fans want to see him the most. There for, the overall rating is bigger than it potentially could have been because of Bryan. There for, Bryan is making them more money because of ratings.

I still don't know why I have to point this out to you. If you're not as dumb as other people here are claiming you are then you shouldn't need this constantly pointed out to you. 



Sonnen Says said:


> It's the lowest just deal with it since you want to be the guy who thinks Bryan is a bigger draw because of ratings and nit picking old numbers to prove. They are not excuses they are just common sense. When we get to the end of this year, you will see ups and down like last year so nothing is changing unless the roster improves and that doesn't mean we should have Bryan in every segment :lmao.


:lmao again, you just contradicted yourself.



Sonnen Says said:


> Overall rating is what matters


You just got done saying this. But now you're using overall ratings as proof that Bryan isn't as big of a draw as we claim. But just before, you were telling me that how good overall ratings are isn't a good indication of how good of a ratings draw Bryan is. 

Okay sonnen, if that's the case here then which is it? Do overall ratings matter the most? Or do individual ratings matter the most? Come on, decide. Because I'm really curious. 



Sonnen Says said:


> I mentioned him because he had a tribute show and the week before it he had a segment which got one of the highest of the night. Either ways he was part of two major shows.


His tribute show came after Wrestlemania. In that post you were talking about the build up to Wrestlemania. So there was no logical reason for you to bring up the Ultimate Warrior there, there for adding to the very large list of idiotic things you've said already. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Now he wasn't I didn't mention the ones before he got pushed because some said it wont be fair will it be fair now if I show those numbers? He did well very few times but a lot of times he didn't.


Well that depends, are you referring to the times where Bryan was put down the card AFTER wining the WWE Championship? Or are you referring to the time before he first won the WWE Championship?



Sonnen Says said:


> No I don't I'm sick of it, if you have time go read his posts again it's in few pages back.


So in other words the post doesn't exist. Gotcha. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Knowledge is all you need.


To spot your bullshit? Yes, knowledge is all I need for that. In fact I'm thankful I have it, it's made this much easier. 



Sonnen Says said:


> You're really confusing me. I didn't say it was the only thing that drew just that it was the biggest match and Meltzer approves that.


You tried to make it sound like the people who gave credit to Bryan/Cena where wrong and that Punk/Lesnar was the main attraction and Meltzer agrees. No one gives a shit what Meltzer says in this regard. We all know how big of an attraction Punk/Lesnar was, a lot of us wanted to watch the PPV just for that reason alone. The fact that you are even bringing that up tells me and everyone else here that you want to just leave Bryan/Cena out of the picture and give all the credit in the world to Punk/Lesnar. 

No one was ever discrediting Punk/Lesnar. That match got the amount of credit that it deserved. It was a huge dream match up. In terms of what was the true main event, Bryan/Cena was without a doubt the true main event. This isn't a case of one match up being bigger than the other, it's simply the fact that this was a never before seen match up on TV or PPV (fuck their 2003 match) and it was, like Lesnar/Punk, a huge HUGE match up. And it was for the WWE Championship. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Ok NOC 13 did better than NOC 11 so what? It only got higher because it had higher international buys but in terms of domestic 11 got higher. Also NOC 09 and 12 got higher that's what matters.


How does that matter in any possible way? NOC 2009 is completely irrelevant to this (yes I know what happened at that PPV event, are you aware of who Punk was facing?), and at NOC in 2012 this was the first time in a long time that the main attention was given to Punk, and it was only given to him because he was facing Cena. Yes, this definitely hurt Punk's drawing power for a good portion of that year, it's unfortunate, but Cena was the bigger factor here, not Punk. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Punk/Ryback in HIAC 12 without Cena did 200k buys which is good for a B level PPV and mostly because Cena and HBK HIAC in 13 got higher because Bryan/Orton got horrible buys in BG and NOC compared to it. Anything below the 200k shouldn't be called good buys because it's still one of the lowest ever for the PPV.


Battleground was expected to have low buys, not a very good example to use. 3 weeks after a PPV just happened with a rematch and a very weak card is going to have low buys no matter what. And again, in this day and age, below 200k isn't bad. It really depends on the situation and the card provided. NOC 2013 did not have a very good card (which is odd given that they just had a great Summerslam card...sort of). 



Sonnen Says said:


> Not true at all he was getting one of the highest if not the highest after WM, didn't just say you can't blame one guy for the overall rating well you just did.


No I didn't because I'm not referring to the overall rating, I'm referring to the individual segments and ratings for those moments. The only time I have ever referred to overall ratings was when dereailing your 2.97 rating, the ratings being lowest since 97 bullshit, the impact a certain amount of ratings can have on advertising, and when comparing the overall ratings from a certain time frame to another time frame. I then also brought up the other people around Punk to point out that the overall ratings for that year were saved thanks to them, because again, Punk wasn't drawing well, and his individual segments/matches were proof of this, the only proof I've been using when it came to that.

So again, stop putting words in my mouth. 



Sonnen Says said:


> Punk ratings in 2012 from Q1 and Q2 got higher than this year. It only got low by the end of the year but that's not because Punk wasn't getting the highest of the night it's actually because Raw had zero starpower outside of him and Cena. ADR, Orton, and Sheamus were losing half million views almost every damn week and there weren't enough stars like now. I don't know if you watched the show back then because if you did you will know what I mean.


And once again, you contradict yourself. You just told me to stop focusing on the overall ratings and to not put blame on one person and now you just said "Punk ratings". Are you kidding me? Do you really expect me to take you seriously at this point when you're saying shit like this? Especially when we are talking about a time period where they were building up for the first time that the Rock and John Cena were ever going to face off, and Taker/HHH were building up for their HIAC match? And then after words Brock Lesnar returned? Do you honestly expect me to take this seriously? 

And guess what, Punk was losing viewers too. Hell a match he was in at one point lost half a million viewers as well, and that was after 2012. But yea, sure, lets just ignore that, right? 



Sonnen Says said:


> Like who? plz get a clue. Stop making up shit. Miz, Ziggler, ADR, etc. aren't big names.


I'm not making shit up. At that time, they were big names. Stop going off of what's going on today and understand that things back then at that time weren't the same as they are now. All three of those guys were in different positions then than they were now. 

And he lost over 300,000 viewers against Cena. If you lose this many at the start of the match then I don't care how much they gain afterwords, common sense pretty much says that people weren't interested in watching them face each other and were only interested in what happened at the end of it. 



Sonnen Says said:


> And this right here is your biggest problem.


Being smarter than you isn't a problem.



Sonnen Says said:


> Time have changed indeed but ratings have been the same for years that's all I have to say about that.


But they clearly aren't the same. In fact this is another moment where you've once again contradicted yourself. You've been spending this entire time trying to argue why the ratings when Punk was on top were better or the reasons for them being different than they are now when Bryan is on top, but now you're here saying that the ratings have been the same for years?

Bullshit. You're absolutely full of it and it's laughable that funnyfaces over there just got done saying you make some valid points because you haven't made a single valid point here yet.


----------



## THANOS

:lmao Holy bloody hell GMofGods that post is going to render this page to a total of 5 posts at most haha. I will read it at some point though.


----------



## Chrome




----------



## Mr.S

The guy who spoke for Punk would not have been considered a joke had he accepted that Punk's reign draw wise was the worst in History. It destroyed the prestige of the belt, relegated the belt to a mid-tier title below Cena.

I can't remember anyone in WWE/F History single handedly destroying the prestige of the belt. Punk was a mid-carder WWE Champion who only ME when he faced guys like Rock. He was after-thought otherwise.

He dragged the ratings and everyone down. Del Rio, Miz, Ziggler, there were all hot property then. But him and his lack of drawing power dragged those feuds down because they were relegated to mid-carder feuds.

I don't know how this is even debatable. People would change Channels when Punk was on TV.

Let us admit this fact and then debate how Bryan has done. 

BTW what a retarded logic on Punk not facing big guys. A massively over Ryback, multiple feuds with Cena, a feud with Bryan, A feud with Undertaker, Del Rio, Miz, Ziggler and ofcourse a massive feud with Jericho and HHH Feud before the title program.

Punk faced every big talent WWE Had and even returning one's like Jericho, Rock, etc


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Chrome said:


>












This is the greatest fucking thing ever.

Btw was that green rep saying "wow" in response to how long my post was? Or was it a response to how badly I owned Sonnen says' logic?



THANOS said:


> :lmao Holy bloody hell GMofGods that post is going to render this page to a total of 5 posts at most haha. I will read it at some point though.


The spring semester just ended for me and I got back home on Thursday. So don't be surprised if I post incredibly long ass posts.


----------



## Chrome

TheGMofGods said:


> Btw was that green rep saying "wow" in response to how long my post was? Or was it a response to how badly I owned Sonnen says' logic?


Both.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Chrome said:


> Both.


So what you're saying is my post has the potential to be the greatest long post that no one wants to read in the history of everness?

My inner flair is wooing out of my inner organs. Something about what I just said there doesn't make sense but fuck it...



Mr.S said:


> The guy who spoke for Punk would not have been considered a joke had he accepted that Punk's reign draw wise was the worst in History. It destroyed the prestige of the belt, relegated the belt to a mid-tier title below Cena.
> 
> I can't remember anyone in WWE/F History single handedly destroying the prestige of the belt. Punk was a mid-carder WWE Champion who only ME when he faced guys like Rock. He was after-thought otherwise.
> 
> He dragged the ratings and everyone down. Del Rio, Miz, Ziggler, there were all hot property then. But him and his lack of drawing power dragged those feuds down because they were relegated to mid-carder feuds.
> 
> I don't know how this is even debatable. People would change Channels when Punk was on TV.
> 
> Let us admit this fact and then debate how Bryan has done.
> 
> BTW what a retarded logic on Punk not facing big guys. A massively over Ryback, multiple feuds with Cena, a feud with Bryan, A feud with Undertaker, Del Rio, Miz, Ziggler and ofcourse a massive feud with Jericho and HHH Feud before the title program.
> 
> Punk faced every big talent WWE Had and even returning one's like Jericho, Rock, etc


This guy destroyed sonnen's entire argument with about 1% the amount of work that I just did. 

#Internetproblems. :cody2


----------



## kokepepsi

:ti
its like watching a an athiest vs creationist debate on evolution
Except the atheist took 1 intro to bio class and thinks he knows shit
And the creationist read half the bible and is just repeating what everyone else says
:maury
at least you both stopped saying buyrates


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

kokepepsi said:


> :ti
> its like watching a an athiest vs creationist debate on evolution
> *Except the atheist took 1 intro to bio class and thinks he knows shit
> And the creationist read half the bible and is just repeating what everyone else says*
> :maury
> at least you both stopped saying buyrates


So wait which description do I fit?


----------



## O Fenômeno

Sonnen got bodied

:floyd1


----------



## Cack_Thu

Sonnen Says said:


> TheGMofGods,Blah blah blah blah...me smart you dumb dumb x 10000 times





TheGMofGods said:


> Sonnen Says,Blah blah blah blah...me smart you dumb dumb x 20000 times





Sonnen Says said:


> TheGMofGods,Blah blah blah blah...you dumb dumb me smart x 40000 times





TheGMofGods said:


> Sonnen Says,Blah blah blah blah...you dumb dumb me smart x 400000 times





Sonnen Says said:


> TheGMofGods,Blah blah blah blah...me dumb dumb you smart x 8000000 times





TheGMofGods said:


> Sonnen Says,Blah blah blah blah...you smart me dumb dumb x 100000000 times


...........

A Woody Allen joke at this point would end my life.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

To summarize: 

Sonnen Says= John Wayne Bobbitt.


TheGMofGods= John Holmes.


----------



## Born of Osiris

This thread is legendary :lmao


----------



## krai999

I can't help but sit back and be astonished at how Daniel Bryan manages to steal each and every episode of Raw. For the past two years, I watched Raw to see Punk. Not much else kept my attention during the time he was there. Bryan's performance this summer, though, has flipped that narrative, as the goat has captured the imaginations of smarks and marks alike. 

It gives me chills to say this.TO this day i can't believe ,that Bryan actually beat Triple H Batista and Orton the same night to become the unified wwe world heavy weight champion

This is a tricky subject to discuss, as it pits factions of the Internet Wrestling Community against one another. I, for one, am just thrilled this conversation has the opportunity to occur. I'm a big fan of both men and, while I can't claim an encyclopedic familiarity with each man's pre-WWE careers, I recognize that Ring of Honor fans are ecstatic to see both Bryan and Punk reaching this pinnacle. 

Punk shook up the wrestling world when he delivered one of the most infamous shoot promos of all time. The storyline that followed, though, didn't seem to have the full support of the front office. Jobbing out to Triple H on pay-per-view drove his unstoppable momentum into a brick wall. Even when he won the WWE title from Alberto Del Rio, the storylines that followed were never the focal point of the product. 

Bryan's recent ascension was clearly the focus of the company's creative direction. With big-money part-timer Brock Lesnar and main event draw Punk engaged in a bitter blood feud, it's Bryan's push that gotten the bulk of TV time. While Punk-Lesnar has major drawing power, Cena-Bryan was the primary sellling for SummerSlam, the second biggest show of the year. So this year even when he wasn't that much of a star during the time Bryan was the main focus in this whole summer angle last year 

Of anybody currently on the roster, Bryan had seemed most logical to be this year's Royal Rumble winner, carrying a Boyhood Dream storyline like his Hall of Fame trainer Shawn Michaels once rode to the top of the industry. Did i mention when CM punk was eliminated that people were still chanting for Daniel Bryan

Perhaps the question of who the bigger star is will be null if we were to witness Punk and Bryan follow in the footsteps of great contemporaries like Michaels and Bret Hart, or The Rock and Stone Cold Steve Austin. Were WWE to capitalize on their natural chemistry and present momentum, Punk and Bryan could become the type of rivals who define one another one day when he comes back.



Bryan and Punk have given hope to a generation of hardcore wrestling fans sick of John Cena's DayGlo shirts and cheesy grin. They are a ray of hope in this wholly mediocre era of wrestling that seems satisfied with the status quo. 

We have two men who have rightful claims to the moniker of Best in the World. Here's to hoping we get to see them rise them face each other in an epic feud with Punk being a great heel as he is and Bryan being a great face that he is stealing the show and having the match of the night which people would remember for years to come proving the nay sayers wrong


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

IDONTSHIV said:


> To summarize:
> 
> Sonnen Says= John Wayne Bobbitt.
> 
> 
> TheGMofGods= John Holmes.


:aries2

*does quick google search*

:hbk1:flair3



Cack_Thu said:


> ...........
> 
> A Woody Allen joke at this point would end my life.


This was a pretty pathetic attempt at trying to be funny.


----------



## Cack_Thu

TheGMofGods said:


> :aries2
> 
> *does quick google search*
> 
> :hbk1:flair3
> 
> 
> 
> *This was a pretty pathetic attempt at trying to be funny*.


Yep,'cause I didnt want to break it down to you with a 1:500 word essay that the exchange of words you had with Sonnen Says,really felt like watching a psychotic calling the other a neurotic and vince versa.:cool2


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Cack_Thu said:


> Yep,'cause I didnt want to break it down to you with a 1:500 word essay that the exchange of words you had with Sonnen Says,really felt like watching a psychotic calling the other a neurotic and vince versa.:cool2


So then why didn't you just say this from the start? Could have saved us from seeing you make that horrible attempt at trying to be funny while also decreasing the quality of the thread in the process.


----------



## Cack_Thu

TheGMofGods said:


> So then why didn't you just say this from the start? Could have saved us from seeing you make that horrible attempt at trying to be funny while also decreasing the quality of the thread in the process.


Because I travelled to India,and I got really sacred down there.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Cack_Thu said:


> Because I travelled to India,and I got really sacred down there.


...

Again, shit jokes are not meant to be in this thread. Please go ruin a thread somewhere else if this is the best you have.


----------



## Cack_Thu

TheGMofGods said:


> ...
> 
> Again, shit jokes are not meant to be in this thread. Please go ruin a thread somewhere else if this is the best you have.


Again,what?I swear,I wouldnt even dream of stealing your thunder of ignorance.Since you're so keen to have a quality uninterrupted dicksuction and 'cause you said "please",i shall oblige your request.:agree:


----------



## Cack_Thu

TheGMofGods said:


> ...
> 
> Again, shit jokes are *not* meant to be in this thread. Please go ruin a thread somewhere else if this is the best you have.


Seriously,that's like having boobs on a bear and me giving a damn about it,in which case you must have mistaken me for someone else 'cause i dont.
Ta!


----------



## Sonnen Says

> Where the hell do you get your facts from? That's not how advertising and commercials work. A network can easily cut off advertisements from their time slots anytime they want to, especially if the advertisers don't pay them the price that they are demanding.


You're really clueless. Do you even watch TV do you think WWE has different commercials than any other show? Maybe one or two which includes WWE ones. Those commercials come by the TV channels itself. WWE makes money out of their TV deals, the more hours they have the more money they get. WWE doesn't play the commercials it't not their network, the USA channel controls it. The advertisers wants their commercials to be on the channel not just on Raw dummy. WWE don't get credit for commercials they just earn money from it they aren't in some weak channel it's the NBC organisation. WWE has the right to advertise their stars that's it. You don't know shit man



> With that said, no, they are not making the same money from last year off of commercials and advertisements. You have no idea how incredibly stupid you sound right now just by saying this, and not to mention you have no sources or proof or anything for that matter that proves that. Right now the ratings on average are higher, so WWE is making much more money off of ratings this year than they were last year. This isn't disputable, and if you think otherwise then you had better do some digging.


Yes they are, they just earn money from the commercials, the USA channel chooses them not WWE that's it. They aren't in some unknown channel to struggle in have advertisers :lmao. It's WWE we are talking about. The advertisers air their commercials for the channel not for WWE. Prove that WWE earned more money from commercials than last year, I dare you. It doesn't make sense WWE makes more money from their TV deals not from commercials fpalm. For example WWE makes extra money for that extra hour, they don't care how low it gets because as I said before it's worth the money. 



> ???
> 
> Do you not understand how much a ratings point is? 1.0=roughly around a million viewers, which means that a .1 is around 100,000 viewers. You're seriously telling me that they're only going to increase prices if they reach the next .5 mark?
> 
> Again, where are you getting your facts from? It goes without saying that what you just said isn't true at all. If a show's ratings increase by .1, the demand is going to increase. If it actually went by what you just said, then a lot of shows would charge much, much more for advertisements because going from 3.0 on a consistent basis to 3.5 on a consistent basis in a short amount of time is very difficult to do. The idea that you're trying to say that the prices Networks charge advertisers only increases if their ratings go from 3.0 to 3.5 or anywhere from that range is both idiotic and laughable. The advertisers don't make the decisions on how much money they have to pay to advertise products, the Networks do. All the advertisers can do is decide whether or not they want to pay the money, and they understand that the higher the ratings=the higher the demand.
> 
> And why do you keep bringing up the 2.96 rating? The first hour was horrible and there was a reason for that, and it wasn't because of WWE. Other events happening at that time were the reason. The fact you're bringing up the 2.96 rating at this point is, again, laughable and idiotic.


Demand can only increase if the overall ratings increase in a weekly basis. The advertisers will not look at Bryan segments and say I want to have commercials during his matches :lmao. They don't fucking look at ratings breakdown mark and the advertisers don't show their commercials because of WWE it's because NBC is a big network and a lot of people watch it. Again WWE only gets profit from commercials they don't get extras it's all on what the NBC networks wants since they signed a long term deal with them. It been said they might not want to give them a bigger deal so WWE time with USA channel might come to an end, isn't it because of Bryan? . WWE job is to get high ratings so they get bigger deals and their demand increase. Because when they do the demands from other networks will rise and they will be willing to pay the money WWE wants. So again Bryan getting one of the highest of the night doesn't mean shit because the overall number is what matters, every hour matters. So getting ups and downs ratings wants matter. They need to get steady ratings. Getting from 3.7 to 3.2 and then to 2.96 isn't a good sign because that's not how it works. It just means it was a one time thing and everything is going back to normal. UFC is making more money than WWE out of buys and tv deals even tho their ratings are nowhere near WWE. Bryan again is just one of the assets nothing more, overall ratings is what they are concerned about to have a long term deal with a network. 



> Yes they do matter. Again, the higher your ratings, the more money you make. WWE's objective: Make as much money as possible. If there's a chance to make more, they will make more.


No, WWE use ratings to survive and to better deals out of other notworks. They don't make money out average ratings that are similar than the past 3 years. Again overall ratings is what matters that's why I said WM season this year is the lowest since 97. You're still contradicting yourself saying it's high when it isn't. That's not how it works ratings aren't high. WWE doesn't make more money from ratings they make money out of buys, merch, and ticket sales. That's why UFC is making more money than WWE now despite how low UFC ratings might get compared to WWE. UFC has ESPN, FOX, etc. So they have a lot of TV deals.



> No there isn't. Do you understand where Bryan is at right now? He got to the top due to overwhelming fan support. That's incredible. Do you know the last time that happened? I sure as hell don't. Bryan is in an incredible place right now with WWE, he's gotten to the point where he's become so valuable for them that he can't be replaced at this point, both from a talent standpoint and value standpoint.


Yes, WWE already made it clear that Bryan isn't gonna be a long term plan, he's not gonna stay in the top all the time. He's no Austin or Cena so get a clue plz. He's just one of the assets that WWE build to increase their roster credibility and starpwer. If Bryan was swimming with the guys in 2012 he won't get any damn praise because ratings will so be low as he will need a strong roster and booking to be something.



> Today? Yes, that is true about the Wyatts and Shield. In most of 2013? No, they weren't, and the ratings prove this.


Do you know what I'm trying to say or you're just acting dumb or something. My point is that the roster is much more stacked than 12/13 and the midcard is much more credible than years before it. Miz, Ziggler, Bryan, Jericho, etc. were never in those years as credible as the shield or the wyatts or even Cesaro (Who's with Heyman now). Those guys had clean wins and Shield and Wyatts were undefeated and unstoppable, You're telling me Miz, Ziggler, Jericho, etc. were unstoppable. They were in a losing streak before they even get a title shot. Plus why are you talking about it, Q1/Q2 in 2012 are higher than this year, so that means Punk title reign was drawing bigger than Bryan as champ. Getting low numbers in a time when it always gets low numbers is pointless to argue with. Plus the only reason why Q3/Q4 got higher in 2013 than 12 is because bigger namas stayed there, guys like HHH, Cena, Punk, Bryan, HBK, Authority, Steph, Shield (is starting to get high ratings every week as they got more big wins), etc.. *And again Punk in 13 got higher rated numbers for his segment than Bryan in the same year*. Nothing Bryan did in that year got in the top 5 highest rated segments. 

This the top 15 top rated segments in 2013. Punk is in it way more than Bryan. So he was the bigger draw in 2013 even still in 14 overall.



> -The high-point of the show came with The Rock and John Cena having their point & counterpoint segment, which did a 4.1 quarter rating and gained 855,000 viewers in the 9pm timeslot.
> -The in-ring segment with Punk and Rock at 10pm gained 279,000 viewers for a 4.03 quarter rating – the largest since Raw 1000.
> -The final segment with Vince McMahon, Heyman and Brock Lesnar gained 750,000 viewers for a 4.00 overrun.
> -John Cena’s promo gained around 140,000 viewers and CM Punk vs. Cena in the main event gained 1,002,000 viewers for a 3.9 overrun rating – a huge success.
> -The MizTV segment with Paul Heyman and Brock Lesnar gained 600,000 viewers at 10pm for a 3.82 quarter rating – the high point of the show.
> -CM Punk’s promo and trailer for The Call gained around 420,000 viewers for a 3.8 quarter rating – huge numbers for that time slot.
> -A Cena interview plus The Shield beating down Cena, Sheamus and Ryback at 9pm gained 145,000 viewers for a 3.80 quarter rating.
> -The show opened huge with a 3.79 quarter rating with CM Punk’s promo.
> -Dolph Ziggler winning the World Heavyweight Title and The Undertaker, The Shield, Kane and Daniel Bryan segment gained 460,000 viewers for a 3.76 quarter rating – the show high point.
> -In the segment breakdown, the opener with john Cena, CM Punk and Paul Heyman did a 3.71 quarter rating for the high point of the night.
> -The Fatal 4 Way main event with Punk, Orton, Sheamus and Big Show gained 570,000 viewers for a 3.7 overrun.
> -In the segment breakdown, the first segment, after The Undertaker opened the show, with CM Punk and Paul Heyman, Randy Orton, Sheamus and Big Show opened strong with a 3.7 quarter rating.
> -Daniel Bryan’s Gauntlet match against The Shield gained 1,092,000 viewers for a 3.7 quarter rating, which are excellent numbers.
> -The big main event angle with Triple H, the McMahons, Randy Orton, Daniel Bryan and The Shield gained around 670,000 viewers for a 3.6 overrun rating.
> -CM Punk’s promo with Paul Heyman and the brawl with Curtis Axel gained around 400,000 viewers for a strong 3.6 quarter rating.


....



> These are the ratings so far for this year after Wrestlemania. In order: 3.7, 3.2 (A big drop and Bryan wasn't on this show), *2.97 (the lowest rating of 2014 and so far the only time this year they've gone below a 3*, and since the segments involving Bryan had, once again, the highest amount of total viewers, *this was clearly not Bryans fault, which again makes me ask the question of why you keep bringing up that rating*, you're sounding more and more like the people who bring up the 2.2 rating in regards to Punk), 3.3, and a 3.02. So for every damn week, the ratings have been way above a three, and were only barely above it once and only went below it once. So again, you're wrong.


No, they also got 2.96 rating. Why I bring it up because the overall numbers is what matters to the dealers and that's how money comes. Here compare it with the previous years and in comparison it's not as high as last year or the year prior that. http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2014-ratings/



> Now, compared to last year after Wrestlemania? In order, *3.43, 3.07, 3.13, 3.06, 2.89. The ratings are noticeably better.* So no, Bryan isn't bringing in Austin level ratings. But the thing is, he doesn't need to. He's bringing in better ratings than they were last year. There are of course other reasons as well, but when looking at the ratings breakdowns, the main focus from audiences is on him. So yes, WWE is making more money off of commercials and advertisements because thanks to Bryan and a few others as well, WWE's ratings are better this year and there for are charging higher prices. This is how commercials and advertisements work.


Well in 2013 it was the start of Bryan push and Punk had a 1 month break. I'm talking about WM season in 13 which got higher than 14 and it wasn't as high nor as high as any previous years. As for the advertisements I already explained it and it has nothing to do with ratings those are channel deals not WWEs, they only get money from them which means it's not affected by ratings. They get the same profit out of commercials every year since they are in the USA network all this time. They are called TV deals. Plus 3.67 was a Taker streak buzz which also had Hogan and UW, the following week got 3.26 which was UW tribute show, 2.96 is bad which didn't happen in 13 or 12 in this month, than 3.26 which also didn't have Bryan in a big role it was Evolution/Shield segment which got the highest of the night, and then 3.02 rating so it's the same thing as last year (Which is Bryans push starting) time will go and you will see the ratings go down.



> So then why the hell is Bryan still drawing the highest numbers when he is put with Orton and ADR? He did it twice with Orton leading into Wrestlemania and he just got done doing it with Del Rio this past week. So where is your argument here?


In WM season he wasn't always, Batista in the first 4 weeks he got the highest of the night then the following week Brock got the highest. Bryan occupy segment got the highest then but the following weeks HHH also was getting the highest of the night but that's not a surprise since it was the biggest stroyline of the WM season so there is no surprise in why Bryan got the highest rated segment with HHH/Batista or Authority. WM fallout raw Paul/Brock got the highest of the night not Bryan segment according to Meltzer. Also last week Wyatts/Shield/Evolution got the highest of the night not Bryan. Punk in 13 was getting higher numbers in WM season than Bryan in a weekly basis. 



> We're talking about ratings because THIS IS A RATINGS THREAD. The ratings are the only thing that matter at this point, and at the end of the day the ratings are the most important aspect of the WWE, so why should we talk about anything else? We know how much more merchandise Cena is selling than Bryan is, and we know how much more Cena and Punk are talked about by the media. But here's the thing, no one gives a shit. Because we know where Bryan's stance is on that. But do you want me to talk about those things? Okay.


It says buys, and draw talk too. No it's not the only thing that matters, WWE will be making far and far less money without merch and buys. Ratings exist to keep them in the business and to have huge tv deals which takes a roster to do so nothing more and they are not in jeopardy so stop acting that they were or are. TV deals is a huge deal which doesn't mean there should be high ratings but that doesn't mean they should do low tho. Also ticket sales which is much important than ratings since they have 3 or 4 shows every week with low/high prices which can fill different kinds of arenas/stadiums. In UFC they make more money with their TV deals, and buys than WWE. 



> Bryan is currently number 2 in merchandise sales, opened and main evented what was most likely the most successful Wrestlemania of all time financially, if he's not at a house show then fans are given REFUNDS, and in this day and age PPV's he was involved in did pretty well in buys. Nothing great except for a few here and there (summerslam, HIAC, etc), but you get the point.


They offer refunds because he was advertised. WM did that much financially because they added the WWE network to it. Anything below 200k shouldn't be called good, it's just bad and it means it's one of the lowest of all time like BG PPV was top 3 or 5 worse buy of all time. SS and HIAC aren't great numbers but they are good tho but then again it's not 50/50 not just Bryan which I give Punk/Brock bigger credit for SSS and HBK/Cena returning for HIAC but that doesn't mean Bryan shouldn't get any credit but the least compared to the ones I mentioned. 



> But again, none of those matter, because we are not discussing those. Bringing them up constantly at this point is just grasping for straws, especially considering how we've already now proven to you numerous times that ratings are the most important aspect when it comes to being a draw.


All I'm getting from you is that ratings is all that matters since that's the only thing Bryan does well according to you. But that's far from the truth it's just called stupidity. You're the only one saying it, not the others who actually knows whats up. Bryan isn't drawing big numbers every week which is what you don't understand just because he was getting the highest of the night doesn't mean those numbers are big thats why the overall ratings aren't as high as the previous two in WM season. Giving most credit to Bryan for the WM fallout Raw and not to Taker streak ending and the fact Meltzer stated the streak segment was the highest of the night or also the fact UW tribute show clearly kept it better than the number from the previous year which is expected since tribute shows always do well. Ratings are decent Cena/HHH are all part of the discussion since they got the highest of the night just as much if not more but again the overall ratings is what WWE is concerning themselves with.



> ...He just main evented his third PPV in a row. Bryan hasn't been in any major show? What the hell are you talking about? And not a big deal to them yet?? What?! He fucking headlined Wrestlemania 30 and WON. He's beaten Cena, Orton, Triple H, Batista, and Sheamus all clean in the middle of the ring, and you're telling me Bryan isn't a big deal to them yet? Are you high?


I meant major shows in media or MS. He isn't getting that much attention. Didn't say WWE shows lol. 



> You're saying people in general could care less about Bryan and don't buy his stuff.
> 
> If this is the case, then why is Bryan currently number 2 in merchandise sales and why is he drawing the most viewers in? Again, your logic is full of holes and is filled with a lot of bullshit.


Again how many times should I say he gets one of the highest not the highest, he probably got the highest 4 times this year so far which part of it should be giving credit to HHH/Authority and most importantly the booking. The booking and storylines draw the viewers not necessarily the wrestler fault. The Rock lost viewers does that mean Bryan is a bigger draw? It's just ratings based on booking and interest in storylines it has nothing to do with bringing money or Bryan being a big draw :lol.

_-The Rock’s interview at 10pm with The Shield attacking him lost 109,000 viewers for a 3.01 quarter rating – a very bad number for the 10pm timeslot.
-The Rock’s promo at John Cena gained 643,000 viewers to a 3.53 quarter rating, which is nothing really special for the overrun. John Cena coming out to cut a promo and The Rock closing the show lost 349,000 viewers. The show finished with a 3.30 quarter rating, which likely came as a surprise to officials.
_



> And Punk didn't have higher buys than Bryan did in different PPVs, PPVs involving Punk in a major role had higher buys than Bryan did in PPV's involving him in a major role. I can easily reverse that around and say PPV's involving Bryan in a major role had more buys than PPV's involving Punk in a major role. Because both are true. The fact that you're saying this based off of a time where the PPV's on average had higher buy rates and the buy rates kept steadily decreasing over time for a very long period of time is once again grasping for straws.


What major role Bryan was in that got higher? I'm talking about all the PPVs that he ME or was Co-Me of because that's how it should work. We should only compare B shows with B shows or A shows with A shows. or the numbers for the same PPVs. You're just out of your ass here. 2012 alone did higher than 13 overall or so far even 14 (EC/RR).



> And of course you are once again showing how big of a hypocrite you are by trying to make it sound like those PPV's where all Punk when in the past you have complained about people claiming that good PPV buys were all Bryan (like Summerslam for example).


No I didn't I dare you to find where I said it. All I said is that Bryan should be part of the blame for SS when the first number came in and again I only judge the ones he ME or Co-ME that's it. There aren't as many good PPV buys for Bryan compared to Punk, only like two which Punk majorly part of. 



> :lmao
> 
> 1. You must not know that WWE has commercials, because if you did you would know that Bryan was in the promotional commercials for Extreme Rules on a daily basis this past month. He was also the main feature in a commercial WWE had thanking the fans that aired on a weekly basis after Wrestlemania where he pretended to be in an empty arena. So either you don't pay much attention to the actual commercials, or you are, like always, full of shit.
> 2. WWE doesn't put people in a commercial because they draw viewers. Kofi Kingston and The Miz both had their own commercials at one point. Kofi Kingston can't even draw a fucking straight line.


That's not true WWE commercials don't only consist of PPVs advertising but also other kinds of commercials which the advertisers ask WWE to have a wrestler on the commercials like Cena for example that's how WWE make extra money from advertising or commercials, TV commercials from USA channel is different and it's something WWE doesn't control it's the channel itself. WWE get money from them but the same money every year since they have a deal with the USA channel anyway. For example SD numbers doesn't get as high as Raw but they still make the same profit from the commercials in every year but for SD it's a different channel tho. TV deals makes WWE money not ratings, WWE just use ratings to grab attention from the TV dealers or keep them trusted. Right now NBC or USA channel doesn't want to pay the amount of money WWE offered to resign with them. Now they are looking for another network deal unless they come in terms with them but that's NBC network lose since WWE is/was getting the highest ratings in Monday despite how low they might get.



> On average, no he hasn't. If we're talking about segments that involve that particular person and just one other performer, then on average Bryan has Punk easily beat out. And all of the segments where Punk lost viewers immediately takes the amount he drew down big time. If we're talking individual segments and comparing them then yes, Punk had bigger gains. But that's not a very good argument


Yes he has in 13 he was drawing one of the highest or the highest rated segments every week even with those midcarders + I already showed you how many times Punk was part of the highest of the night in the same post. Bryan only started to draw when he got part of the authority and he was losing and gaining weak numbers with Orton despite that. Losing viewers or gain little isn't a big deal since Bryan does too. Nobody can draw with any wrestler it's impossible without a story or good booking and that's all Bryan is having. 



> How am I supposed to take you seriously at this point when you just spelled out point blank to me why Punk isn't as big of a ratings draw as you claim? I don't give a shit if he was directionless, I'm not going to deny that was the case, *but if you're a major ratings draw, then fans are tuning in to see YOU,* they don't give a shit what you're doing at this point, especially the casuals. Especially when you consider the fact that Punk was actually involved in a lot of great programs through out 2013. Yea there were dark moments (the build up to HIAC with Punk vs Ryback/Heyman), but for the most part he was still able to put on a lot of great promos through out that year and had entertaining matches. I don't care what he was doing and most people who want to watch someone don't care either. If they're waiting for him to do something exciting with someone, then you're basically telling me that it's the match up or the other person that draws, not Punk.


They do but that's not always the case if there is no story or enough attention or advertising than it wont draw as good because the viewers might not be interested in the opponents as they might have bad repetition and zero credibility. Show me when did Bryan face a guy with no credibility and gained big numbers? All the ones Bryan faced had credibility and are major part of the show. He wasn't going against guys like Big E or Axel/Ryback or Fandango or Young why is that? Because he was clearly protected. 



> In terms of name, no I can't. But in terms of drawing power? Yes, I can definitely compare the Shield with Axel/Ryback, without a doubt. Because in 2013, the Shield weren't drawing anything. In fact there were a lot of times where they were losing viewers because there was a very long stretch where the simply weren't doing anything. They were the bodyguards for the authority and that was it. Orton however? No, I can't compare them with Orton. *But guess what? Punk struggled to gain ratings with Orton, so what does that tell you?*


In term of drawing power no way dude, Shield wasn't losing million viewers like those guys I mentioned. Shield was gaining very solid numbers when they get advertised and they don't usually lose a lot viewers only at times but that's because they were directionless, it will happen to anyone + they were part of the highest segments last year as I showed. Bryan also struggled to gain ratings with Orton so again what does that mean :lol, stop ignoring it it's a fact. I already showed how week they gained, Punk didn't lose viewers with him, hell he gained a better rating with Orton than Bryan/Orton in a street fight. 



> It's not dumb, it's literally the way it is. You can't just say something that is in fact happening isn't happening because it's dumb. Not everything you say happens is happening Sonnen. In fact barely any of the things you have claimed happened actually happened. You need to start living in the real world (which is ironic given that we're talking about a scripted sport). *Ratings are what the WWE makes a shitload of money off of, the fact that you're still trying to deny this after it has been explained to you* and pointed out to you with countless amounts of evidence is only proving how biased you are. And so far you still have yet to show us any proof as to why we are wrong in this regard.


No they don't Tv deals does, prove me wrong here with actual facts. Ratings are important to keep WWE in business they use the shows to advertise merch/PPVs/ticket sales to gain money and also to grab viewers to their product that's it. UFC doesn't have good ratings but yet they are running a very successful business compared to WWE. Just because you explained it doesn't mean it's true.



> And overall he's doing better than Cena right now. Again, we are talking about drawing power. Buys, ticket sales, live events and merchandise have nothing to do with this because buys are no longer a factor, and merchandise as we've stated before is not a determining factor in your drawing abilities. We've gone over this numerous times now. Right now, according to ratings breakdowns, Bryan's segments are drawing much bigger amounts of viewers than Cena's are.


Overall drawing is what matters. Rock didn't increase ratings dramatically last year just a bit higher but in buys and ticket sales he's top notch which is what WWE is looking for that's what they need not Bryan just saying. Anyway Bryan will be pushed down the card anyway so it's pointless and you will not be able to use ratings anymore even tho it makes no sense to even keep mentioning ratings.



> But the thing you keep on forgetting is that Bryan is currently their HIGHEST RATINGS DRAW. So if your highest ratings draw is gone all of a sudden for a good amount of time, then your overall ratings suffer. This is very simple math dude, I shouldn't need to explain this to you, you're not a baby.


One of the highest I already explained. Nope WWE will only suffer if the stroylines and booking sucks and the top star are directionless. They can make anyone a star if they want, so sooner or later the next guy will come and be in Bryans place somewhere this year.

With that said, yes you did say that. 





> I never said it was all about Bryan, don't put words in my mouth. I said that Bryan is their highest ratings draw, therefor from an individual aspect, Bryan has had the biggest impact on the ratings. I'm not sorry if you can't understand that. It's not a very hard concept to understand, so there's no reason why you shouldn't have been able to figure this out by now.


You seem to give all the credit to Bryan for those high rated segments which the person who's part of it is just as responsible. Plus if the storyline and the booking are bad or nonexistent then Bryan will not be able to draw. This is what happened with Punk at times very bad booking and was having unworthy opponents.



> The only one making this about one person here is you, because you are continuing to put the blame solely on Bryan in times where ratings were low. Want proof? Here's your next post.


Oh and you're the same guy who made excuses for almost every gain Punk had and said it's because the stipulation or the storyline was the reason fpalm. Bryan is having just that with HHH for example so you're biased here. Very hypocritical. 



> Not only are you now acting like it's one person here but you're making things up again. You just said that Punk has been their top notch draw since 2013. This was never the case, at all. You tried to make it sound like this was the case as well in 2012. Again, this was never the case. Punk was never consistently drawing in the most viewers for his segments in both 2012 and 2013. You're not fooling anyone.


He wasn't in 2012 because he wasn't booked properly and didn't have any opoonent that had value and anyone think that this guy is competition except for Cena/Ryback/Rock/Bryan ,etc. The roster was thin, bad booking is the big reason and the fact that he was shoved down the card since HHH beating him in hottest time doesn't help, he should have been a major focus of the show but he wasn't a lot of times and that's not his fault. He wasn't protected like Bryan now who's having top notch matches and clean wins unlike Punk who didn't in consist basis. 



> 1. You just contradicted yourself once again. You're saying being a bigger merchandise seller than Orton isn't any good and yet before you were saying that Orton is a top tier guy.
> 2. A major star from the past dying is going to most likely outsell anyone in merchandise sales dude. You're grasping for straws again at this point.
> 3. Why isn't Bryan able to do that? Because he didn't die yet. Why do I need to point this out to you?
> 4. WWE does make a lot of money from Merchandise sales. But the fact is, they make a lot more money off of ratings.
> 5. Bryan wasn't pushed later in the year of 2013. He basically started being pushed after Extreme Rules where he was on a hot streak and beat just about everyone he faced. He beat Orton, Kane, was the first person to beat the Shield, Sheamus, Christian, and beat John Cena at Summerslam to become WWE Champion. So he clearly wasn't pushed "later" in 2013.
> 6. Bryan definitely was a factor in a lot of the 2013 PPV's in terms of buys. I'm not going into how big of an effect because I don't need to.


[/quote]


1.Because Orton isn't a big enough draw and not as over as Bryan is so that's why, it's not about him being top tier talent at all since Orton is been made Bryan's bitch but even then he's still a big star cuz of his accomplishments. 
2. That's not always the case lol, fact is Warrior isn't well known to those fans today. It's not easy to outsell Cena so that's something. Punk didn't have to die to outsell Cena in online orders so there is no excuses for Bryan here.
3. Punk didn't either lol yet he did.
4. Again they don't make a lot more money out of ratings. It's a TV deal thing get it in your thick skull.
5. So that explains why ratings got low since ER. http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2013-ratings/
6. Ok for example ER he had nothing to do with it since he was just part of a tag team and Brock/HHH was the biggest match with Ryback/Cena for the wwe title and PB was the return of CM Punk which did very well and in MITB Bryan was part of the MITB match so not really much credit here. 



> It's not about what I think, it's about what I know.
> 
> What I know is right now Bryan is their biggest draw. There for, he is having the biggest impact on the overall ratings. *Fans want to see him the most. There for, the overall rating is bigger than it potentially could have been because of Bryan. There for, Bryan is making them more money because of ratings.*
> 
> I still don't know why I have to point this out to you. If you're not as dumb as other people here are claiming you are then you shouldn't need this constantly pointed out to you.


NO just stop. Potentially my ass, how many times I should tell you it's not how you bring money out of somebody. If they really want to see him he will be the top draw in merch, ticket sales, ME, buys, but he isn't that means ratings aren't enough proof for this. It just show that people are only excited about the storylines and again he's not having the highest all the time guys like Batista, Brock, HHH and Shield/Wyatts got that too. Bryan got the highest of the night 3 or 4 times this whole year. So it's not every week damn week. Again last week Shield/Wyatts/Evolution got the highest. Bryan was part of the biggest storyline of the year so he was supposed to gain the most attention since WWE is booking him that way. They could do it with Cesaro if they wanted. 



> Okay sonnen, if that's the case here then which is it? *Do overall ratings matter the most? *Or do individual ratings matter the most? Come on, decide. Because I'm really curious.


In bold. Because it's the overall number that gives WWE a name. It's not Bryan's fault but that doesn't make him a bigger draw than Punk or Cena. Saying he gets one of the highest or highest doesn't mean shit because they all did. They can't get money from him if he doesn't brings enough buys, merch, or live attendance it doesn't secure his a place in the card because when he's not protected anymore he's not gonna pull the same numbers. He will be shoved down the card and be in Cena position now. It's WWE job to get better ratings not Bryans so bringing money because of ratings is BS and you need to prove it, not just act like that's how it works. 



> His tribute show came after Wrestlemania. In that post you were talking about the build up to Wrestlemania. So there was no logical reason for you to bring up the Ultimate Warrior there, there for adding to the very large list of idiotic things you've said already.


I was talking about who was/is in Raw this year. Don't include him before WM but that's not what I was trying to say. 



> Well that depends, are you referring to the times where Bryan was put down the card AFTER wining the WWE Championship? Or *are you referring to the time before he first won the WWE Championship?*


Bold part. 



> You tried to make it sound like the people who gave credit to Bryan/Cena where wrong and that Punk/Lesnar was the main attraction and Meltzer agrees. No one gives a shit what Meltzer says in this regard. We all know how big of an attraction Punk/Lesnar was, a lot of us wanted to watch the PPV just for that reason alone. The fact that you are even bringing that up tells me and everyone else here that you want to just leave Bryan/Cena out of the picture and give all the credit in the world to Punk/Lesnar.
> 
> No one was ever discrediting Punk/Lesnar. That match got the amount of credit that it deserved. It was a huge dream match up. In terms of what was the true main event, Bryan/Cena was without a doubt the true main event. This isn't a case of one match up being bigger than the other, it's simply the fact that this was a never before seen match up on TV or PPV (fuck their 2003 match) and it was, like Lesnar/Punk, a huge HUGE match up. And it was for the WWE Championship.



Won't argue about that but Meltzer knows more shit than you do. It's his thing he knows because he has his sources in WWE and knows whats big or not. There were people who thought Cena/Bryan should get credit but I don't take it to heart because it's not true. Since you said Bryan got good buys you included SS as something he's responsible for. 



> How does that matter in any possible way? NOC 2009 is completely irrelevant to this (yes I know what happened at that PPV event, are you aware of who Punk was facing?), and at NOC in 2012 this was the first time in a long time that the main attention was given to Punk, and it was only given to him because he was facing Cena. Yes, this definitely hurt Punk's drawing power for a good portion of that year, it's unfortunate, *but Cena was the bigger factor here, not Punk.*


So when I say Cena and Punk/Brock were a bigger factors for SS than Bryan will I be wrong? NOC 09 is still a great number because it was higher than the previous year which was HHH/Cena. So either ways it's an impressive number.



> Battleground was expected to have low buys, not a very good example to use. *3 weeks after a PPV just happened with a rematch and a very weak card is going to have low buys no matter what.* And again, in this day and age, below 200k isn't bad. It really depends on the situation and the card provided. NOC 2013 did not have a very good card (which is odd given that they just had a great Summerslam card...sort of).


Doesn't mean it should get as low as that. The event received 114,000 buys worldwide, making it the second lowest number (to the ECW December to Dismember) in the last 17 years



> No I didn't because I'm not referring to the overall rating, *I'm referring to the individual segments and ratings for those moments.* The only time I have ever referred to overall ratings was when dereailing your 2.97 rating, the ratings being lowest since 97 bullshit, the impact a certain amount of ratings can have on advertising, and when comparing the overall ratings from a certain time frame to another time frame. I then also brought up the other people around Punk to point out that the overall ratings for that year were saved thanks to them, because again, Punk wasn't drawing well, and his individual segments/matches were proof of this, the only proof I've been using when it came to that.
> 
> So again, stop putting words in my mouth.


Again that's exactly what you don't understand he's not bringing money because he had the highest segment, ratings can't rely on one person. Cena is a bigger draw because he gets not only high ratings but also merch, ticket sales, buys. If you think Bryan is a bigger draw because of a fucking segment than you're really really clueless. It's all because he's the focus of the show and is getting the major top tier wrestlers and storylines. It's no secret for the fact Cena is midcarding not ME over Bryan. I can admit that Cena is a bigger draw than Punk but you're just so delusional and biased it's crazy.



> And once again, you contradict yourself. You just told me to stop focusing on the overall ratings and to not put blame on one person and now you just said "Punk ratings". Are you kidding me? Do you really expect me to take you seriously at this point when you're saying shit like this? Especially when we are talking about a time period where they were building up for the first time that the Rock and John Cena were ever going to face off, and Taker/HHH were building up for their HIAC match? And then after words Brock Lesnar returned? Do you honestly expect me to take this seriously?


Because you act like Punk can't have good overall ratings but Bryan can, Punk was also getting one of the highest and highest in 2012 even when overall ratings were low by the end of the year. I said overall ratings matters more and this goes to Punk too not just Bryan, and that's not necessarily their fault it's just that WWE doesn't make good effort to do something about it. At least now they have been doing something since new guys are debuting and others are getting more screen time. 



> *And guess what, Punk was losing viewers too. Hell a match he was in at one point lost half a million viewers as well, and that was after 2012. But yea, sure, lets just ignore that, right? *


Which one are you talking about? Everybody loses viewers nobody is gonna be doing the same numbers with anyone. But that's what you don't understand Bryan won't be getting the same numbers with anyone for example a match with Young for no reason in a bad timslot wont do well and will lose viewers. 



> I'm not making shit up. At that time, they were big names. Stop going off of what's going on today and understand that things back then at that time weren't the same as they are now. All three of those guys were in different positions then than they were now.


Stop running from it. Name them because Miz isn't a big name that's fucking for sure he was losing million and half million views a lot of times since WM and nobody gives a crap about him no matter how many time they push him just like ADR who has the Miz syndrome. And Punk wasn't losing viewers with them, he gained with them too in 2011. 

It's about logic and clearly all you show is biased opinions and pass it as facts. 



> But they clearly aren't the same. In fact this is another moment where you've once again contradicted yourself. You've been spending this entire time trying to argue why the ratings when Punk was on top were better or the reasons for them being different than they are now when Bryan is on top, but now you're here saying that the ratings have been the same for years?


I'm not contradicting myself you're. They are the same ratings and my point was they make the same profit so either ways Bryan getting the highest segment doesn't mean shit, it's the overall number that dealers look for. For example they don't look for ratings breakdown for other tv shows and say this guy is a draw, it's the appeal of the show that draws. End of story.



> Bullshit. You're absolutely full of it and it's laughable that funnyfaces over there just got done saying you make some valid points because you haven't made a single valid point here yet.


Because you're stubborn and you don't know shit.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

DAT post.

:wall

So. Fucking. Long.


----------



## Afnorok

TheGMofGods said:


> Well alright shiv, I shall continue.
> 
> Looking at Sonnen's post now, this may very well be one of his dumbest posts here on this site. LONG POST INCOMING!
> 
> 
> 
> Where the hell do you get your facts from? That's not how advertising and commercials work. A network can easily cut off advertisements from their time slots anytime they want to, especially if the advertisers don't pay them the price that they are demanding.
> 
> With that said, no, they are not making the same money from last year off of commercials and advertisements. You have no idea how incredibly stupid you sound right now just by saying this, and not to mention you have no sources or proof or anything for that matter that proves that. Right now the ratings on average are higher, so WWE is making much more money off of ratings this year than they were last year. This isn't disputable, and if you think otherwise then you had better do some digging.
> 
> 
> 
> ???
> 
> Do you not understand how much a ratings point is? 1.0=roughly around a million viewers, which means that a .1 is around 100,000 viewers. You're seriously telling me that they're only going to increase prices if they reach the next .5 mark?
> 
> Again, where are you getting your facts from? It goes without saying that what you just said isn't true at all. If a show's ratings increase by .1, the demand is going to increase. If it actually went by what you just said, then a lot of shows would charge much, much more for advertisements because going from 3.0 on a consistent basis to 3.5 on a consistent basis in a short amount of time is very difficult to do. The idea that you're trying to say that the prices Networks charge advertisers only increases if their ratings go from 3.0 to 3.5 or anywhere from that range is both idiotic and laughable. The advertisers don't make the decisions on how much money they have to pay to advertise products, the Networks do. All the advertisers can do is decide whether or not they want to pay the money, and they understand that the higher the ratings=the higher the demand.
> 
> And why do you keep bringing up the 2.96 rating? The first hour was horrible and there was a reason for that, and it wasn't because of WWE. Other events happening at that time were the reason. The fact you're bringing up the 2.96 rating at this point is, again, laughable and idiotic.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they do matter. Again, the higher your ratings, the more money you make. WWE's objective: Make as much money as possible. If there's a chance to make more, they will make more.
> 
> 
> 
> No there isn't. Do you understand where Bryan is at right now? He got to the top due to overwhelming fan support. That's incredible. Do you know the last time that happened? I sure as hell don't. Bryan is in an incredible place right now with WWE, he's gotten to the point where he's become so valuable for them that he can't be replaced at this point, both from a talent standpoint and value standpoint.
> 
> 
> 
> Today? Yes, that is true about the Wyatts and Shield. In most of 2013? No, they weren't, and the ratings prove this.
> 
> 
> 
> These are the ratings so far for this year after Wrestlemania. In order: 3.7, 3.2 (A big drop and Bryan wasn't on this show), 2.97 (the lowest rating of 2014 and so far the only time this year they've gone below a 3, and since the segments involving Bryan had, once again, the highest amount of total viewers, this was clearly not Bryans fault, which again makes me ask the question of why you keep bringing up that rating, you're sounding more and more like the people who bring up the 2.2 rating in regards to Punk), 3.3, and a 3.02. So for every damn week, the ratings have been way above a three, and were only barely above it once and only went below it once. So again, you're wrong.
> 
> Now, compared to last year after Wrestlemania? In order, 3.43, 3.07, 3.13, 3.06, 2.89. The ratings are noticeably better. So no, Bryan isn't bringing in Austin level ratings. But the thing is, he doesn't need to. He's bringing in better ratings than they were last year. There are of course other reasons as well, but when looking at the ratings breakdowns, the main focus from audiences is on him. So yes, WWE is making more money off of commercials and advertisements because thanks to Bryan and a few others as well, WWE's ratings are better this year and there for are charging higher prices. This is how commercials and advertisements work.
> 
> 
> 
> So then why the hell is Bryan still drawing the highest numbers when he is put with Orton and ADR? He did it twice with Orton leading into Wrestlemania and he just got done doing it with Del Rio this past week. So where is your argument here?
> 
> 
> 
> We're talking about ratings because THIS IS A RATINGS THREAD. The ratings are the only thing that matter at this point, and at the end of the day the ratings are the most important aspect of the WWE, so why should we talk about anything else? We know how much more merchandise Cena is selling than Bryan is, and we know how much more Cena and Punk are talked about by the media. But here's the thing, no one gives a shit. Because we know where Bryan's stance is on that. But do you want me to talk about those things? Okay.
> 
> Bryan is currently number 2 in merchandise sales, opened and main evented what was most likely the most successful Wrestlemania of all time financially, if he's not at a house show then fans are given REFUNDS, and in this day and age PPV's he was involved in did pretty well in buys. Nothing great except for a few here and there (summerslam, HIAC, etc), but you get the point.
> 
> But again, none of those matter, because we are not discussing those. Bringing them up constantly at this point is just grasping for straws, especially considering how we've already now proven to you numerous times that ratings are the most important aspect when it comes to being a draw.
> 
> 
> 
> ...He just main evented his third PPV in a row. Bryan hasn't been in any major show? What the hell are you talking about? And not a big deal to them yet?? What?! He fucking headlined Wrestlemania 30 and WON. He's beaten Cena, Orton, Triple H, Batista, and Sheamus all clean in the middle of the ring, and you're telling me Bryan isn't a big deal to them yet? Are you high?
> 
> 
> 
> This might be one of the worst parts of your post.
> 
> You're saying people in general could care less about Bryan and don't buy his stuff.
> 
> If this is the case, then why is Bryan currently number 2 in merchandise sales and why is he drawing the most viewers in? Again, your logic is full of holes and is filled with a lot of bullshit.
> 
> And Punk didn't have higher buys than Bryan did in different PPVs, PPVs involving Punk in a major role had higher buys than Bryan did in PPV's involving him in a major role. I can easily reverse that around and say PPV's involving Bryan in a major role had more buys than PPV's involving Punk in a major role. Because both are true. The fact that you're saying this based off of a time where the PPV's on average had higher buy rates and the buy rates kept steadily decreasing over time for a very long period of time is once again grasping for straws.
> 
> And of course you are once again showing how big of a hypocrite you are by trying to make it sound like those PPV's where all Punk when in the past you have complained about people claiming that good PPV buys were all Bryan (like Summerslam for example).
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao
> 
> 1. You must not know that WWE has commercials, because if you did you would know that Bryan was in the promotional commercials for Extreme Rules on a daily basis this past month. He was also the main feature in a commercial WWE had thanking the fans that aired on a weekly basis after Wrestlemania where he pretended to be in an empty arena. So either you don't pay much attention to the actual commercials, or you are, like always, full of shit.
> 2. WWE doesn't put people in a commercial because they draw viewers. Kofi Kingston and The Miz both had their own commercials at one point. Kofi Kingston can't even draw a fucking straight line.
> 
> 
> 
> On average, no he hasn't. If we're talking about segments that involve that particular person and just one other performer, then on average Bryan has Punk easily beat out. And all of the segments where Punk lost viewers immediately takes the amount he drew down big time. If we're talking individual segments and comparing them then yes, Punk had bigger gains. But that's not a very good argument.
> 
> 
> 
> How am I supposed to take you seriously at this point when you just spelled out point blank to me why Punk isn't as big of a ratings draw as you claim? I don't give a shit if he was directionless, I'm not going to deny that was the case, but if you're a major ratings draw, then fans are tuning in to see YOU, they don't give a shit what you're doing at this point, especially the casuals. Especially when you consider the fact that Punk was actually involved in a lot of great programs through out 2013. Yea there were dark moments (the build up to HIAC with Punk vs Ryback/Heyman), but for the most part he was still able to put on a lot of great promos through out that year and had entertaining matches. I don't care what he was doing and most people who want to watch someone don't care either. If they're waiting for him to do something exciting with someone, then you're basically telling me that it's the match up or the other person that draws, not Punk.
> 
> 
> 
> In terms of name, no I can't. But in terms of drawing power? Yes, I can definitely compare the Shield with Axel/Ryback, without a doubt. Because in 2013, the Shield weren't drawing anything. In fact there were a lot of times where they were losing viewers because there was a very long stretch where the simply weren't doing anything. They were the bodyguards for the authority and that was it. Orton however? No, I can't compare them with Orton. But guess what? Punk struggled to gain ratings with Orton, so what does that tell you?
> 
> 
> 
> It's not dumb, it's literally the way it is. You can't just say something that is in fact happening isn't happening because it's dumb. Not everything you say happens is happening Sonnen. In fact barely any of the things you have claimed happened actually happened. You need to start living in the real world (which is ironic given that we're talking about a scripted sport). Ratings are what the WWE makes a shitload of money off of, the fact that you're still trying to deny this after it has been explained to you and pointed out to you with countless amounts of evidence is only proving how biased you are. And so far you still have yet to show us any proof as to why we are wrong in this regard.
> 
> And overall he's doing better than Cena right now. Again, we are talking about drawing power. Buys, ticket sales, live events and merchandise have nothing to do with this because buys are no longer a factor, and merchandise as we've stated before is not a determining factor in your drawing abilities. We've gone over this numerous times now. Right now, according to ratings breakdowns, Bryan's segments are drawing much bigger amounts of viewers than Cena's are.
> 
> 
> 
> But the thing you keep on forgetting is that Bryan is currently their HIGHEST RATINGS DRAW. So if your highest ratings draw is gone all of a sudden for a good amount of time, then your overall ratings suffer. This is very simple math dude, I shouldn't need to explain this to you, you're not a baby.
> 
> With that said, yes you did say that.
> 
> 
> 
> I never said it was all about Bryan, don't put words in my mouth. I said that Bryan is their highest ratings draw, therefor from an individual aspect, Bryan has had the biggest impact on the ratings. I'm not sorry if you can't understand that. It's not a very hard concept to understand, so there's no reason why you shouldn't have been able to figure this out by now.
> 
> The only one making this about one person here is you, because you are continuing to put the blame solely on Bryan in times where ratings were low. Want proof? Here's your next post.
> 
> 
> 
> Not only are you now acting like it's one person here but you're making things up again. You just said that Punk has been their top notch draw since 2013. This was never the case, at all. You tried to make it sound like this was the case as well in 2012. Again, this was never the case. Punk was never consistently drawing in the most viewers for his segments in both 2012 and 2013. You're not fooling anyone.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. You just contradicted yourself once again. You're saying being a bigger merchandise seller than Orton isn't any good and yet before you were saying that Orton is a top tier guy.
> 2. A major star from the past dying is going to most likely outsell anyone in merchandise sales dude. You're grasping for straws again at this point.
> 3. Why isn't Bryan able to do that? Because he didn't die yet. Why do I need to point this out to you?
> 4. WWE does make a lot of money from Merchandise sales. But the fact is, they make a lot more money off of ratings.
> 5. Bryan wasn't pushed later in the year of 2013. He basically started being pushed after Extreme Rules where he was on a hot streak and beat just about everyone he faced. He beat Orton, Kane, was the first person to beat the Shield, Sheamus, Christian, and beat John Cena at Summerslam to become WWE Champion. So he clearly wasn't pushed "later" in 2013.
> 6. Bryan definitely was a factor in a lot of the 2013 PPV's in terms of buys. I'm not going into how big of an effect because I don't need to.
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus Christ man. I could talk to a brick wall and would probably get more accomplished with that then talk to you.
> 
> It's not about what I think, it's about what I know.
> 
> What I know is right now Bryan is their biggest draw. There for, he is having the biggest impact on the overall ratings. Fans want to see him the most. There for, the overall rating is bigger than it potentially could have been because of Bryan. There for, Bryan is making them more money because of ratings.
> 
> I still don't know why I have to point this out to you. If you're not as dumb as other people here are claiming you are then you shouldn't need this constantly pointed out to you.
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao again, you just contradicted yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> You just got done saying this. But now you're using overall ratings as proof that Bryan isn't as big of a draw as we claim. But just before, you were telling me that how good overall ratings are isn't a good indication of how good of a ratings draw Bryan is.
> 
> Okay sonnen, if that's the case here then which is it? Do overall ratings matter the most? Or do individual ratings matter the most? Come on, decide. Because I'm really curious.
> 
> 
> 
> His tribute show came after Wrestlemania. In that post you were talking about the build up to Wrestlemania. So there was no logical reason for you to bring up the Ultimate Warrior there, there for adding to the very large list of idiotic things you've said already.
> 
> 
> 
> Well that depends, are you referring to the times where Bryan was put down the card AFTER wining the WWE Championship? Or are you referring to the time before he first won the WWE Championship?
> 
> 
> 
> So in other words the post doesn't exist. Gotcha.
> 
> 
> 
> To spot your bullshit? Yes, knowledge is all I need for that. In fact I'm thankful I have it, it's made this much easier.
> 
> 
> 
> You tried to make it sound like the people who gave credit to Bryan/Cena where wrong and that Punk/Lesnar was the main attraction and Meltzer agrees. No one gives a shit what Meltzer says in this regard. We all know how big of an attraction Punk/Lesnar was, a lot of us wanted to watch the PPV just for that reason alone. The fact that you are even bringing that up tells me and everyone else here that you want to just leave Bryan/Cena out of the picture and give all the credit in the world to Punk/Lesnar.
> 
> No one was ever discrediting Punk/Lesnar. That match got the amount of credit that it deserved. It was a huge dream match up. In terms of what was the true main event, Bryan/Cena was without a doubt the true main event. This isn't a case of one match up being bigger than the other, it's simply the fact that this was a never before seen match up on TV or PPV (fuck their 2003 match) and it was, like Lesnar/Punk, a huge HUGE match up. And it was for the WWE Championship.
> 
> 
> 
> How does that matter in any possible way? NOC 2009 is completely irrelevant to this (yes I know what happened at that PPV event, are you aware of who Punk was facing?), and at NOC in 2012 this was the first time in a long time that the main attention was given to Punk, and it was only given to him because he was facing Cena. Yes, this definitely hurt Punk's drawing power for a good portion of that year, it's unfortunate, but Cena was the bigger factor here, not Punk.
> 
> 
> 
> Battleground was expected to have low buys, not a very good example to use. 3 weeks after a PPV just happened with a rematch and a very weak card is going to have low buys no matter what. And again, in this day and age, below 200k isn't bad. It really depends on the situation and the card provided. NOC 2013 did not have a very good card (which is odd given that they just had a great Summerslam card...sort of).
> 
> 
> 
> No I didn't because I'm not referring to the overall rating, I'm referring to the individual segments and ratings for those moments. The only time I have ever referred to overall ratings was when dereailing your 2.97 rating, the ratings being lowest since 97 bullshit, the impact a certain amount of ratings can have on advertising, and when comparing the overall ratings from a certain time frame to another time frame. I then also brought up the other people around Punk to point out that the overall ratings for that year were saved thanks to them, because again, Punk wasn't drawing well, and his individual segments/matches were proof of this, the only proof I've been using when it came to that.
> 
> So again, stop putting words in my mouth.
> 
> 
> 
> And once again, you contradict yourself. You just told me to stop focusing on the overall ratings and to not put blame on one person and now you just said "Punk ratings". Are you kidding me? Do you really expect me to take you seriously at this point when you're saying shit like this? Especially when we are talking about a time period where they were building up for the first time that the Rock and John Cena were ever going to face off, and Taker/HHH were building up for their HIAC match? And then after words Brock Lesnar returned? Do you honestly expect me to take this seriously?
> 
> And guess what, Punk was losing viewers too. Hell a match he was in at one point lost half a million viewers as well, and that was after 2012. But yea, sure, lets just ignore that, right?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not making shit up. At that time, they were big names. Stop going off of what's going on today and understand that things back then at that time weren't the same as they are now. All three of those guys were in different positions then than they were now.
> 
> And he lost over 300,000 viewers against Cena. If you lose this many at the start of the match then I don't care how much they gain afterwords, common sense pretty much says that people weren't interested in watching them face each other and were only interested in what happened at the end of it.
> 
> 
> 
> Being smarter than you isn't a problem.
> 
> 
> 
> But they clearly aren't the same. In fact this is another moment where you've once again contradicted yourself. You've been spending this entire time trying to argue why the ratings when Punk was on top were better or the reasons for them being different than they are now when Bryan is on top, but now you're here saying that the ratings have been the same for years?
> 
> Bullshit. You're absolutely full of it and it's laughable that funnyfaces over there just got done saying you make some valid points because you haven't made a single valid point here yet.





Sonnen Says said:


> You're really clueless. Do you even watch TV do you think WWE has different commercials than any other show? Maybe one or two which includes WWE ones. Those commercials come by the TV channels itself. WWE makes money out of their TV deals, the more hours they have the more money they get. WWE doesn't play the commercials it't not their network, the USA channel controls it. The advertisers wants their commercials to be on the channel not just on Raw dummy. WWE don't get credit for commercials they just earn money from it they aren't in some weak channel it's the NBC organisation. WWE has the right to advertise their stars that's it. You don't know shit man
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they are, they just earn money from the commercials, the USA channel chooses them not WWE that's it. They aren't in some unknown channel to struggle in have advertisers :lmao. It's WWE we are talking about. The advertisers air their commercials for the channel not for WWE. Prove that WWE earned more money from commercials than last year, I dare you. It doesn't make sense WWE makes more money from their TV deals not from commercials fpalm. For example WWE makes extra money for that extra hour, they don't care how low it gets because as I said before it's worth the money.
> 
> 
> 
> Demand can only increase if the overall ratings increase in a weekly basis. The advertisers will not look at Bryan segments and say I want to have commercials during his matches :lmao. They don't fucking look at ratings breakdown mark and the advertisers don't show their commercials because of WWE it's because NBC is a big network and a lot of people watch it. Again WWE only gets profit from commercials they don't get extras it's all on what the NBC networks wants since they signed a long term deal with them. It been said they might not want to give them a bigger deal so WWE time with USA channel might come to an end, isn't it because of Bryan? . WWE job is to get high ratings so they get bigger deals and their demand increase. Because when they do the demands from other networks will rise and they will be willing to pay the money WWE wants. So again Bryan getting one of the highest of the night doesn't mean shit because the overall number is what matters, every hour matters. So getting ups and downs ratings wants matter. They need to get steady ratings. Getting from 3.7 to 3.2 and then to 2.96 isn't a good sign because that's not how it works. It just means it was a one time thing and everything is going back to normal. UFC is making more money than WWE out of buys and tv deals even tho their ratings are nowhere near WWE. Bryan again is just one of the assets nothing more, overall ratings is what they are concerned about to have a long term deal with a network.
> 
> 
> 
> No, WWE use ratings to survive and to better deals out of other notworks. They don't make money out average ratings that are similar than the past 3 years. Again overall ratings is what matters that's why I said WM season this year is the lowest since 97. You're still contradicting yourself saying it's high when it isn't. That's not how it works ratings aren't high. WWE doesn't make more money from ratings they make money out of buys, merch, and ticket sales. That's why UFC is making more money than WWE now despite how low UFC ratings might get compared to WWE. UFC has ESPN, FOX, etc. So they have a lot of TV deals.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, WWE already made it clear that Bryan isn't gonna be a long term plan, he's not gonna stay in the top all the time. He's no Austin or Cena so get a clue plz. He's just one of the assets that WWE build to increase their roster credibility and starpwer. If Bryan was swimming with the guys in 2012 he won't get any damn praise because ratings will so be low as he will need a strong roster and booking to be something.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know what I'm trying to say or you're just acting dumb or something. My point is that the roster is much more stacked than 12/13 and the midcard is much more credible than years before it. Miz, Ziggler, Bryan, Jericho, etc. were never in those years as credible as the shield or the wyatts or even Cesaro (Who's with Heyman now). Those guys had clean wins and Shield and Wyatts were undefeated and unstoppable, You're telling me Miz, Ziggler, Jericho, etc. were unstoppable. They were in a losing streak before they even get a title shot. Plus why are you talking about it, Q1/Q2 in 2012 are higher than this year, so that means Punk title reign was drawing bigger than Bryan as champ. Getting low numbers in a time when it always gets low numbers is pointless to argue with. Plus the only reason why Q3/Q4 got higher in 2013 than 12 is because bigger namas stayed there, guys like HHH, Cena, Punk, Bryan, HBK, Authority, Steph, Shield (is starting to get high ratings every week as they got more big wins), etc.. *And again Punk in 13 got higher rated numbers for his segment than Bryan in the same year*. Nothing Bryan did in that year got in the top 5 highest rated segments.
> 
> This the top 15 top rated segments in 2013. Punk is in it way more than Bryan. So he was the bigger draw in 2013 even still in 14 overall.
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> 
> No, they also got 2.96 rating. Why I bring it up because the overall numbers is what matters to the dealers and that's how money comes. Here compare it with the previous years and in comparison it's not as high as last year or the year prior that. http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2014-ratings/
> 
> 
> 
> Well in 2013 it was the start of Bryan push and Punk had a 1 month break. I'm talking about WM season in 13 which got higher than 14 and it wasn't as high nor as high as any previous years. As for the advertisements I already explained it and it has nothing to do with ratings those are channel deals not WWEs, they only get money from them which means it's not affected by ratings. They get the same profit out of commercials every year since they are in the USA network all this time. They are called TV deals. Plus 3.67 was a Taker streak buzz which also had Hogan and UW, the following week got 3.26 which was UW tribute show, 2.96 is bad which didn't happen in 13 or 12 in this month, than 3.26 which also didn't have Bryan in a big role it was Evolution/Shield segment which got the highest of the night, and then 3.02 rating so it's the same thing as last year (Which is Bryans push starting) time will go and you will see the ratings go down.
> 
> 
> 
> In WM season he wasn't always, Batista in the first 4 weeks he got the highest of the night then the following week Brock got the highest. Bryan occupy segment got the highest then but the following weeks HHH also was getting the highest of the night but that's not a surprise since it was the biggest stroyline of the WM season so there is no surprise in why Bryan got the highest rated segment with HHH/Batista or Authority. WM fallout raw Paul/Brock got the highest of the night not Bryan segment according to Meltzer. Also last week Wyatts/Shield/Evolution got the highest of the night not Bryan. Punk in 13 was getting higher numbers in WM season than Bryan in a weekly basis.
> 
> 
> 
> It says buys, and draw talk too. No it's not the only thing that matters, WWE will be making far and far less money without merch and buys. Ratings exist to keep them in the business and to have huge tv deals which takes a roster to do so nothing more and they are not in jeopardy so stop acting that they were or are. TV deals is a huge deal which doesn't mean there should be high ratings but that doesn't mean they should do low tho. Also ticket sales which is much important than ratings since they have 3 or 4 shows every week with low/high prices which can fill different kinds of arenas/stadiums. In UFC they make more money with their TV deals, and buys than WWE.
> 
> 
> 
> They offer refunds because he was advertised. WM did that much financially because they added the WWE network to it. Anything below 200k shouldn't be called good, it's just bad and it means it's one of the lowest of all time like BG PPV was top 3 or 5 worse buy of all time. SS and HIAC aren't great numbers but they are good tho but then again it's not 50/50 not just Bryan which I give Punk/Brock bigger credit for SSS and HBK/Cena returning for HIAC but that doesn't mean Bryan shouldn't get any credit but the least compared to the ones I mentioned.
> 
> 
> 
> All I'm getting from you is that ratings is all that matters since that's the only thing Bryan does well according to you. But that's far from the truth it's just called stupidity. You're the only one saying it not the ones who actually knows whats up. Bryan is drawing big numbers which is what you don't understand but just because he was getting the highest of the night doesn't those numbers are big thats why the overall ratings aren't as high as the previous two in WM season. Giving most credit to Bryan for the WM fallout Raw and not to Taker streak ending and the fact Meltzer stated the streak segment was the highest of the night or also the fact UW tribute show clearly kept it better than the number from the previous year which is expected since tribute shows always do well. Ratings are decent Cena/HHH are all part of the discussion since they got the highest of the night just as much if not more but again the overall rating is what WWE should concern themselves with.
> 
> 
> 
> I meant major shows in media or MS. He isn't getting that much attention. Didn't say WWE shows lol.
> 
> 
> 
> Again how many times should I say he gets one of the highest not the highest, he probably got the highest 4 times this year so far which part of it should be giving credit to HHH/Authority and most importantly the booking. The booking and storylines draw the viewers not necessarily the wrestler fault. The Rock lost viewers does that mean Bryan is a bigger draw? It's just ratings based on booking and interest in storylines it has nothing to do with bringing money or Bryan being a big draw :lol.
> 
> _-The Rock’s interview at 10pm with The Shield attacking him lost 109,000 viewers for a 3.01 quarter rating – a very bad number for the 10pm timeslot.
> -The Rock’s promo at John Cena gained 643,000 viewers to a 3.53 quarter rating, which is nothing really special for the overrun. John Cena coming out to cut a promo and The Rock closing the show lost 349,000 viewers. The show finished with a 3.30 quarter rating, which likely came as a surprise to officials.
> _
> 
> 
> 
> What major role Bryan was in that got higher? I'm talking about all the PPVs that he ME or was Co-Me of because that's how it should work. We should only compare B shows with B shows or A shows with A shows. or the numbers for the same PPVs. You're just out of your ass here. 2012 alone did higher than 13 overall or so far even 14 (EC/RR).
> 
> 
> 
> No I didn't I dare you to find where I said it. All I said is that Bryan should be part of the blame for SS when the first number came in and again I only judge the ones he ME or Co-ME that's it. There aren't as many good PPV buys for Bryan compared to Punk, only like two which Punk majorly part of.
> 
> 
> 
> That's not true WWE commercials don't only consist of PPVs advertising but also other kinds of commercials which the advertisers ask WWE to have a wrestler on the commercials like Cena for example that's how WWE make extra money from advertising or commercials, TV commercials from USA channel is different and it's something WWE doesn't control it's the channel itself. WWE get money from them but the same money every year since they have a deal with the USA channel anyway. For example SD numbers doesn't get as high as Raw but they still make the same profit from the commercials in every year but for SD it's a different channel tho. TV deals makes WWE money not ratings, WWE just use ratings to grab attention from the TV dealers or keep them trusted. Right now NBC or USA channel doesn't want to pay the amount of money WWE offered to resign with them. Now they are looking for another network deal unless they come in terms with them but that's NBC network lose since WWE is/was getting the highest ratings in Monday despite how low they might get.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes he has in 13 he was drawing one of the highest or the highest rated segments every week even with those midcarders + I already showed you how many times Punk was part of the highest of the night in the same post. Bryan only started to draw when he got part of the authority and he was losing and gaining weak numbers with Orton despite that. Losing viewers or gain little isn't a big deal since Bryan does too. Nobody can draw with any wrestler it's impossible without a story or good booking and that's all Bryan is having.
> 
> 
> 
> They do but that's not always the case if there is no story or enough attention or advertising than it wont draw as good because the viewers might not be interested in the opponents as they might have bad repetition and zero credibility. Show me when did Bryan face a guy with no credibility and gained big numbers? All the ones Bryan faced had credibility and are major part of the show. He wasn't going against guys like Big E or Axel/Ryback or Fandango or Young why is that? Because he was clearly protected.
> 
> 
> 
> In term of drawing power no way dude, Shield wasn't losing million viewers like those guys I mentioned. Shield was gaining very solid numbers when they get advertised and they don't usually lose a lot viewers only at times but that's because they were directionless, it will happen to anyone + they were part of the highest segments last year as I showed. Bryan also struggled to gain ratings with Orton so again what does that mean :lol, stop ignoring it it's a fact. I already showed how week they gained, Punk didn't lose viewers with him, hell he gained a better rating with Orton than Bryan/Orton in a street fight.
> 
> 
> 
> No they don't Tv deals does, prove me wrong here with actual facts. Ratings are important to keep WWE in business they use the shows to advertise merch/PPVs/ticket sales to gain money and also to grab viewers to their product that's it. UFC doesn't have good ratings but yet they are running a very successful business compared to WWE. Just because you explained it doesn't mean it's true.
> 
> 
> 
> Overall drawing is what matters. Rock didn't increase ratings dramatically last year just a bit higher but in buys and ticket sales he's top notch which is what WWE is looking for that's what they need not Bryan just saying. Anyway Bryan will be pushed down the card anyway so it's pointless and you will not be able to use ratings anymore even tho it makes no sense to even keep mentioning ratings.
> 
> 
> 
> One of the highest I already explained. Nope WWE will only suffer if the stroylines and booking sucks and the top star are directionless. They can make anyone a star if they want, so sooner or later the next guy will come and be in Bryans place somewhere this year.
> 
> With that said, yes you did say that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You seem to give all the credit to Bryan for those high rated segments which the person who's part of it is just as responsible. Plus if the storyline and the booking are bad or nonexistent then Bryan will not be able to draw. This is what happened with Punk at times very bad booking and was having unworthy opponents.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and you're the same guy who made excuses for almost every gain Punk had and said it's because the stipulation or the storyline was the reason fpalm. Bryan is having just that with HHH for example so you're biased here. Very hypocritical.
> 
> 
> 
> He wasn't in 2012 because he wasn't booked properly and didn't have any opoonent that had value and anyone think that this guy is competition except for Cena/Ryback/Rock/Bryan ,etc. The roster was thin, bad booking is the big reason and the fact that he was shoved down the card since HHH beating him in hottest time doesn't help, he should have been a major focus of the show but he wasn't a lot of times and that's not his fault. He wasn't protected like Bryan now who's having top notch matches and clean wins unlike Punk who didn't in consist basis.





> 1.Because Orton isn't a big enough draw and not as over as Bryan is so that's why, it's not about him being top tier talent at all since Orton is been made Bryan's bitch but even then he's still a big star cuz of his accomplishments.
> 2. That's not always the case lol, fact is Warrior isn't well known to those fans today. It's not easy to outsell Cena so that's something. Punk didn't have to die to outsell Cena in online orders so there is no excuses for Bryan here.
> 3. Punk didn't either lol yet he did.
> 4. Again they don't make a lot more money out of ratings. It's a TV deal thing get it in your thick skull.
> 5. So that explains why ratings got low since ER. http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2013-ratings/
> 6. Ok for example ER he had nothing to do with it since he was just part of a tag team and Brock/HHH was the biggest match with Ryback/Cena for the wwe title and PB was the return of CM Punk which did very well and in MITB Bryan was part of the MITB match so not really much credit here.
> 
> 
> 
> NO just stop. Potentially my ass, how many times I should tell you it's not how you bring money out of somebody. If they really want to see him he will be the top draw in merch, ticket sales, ME, buys, but he isn't that means ratings aren't enough proof for this. It just show that people are only excited about the storylines and again he's not having the highest all the time guys like Batista, Brock, HHH and Shield/Wyatts got that too. Bryan got the highest of the night 3 or 4 times this whole year. So it's not every week damn week. Again last week Shield/Wyatts/Evolution got the highest. Bryan was part of the biggest storyline of the year so he was supposed to gain the most attention since WWE is booking him that way. They could do it with Cesaro if they wanted.
> 
> 
> 
> In bold. Because it's the overall number that gives WWE a name. It's not Bryan's fault but that doesn't make him a bigger draw than Punk or Cena. Saying he gets one of the highest or highest doesn't mean shit because they all did. They can't get money from him if he doesn't brings enough buys, merch, or live attendance it doesn't secure his a place in the card because when he's not protected anymore he's not gonna pull the same numbers. He will be shoved down the card and be in Cena position now. It's WWE job to get better ratings not Bryans so bringing money because of ratings is BS and you need to prove it, not just act like that's how it works.
> 
> 
> 
> I was talking about who was/is in Raw this year. Don't include him before WM but that's not what I was trying to say.
> 
> 
> 
> Bold part.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Won't argue about that but Meltzer knows more shit than you do. It's his thing he knows because he has his sources in WWE and knows whats big or not. There were people who thought Cena/Bryan should get credit but I don't take it to heart because it's not true. Since you said Bryan got good buys you included SS as something he's responsible for.
> 
> 
> 
> So when I say Cena and Punk/Brock were a bigger factors for SS than Bryan will I be wrong? NOC 09 is still a great number because it was higher than the previous year which was HHH/Cena. So either ways it's an impressive number.
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't mean it should get as low as that. The event received 114,000 buys worldwide, making it the second lowest number (to the ECW December to Dismember) in the last 17 years
> 
> 
> 
> Again that's exactly what you don't understand he's not bringing money because he had the highest segment, ratings can't rely on one person. Cena is a bigger draw because he gets not only high ratings but also merch, ticket sales, buys. If you think Bryan is a bigger draw because of a fucking segment than you're really really clueless. It's all because he's the focus of the show and is getting the major top tier wrestlers and storylines. It's no secret for the fact Cena is midcarding not ME over Bryan. I can admit that Cena is a bigger draw than Punk but you're just so delusional and biased it's crazy.
> 
> 
> 
> Because you act like Punk can't have good overall ratings but Bryan can, Punk was also getting one of the highest and highest in 2012 even when overall ratings were low by the end of the year. I said overall ratings matters more and this goes to Punk too not just Bryan, and that's not necessarily their fault it's just that WWE doesn't make good effort to do something about it. At least now they have been doing something since new guys are debuting and others are getting more screen time.
> 
> 
> 
> Which one are you talking about? Everybody loses viewers nobody is gonna be doing the same numbers with anyone. But that's what you don't understand Bryan won't be getting the same numbers with anyone for example a match with Young for no reason in a bad timslot wont do well and will lose viewers.
> 
> 
> 
> Stop running from it. Name them because Miz isn't a big name that's fucking for sure he was losing million and half million views a lot of times since WM and nobody gives a crap about him no matter how many time they push him just like ADR who has the Miz syndrome. And Punk wasn't losing viewers with them, he gained with them too in 2011.
> 
> It's about logic and clearly all you show is biased opinions and pass it as facts.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not contradicting myself you're. They are the same ratings and my point was they make the same profit so either ways Bryan getting the highest segment doesn't mean shit, it's the overall number that dealers look for. For example they don't look for ratings breakdown for other tv shows and say this guy is a draw, it's the appeal of the show that draws. End of story.
> 
> 
> 
> Because you're stubborn and you don't know shit.























Last man standing thread?


----------



## kokepepsi

Wait TheGM was arguing that higher ratings means more money :maury

I think Sonnen wins despite some mis statements

Bryan needs like 3 more months before any real discussion or pontiless arguing can be made

Unless you wanna bring up his shitty world heavy weight title run but thats not fair


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

kokepepsi said:


> Wait TheGM was arguing that higher ratings means more money :maury
> 
> I think Sonnen wins despite some mis statements.


Lol.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_te...ompanies_make_money_from_tv_ratings?#slide=10

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/insidelocalnews/ratings.html



> The more a show is watched, the more and higher-paid advertising is programmed into that time segment. In addition, whole populations can be targeted for specific advertisements, just by the demographic information provided by Nielsen. Nielsen says industry leaders and advertisers use this television audience research information to buy and sell television time as well as to increase the effectiveness of television advertising and programming.
> 
> If an advertiser spent millions running ads during a show that did not meet its expectations for viewership, it would be economically wise to reconsider its placement of advertising dollars in that time slot. And so, the Nielsen ratings are the most important factor in deciding what shows get aired, when they are shown, and what will be advertised in that time slot.
> 
> *Chart showing advertising dollars and ratings Advertising pays for commercial television. Period. And that is serious business when it comes to what shows go on the air. According to Nielsen, "Ratings are used like currency in the marketplace of advertiser-supported TV. When advertisers want a commercial to reach an audience, they need to place it in TV programs which deliver an audience. The more audience a program delivers, the more the commercial time is worth to advertisers." To get an estimate of how important advertising is to television, the American Association of Advertising Agencies estimated advertising comprises nearly 22 minutes of each hour of daytime programming, and almost 19 minutes an hour during network news.
> *
> For local affiliate stations of larger networks, this makes the difference in what gets shown -- and, in some cases, who gets aired -- on the news and other live programs. So how are local stations to determine what shows overall achieve a higher viewership than others? Nielsen Media Research conducts individual station ratings about three times a year during the "sweeps" months of November, February, and May. During these periods, the performance of the 250 local television markets in the U.S. is thoroughly researched. It is also during these peak periods that the most attention-grabbing shows are aired, in an effort to gain the best ratings.
> 
> Photo of Faces from Newscast It is the information gathered from each of these periods that determines how much to charge an advertiser for a specific time slot and also how much profit can be earned. Local stations with low-rated shows will receive the least from advertisers and sponsoring networks. Sometimes this leads to the misconception that "sensational" or high-drama local news increases viewership and, hence, more advertising revenue for the station.


You just basically made a fool out of yourself with this statement. It's a shame really, all you needed to do was do some research, something sonnen apparently hasn't done yet. 

Just so you understand how it works, what happens is the money the USA and Sci Fi (again fuck the way they spell their new name) make off of advertisements varies depending on how good the ratings are. If the ratings are higher, they charge more money for advertisements and sponsers during their commercials during a certain time slot, referring of course to the time slots they are given for Raw and Smackdown, which both are a combined 5 hours of programming. That's a lot of commercial time slots. A portion of that money goes to the WWE, which is a good amount. 

Wrestlers are usually paid by the WWE from the money they make off of merchandise sales and ticket revenues. PPV buys are given to wrestlers as bonus's if they were on that PPV card. 

But I will say this, if you go back and look through my arguments, you will see at one point where I am horribly wrong on something that I decided not to edit out a while ago just to see if Sonnen would actually take advantage of that and call me out on it. To no one's surprise (if anyone else has seen it yet, and if they want to know what it is just PM me), Sonnen hasn't done the single thing he needs to do to figure out I'm wrong which is do some research on the matter. 

And btw, Sonnen was also trying to argue that being a draw doesn't in any way involve ratings. He basically loses the argument automatically. 



Cack_Thu said:


> Again,what?I swear,I wouldnt even dream of stealing your thunder of ignorance.Since you're so keen to have a quality uninterrupted dicksuction and 'cause you said "please",i shall oblige your request.:agree:





Cack_Thu said:


> Seriously,that's like having boobs on a bear and me giving a damn about it,in which case you must have mistaken me for someone else 'cause i dont.
> Ta!


Please, for your own sake, just stop already. You've already become the buzz killington of this thread. Just stop responding, all you're doing at this point is making things worse for yourself.

Saw that sonnen responded. I'm tired, so I'm not responding to that tonight. Does anyone want to take over for now? If so, thanks. I'll respond to it tomorrow if no one else does.

Edit: Just remembered tomorrow is mothers day, so yea I'll humor myself by reading that post that I'm sure is full of bullshit again if no one acknowledges it.


----------



## kokepepsi

Here from your first link


> Production companies don't make money directly from television viewing ratings. Having high ratings are good for a production company in that the program becomes more attractive to broadcasters.
> Broadcasters generally make their profits from commercials and sponsorship of programs. A popular program will allow the broadcaster to sell commercial slots at a far higher rate than programs that have a small number of viewers. Slots for commercials during the Superbowl for example can cost well into six figures.


Fix it so you understand


> *Production companies (WWE) *don't make money directly from television viewing ratings. Having high ratings are good for a *production company(WWE)* in that the program becomes more attractive to broadcasters*(USA/SyFy/Ion/CW)*.
> Broadcasters *(USA/SyFy/Ion/CW)* generally make their profits from commercials and sponsorship of programs. A popular program will allow the *broadcaster(USA/SyFy/Ion/CW)* to sell commercial slots at a far higher rate than programs that have a small number of viewers. Slots for commercials during the Superbowl for example can cost well into six figures.


If you were saying high ratings help to give them better tv right fees (which it does) then yes, but from what I understood you were making the point that high tv ratings isntantly means more revenue in tv ads.

The tv ad money they do make is nothing compared to the tv rights, about 1million last time I saw a figure

Not gonna respond to sonnen....You giving up?
:ti


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Well... I certainly hope Sonnen and ThGMofGods are having fun.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

I give up reading those I tried to keep up but I'm getting nothing out of it lol Props to both for being passionate and loving both my favorite wrestlers.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

kokepepsi said:


> Here from your first link
> 
> 
> Fix it so you understand
> 
> 
> If you were saying high ratings help to give them better tv right fees (which it does) then yes, *but from what I understood you were making the point that high tv ratings isntantly means more revenue in tv ads.*
> 
> The tv ad money they do make is nothing compared to the tv rights, about 1million last time I saw a figure
> 
> Not gonna respond to sonnen....You giving up?
> :ti


I will at some point monday if no one else does. But today's been a long day. 

And no that isn't what I was stating, but you are very close actually to spotting out the error I made which I am, again, surprised Sonnen hasn't noticed yet. I could just tell you now, but nah. Pointing out my own flaws isn't my thing.


----------



## Jingoro

well, the good news is they will probably make a little more of an effort in the next smackdown they tape and maybe even have a great match. something good like the big show/del rio epic smackdown title match.


----------



## Cobalt

Everyone will hop off Bryan's dick the second some new IWC darling makes an impact anyways, why does everyone care so much?


----------



## Cack_Thu

TheGMofGods said:


> Please, for your own sake, just stop already. You've already become the buzz killington of this thread. Just stop responding, all you're doing at this point is making things worse for yourself.
> 
> Saw that sonnen responded. I'm tired, so I'm not responding to that tonight. Does anyone want to take over for now? If so, thanks. I'll respond to it tomorrow if no one else does.
> 
> Edit: Just remembered tomorrow is mothers day, so yea I'll humor myself by reading that post that I'm sure is *full of bullshit* again if no one acknowledges it.





TheGMofGods said:


> I will at some point monday if no one else does. But today's been a long day.
> 
> And no that isn't what I was stating, but you are very close actually *to spotting out the error I made which I am, again, surprised Sonnen hasn't noticed yet. I could just tell you now, but nah. Pointing out my own flaws isn't my thing*.


Did someone mention bullshitting?:lol

This parody of a debate between you and Sonnen Says is a total waste of bandwidth,much worse than my humor,honestly.FACT.

You seem to be living under this notion that typing lengthy posts and getting the last word,equates to owning somebody in an argument.Childish I say.There is something called "opinion" and everybody is entitled to one.

How old are you?
You surely got be younger than 17,which could s'plain a lot,starting from your uppity mannerism,obsession with lengthy posts,getting the last word......:lol


----------



## Starbuck

+10 to whoever can make their point in less than 200 words.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Not even Rock316AE was this passionate. We've reached levels never seen before.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Cack_Thu said:


> Did someone mention bullshitting?:lol


No body mentioned bullshiting here since all you have to do is pm me to figure out what part of my post that is.



Cack_Thu said:


> This parody of a debate between you and Sonnen Says is a total waste of bandwidth,much worse than my humor,honestly.FACT.


Lol.

And you care why? Because you just got done making arguably the worst posts in this thread now you want to try to make our debate seem like it's worth nothing of importance? I think I need to remind you that you're the only one who thinks this way about this so far. Everyone else has been enjoying the ass whipping Sonnen has been getting not just by me but by seemingly everyone.



Cack_Thu said:


> You seem to be living under this notion that typing lengthy posts and getting the last word,equates to owning somebody in an argument.Childish I say.There is something called "opinion" and everybody is entitled to one.


And you just tried to make your opinion seem like it was a fact. Hypocritical much? I'd say that's the most childish thing here if anything.



Cack_Thu said:


> How old are you?
> You surely got be younger than 17,which could s'plain a lot,starting from your uppity mannerism,obsession with lengthy posts,getting the last word......:lol


I'm much older than 17, and I can say with certainty that I'm older with you. The fact that you think people who are 17 years old type long posts like that for a living tells me you haven't even reached puberty yet.

And so far I haven't gotten the last word, Sonnen has. He made the last big response post so far and I'm giving someone else the chance to step in, so as far as I'm concerned he's had the last word. I don't know how you're coming to these conclusions, but if you are however trying to reach Sonnen territory in that you ruin threads just by posting here and not making any sense, you've got a long way to go but you're at least on the right track.


----------



## Cack_Thu

TheGMofGods said:


> No body mentioned bullshiting here since all you have to do is pm me to figure out what part of my post that is.
> 
> 
> 
> Lol.
> 
> And you care why? Because you just got done making arguably the worst posts in this thread now you want to try to make our debate seem like it's worth nothing of importance? I think I need to remind you that you're the only one who thinks this way about this so far. Everyone else has been enjoying the ass whipping Sonnen has been getting not just by me but by seemingly everyone.
> 
> 
> 
> And you just tried to make your opinion seem like it was a fact. Hypocritical much? I'd say that's the most childish thing here if anything.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm much older than 17, and I can say with certainty that I'm older with you. The fact that you think people who are 17 years old type long posts like that for a living tells me you haven't even reached puberty yet.
> 
> And so far I haven't gotten the last word, Sonnen has. He made the last big response post so far and I'm giving someone else the chance to step in, so as far as I'm concerned he's had the last word. I don't know how you're coming to these conclusions, but if you are however trying to reach Sonnen territory in that you ruin threads just by posting here and not making any sense, you've got a long way to go but you're at least on the right track.


smdh.
Wait.
Showing more and more signs of emotional immaturity and a need for constant acknowledgement.A damn good sign of you're under 17 instincts.

No lengthy post for me.Suffice to say,I without yours or others acknowledgement is like a Siberian Tiger without a Hayabusa


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Cack_Thu said:


> smdh.
> Wait.
> Showing more and more signs of emotional immaturity and a need for constant acknowledgement.A damn good sign of you're under 17 instincts.


So you dodged my entire argument and went back to the age comment. Gotcha.

And wait, you're saying all of this despite the fact that this is coming from someone who attempted to be different in this thread and tried making a mockery and joke out of the two people who were getting the main attention in the thread after they in no way acknowledged you? 

So far you're fitting the description of immaturity and you're certainly fitting the description of an attention whore. I'm already pretty well known on this site so why do I need any attention? Everyone knows what my motto is.

Arrive. 
Long Ass Post.
Rant about the Rock.
Suck Flair's dick.
Leave.
Repeat. 



Cack_Thu said:


> No lengthy post for me.Suffice to say,I without yours or others acknowledgement is like a Siberian Tiger without a Hayabusa


So then why do you keep responding?


----------



## Cack_Thu

TheGMofGods said:


> So you dodged my entire argument and went back to the age comment. Gotcha.
> 
> And wait, you're saying all of this despite the fact that this is coming from someone who attempted to be different in this thread and tried making a mockery and joke out of the two people who were getting the main attention in the thread after they in no way acknowledged you?
> 
> So far you're fitting the description of immaturity and you're certainly fitting the description of an attention whore. I'm already pretty well known on this site so why do I need any attention? Everyone knows what my motto is.
> 
> Arrive.
> Long Ass Post.
> Rant about the Rock.
> Suck Flair's dick.
> Leave.
> Repeat.
> 
> 
> 
> So then why do you keep responding?


A clear cut case of


Spoiler: a spoiler



Delusions of Grandeur



Internet iz serious bidnez :|

Sad existence.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."

Grow up,Morgan Freeman wannabe.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Cack_Thu said:


> A clear cut case of
> 
> 
> Spoiler: a spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Delusions of Grandeur
> 
> 
> 
> Internet iz serious bidnez :|
> 
> Sad existence.
> 
> "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."
> 
> Grow up,Morgan Freeman wannabe.


Lol.

Everyone take notes. This is what a sad defeated poster looks like.

Edit: Thanos quit being lazy and respond to Sonnen's post. I'm tagging you in. Go.


----------



## Cack_Thu

TheGMofGods said:


> Lol.
> 
> Everyone take notes. This is what a sad defeated poster looks like.
> 
> Edit: Thanos quit being lazy and respond to Sonnen's post. I'm tagging you in. Go.


Short,concise and to the point.Now this is what I call progress.:cool2


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Cack_Thu said:


> Short,concise and to the point.Now this is what I call progress.:cool2


If by progress you mean you're trying to make progress in becoming a better poster, then you're at least coming to the right place. Otherwise I hope you don't think that I'm going to continue to post short and concise posts. Regardless people will still probably think me>you.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So TheGMOfGods vs Sonnen has become TheGMOfGods vs Cack_Thu. What a plot twist!

*Continues eating Popcorn*


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

#BadNewsSanta said:


> So TheGMOfGods vs Sonnen has become TheGMOfGods vs Cack_Thu. What a plot twist!
> 
> *Continues eating Popcorn*


Thanks for telling me you had popcorn. Now I have a reason to end the argument quickly just so that popcorn goes to waste. :curry2

#soevil #betterthanyou(sortof)


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

You bastard...


----------



## Londrick

TheGMofGods vs Sonnen Says is the El Torito vs Hornswoggle of WF.


----------



## THANOS

Londrick said:


> TheGMofGods vs Sonnen Says is the El Torito vs Hornswoggle of WF.


:lmao


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Londrick said:


> TheGMofGods vs Sonnen Says is the El Torito vs Hornswoggle of WF.


You mean the brutal classic on the Extreme Rules pre show? Don't you think this is a little too one sided for that to be a valid comparison?

If not then I'm Hornswoggle, at least I can say that I've kissed Aj Lee :trips2


----------



## Gretchen

Honestly... isn't this *a little* (lol) too much? All the ratings threads I've come across are awful in so many ways, but these arguments that involve writing multiple essays back and forth to one another...

At the end of the day, it's fucking wrestling. Why not just enjoy it? Is writing an essay to prove that a performer involved in scripted fighting is a bigger draw than another really worth it? Especially when it's just to another wrestling fan on this forum. 

Why not just mark for and appreciate the guys we like, and leave it at that, instead of trying to pawn them off as better than some other wrestler, and bash other wrestlers? 

Keep it positive. ositivity


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

RFWHC said:


> Honestly... isn't this *a little* (lol) too much? All the ratings threads I've come across are awful in so many ways, but these arguments that involve writing multiple essays back and forth to one another...
> 
> At the end of the day, it's fucking wrestling. Why not just enjoy it? Is writing an essay to prove that a performer involved in scripted fighting is a bigger draw than another really worth it? Especially when it's just to another wrestling fan on this forum.
> 
> Why not just mark for and appreciate the guys we like, and leave it at that, instead of trying to pawn them off as better than some other wrestler, and bash other wrestlers?
> 
> Keep it positive. ositivity


Because someone is wrong on the internet. It is my duty as a douche bag to correct them by any means necessary.


----------



## Cobalt

RFWHC said:


> Honestly... isn't this *a little* (lol) too much? All the ratings threads I've come across are awful in so many ways, but these arguments that involve writing multiple essays back and forth to one another...
> 
> At the end of the day, it's fucking wrestling. Why not just enjoy it? Is writing an essay to prove that a performer involved in scripted fighting is a bigger draw than another really worth it? Especially when it's just to another wrestling fan on this forum.
> 
> Why not just mark for and appreciate the guys we like, and leave it at that, instead of trying to pawn them off as better than some other wrestler, and bash other wrestlers?
> 
> Keep it positive. ositivity


This would involve too much brains, hence why it never happens.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Cobalt said:


> This would involve too much brains, hence why it never happens.


...

:jose

I mean...wow. All of my long ass posts just got basically shitted on just by this one sentence.

Yea...I think I'm done here.


----------



## MaybeLock

Bah Gowd, what happened to this thread and the times when people kept it short and sweet? Damn...

SonnenSays deserves some recognition, he has single handedly kept these mark wars alive for months against the prediction of many. He reminds me of that japanese soldier who took 30 years to surrender after the end of World War II, because he didn't know the war ended. Keep the fight brother, some day, Punk will be recognized as the great draw he was in this thread  It also took Mark Henry some time to reach his drawing GOAT status. :henry1


----------



## Cack_Thu

TheGMofGods said:


> ...
> 
> :jose
> 
> I mean...wow. All of my long ass posts just got basically shitted on just by this one sentence.
> 
> Yea...I think I'm done here.


....Excuse me while I'm having a kidney attack.
R.I.P to all those brain cells that tried to stay alive before people finally figured out that reading your long "I smart,you dumb dumb" posts were an easy,effective,alternate way to get lobotomized.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This should be renamed The *Ravings* Thread.


----------



## RebelArch86

So are there breakdowns from the last 2 weeks lost anywhere in this thread?


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Cack_Thu said:


> ....Excuse me while I'm having a kidney attack.
> R.I.P to all those brain cells that tried to stay alive before people finally figured out that reading your long "I smart,you dumb dumb" posts were an easy,effective,alternate way to get lobotomized.


You must have lost a lot of brain cells a long time ago if you think anyone actually feels the same way you do in regards to my post. Hell the only reason I'm responding to your posts is so you have a reason to humor yourself. It's really entertaining.


----------



## Cack_Thu

TheGMofGods said:


> You must have lost a lot of brain cells a long time ago if you think anyone actually feels the same way you do in regards to my post. Hell the only reason I'm responding to your posts is so you have a reason to humor yourself. It's really entertaining.


There is something called '*sarcasm*',and you're woefully unaware of it.Anybody can type long posts.It's as useless as "ueue" in Queue. :lol

What a pitiful existence.You're on an internet wrestling forum,kid.Everyday you wake up,be it mothers days,valentines days,internet keyboard day or whatever,do you look yourself in the mirror and say: "OH,EVERYBODY KNOWS ME.YEAHHHHH LOOK AT ME.I'M FAMOUS WRESTLING FORUM MEMBER.I HAVE TO LOG IN TO THIS FORUM NOW TO DO THE FOLLOWING SHIT.ARRIVE.BLAH BLAH BLAH SOME MORE BLAH BLAH BLAH..BLAH BLAH BLAH..A BIT MORE BLAH BLAH TO SHOW EVERYONE I SMART YOU DUMB DUMB.LEAVE.BLAH BLAH BLAH AND SOME MORE BLAH BLAH BLAH.YEAHHHHHHHHH"

Knock-Knock.















.






















.






















.
























.




























.






















.

















.





















.






















.



























.























.





































.



































.
























.








































.







































.








































.




































.














































.








































.


































Nope,not another knock-knock joke.Somebody knocked at your door.Go check out who it is. :lol


----------



## Cobalt

TheGMofGods said:


> ...
> 
> :jose
> 
> I mean...wow. All of my long ass posts just got basically shitted on just by this one sentence.
> 
> Yea...I think I'm done here.


Sorry, had to be said.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Cack_Thu said:


> There is something called '*sarcasm*',and you're woefully unaware of it.Anybody can type long posts.It's as useless as "ueue" in Queue. :lol
> 
> What a pitiful existence.You're on an internet wrestling forum,kid.Everyday you wake up,be it mothers days,valentines days,internet keyboard day or whatever,do you look yourself in the mirror and say: "OH,EVERYBODY KNOWS ME.YEAHHHHH LOOK AT ME.I'M FAMOUS WRESTLING FORUM MEMBER.I HAVE TO LOG IN TO THIS FORUM NOW TO DO THE FOLLOWING SHIT.ARRIVE.BLAH BLAH BLAH SOME MORE BLAH BLAH BLAH..BLAH BLAH BLAH..A BIT MORE BLAH BLAH TO SHOW EVERYONE I SMART YOU DUMB DUMB.LEAVE.BLAH BLAH BLAH AND SOME MORE BLAH BLAH BLAH.YEAHHHHHHHHH"
> 
> Knock-Knock.


You're making this way too easy for me. Again, for your own sake, stop posting. You're only making a bigger fool out of yourself.


----------



## JohnCenaTheGOAT

Can't wait for Punk to return so ratings will reach record highs again......


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

JohnCenaTheGOAT said:


> Can't wait for Punk to return so ratings will reach record highs again......


Thanks for the good laugh. I needed one.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

JohnCenaTheGOAT said:


> Can't wait for Punk to return so ratings will reach record highs again......


Even if he did, outside of us Punk marks, no one would give him credit anyway.


----------



## Happenstan

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Even if he did, outside of us Punk marks, no one would give him credit anyway.


That's because you Punk marks would be the only ones left here what with the rapture having taken place and all...:angel


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Happenstan said:


> That's because you Punk marks would be the only ones left here what with the rapture having taken place and all...:angel


:lmao

Wait... does that make us Punk marks evil?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Happenstan said:


> That's because you Punk marks would be the only ones left here what with the rapture having taken place and all...:angel


:clap


----------



## Afnorok

Hr 1 - 3.810 1.4
Hr 2 - 4.251 1.5
Hr 3 - 3.957 1.4


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Every hour down but hour 3 down almost 500,000 viewers. NBA is hurting obviously but perhaps viewers are tiring of the same Shield/Evolution schtick every week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The ratings need Punk asap so the haters can put the blame on the lower numbers coming up in a few months.

If he doesn't return by October, some might actually have to *gasp* blame Bryan.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Hour 1 featured the following:


The Shield attacked Evolution as they arrived at the arena. Later in the show, the two teams got into it and a Batista vs. Roman Reigns match was made.
Rob Van Dam defeated Jack Swagger. Adam Rose distracted Swagger, allowing Van Dam to hit a kick and a Five-Star Frog Splash for a quick victory.
WWE Divas Champion Paige defeated Alicia Fox. Paige hit a Paige Turner for an out-of-nowhere pinfall victory. After the match, Alicia Fox threw a tantrum.
Daniel Bryan announced that he will be having neck surgery on Thursday and will be taking time off. He promised to return.

Hour 2 Featured:


John Cena and The Usos defeated The Wyatt Family. Cena won with an Attitude Adjustment on Erick Rowan.
Nikki Bella defeated Natalya. The cast of Total Divas was at ringside “scoring” the match. After the match, Natalya got upset and tore up their numbers.
United States Champion Sheamus defeated Curtis Axel. Sheamus won by submissions with a Texas Cloverleaf. After the match, Ryback attacked Sheamus to set up the next match.
United States Champion Sheamus defeated Ryback. Sheamus won with a Brogue Kick.

Hour 3 Featured:


*Stephanie McMahon asked Daniel Bryan to come to the ring, but he was dragged out unconscious by Kane. Bryan was taken away on a stretcher and loaded into an ambulance.*
Dolph Ziggler defeated Fandango. Layla got caught up on the ring apron, distracting Fandango long enough for Ziggler to hit the Zig Zag and pick up the win. After the match, Fandango declared his love for Layla and they kissed. JBL was grossed out by the love between a man and a woman.
Hacksaw Jim Duggan showed up to shill Legends House. Rusev interrupted and tried to beat up Duggan, but Big E made the save. Reinforced: Rusev only beats up black wrestlers.
Cody Rhodes defeated Damien Sandow. Rhodes pinned Sandow after a rake to the eyes and a Disaster Kick.
Roman Reigns vs. Batista was a no contest, I guess. Evolution kept trying to interfere, so the Shield stepped in to stop them. That turned into another Shield vs. Evolution melee, and when The Shield got the upper hand, Stephanie McMahon sent down a variety of Raw heels to help out Evolution. The Shield fought off everyone with steel chairs.

The segment with Stephanie, Bryan and Kane was most likely at the end of hour 2. So I'm assuming that did a good number.


----------



## Wagg

lowest viewership of 2014. :duck


----------



## Afnorok

The Boy Wonder said:


> Hour 1 featured the following:
> 
> 
> The Shield attacked Evolution as they arrived at the arena. *Later in the show, the two teams got into it and a Batista vs. Roman Reigns match was made.*
> Rob Van Dam defeated Jack Swagger. Adam Rose distracted Swagger, allowing Van Dam to hit a kick and a Five-Star Frog Splash for a quick victory.
> WWE Divas Champion Paige defeated Alicia Fox. Paige hit a Paige Turner for an out-of-nowhere pinfall victory. After the match, Alicia Fox threw a tantrum.
> Daniel Bryan announced that he will be having neck surgery on Thursday and will be taking time off. He promised to return.
> 
> Hour 2 Featured:
> 
> 
> John Cena and The Usos defeated The Wyatt Family. Cena won with an Attitude Adjustment on Erick Rowan.
> Nikki Bella defeated Natalya. The cast of Total Divas was at ringside “scoring” the match. After the match, Natalya got upset and tore up their numbers.
> United States Champion Sheamus defeated Curtis Axel. Sheamus won by submissions with a Texas Cloverleaf. After the match, Ryback attacked Sheamus to set up the next match.
> United States Champion Sheamus defeated Ryback. Sheamus won with a Brogue Kick.
> 
> Hour 3 Featured:
> 
> 
> Stephanie McMahon asked Daniel Bryan to come to the ring, but he was dragged out unconscious by Kane. Bryan was taken away on a stretcher and loaded into an ambulance.
> Dolph Ziggler defeated Fandango. Layla got caught up on the ring apron, distracting Fandango long enough for Ziggler to hit the Zig Zag and pick up the win. After the match, Fandango declared his love for Layla and they kissed. JBL was grossed out by the love between a man and a woman.
> Hacksaw Jim Duggan showed up to shill Legends House. Rusev interrupted and tried to beat up Duggan, but Big E made the save. Reinforced: Rusev only beats up black wrestlers.
> Cody Rhodes defeated Damien Sandow. Rhodes pinned Sandow after a rake to the eyes and a Disaster Kick.
> Roman Reigns vs. Batista was a no contest, I guess. Evolution kept trying to interfere, so the Shield stepped in to stop them. That turned into another Shield vs. Evolution melee, and when The Shield got the upper hand, Stephanie McMahon sent down a variety of Raw heels to help out Evolution. The Shield fought off everyone with steel chairs.



Hour 2.


----------



## #Mark

Wagg said:


> lowest viewership of 2014. :duck


Looks like Shield/Evolution is flopping.


----------



## Afnorok

Average: 4,006,000 viewers. NBA Playoff game - 5,540,000 viewers.


Last year, Average: 4.15 million viewers. NBA playoff game - 5.19 million viewers

Hr 1: 3.79 
Hr 2: 4.10
Hr 3: 4.25





#Mark said:


> Looks like Shield/Evolution is flopping.


More like Shield/Evolution is the only thing working. Nothing else is drawing.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Afnorok said:


> Hr 1 - 3.810 1.4
> Hr 2 - 4.251 1.5
> Hr 3 - 3.957 1.4


Thats about 800,000 fewer viewers than last week in total. 
Last week was a 3.02.

This week might be in the 2.8s or 2.7s


----------



## #Mark

Bryan/Kane/Steph has been topping the night regularly though. Shield/Evolution were in three segments and the show was the lowest of the year. If that was Bryan or Punk the finger would have been pointed at them immediately.


----------



## MaybeLock

Drawing problems? Might have to make some calls to Chicago unk2 

REMOVE THE POST-ITS FROM THE POSTERS DAMMIT, BRING PHIL BACK :vince3


It's gonna be some rough weeks/months without Bryan, ratings wise. Nothing except for Evolution/Shield seems to be drawing well, and even that feud seems to be running out of steam a little bit.


----------



## THANOS

I have no problem, at all, believing that both of Bryan's segments topped the night once again. In the past few weeks I've never outright said he would and felt either Evo/Shield or Cena/Wyatt would top the show since the Kane/Bryan feud has been pretty lame, but every single week I was proven wrong and Bryan overcame the ratings once again. If his promo by himself this week tops the night the haters will promptly be offed and buried, so it will be interesting to see if it happens.


----------



## Afnorok

#Mark said:


> Bryan/Kane/Steph has been topping the night regularly though.


That is not true, Overrun was always the highest rated. Bryan/Kane/Stephanie merely to manage to get peak viewership for a minute.



> Shield/Evolution were in three segments and the show was the lowest of the year. If that was Bryan or Punk the finger would have been pointed at them immediately.


Anyone being in three segments doesn't automatically mean bigger ratings. With this line of thought, you could easily point to Bryan, since he is the champion and the star who is main eventing PPVs over Shield/Evolution, with the ratings falling one week after another. There was even a week which Bryan missed due to his honeymoon I think, where rating went up and the next week when Bryan returned, the rating went down again. 

If anything Bryan should take more of the blame compared to Punk, since they never really let punk main event.


----------



## THANOS

Afnorok said:


> That is not true, Overrun was always the highest rated. Bryan/Kane/Stephanie merely to manage to get peak viewership for a minute.


The overrun is the highest every week on average, and this has always been due to the viewers coming in for the next show. The only way to measure overrun ratings is how they do compared to previous weeks or years. Every other segment in the night is compared with one another in each breakdown but it has been coming for the overrun to be separate from that for the reasons I mentioned. But since you're bringing it up, the last breakdown that came out, the one you're refering to, the overrun was ONLY 20,000 viewers higher than Bryan/Del Rio, which was higher than all non-overrun spots on the show, and had the peak minute watched in the show. 



Afnorok said:


> Anyone being in three segments doesn't automatically mean bigger ratings. With this line of thought, you could easily point to Bryan, since he is the champion and the star who is main eventing PPVs over Shield/Evolution, with the ratings falling one week after another. There was even a week which Bryan missed due to his honeymoon I think, where rating went up and the next week when Bryan returned, the rating went down again.
> 
> If anything Bryan should take more of the blame compared to Punk, since they never really let punk main event.


Fine, but by that logic, If Bryan is continuing to be the peak the night in all non-overrun segments, and the ratings average continues to be higher than the past two years post Mania, which it has, then you would have to point the finger at Bryan for that as well, or does your story change when you look at it that way?


----------



## ecabney

Ratings tank when D-Bry announced his injury, which is understandable. The Shield/Evolution stuff is barely keeping the E above water at the moment.


----------



## #Mark

Afnorok said:


> That is not true, Overrun was always the highest rated. Bryan/Kane/Stephanie merely to manage to get peak viewership for a minute.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone being in three segments doesn't automatically mean bigger ratings. With this line of thought, you could easily point to Bryan, since he is the champion and the star who is main eventing PPVs over Shield/Evolution, with the ratings falling one week after another. There was even a week which Bryan missed due to his honeymoon I think, where rating went up and the next week when Bryan returned, the rating went down again.
> 
> If anything Bryan should take more of the blame compared to Punk, since they never really let punk main event.


That show was higher because A. It was the week before the NBA playoffs started and B. It was the week after the Post Mania RAW that featured the awesome Heyman promo, a new Divas champion, Cesaro joining Heyman, and a really hot angle that was the Shield saving Daniel Bryan. The show was up because of the interest generated from the previous show and DB's title reign, just like the show was especially high after Mania because of the interest generated from the Streak ending (despite Taker not appearing on the show). The third hour was considerably down that week anyways despite having the Shield handicap match and the Evolution reunion. Conversely, the opening hour the following week (which featured Bryan) was significantly higher than it was the previous week. Also, Cena was off the show last week and had a long match this week. The rating last week was substantially higher than it was this week, with every hour experiencing a loss this week, are you also arguing that Cena isn't the main draw of the company?

The Shield/Evolution have been featured more than anything else and it isn't translating to great ratings. Why does DB deserve blame when Evolution/Shield is clearly positioned as the main angle? It's been closing RAW every week since Mania. I understand everyone is obsessed with the Shield but why are they absolved of blame when Bryan and Punk were getting scrutinized for the ratings of segments they weren't even in?

Also, Bryan/Kane has been getting higher numbers for weeks now despite not being placed in the final segment:



> RAW 4/28:
> Show Peaks - m18-49 demo
> 
> - Q10: The end of Bryan-Kane after the Paige vs. Brie Bella Divas Title match drew 1.918 and 1.955 million viewers.
> 
> - Q9: The Bryan/Brie-Stephanie McMahon exchange drew 1.859 million viewers at the top of the third hour.
> 
> - OR: The finish to Orton vs. Reigns drew 1.708 million viewers at 11:04 p.m. The remaining ten minutes for the extended beat down segment did not reach 1.7 million.
> 
> RAW 5/5:
> 
> WWE World Hvt. champion Daniel Bryan retained his position as WWE's top draw in the males 18-49 demographic Monday night on Raw.
> 
> During the main three hours of Raw (pre-overrun), Bryan's match with Alberto Del Rio included the most-watched minute of the show and delivered the highest quarter-hour rating of the show.


Last week, the overrun only did marginally better and dropped below Bryan's number after the Shield/Wyatts match finished. The overrun generally blows the other segments out of the water so it is pretty telling that Bryan is getting comparable or better numbers than the overrun in the 9PM or 10PM hour.


----------



## Afnorok

THANOS said:


> The overrun is the highest every week on average, and this has always been due to the viewers coming in for the next show. *The only way to measure overrun ratings is how they do compared to previous weeks or years.* Every other segment in the night is compared with one another in each breakdown but it has been coming for the overrun to be separate from that for the reasons I mentioned. But since you're bringing it up, the last breakdown that came out, the one you're refering to, *the peak of the overrun was ONLY 20,000 viewers* higher than the peak of Bryan/Del Rio, which was higher than all non-overrun spots on the show.


Not true. Every key quarter including Overrun can be compared relatively each week to determine where viewers showed the most interest. There is no exclusive rule that Overrun should top the night every week, if viewers don't care about the stars involved, viewership would drop or gain very little leading to one of the lowest rated part of the show. 

You're talking about peak viewership for a single minute. Overrun rated higher as a over-all Quarter hour following the main event.




> Fine, but by that logic, If Bryan is continuing to be the peak the night in all non-overrun segments, and the ratings average continues to be higher than the past two years post Mania, which it has, then you would have to point the finger at Bryan for that as well, or does your story change when you look at it that way?


If there is a substantial increase, like that of 97/98 or 2005, I would certainly be willing to credit Bryan for it because he was the most featured star. Average insignificant increase could be due to any number of reasons, like the streak ending or the WWE network(which is probably the real reason behind it).




#Mark said:


> That show was higher because A. It was the week before the NBA playoffs started and B. It was the week after the Post Mania RAW that featured the awesome Heyman promo, a new Divas champion, Cesaro joining Heyman, *and a really hot angle that was the Shield saving Daniel Bryan. The show was up because of the interest generated from the previous show and DB's title reign, *just like the show was especially high after Mania because of the interest generated from the Streak ending (despite Taker not appearing on the show). The third hour was considerably down that week anyways despite having the Shield handicap match and the Evolution reunion. Conversely, the opening hour the following week (which featured Bryan) was significantly higher than it was the previous week. Also, Cena was off the show last week and had a long match this week. The rating last week was substantially higher than it was this week, with every hour experiencing a loss this week, are you also arguing that Cena isn't the main draw of the company?


So you're blaming the Shield lower viewerships but here you're giving Bryan the credit for the increase when the "hot angle" previous week, as you noted, involved Shield and Evolution? 



> Why does DB deserve blame when Evolution/Shield is clearly positioned as the main angle? It's been closing RAW every week since Mania.


He doesn't and I didn't blame him, if you read my original post. I was pointing out the hypocrisy in your posts, the fact that you're crediting Bryan with the increase in Post-Mania viewership average when he wasn't positioned as the main event, all the while blaming the Shield for week to week rating. 



> Also, Bryan/Kane has been getting higher numbers for weeks now despite not being placed in the final segment


It had the peak viewership twice that's it. Overrun still the highest rated.




> Last week, the overrun only did marginally better and dropped below Bryan's number after the Shield/Wyatts match finished.


First of all, you don't even know what the low point of Bryan/Kane/Stephanie quarter was because its not reported, only the high point is reported which the overrun beat when Shield/Evolution started. 

Considering overrun was rated higher over-all, its safe assume rest of the quarter did outdraw rest of the quarter of Bryan/Kane, by a fair margin. 



> The overrun generally blows the other segments out of the water so it is pretty telling that Bryan is getting comparable or better numbers than the overrun in the 9PM or 10PM hour.


Once again, where is this written rule that overrun "blows away rest of the night"? It hasn't been that way since the attitude era. Not to mention the three hour era since 2011. Even the biggest angles these days only draw marginally well.


----------



## LilOlMe

This is the most circular thread in the history of the internet. I'm convinced of it.

_So_ bad.

Do people not realize that there are other things going on at certain minutes on tv as well, btw?

It's just amusing, because the WWE obviously pays no attention to this bs, mainly because they have a ton more metrics, so all of this arguing is really pointless anyway. But we knew that.


----------



## RabidCrow

WE NEED PUNK DAMMIT!1!!1! :vince3


----------



## Alo0oy

The fact that Punk is still the most talked about guy in this thread proves that he's more relevant than what his detractors would like to believe!


----------



## Bushmaster

LilOlMe said:


> This is the most circular thread in the history of the internet. I'm convinced of it.
> 
> _So_ bad.
> 
> Do people not realize that there are other things going on at certain minutes on tv as well, btw?
> 
> It's just amusing, because the WWE obviously pays no attention to this bs, mainly because they have a ton more metrics, so all of this arguing is really pointless anyway. But we knew that.


The Ratings thread is good for the lulz, Some people seem to care more about the ratings that what is actually put on TV sometimes.


----------



## RabidCrow

SoupBro said:


> The Ratings thread is good for the lulz, Some people seem to care more about the ratings that what is actually put on TV sometimes.


Hornswoggle threw a fart in the middle of the ring! The breakdowns shows that his segment gains 50000 viewers... 

HORNSWOGGLE AND THESE DAMN RATINGGZ!!
HORNWEOSGLE IS HELPIN THE BUSSINEZ SO MUCH!!. 
HORNSWOGLE IS INDISPUTABLY THE GOAT!11!!!1


----------



## RatedR10

It's just going to go lower until Bryan returns. Evolution vs. The Shield alone can't keep the show at the 3.0+ mark.

The star power is lacking on the roster, it's evident with Bryan's injury and Punk's walkout. You had Bryan/Kane/Steph, Shield/Evolution and Cena/Wyatt (is that even drawing well?) as the top programs, now you have Bryan out. Evolution/Shield will continue to carry the load, but it's a big drop off after the top programs, and I don't even know how well Cena/Wyatt is drawing.


----------



## WWE

Miami/Brooklyn & Bruins/Canadians didn't help at all


----------



## Happenstan

Alo0oy said:


> The fact that Punk is still the most talked about guy in this thread proves that he's more relevant than what his detractors would like to believe!


Or it proves his fan boys just can't move on from a guy who clearly doesn't give a shit about them. It would be quite comical if it wasn't so sad at this point.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

No ne cares about all of these flip floppy indie nerds like Ambrose/Rollins/Waaaahnieldaughter cant wait till Reigns's 435 day title run :mark:


----------



## Cobalt

Happenstan said:


> Or it proves his fan boys just can't move on from a guy who clearly doesn't give a shit about them. It would be quite comical if it wasn't so sad at this point.


That's where your wrong, this was started by someone who IS NOT a Punk fan boy, much like many other of the threads about him.


Don't make out like it's always the Punk marks starting this shit. fpalm


----------



## Happenstan

Cobalt said:


> That's where your wrong, this was started by someone who IS NOT a Punk fan boy, much like many other of the threads about him.
> 
> 
> Don't make out like it's always the Punk marks starting this shit. fpalm



Fair enough if true. This time it was a non-Punktard who brought up Phil's name...but that doesn't explain the 20 other threads from this past week.


----------



## Cobalt

Happenstan said:


> Fair enough if true. This time it was a non-Punktard who brought up Phil's name...but that doesn't explain the 20 other threads from this past week.


Maybe so, but most of the threads made about Punk these days are made about how "his better off gone" or just made to cause a mark war. Some are Punk marks but just as many are not.


----------



## D.M.N.

2.88 rating - http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_78364.shtml#.U3OTGfldWFc


----------



## Shenroe

Damn


----------



## Londrick

Not surprised that Evolution can't keep up the numbers. No one cares abut a dinosaur, some washed up has been and one of the biggest flops in wrestling.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Clearly needs 3 divas matches next week that last 10-15 minutes each.


----------



## RabidCrow

The GOAT stable. :HHH :batista3 :rko2 


:ti


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I bet Vince is wondering: so this is what happens when I push IWC darlings? He has right to think this way too. He invested so much time and effort, and sacrificed shows with hijackings to push these two guys. Punk walked out on him and Bryan got hurt.


----------



## Alo0oy

The Boy Wonder said:


> I bet Vince is wondering: so this is what happens when I push IWC darlings? He has right to think this way too. He invested so much time and effort, and sacrificed shows with hijackings to push these two guys. Punk walked out on him and Bryan got hurt.


This has nothing to do with them being "IWC darlings", Punk didn't walk out because he was an IWC darling & Bryan didn't get injured because he was an IWC darling...Them being "IWC darlings" as you put it is irrelevant to what happened.



Londrick said:


> Not surprised that Evolution can't keep up the numbers. No one cares abut a dinosaur, some washed up has been and one of the biggest flops in wrestling.





RabidCrow said:


> The GOAT stable. :HHH :batista3 :rko2
> 
> 
> :ti


That would be hilarious if it wasn't so ironic, Evolution were either in the most watched segment or the second most watched segment every single week since reforming. The ratings going down because of Evolution is as likely as them going down because of Daniel Bryan.


----------



## Londrick

The Boy Wonder said:


> I bet Vince is wondering: so this is what happens when I push IWC darlings? He has right to think this way too. He invested so much time and effort, and sacrificed shows with hijackings to push these two guys. Punk walked out on him and Bryan got hurt.


Could be worse. Both could be druggies with two wellness violations already and a history of backstage problems. rton2


----------



## kokepepsi

Ratings go down because of the shit midcard booking

Attitude Era Al snow would gain 300k viewers easily AL FUCKING SNOW
Anyways 2.88
:ti


----------



## THANOS

Still no breakdown eh?


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

With Cryan' out nursing his widdle biddy neck injuwy, now is the perfect time to strip him of the belt and make the Bray/Cena feud EXTRA HIGH STAKES :mark:


----------



## WWE

I like how all dem indy guys are hogging up the main event with LEGENDS and the ratings are shiiiet


Put the best on batista and watch the ratings sky rocket into numbers indy marks have never seen before

Sent from the Vertical Sports app on my sexy ass Nexus 5 cellular phone


----------



## JY57

> - Below are some WWE business numbers from March 2014, compared to March 2013:
> 
> * WWE averaged 7,190 paid fans per show at their live events in March 2014, up 5.5% from 6,816 in March 2013.
> 
> * RAW ratings dropped from a 3.29 rating and 4.67 million viewers on average in March 2013 to a 3.10 rating and 4.32 million viewers in March 2014. This is a 5.8% drop in ratings and a 7.5% drop in viewers.
> 
> * SmackDown ratings increased from an average 2.00 rating with 2.78 million viewers in March 2013 to an average 2.03 rating and 2.88 million viewers in March 2014. This is a 1.5% increase in ratings and a 3.6% increase in audience.
> 
> * WWE shipped 792,000 DVD units to retail in March 2013, compared to 542,000 in March 2014. This is a 31.6% drop.
> 
> * WWE went from 13.9 million unique website visitors in March 2013 to 22.2 million in March 2014. This is an increase of 59.7%.
> 
> * WWE's website processed 1,161 shop orders per day in March 2014, up from 903 in March 2013. This is a 28.6% increase.


comparison of March 2014 to March 2013


----------



## Mr. I

Nothing surprising. The DVD business is dying everywhere, their website focus is greatly increased, and they've offered a stronger lineup at house shows.


----------



## DoubtGin

> Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter
> 
> - For the second straight week on RAW, The Shield's overrun segment has had the highest rated quarter-rating of the night.


I know this isn't anything special since it's the overrun, but I just posted this because the breakdown should be out soon since WON know about this.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Nothing surprising here. As soon as we get some kind of ratings breakdown we'll know if this was indeed the case of fans tuning out after Bryan announced his injury or if fans simply weren't interested.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DoubtGin said:


> I know this isn't anything special since it's the overrun, but I just posted this because the breakdown should be out soon since WON know about this.


That's good, but considering it's just that, the overrun, it should top the night more often than not, or at the very least, have a big gain. If it was just an average gain with an average number, it's nothing to talk about. If Bryan's segment was as close to it as it was last week, especially the first one, it speaks volumes about his drawing power, yet again.


----------



## DoubtGin

Yup, I expect the Bryan/Kane segments and The Shield/Evolution segments to reach the highest rating again like last week.

Those were the only ones reaching a +2.0 rating last RAW, as far as I know.


----------



## D.M.N.

For reference, regarding March viewership numbers:

- 2012 - 2.27m A18-49 / 4.56m Total - 8 hours = 4 x 2 hours of programming
- 2013 - 2.14m A18-49 / 4.68m Total - 12 hours = 4 x 3 hours of programming (including 'Old School Raw')
- 2014 - 1.88m A18-49 / 4.34m Total - 15 hours = 5 x 3 hours of programming

And for April...

- 2012 - 2.26m A18-49 / 4.59m Total - 11 hours = 4 x 2 hours of programming (+1 x 3 hour for WWE Draft)
- 2013 - 1.99m A18-49 / 4.35m Total - 15 hours = 5 x 3 hours of programming
- 2014 - 2.14m A18-49 / 4.67m Total - 12 hours = 4 x 3 hours of programming


----------



## kokepepsi

That new TV deal with NBC is gonna make them about 40millionish$$$$ more
Inb4 @GM says its due to Bryan
:ti

:bryan2=:vince$


----------



## Waffelz

Bryan bringing in that new TV deal. GOAT without a shadow of a doubt.


----------



## DoubtGin

NO BRYAN NO NEW TV DEAL


----------



## MaybeLock

40 MOAR MILLION ONLY CUZ OF DANIEL BRYAN. GOAT DRAWZ!!!!


----------



## krai999

kokepepsi said:


> That new TV deal with NBC is gonna make them about 40millionish$$$$ more
> Inb4 @GM says its due to Bryan
> :ti
> 
> :bryan2=:vince$


says the guy with the punk=ratings sig


----------



## vanboxmeer

How to play spin doctor like a diva mark:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

vanboxmeer said:


> How to play spin doctor like a diva mark:


Can't argue with the facts, WWE needs Phillip Brooks. unk5

:vince4 "PHIL, WE NEED YOU BACK!"

unk2 "Nah I'm good Vince"

:vince3


----------



## kurtmangled

God i hate CM punk.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

kurtmangled said:


> God i hate CM punk.


I wonder if vegetarians are allowed to eat knuckle/hot lead sandwiches?

Guess we'll find out when my flight to Chicago lands unk


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Where are the quarter breakdowns at?


----------



## krai999

nuff said there hasn't been a wrestlemania attendance this big since wrestlemania 3. WRESTLE fucking mania and wrestlemania xxx where the main focus was on daniel bryan
http://wrestlingdata.com/index.php?...&liga=&land=&jahrzehnt=0&jahr=&sort=0&seite=1
:bryan


----------



## RabidCrow

kurtmangled said:


> God i hate CM punk.


Who fucking cares?


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

kokepepsi said:


> That new TV deal with NBC is gonna make them about 40millionish$$$$ more
> Inb4 @GM says its due to Bryan
> :ti
> 
> :bryan2=:vince$


:rodgers

Son of a bitch somehow knew I was going to say this...

How? Tell me how your methods work.


----------



## WWE

Punk leaving is causing it to go down?

:HHH2

Please.


Cena not main eventing is the reason why :cena3


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Thuganomics said:


> Punk leaving is causing it to go down?
> 
> :HHH2
> 
> Please.
> 
> 
> Cena not main eventing is the reason why :cena3


:vince "Cena vs Bryan at Summerslam this year in a rematch from last year + Cena getting his win back= I become a billionaire again!"


----------



## Kaze Ni Nare

It's always good to pop into this thread for a few laughs, and then bounce before anybody notices.

It's like running with the bulls for a few seconds before intelligently jumping out of the stampede.


----------



## Loader230

Londrick said:


> No one cares abut a dinosaur,


A Kevin Nash fan talking about dinosaurs? :maury :maury


----------



## Afnorok

Interesting note from the conference call - 



> WWE CEO Vince McMahon acknowledged that launching WWE Network in February may have negatively impacted their negotiations with NBC Universal for the U.S. TV market.
> 
> Asked during Monday's conference call if the Network launch hurt NBCU TV negotiations, McMahon said that's a "very fair question." McMahon added that he thinks it had a negative impact, but if WWE did not come out with the Network this year, they would have had to have waited another year for their strongest point during WrestleMania Season.
> 
> In his opening remarks, McMahon said WWE was "disappointed" by the contract renewal with NBC Universal, especially because they did better with their international renewals.
> 
> "Not what we wanted and not what our research showed us (domestically)," McMahon said. "A good deal; not what we wanted."
> 
> Later in the conference call, WWE financial executive George Barrios addressed whether WWE's demographics impacted their negotiations with NBCU.
> 
> *Barrios said demos "didn't seem to have an impact in three of the four markets" where WWE renewed TV contracts. The implication was international TV partners did not de-value WWE programming based on demos, while the NBCU renewal was affected by the demographics of U.S. wrestling viewers.*



Also this little info - 



> The next follow-up was on how to adjust costs if the Network does not stick to expectations.
> 
> Barrios said they did about $480 million in expenses in 2013, *and 20-25 percent were variable costs tied to revenue generated.
> 
> Overall, if WWE is wrong on the Network, the core business is strong and they can "re-engineer" some things to re-stress the core.*


Torch.

Wonder what those variable costs and "re-engineering" he's talking about? I guess they might release more talents or simply reduce pay, cut down on pyrotechnics(if they haven't already) and maybe even shut down the performance centre and hall of fame, if it comes down to it.


----------



## THANOS

Afnorok said:


> Interesting note from the conference call -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also this little info -
> 
> 
> 
> Torch.
> 
> Wonder what those variable costs and "re-engineering" he's talking about? I guess they might release more talents or simply reduce pay, cut down on pyrotechnics(if they haven't already) and maybe even shut down the performance centre and hall of fame, if it comes down to it.


The variable costs likely were tied to the Network start-up predominantly (R&D, implementation, testing, promotion etc.), but now that the Network is up and running, they can move around some of their variable budget onto other revenue generating ideas, like perhaps producing similar reality shows like Total Divas which has proven to be successful in the right spotlight, for an example.


----------



## Afnorok

Observer on last week's rating - 



> Raw on 5/12 did a 2.87 rating and 4.00 million viewers, the lowest numbers so far this year. The culprit looks to be the Brooklyn Nets vs. Miami Heat NBA playoff game head-to-head on TNT that did 5.54 million viewers. They also had NHL playoffs on NBC Sports Network that did 1.61 million viewers.
> 
> The Daniel Bryan interview where he said he was leaving to get surgery aired at the top of the second hour. Even though he did come back later, nobody would have expected it, and John Cena, had already wrestled. *Still, the Evolution-Shield stuff has been doing the highest quarters the last few weeks* and they saved that for last. But the rating was down because of the third hour drop, with hours of 3.81 million, 4.25 million and 3.96 million.


----------



## DoubtGin

> Friday's WWE SmackDown was the #1 original program on cable for the night. The show averaged 2.49 million viewers, up from last week's 2.276 million


.


----------



## JY57

Total Divas saw a 75 % increase from the previous week: 1.313 million compared to 750,000 viewers the previous week (which was the worst of the show)


----------



## Afnorok

Total divas typically draws only 0.5-0.6 in A18-49. Not that impressive, although that's double of what TNA impact usually draws.


----------



## roadkill_

LOL Some universe mark in this thread said Punk leaving is the cause of WWE death?


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Afnorok said:


> Observer on last week's rating -


Meanwhile, Staniel Ryan is costing the company over $400 mil in stock valuation :yes

Get the belt off of this bearded malignant tumor already.


----------



## The XL

Arguing who's the bigger draw over Bryan and Punk is a like arguing who placed higher in the special Olympics.


----------



## RabidCrow

roadkill_ said:


> LOL Some universe mark in this thread said Punk leaving is the cause of WWE death?


Yeah, i know. The lack of the GOAT Cm Punk hurting the business is something pretty sad and funny at the same time. :lebron8


----------



## Fissiks

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> Meanwhile, Staniel Ryan is costing the company over $400 mil in stock valuation :yes
> 
> Get the belt off of this bearded malignant tumor already.


Nary...shit hit fan when he left and not before. he is worth $400 mil tbh.


----------



## Happenstan

RabidCrow said:


> Yeah, i know. The lack of the GOAT Cm Punk hurting the business is something pretty sad and funny at the same time. :lebron8


Yeah, it's funny and sad that you guys think the lowest drawing champion since Diesel is in any way effecting business today after bitch quitting 5 months ago. You could make an argument that Taker losing his streak was the final straw for a lot of fans and caused them to give up on the product and tune out. It would be a silly argument but it would be just as valid as this CM Punk nonsense.


----------



## RabidCrow

Happenstan said:


> Yeah, it's funny and sad that you guys think the lowest drawing champion since Diesel is in any way effecting business today after bitch quitting 5 months ago. You could make an argument that Taker losing his streak was the final straw for a lot of fans and caused them to give up on the product and tune out. It would be a silly argument but it would be just as valid as this CM Punk nonsense.


Lowest drawing champion? unk2
You should tell that to Vince, how stupid the man should be for being trying desperately to bring back this guy to the company.

Yeah, hey! You should know better who is a draw than him. :vince3


----------



## Happenstan

RabidCrow said:


> Lowest drawing champion? unk2


Yes. The lowest drawing champion. Deal with it.




RabidCrow said:


> You should tell that to Vince, how stupid the man should be for being trying desperately to bring back this guy to the company.


Oh, you know this for a fact, do you? Seems to me if Vince REALLY wanted Punk back he could have given Punk what he always wanted and let him main event Mania 30...but that didn't happen now did it? Yeah, Vince is trying REAL hard to get Mr. Quitting Sad Clown back. unk3


----------



## Mr. Yes

Raw Viewership:

8PM: 3.535 Million
9PM: 3.903 Million
10PM: 3.852 Million

Definitely lowest of the year.


----------



## Afnorok

Average: 3,763,000 viewers. NBA playoffs drew 6.3 million viewers, compared to 5.5m viewers last week.

Last year same week averaged 4,227,000 viewers.

The show was advertised primarily with the Bryan/title situation as a follow-up of last week. Clearly did not work, as viewers didn't seem to care as much.


----------



## JamesK

Afnorok said:


> Average: 3,763,000 viewers. NBA playoffs drew 6.3 million viewers, compared to 5.5m viewers last week.
> 
> Last year same week averaged 4,227,000 viewers.
> 
> The show was advertised primarily with the Bryan/title situation as a follow-up of last week. Clearly did not work, as viewers didn't seem to care as much.


It's Bryan's fault...


----------



## Mr. Yes

Even when he's not there it's Daniel Bryan's fault somehow.


----------



## Vyer

I kind of expected it to be low with it being taped and the playoffs.


----------



## #Mark

Not surprised.. Bryan announces his injury and the show tanks the following week. People clearly aren't invested in Cena/Wyatt and Shield/Evolution is pretty uninspiring right now.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Afnorok said:


> Average: 3,763,000 viewers. NBA playoffs drew 6.3 million viewers, compared to 5.5m viewers last week.
> 
> Last year same week averaged 4,227,000 viewers.
> 
> The show was advertised primarily with the Bryan/title situation as a follow-up of last week. Clearly did not work, as viewers didn't seem to care as much.


Yeah it was heavily promoted by WWE all week. But to be fair it was on delay. I'm sure a good # of the fans read the spoilers and decided not to tune in.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Bryan isnt there and the segment where his name is invoked by that troll goddess Stephanie is in the highest rated hour. *That Bryan, That Earthbound Ratingz God!* :bryan


----------



## DoubtGin

> For what it's worth, last year's taped show from London, which included an appearance from The Undertaker, drew 4.40 million viewers (about 15% more than last night):


Numbers are incredibly low, but I don't think Bryan's absence was the reason for that. Many simply preferred the playoff match. + Jericho obviously :mark:


----------



## hbgoo1975

DoubtGin said:


> Numbers are incredibly low, but I don't think Bryan's absence was the reason for that. Many simply preferred the playoff match.


Looks like the boring ass Slurs are gonna win the NBA title.


----------



## Happenstan

Afnorok said:


> The show was advertised primarily with the Bryan/title situation as a follow-up of last week. Clearly did not work, as viewers didn't seem to care as much.


Not here it wasn't. We got Shield/Evolution stuff.


----------



## Afnorok

Mr. Yes said:


> Even when he's not there it's Daniel Bryan's fault somehow.


He's the world Champion, isn't he? you could even argue he is the "face of WWE" right now. 




IDONTSHIV said:


> Bryan isnt there and the segment where his name is invoked by that troll goddess Stephanie is in the highest rated hour.


Highest rated hour of the lowest rated RAW of the year lol. Plus first hour would've drawn well if viewers were interested at all in this title situation.




DoubtGin said:


> Numbers are incredibly low, but I don't think Bryan's absence was the reason for that. Many simply preferred the playoff match. + Jericho obviously :mark:


I think last year this week was post PPV episode.


----------



## Afnorok

Happenstan said:


> Not here it wasn't. We got Shield/Evolution stuff.


Nope it was Bryan and his title reign, this show was advertised on. 

Evolution/Shield is incredibly repetitive at this point, which is probably why WWE doesn't even advertise it anymore. Batista/reigns last week and Batista/Seth this week, wasn't promoted at all.


----------



## Happenstan

Afnorok said:


> Nope it was Bryan and his title reign, this show was advertised on.
> 
> Evolution/Shield is incredibly repetitive at this point, which is probably why WWE doesn't even advertise it anymore. Batista/reigns last week and Batista/Seth this week, wasn't promoted at all.



:lmao Dude I think I know the ads for Raw I saw this past week. It was all about Evolution taking Shield down. I didn't see a single mention of Bryan all week save for a mention on Smackdown that left people convinced Bryan would appear via satellite. No mention of that in the ads though. I only knew about it cause of this place.


----------



## #Mark

Afnorok said:


> Highest rated hour of the lowest rated RAW of the year lol.


Which says a lot about Evolution/Shield and Wyatt/Cena. Bryan isn't even on the show and the segment about him draws a higher rating than the other two. Face it, both Shield/Evolution and Wyatt/Cena are bombing hard. Bryan wasn't advertised for RAW until Smackdown, four days after RAW and only seen by a fraction of the audience. The core audience that watches RAW only saw Bryan announce his surgery and then laid out by Kane. There was no indication that Bryan would be on TV during RAW last week and evidently he wasn't. The closing angle last week was Shield/Evolution and it has clearly been presented as the main angle. Face facts, that angle is not captivating viewers.


----------



## THANOS

Happenstan said:


> :lmao Dude I think I know the ads for Raw I saw this past week. It was all about Evolution taking Shield down. I didn't see a single mention of Bryan all week save for a mention on Smackdown that left people convinced Bryan would appear via satellite. No mention of that in the ads though. I only knew about it cause of this place.


Exactly and he's using that ridiculous uninformative report from the Observer where Dave said the Evolution/Shield segments topped the show most Raw's for the past several weeks, yet hasn't given us a single breakdown to prove it. There's also the fact the Evolution/Shield were in the Overrun most of those shows, and yet his report conveniently leaves that out.

Meanwhile, PWTorch has posted breakdowns almost every week since Mania, and Bryan has been topping the show in middle of the show segments, or losing to the overrun by a small amount of viewers (like 20,000) one week, which says a lot about Bryan's drawing power. Pwtorch discusses it extensively with proper analysis' in each of these full breakdowns.


----------



## Born of Osiris

Indeed. Shield/Evolution at this point is getting overplayed with the Ads and on the show.

It's pretty much the TOP fued right now.


----------



## Waffelz

Shows are awful. Ratings are awful. i see a pattern.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Afnorok said:


> Highest rated hour of the lowest rated RAW of the year lol.


And this proves...what exactly?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Numbers suck, but I expected lower than average numbers for a taped show.

:lol at people blaming Bryan.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

TheGMofGods said:


> And this proves...what exactly?



It proves in the land of the ratings munchkins on Raw last night, only Bryan was tall enough to ride that ride. :dazzler :bryan


----------



## Sonnen Says

THANOS said:


> Exactly and he's using that ridiculous uninformative report from the Observer where *Dave said the Evolution/Shield segments topped the show most Raw's for the past several weeks, yet hasn't given us a single breakdown to prove it. *There's also the fact the Evolution/Shield were in the Overrun most of those shows, and yet his report conveniently leaves that out.
> 
> Meanwhile, PWTorch has posted breakdowns almost every week since Mania, and Bryan has been topping the show in middle of the show segments, or losing to the overrun by a small amount of viewers (like 20,000) one week, which says a lot about Bryan's drawing power. Pwtorch discusses it extensively with proper analysis' in each of these full breakdowns.


Not sure if serious.


----------



## THANOS

Sonnen Says said:


> Not sure if serious.


Something wrong with your reading comprehension? The post was pretty damn clear. Pwtorch gives full breakdowns with analysis' and Dave has only given one point to sum up a bunch of weeks with no basis, no analysis, and zero breakdowns released. It's pretty simple to understand which report(s) we should place more assurance in.


----------



## #Mark

> The overrun segments for RAW in the last two weeks have featured The Shield and they’ve been the highest-rated quarter-hour segments of both weeks. Both segments have also featured Evolution.


Exact quote from Meltzer last Thursday. All this seems to indicate is that the Shield have topped the night the past two weeks in the overrun. I guess Kane/Bryan has been topping the night prior to the last two weeks despite not being featured in the overrun. This really paints Bryan/Kane in a better light than Shield/Evolution.


----------



## Blade Runner

some people in here are reaching. bryan was not on the show, he announced that he was going away from surgery and would be out of action. even me, someone that hasn't missed an episode in over 7 years still couldn't find any motivation to tune in. let alone all the other stuff like it's competition, and that fact that you could read spoilers online before the show started.

besides, when have ratings really indicated anything since the monday night wars? they always fluctuate around the same numbers on average every week give or take.


----------



## RabidCrow

Happenstan said:


> Yes. The lowest drawing champion. Deal with it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, you know this for a fact, do you? Seems to me if Vince REALLY wanted Punk back he could have given Punk what he always wanted and let him main event Mania 30...but that didn't happen now did it? Yeah, Vince is trying REAL hard to get Mr. Quitting Sad Clown back. unk3


A random smarky guy in WF called "Happensten" said that Cm Punk cant' draw money as a champion based on some random segments where whe wasnt even the focus of the show?
:shiiit This should be quickly taken as fact. :lol

i don't know dude, a lot of reports saying that Vince wanted Punk back desperately says that this is actually a fact. unk2

And lol if you seriously think Vince didn't offer Punk the main event after he leave. :lol


----------



## Happenstan

RabidCrow said:


> A random smarky guy in WF called "Happensten" said that Cm Punk cant' draw money as a champion based on some random segments where whe wasnt even the focus of the show?
> :shiiit This should be quickly taken as fact. :lol
> 
> i don't know dude, a lot of reports saying that Vince wanted Punk back desperately says that this is actually a fact. unk2
> 
> And lol if you seriously think Vince didn't offer Punk the main event after he leave. :lol


All you need to do is read this series of threads to see what Punk drew (Flies).

And Punk got offered the Mania main event after he left, eh? :lol Sure. He probably got offered a third of the company and a ride on Stephanie while HHH watches as well in your world.


----------



## Sonnen Says

THANOS said:


> Something wrong with your reading comprehension? The post was pretty damn clear. Pwtorch gives full breakdowns with analysis' and Dave has only given one point to sum up a bunch of weeks with no basis, no analysis, and zero breakdowns released. It's pretty simple to understand which report(s) we should place more assurance in.


I think you just post what makes you feel good. It's not really clear, you're not making a point when you doubt his numbers. He doesn't need to release any breakdown to prove himself, he knows his shit. You keep assuming that Bryan is the top rated guy all this time because you think the overrun doesn't count is really laughable. The overrun doesn't always do good or gets the highest. Shield/Evolution got the highest rated segment of the the past 3 or 4 weeks, and plus you're probably still so butthurt at Meltzer saying Paul/Lesnar segment got the highest in the WM fallout raw, he's very reliable when it comes to these things. PWtorch breakdown is different than Meltzer breakdown. Meltzer shows the amount of gains and losses the other one doesn't and is not as accurate I think.


----------



## Loader230

#Mark said:


> Exact quote from Meltzer last Thursday. All this seems to indicate is that the Shield have topped the night the past two weeks in the overrun. *I guess Kane/Bryan has been topping the night prior to the last two weeks* despite not being featured in the overrun. This really paints Bryan/Kane in a better light than Shield/Evolution.


You can't really know that for sure. Meltzer may very well be talking about those two weeks just because it featured Shield and Evolution in the overrun. Just because he didn't address the weeks prior doesn't automatically mean Bryan and Kane QHs topped those.

Really bad viewership and rating in any case, no point in blaming anyone specific. I guess what this means is that WWE needs some fresh feuds and storyline. Mid-card stars have no credibility, they need to fix that first.


----------



## RabidCrow

Happenstan said:


> *All you need to do is read this series of threads to see what Punk drew (Flies).
> *
> 
> And Punk got offered the Mania main event after he left, eh? :lol Sure. He probably got offered a third of the company and a ride on Stephanie while HHH watches as well in your world.


Seriously? That's your great and veridic source? :lol

Aww! Do you really think that your boy D.Bryan would have taken the main event if Punk would have been there? That's cute. :leo


----------



## Fissiks

RabidCrow said:


> Seriously? That's your great and veridic source? :lol
> 
> Aww! Do you really think that your boy D.Bryan would have taken the main event if Punk would have been there? That's cute. :leo


they have a mountain of rating breakdowns that show Punk not drawing for shit...

seriously if Vince needed Punk he would have given him what he wanted which was the Mainevent of WM but Vince knew he wouldn't draw so it was given to Bryan who brought in 1 million domestic buys.

it's over you lost, no amount of silly faces will change that. Bryan >>> Punk when it comes to being a draw.


----------



## kokepepsi

Wow bryan marks pulling a Rock316ae and acting like Overruns don't matter
:ti


----------



## Happenstan

RabidCrow said:


> Seriously? That's your great and veridic source? :lol


No. I referenced this thread because all the ratings breakdowns are posted here all in one spot so even a simpleton could follow along. Obviously, I was aiming too high.



RabidCrow said:


> Aww! Do you really think that your boy D.Bryan would have taken the main event if Punk would have been there? That's cute. :leo


And yet I heard the great Meltzer say on 1 of his podcasts that Punk was told Bryan would be getting Punk's match with HHH the morning he quit.


----------



## Billy Kidman

#BadNewsSanta said:


> :lol at people blaming Bryan.


Seriously. How predictable. He wasn't even on the show and yet he still gets the brunt of the blame. :HHH2:cena6


----------



## WWE

Are some people forgetting that it was a taped show? 

Sent from the Vertical Sports app on my sexy ass Nexus 5 cellular phone


----------



## #Mark

kokepepsi said:


> Wow bryan marks pulling a Rock316ae and acting like Overruns don't matter
> :ti


Are you implying that the overrun isn't the most advantageous position on the show? If you aren't getting the highest number of viewers during the overrun then that is a problem. Meltzer mentioning that the Shield/Evolution have only been topping the night the best two weeks suggest that even with the most advantageous position on the show they were still falling short to Bryan in an angle with Kane of all people.



RabidCrow said:


> Seriously? That's your great and veridic source? :lol
> 
> Aww! Do you really think that your boy D.Bryan would have taken the main event if Punk would have been there? That's cute. :leo


The last image of Punk in the WWE is him selling a table bump after being screwed out of the Rumble while the entire crowd no-sold it and chanted for Bryan. That's why Bryan main evented a Wrestlemania card with guys like Taker, Brock, Cena, and HHH on it while Punk couldn't main event B PPVs over John Laurinaitis.


----------



## Loader230

#Mark said:


> Are you implying that the overrun isn't the most advantageous position on the show? If you aren't getting the highest number of viewers during the overrun then that is a problem. *Meltzer mentioning that the Shield/Evolution have only been topping the night the best two weeks suggest that even with the most advantageous position on the show they were still falling short to Bryan in an angle with Kane of all people.*


LOL stop making up shit, that is not what he's saying. :lol Even in the PWtorch breakdowns Sheild/Evolution has been consistently topping the shows.


----------



## RabidCrow

Happenstan said:


> No. I referenced this thread because all the ratings breakdowns are posted here all in one spot so even a simpleton could follow along. Obviously, I was aiming too high.
> 
> 
> And yet I heard the great Meltzer say on 1 of his podcasts that Punk was told Bryan would be getting Punk's match with HHH the morning he quit.


You know what I've learned about the ridiculous and lengthy discussions of Sonnensays and Godmofg (or whatever)?
Breakdowns are useless... :floyd1

Just give up, the stadistic shows how Punk's overall drawing power is still decent like any other current wrestler no named the rock.. (forgetting that vewership isnt the only way that Punk have to draw a lot of money)

And what's your point? Punk vs HHH and Orton vs Batista were the two matches planned at first. (Yeah, Daniel Bryan wasn't even figured there). 

Vince realized that Orton vs Batista would have been fail, Punk would have been put there, but he leave and they needed a another babyface. The match for default was Daniel Bryan vs Orton vs Batista.... Yeah.. A random and boring feud that not even would have working without the presence of HHH. unk2


----------



## Happenstan

RabidCrow said:


> Breakdowns are useless...


Only when they show your guy failing. If they showed Punk doing huge numbers you'd be quoting those f'ers.




RabidCrow said:


> Just give up, the stadistic shows how Punk's overall drawing power is still decent like any other current wrestler no named the rock.. (forgetting that vewership isnt the only way that Punk have to draw a lot of money)


:lmao Sure. That's why Punk is the lowest rated champion since Diesel in 1995.



RabidCrow said:


> And what's your point? Punk vs HHH and Orton vs Batista were the two matches planned at first. (Yeah, Daniel Bryan wasn't even figured there).


Correct. Then RR backlash happened and WWE realized they had to give Punk's match to Bryan. Punk probably would have been added to the title match with Batista and Orton but he didn't sick around long enough to find out. He quit. Like a bitch.


----------



## #Mark

Loader230 said:


> LOL stop making up shit, that is not what he's saying. :lol Even in the PWtorch breakdowns Sheild/Evolution has been consistently topping the shows.


Nah, quit your stanning for Evolution. The last two breakdowns from PWTorch clearly say that Bryan has been topping the show.



> RAW 4/28:
> Show Peaks - m18-49 demo
> 
> - Q10: The end of Bryan-Kane after the Paige vs. Brie Bella Divas Title match drew 1.918 and 1.955 million viewers.
> 
> - Q9: The Bryan/Brie-Stephanie McMahon exchange drew 1.859 million viewers at the top of the third hour.
> 
> - OR: The finish to Orton vs. Reigns drew 1.708 million viewers at 11:04 p.m. The remaining ten minutes for the extended beat down segment did not reach 1.7 million.
> 
> RAW 5/5:
> 
> WWE World Hvt. champion Daniel Bryan retained his position as WWE's top draw in the males 18-49 demographic Monday night on Raw.
> 
> During the main three hours of Raw Bryan's match with Alberto Del Rio included the most-watched minute of the show and delivered the highest quarter-hour rating of the show.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

JamesK said:


> It's Bryan's fault...


NOW you're starting to get it.

Butthurt neg rep incoming, finna batten down the hatches.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

I think Vince should seriously consider garnishing Bryans wages until the 400 mil he's cost the company so far is paid back.


----------



## RabidCrow

Happenstan said:


> Only when they show your guy failing. If they showed Punk doing huge numbers you'd be quoting those f'ers.
> 
> 
> :lmao Sure. That's why Punk is the lowest rated champion since Diesel in 1995.
> 
> 
> 
> Correct. Then RR backlash happened and WWE realized they had to give Punk's match to Bryan. Punk probably would have been added to the title match with Batista and Orton but he didn't sick around long enough to find out. He quit. Like a bitch.



You still arguing that Punk can't draw money only based on your truthful and repetitive baseless argument of "Punk was the lowest drawing champion since 1995!!". (I recomended you see that http://www.sescoops.com/cm-punk-drawing-power/ )

You already accepted that Punk would have taken the main event of WM instead of Bryan.

You still showing ignorance about the human body and his limits. Retire for have a full injured body =/= quiting like a bitch.

:clap Thanks for making me realize. Punk haters Have not gray matter.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Bryan marks would sell their own mothers into white neckbearded slavery if it meant one of his segments got an extra 200,000 viewers.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

RabidCrow said:


> You know what I've learned about the ridiculous and lengthy discussions of Sonnensays and Godmofg (or whatever)?
> Breakdowns are useless... :floyd1
> 
> Just give up, the stadistic shows how Punk's overall drawing power is still decent like any other current wrestler no named the rock.. (forgetting that vewership isnt the only way that Punk have to draw a lot of money)
> 
> And what's your point? Punk vs HHH and Orton vs Batista were the two matches planned at first. (Yeah, Daniel Bryan wasn't even figured there).
> 
> Vince realized that Orton vs Batista would have been fail, *Punk would have been put there*, but he leave and they needed a another babyface. The match for default was Daniel Bryan vs Orton vs Batista.... Yeah.. A random and boring feud that not even would have working without the presence of HHH. unk2


Where are you getting this bullshit from? This wasn't even being considered until after Punk had left. The only spot Bryan took from Punk as a result of Punk leaving was his match against Triple H. Punk at no point was ever being considered to be the third man in the main event to make it into a triple threat match. Bryan was put there due to overwhelming fan support. He most likely would have been put there regardless of whether or not Punk was still around because Bryan was the one everyone wanted main eventing, not Punk.



AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> I think Vince should seriously consider garnishing Bryans wages until the 400 mil he's cost the company so far is paid back.


How is Bryan the reason for that?



Sonnen Says said:


> I think you just post what makes you feel good. It's not really clear, you're not making a point when you doubt his numbers. He doesn't need to release any breakdown to prove himself, he knows his shit. You keep assuming that Bryan is the top rated guy all this time because you think the overrun doesn't count is really laughable. The overrun doesn't always do good or gets the highest. Shield/Evolution got the highest rated segment of the the past 3 or 4 weeks, and plus you're probably still so butthurt at Meltzer saying Paul/Lesnar segment got the highest in the WM fallout raw, he's very reliable when it comes to these things. PWtorch breakdown is different than Meltzer breakdown. Meltzer shows the amount of gains and losses the other one doesn't and is not as accurate I think.


Lol what?


----------



## Happenstan

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> NOW you're starting to get it.


Not big on sarcasm, are ya?




RabidCrow said:


> You already accepted that Punk would have taken the main event of WM instead of Bryan.


No, I said he PROBABLY would have been added to the title match. At that time I also though HHH's match would close Mania no matter the opponent. I still believe that would have been the case had things worked out with Punk. The only reason HHH didn't close Mania as is was because his defeat was needed to get Bryan into the title match.



RabidCrow said:


> You still showing ignorance about the human body and his limits. Retire for have a full injured body =/= quiting like a bitch.


You have no idea if he was injured or just over wrestling all together since he'd hit his ceiling. And considering he came back from his previous 3 month break and still turned in a half assed performance (All of them were half assed minus the Brock match) with Jericho at Payback leads down the "his heart's not in it" path more than the injured path.



RabidCrow said:


> :clap Thanks for making me realize. Punk haters Have not gray matter.


I hope English isn't your first language because if it is....sweet baby Jesus on a cross.


----------



## joeycalz

Bryan draws, get over it.


----------



## Randy Lahey

2.72 is a joke. I so wish WWE would change up their formula. Its like they dont even want casual fans to watch.


----------



## Randy Lahey

The XL said:


> Arguing who's the bigger draw over Bryan and Punk is a like arguing who placed higher in the special Olympics.


Exactly!

Wrestling is dead in its present form and these posters are arguing over which zombie is better.


----------



## Superhippy

I figured the rating was going to drop significantly with Bryan out. He's the top draw right now. You can't argue that at all. When Cena was out last year the TV ratings stayed the same and the PPV buyrates were stayed about where they have been except for Battleground which was a 3rd PPV squished in a 2 month period. The WWE hasn't seen a significant ratings drop with one guy out like this in a while so whether people like it or not, expect Bryan to be pushed as the champ again once he returns.

I just wanted to throw my thoughts on Punk being a draw or not out there too.

Punk is a MASSIVE draw within the 18 - 45 demographic. The overall ratings were poor with him as the champ but the ratings in that demo did very well. He was obviously the biggest draw when it came to the adult fans. I point this out because him leaving may very well of had a big impact on the stock dropping out, just indirectly.

TV Networks these days only care about the 18 - mid 40's demo. That's who spends the most money by far. The WWE has been pulling in poor ratings in the 1's in that demo and it only got worse once Punk left. The TV Networks then refused to offer the WWE their double or triple TV fees like they were looking for, and when that news got out Investors had a crazy sell-off. I'm not saying by any means that Punk is the sole reason the stock bombed or anything stupid like that, but it really didsn't help.


----------



## Cobalt

RabidCrow said:


> You still arguing that Punk can't draw money only based on your truthful and repetitive baseless argument of "Punk was the lowest drawing champion since 1995!!". (I recomended you see that http://www.sescoops.com/cm-punk-drawing-power/ )
> 
> You already accepted that Punk would have taken the main event of WM instead of Bryan.
> 
> You still showing ignorance about the human body and his limits. Retire for have a full injured body =/= quiting like a bitch.
> 
> :clap Thanks for making me realize. Punk haters Have not gray matter.


You wouldn't know but I'll warn you myself, don't waste your time on Happenstan. Trust me a brick wall would give a better response.


----------



## Loader230

Superhippy said:


> I figured the rating was going to drop significantly with Bryan out. He's the top draw right now. You can't argue that at all. When Cena was out last year the TV ratings stayed the same and the PPV buyrates were stayed about where they have been except for Battleground which was a 3rd PPV squished in a 2 month period. The WWE hasn't seen a significant ratings drop with one guy out like this in a while so whether people like it or not, expect Bryan to be pushed as the champ again once he returns.


Ratings have been going down even with him present weekly on the show. But I agree he is a valuable asset right now as a top star, especially after wrestlemania. 

There is nothing really to "draw" nowadays, atleast not for guys like Bryan. WWE brand is the real draw. Top stars of this era sell merchandise, that's it. PPV buys are becoming irrelevant since the network has been introduced and as for ratings, they're either maintaining it at the same level as previous years like Cena/Bryan or unable to keep up like Punk. 

What's funny is that guys like Bryan appear to be Stone cold hot with all the incredible crowd reactions in this era but clearly is not. IMO they really had something special with Ryback back in '12, he could've been a major difference maker for the promotion just like old times but instead of building him up, they quickly managed to ruin him. When he was a hot face, they fed to Punk and the Shield, and when he was a hot heel, he was fed to John Cena as usual. Maybe this time, WWE will do something right with Roman Reigns, maybe he can be the difference maker that actually matters in, you know, more than just stupid merchandise sales. 




> Punk is a MASSIVE draw within the 18 - 45 demographic. The overall ratings were poor with him as the champ but the ratings in that demo did very well. He was obviously the biggest draw when it came to the adult fans.


Yeah that is not true. Adult Viewers bailed when he used to do his 25min rants on the mic every week with heyman, sometimes twice per episode.




> I point this out because him leaving may very well of had a big impact on the stock dropping out, just indirectly.


Not sure if serious... You do realize Stocks were still trading high only a month ago?



> TV Networks these days only care about the 18 - mid 40's demo. That's who spends the most money by far. *The WWE has been pulling in poor ratings in the 1's *in that demo and it only got worse once Punk left. The TV Networks then refused to offer the WWE their double or triple TV fees like they were looking for, and when that news got out Investors had a crazy sell-off. I'm not saying by any means that Punk is the sole reason the stock bombed or anything stupid like that, but it really didsn't help.


They have always been drawing in that range. 1.5 ~ 1.7 is usually their level, when its hot, it goes up-to 1.9 and when its bad, falls down to 1.4.


----------



## DoubtGin

Can't wait for next week to have a higher rating. We'll have discussions whether it was Bryan being in it or the fact that the show is live again and its the last RAW before Payback.


----------



## Happenstan

Cobalt said:


> You wouldn't know but I'll warn you myself, don't waste your time on Happenstan. Trust me a brick wall would give a better response.


That's hilarious coming from you. You're the guy who admitted his "lifestyle" was living in his mother's basement in a previous thread.


----------



## vanboxmeer

This is all pointless since to the US Networks, wrestling ratings are worth nothing. The viewers can only afford the Tuesday specials from Popeye's. So the reality is everyone in WWE can only draw in the Tuesday specials. If the thread was about how much breaded chicken one wrestler can outsell versus another, then we're finally on point.


----------



## Fissiks

DoubtGin said:


> Can't wait for next week to have a higher rating. We'll have discussions whether it was Bryan being in it or the fact that the show is live again and its the last RAW before Payback.


it would help if there was a breakdown


----------



## DoubtGin

Fissiks said:


> it would help if there was a breakdown


I agree. Any reason there was none for last week? I hope we'll get some for this RAW.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DoubtGin said:


> Can't wait for next week to have a higher rating. We'll have discussions whether it was Bryan being in it or the fact that the show is live again and its the last RAW before Payback.


Of course it'll be mostly because of Bryan. If it's anything positive, it's mostly because of Bryan.


----------



## Born of Osiris

Happenstan said:


> That's hilarious coming from you. You're the guy who admitted his "lifestyle" was living in his mother's basement in a previous thread.


This thread brings me to tears from laughter :maury


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Sachiko Shinozaki said:


> This thread brings me to tears from laughter :maury


AV/sig is getting me harder than Chinese math :yum:


----------



## dxbender

LOL, sound familiar? 

http://web.archive.org/web/20080913022639/http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/424170-raw-rating.html

Things never change


----------



## Chrome

dxbender said:


> LOL, sound familiar?
> 
> http://web.archive.org/web/20080913022639/http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/424170-raw-rating.html
> 
> Things never change


No kidding....

-People say it's a shit rating
-People make excuses for the supposed shit rating (MNF, holidays, etc...)
-People blame *insert wrestler's name here________* for the supposed shit rating
-People say nobody watches TV anymore or they just DVR everything now
-People say wrestling is dead
-People say everything was better in the Attitude Era


----------



## kokepepsi

dxbender said:


> LOL, sound familiar?
> 
> http://web.archive.org/web/20080913022639/http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/424170-raw-rating.html
> 
> Things never change


Holy shit this forum at one point actually had smarks!!!!!



> *Waits for people to come and blame the rating on Jericho*


:ti


----------



## Afnorok

kokepepsi said:


> Holy shit this forum at one point actually had smarks!!!!!


After looking at those posts, I'd say that's debatable.


----------



## Cobalt

Happenstan said:


> That's hilarious coming from you. You're the guy who admitted his "lifestyle" was living in his mother's basement in a previous thread.


If I had nothing better to do I would look for the post that you referred to me as a "cellar dweller", I never admitted anything your the one who seems to struggle to enjoy life outside of these forums.

Nonetheless I was just giving him a friendly heads up to not waste his energy on someone as ridiculously stubborn as you, why you so upset for. Hope I didn't strike a nerve.


----------



## Cmpunk91

Wwe stock falls and rating falls clearly show they not only miss Punk, but they are missing something else, better product would help.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Cmpunk91 said:


> *Wwe stock falls and rating falls clearly show they not only miss Punk*, but they are missing something else, better product would help.


:done


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Will people please stop bringing up the stock? Seriously, each comment I see on here that involves the stock in someway just results in a stupid post.


----------



## kokepepsi

vanboxmeer said:


> This is all pointless since to the US Networks, wrestling ratings are worth nothing. The viewers can only afford the Tuesday specials from Popeye's. So the reality is everyone in WWE can only draw in the Tuesday specials. If the thread was about how much breaded chicken one wrestler can outsell versus another, then we're finally on point.


:banderas
Love this genius metaphor


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

TheGMofGods said:


> Will people please stop bringing up the stock? Seriously, each comment I see on here that involves the stock in someway just results in a stupid post.


Correlation = causation, maybe take some Oxford courses on Logic & Rhetoric like I have.


----------



## SerapisLiber

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> Correlation = causation, maybe take some Oxford courses on Logic & Rhetoric like I have.


Ahhh... so wearing my lucky t-shirt while watching Wrestlemania DID help Bryan win the main event! I knew it! I'm responsible! All praise belongs to _*ME*_!!!


----------



## FITZ

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> Correlation = causation, maybe take some Oxford courses on Logic & Rhetoric like I have.


There's also the fact that if X happens after Y then Y causes X every single time. Which means the Daniel Bryan injury caused the stock to plummet and Punk leaving led to WWE getting less subscribers than expected.

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> Correlation = causation, maybe take some Oxford courses on Logic & Rhetoric like I have.


If you had taken even a single course on logic you would realize that correlation and causation doesn't apply here.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

TheGMofGods said:


> If you had taken even a single course on logic you would realize that correlation and causation doesn't apply here.


"Not all people who lose the company $400 million are Daniel Bryan, but every Daniel Bryan has lost the company $400 million" - Xenophon


----------



## Happenstan

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> "Not all people who lose the company $400 million are Daniel Bryan, but every Daniel Bryan has lost the company $400 million" - Xenophon


fpalm Is EVERYONE trying to be a gimmick/troll poster now? Jesus. If this is what wrestling fans have become it's no wonder WWE's creative department is brain dead. Look who they are trying to cater to.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Happenstan said:


> fpalm Is EVERYONE trying to be a gimmick/troll poster now? Jesus. If this is what wrestling fans have become it's no wonder WWE's creative department is brain dead. Look who they are trying to cater to.


Don't shoot the messenger, breh. If you want beef, take it up with the 'Phon.


----------



## THANOS

Happenstan said:


> fpalm Is EVERYONE trying to be a gimmick/troll poster now? Jesus. If this is what wrestling fans have become it's no wonder WWE's creative department is brain dead. Look who they are trying to cater to.


Just block him, and respond to the posters who actually use proper logic. If you tune them out, eventually they don't exist, just like those damn monsters under all our beds :.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> "Not all people who lose the company $400 million are Daniel Bryan, but every Daniel Bryan has lost the company $400 million" - Xenophon


Except Daniel Bryan has absolutely nothing to do with the company losing 400 million. So again, that doesn't apply here.


----------



## Waffelz

No numbers? Must be absolutely dreadful.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Waffelz said:


> No numbers? Must be absolutely dreadful.


They might be bad going against the Miami Heat game, but that isnt the reason for the delay. Whenever there is a holiday, the ratings get delayed. They should be available today.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So when the numbers come out disappointing, who do we blame? Bryan? Shield/Evolution? Vince for constantly burying Sandow? (I'll jump on this train if I feel like it  )

Or will the majority actually give the correct answer?


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

THANOS said:


> Just block him, and respond to the posters who actually use proper logic. If you tune them out, eventually they don't exist, just like those damn monsters under all our beds :.


Logic in a ratings thread? Jesus Christ, and you're serious too :ti

This thread is strictly about trolling/shitposting/novel-length "rebuttals"


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

TheGMofGods said:


> Except Daniel Bryan has absolutely nothing to do with the company losing 400 million. So again, that doesn't apply here.


You smarks deluded Vince into thinking Bryan really WOULD be the biggest thing since the AE, which made him lie to investors and pin the launch of the WWE Network to a WrestleMania that was built entirely around DB.

Guess what happened then :faint:


----------



## Bushmaster

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> Logic in a ratings thread? Jesus Christ, and you're serious too :ti
> 
> *This thread is strictly about trolling/shitposting/novel-length "rebuttals"*


From what I've seen in this thread, you're right.


----------



## FITZ

#BadNewsSanta said:


> So when the numbers come out disappointing, who do we blame? Bryan? Shield/Evolution? Vince for constantly burying Sandow? (I'll jump on this train if I feel like it  )
> 
> Or will the majority actually give the correct answer?


I'm blaming the bad rating on the TROOPS because without them Monday wouldn't have been Memorial Day.


----------



## D.M.N.

WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	3538	1.2
WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	3858	1.3
WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	3411	1.2

You can't defend the indefensible. Very low and poor numbers.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Sandow's career and the numbers are one in the same. Vince, it's not pushing Sandow over the top, it's pushing the numbers over the top. Having Sandow job was one thing but when you humiliate him with these ridiculous gimmicks, you get humiliating numbers. Take this as a lesson Vince, and push the almighty Sandow before his career, and your ratings, are too far down to save...


... although most would already say it's impossible to save. <_<


----------



## D.M.N.

With all the May numbers in, here is how May rated versus 2012 and 2013....

- 2012 - 1.99m A18-49 / 4.15m Total - 8 hours = 4 x 2 hours of programming
- 2013 - 1.78m A18-49 / 4.03m Total - 12 hours = 4 x 3 hours of programming
- 2014 - _1.75m A18-49_ / 3.91m Total - 12 hours = 4 x 3 hours of programming

Not too surprising though, the drop is identical compared with the 2012 to 2013 drop. Will update the 2014 A18-49 number when we know the 26/05 number.

Whether its the Evolution reunion or what, I don't know, but either way viewers don't like what they're getting at the moment.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Awful numbers.


----------



## Mr. Yes

Bad rating this week. No spin necessary. Nothing is hot in the eyes of the non-hardcores.


----------



## Londrick

Just imagine how bad the ratings are gonna get when it's Reigns vs HHH


----------



## Goldusto

Consistently 1 Million people have left the product Post Wrestlemania.

1

Million

In

1

Month. so like what, 1/5, 1/6 people have decided Wrestlemania 30 was it for them and have gone on to watch something else.


----------



## bmtrocks

The product is just meh now. DB is out of action, storylines are going nowhere, and the ones that are going somewhere are REPEATING THEMSELVES FOR A SECOND TIME. No one wants to see Evolution vs. Shield outside of hardcore fans.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I really think the Wyatt/Cena feud is hurting the ratings. I like Bray, but he needs to move on to a new feud. And they need to get Cena into something new.


----------



## DoubtGin

Inexcusable.

Didn't expect the ratings to be THIS low... holy crap.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

WWE needs something big to happen at Payback. And DB saying NO to Stephanie is NOT big enough. I really believe that after Sunday The Shield will be no more. With Batista scheduled to leave after Monday's RAW I have a feeling two guys will be trading in their black vests for black suits.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw needs to ride out the drubbing by the NBA and hope they get back some of the casuals they have lost. Plus,it wouldnt hurt to not put on more or less the same show week to week.


----------



## Born of Osiris

The product is just so dull at the moment. Nothing really big to look foward to until July at the least. 

Wyatt/Cena NEEDS to end at Payback. This shit has gone on long enough.

So does Shield/Evolution unless there's a turn involved.

They need to make a decision with the Bryan situation as well and not ride it out for a few weeks like they've been doing. Either strip him or don't. It's enough they've practically shoved Brie in to make it worse.


----------



## FITZ

So nobody is going to mention that it was Memorial Day on Monday? Don't they usually have lower ratings when they have Raw on holidays? 

I mean the terrible show probably didn't help things either.


----------



## xdoomsayerx

They really, REALLY need to move back to 2 hours.


----------



## Randy Lahey

2.64. Thats hilariously bad. The only ones left in this thread trying to prop up WWE are a bunch of teenagers that cant even remember when ratings were 5+. The present sucks, PG sucks, and wrestling is dead. The end.


----------



## Cliffy

Cena :lmao

What a fucking failure.

Bryan can't get back soon enough to save this company. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> You smarks deluded Vince into thinking Bryan really WOULD be the biggest thing since the AE, which made him lie to investors and pin the launch of the WWE Network to a WrestleMania that was built entirely around DB.
> 
> Guess what happened then :faint:


...literally nothing you just stated there actually happened. Everything you just stated is wrong. 

But apparently you're trolling now. So is this the part where I pretend to believe you?


----------



## hbgoo1975

Randy Lahey said:


> 2.64. Thats hilariously bad. The only ones left in this thread trying to prop up WWE are a bunch of teenagers that cant even remember when ratings were 5+. The present sucks, PG sucks, and wrestling is dead. The end.


WWE and Pro Wrestling need to be off the air for the Summer!


----------



## Waffelz

Kinda glad the numbers are awful because the booking since RAW after WMXXX has been a shambles.


----------



## Superhippy

That's a miserably bad Raw rating. I said when Punk left that the WWE wouldn't feel the effects right away because it was Mania season and there was alot of other stuff going on that was well worth watching, but now that he are well beyond Mania AND Bryan is hurt they are really missing him.

Some other people here mentioned the stock bombing happening at the same time as the ratings falling, but those 2 things are the effect of the same problem. The product is terrible and has pushed away a ton of the people in the demographic that the TV stations are worried about the most (18-49). The ratings are bad for the same reason. Most people in that age group would much rather watch playoff basketball, or pretty much anything else then a boring ass 3 hours of Raw. I was going to saw a boring ass 3 hours of wrestling, but there is only about 40 minutes of wrestling per week and the rest of filler and extremely drawn out segments. Steph + HHH, Wyatt + Cena, Bryan + Steph, and Evolution v. Shield contract signing took up an easy hour of air time and when you factor in the commercials, it equals out to about half of the show. 


The thing I am wondering now is this though. Ussually the WWE's ratings after Mania are pretty solid as the product is normally pretty good after Mania through Summerslam. Then after Summerslam, NFL season starts and the ratings normally drop off. I have a feeling that Raw this fall is going to see some some catastrophic ratings. Like getting dangerously close to 2.0 ratings, and if that is the case, don't be shocked if you see Vince back the money truck up to bring Punk back, and the WWE seriously consider dropping PG.


----------



## WWE

This is what you get for giving us Santino/fandango, El torito/3mb, Alicia fox/Paige, and RVD/Cesaro every damn week. 

Sad thing is, they're going to do it again next week. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## RatedR10

Terrible, yet not surprising. The product is absolutely terrible right now, more so than it usually is after Wrestlemania. The roster depth has been exposed badly during this time.


----------



## Oakue

3 hours is the problem. To many commercials, to many cross WWE promotions, all of which leads to boredom. The cross WWE promotions will end with a 2 hour program and the insane amount of commercials will be cut by a significant margin. 

Even if the booking is bad, I really believe people are bored not because of that but because of the 3 hour show. It is boring. It's to long.


----------



## hbgoo1975

Oakue said:


> 3 hours is the problem. To many commercials, to many cross WWE promotions, all of which leads to boredom. The cross WWE promotions will end with a 2 hour program and the insane amount of commercials will be cut by a significant margin.
> 
> Even if the booking is bad, I really believe people are bored not because of that but because of the 3 hour show. It is boring. It's to long.


Yeah, but they re-upped their contract to keep this crap going! They could push Cena as champion again and old stale farts like the Big Show and Khali doing the same squashes!


----------



## Sonnen Says

This is terrible and some marks will still come in here and talk about on who got the highest rated segment like it matters. They are already getting these terrible numbers in this time of year when it's not even Oct/Nov yet. I'm really getting to a point that I want to quit watching for awhile. You know it's bad when Alicia is the highlight of the show (at least for me).


----------



## #Mark

Actually, the numbers are pretty standard. Up until last week, 2014 numbers were consistently higher than 2013 numbers (remember Brock was on TV on a weekly basis then). Comparing this memorial day edition to 2012 (when Punk was champion), RAW had the benefit of a two hour show and this year still had a slightly higher number (2.72 compared to a 2.7 in 2012).


----------



## Fatcat

I guess Vince doesn't care. He got his money from NBC and the 6 month subscriptions from Wrestlemania. Would be shocked if they don't even bother with a big summer angle this year and instead save it for the fall when they need the subscribers to renew.


----------



## Happenstan

Superhippy said:


> ..don't be shocked if you see Vince back the money truck up to bring Punk back, and the WWE seriously consider dropping PG.


And if Punk actually drew a decent rating consistently I'd agree but he doesn't so Vince won't. If Vince is gonna throw money at this problem he'll try to go after known ratings getters like Rock. Hell, maybe SCSA comes in to fill the GM spot. Maybe they see what Sting can draw and put him on tv. Who knows. Punk isn't the answer here. The guy is not some huge draw. He's just not. It's just as likely (more so given who's in charge) that WWE would throw money at HBK to pop a rating over Punk. Then there is Hogan as well. granted Hogan didn't do shit last time he was on tv but he was just making announcements then. get him feuding with someone (Bray, but no matches. Hogan can't do that) and people will be interested in Hogan again...for a while anyway.

Also, it was a holiday so let's not go all "end of the world" just yet. If this turns into a pattern and continues for a few weeks WWE needs to worry. They also need to build up some more main eventers. They haven't taken the title off Bryan because there is no one left to give it to who is ready other than Haitch. Even if Bryan were healthy, who's his next big opponent gonna be after Kane? (Personally I'd love it to be Jericho.) Brock isn't gonna do extra work and even then he's just got the 1 match at SS until he's gone until January. Who else is there? Bray is coming up but he hasn't even been on the roster a full year yet. If people think Reigns is being pushed too fast imagine Bray with the belt. Not to mention a world title does not fit Bray's gimmick IMO.

EDIT: People hated the "Miz Experiment", including me, but at least WWE tried something (someone) new. Do the same with Cesaro, Barrett, or Sandow and see if these guys sink or swim, but at the very least TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT. Bryan's the first new main eventer they've made in 3 years (Since Punk) and the IIC were dragged there kicking and screaming thanks to WWE fans. That's really f'ing pathetic when you think about it.


----------



## WWE

I don't think Memorial day is considered to be an actual holiday 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## metr0man

Far be it for me to defend the shit show that is WWE but it was Memorial Day. Game of thrones skips Memorial Day specifically because ratings are lower that day.


----------



## Happenstan

Thuganomics said:


> I don't think Memorial day is considered to be an actual holiday
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Sure, it is. No garbage pickup, USPS closes down. And where I live most people spend it traveling to and from and at family cook outs not watching tv.


----------



## Randy Lahey

#Mark said:


> Actually, the numbers are pretty standard. Up until last week, 2014 numbers were consistently higher than 2013 numbers (remember Brock was on TV on a weekly basis then). Comparing this memorial day edition to 2012 (when Punk was champion), RAW had the benefit of a two hour show and this year still had a slightly higher number (2.72 compared to a 2.7 in 2012).


Raw had a 2.64 rating this week.


----------



## chronoxiong

Horrible rating this week. I'm not surprised because I've actually been tuning out the last few weeks. I got occupied with life and with the product being boring with repetitive rematches, I felt like I wasn't missing much. The WWE needs to do something big this summer to get interest back up.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Sonnen Says said:


> *This is terrible and some marks will still come in here and talk about on who got the highest rated segment like it matters.* They are already getting these terrible numbers in this time of year when it's not even Oct/Nov yet. I'm really getting to a point that I want to quit watching for awhile. You know it's bad when Alicia is the highlight of the show (at least for me).


It does when trying to figure out who the biggest draw is. But according to you, logic doesn't apply here.

And you're gonna quit watching because of the ratings? Lol. Good riddance then. Stop watching already. If that's what you're basing off of then you're watching this for the wrong reasons.


----------



## Superhippy

Happenstan said:


> And if Punk actually drew a decent rating consistently I'd agree but he doesn't so Vince won't. If Vince is gonna throw money at this problem he'll try to go after known ratings getters like Rock. Hell, maybe SCSA comes in to fill the GM spot. Maybe they see what Sting can draw and put him on tv. Who knows. Punk isn't the answer here. The guy is not some huge draw. He's just not. It's just as likely (more so given who's in charge) that WWE would throw money at HBK to pop a rating over Punk. Then there is Hogan as well. granted Hogan didn't do shit last time he was on tv but he was just making announcements then. get him feuding with someone (Bray, but no matches. Hogan can't do that) and people will be interested in Hogan again...for a while anyway.
> 
> Also, it was a holiday so let's not go all "end of the world" just yet. If this turns into a pattern and continues for a few weeks WWE needs to worry. They also need to build up some more main eventers. They haven't taken the title off Bryan because there is no one left to give it to who is ready other than Haitch. Even if Bryan were healthy, who's his next big opponent gonna be after Kane? (Personally I'd love it to be Jericho.) Brock isn't gonna do extra work and even then he's just got the 1 match at SS until he's gone until January. Who else is there? Bray is coming up but he hasn't even been on the roster a full year yet. If people think Reigns is being pushed too fast imagine Bray with the belt. Not to mention a world title does not fit Bray's gimmick IMO.
> 
> EDIT: People hated the "Miz Experiment", including me, but at least WWE tried something (someone) new. Do the same with Cesaro, Barrett, or Sandow and see if these guys sink or swim, but at the very least TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT. Bryan's the first new main eventer they've made in 3 years (Since Punk) and the IIC were dragged there kicking and screaming thanks to WWE fans. That's really f'ing pathetic when you think about it.


None of those guys you listed are realistic. The Rock is never going to come back full-time not to mention the amount of money it would take is far beyond what the WWE could pay. SCSA has no interest in coming back, especially if it's just for some side roll. HBK doesn't draw jack squat and bringing him in wouldn't do much either. They did that already last year too and it had zero impact. Sting won't draw a dime either. He was in TNA for years and it did nothing for them. We already saw the same thing with Hogan. They brought him in and he gave a little ratings bump his 1st night back and otherwise no one gives a shit.

There is starting to be a "bad ratings pattern". That pattern is already starting to show. Bryan has been in a non-wrestling role for 3 weeks now and all three weeks the WWE has pulled in bad ratings and they are just getting worse every week, and I really doubt that they are going to get a huge bump after a B-Level PPV whose main events are just rematches of things we have already seen.

As for Punk not being a draw. I'm not saying he is The Rock or The Undertaker, but tell me one guy on the roster without a doubt draws better then Punk not named Daniel Bryan or John Cena. Sheamus? Orton? Del Rio? Kane? No. They brought Batista back in, and the fans booed him away and ratings are at the lowest they have been in years with a re-formed Evolution. Meanwhile every week there are still CM Punk chants and he people are still really wanting him to come back, even months after he left. Punk is a big draw. An all-time Hogan / Austin / Rock level draw? Nope. But if you don't think he was some serious star power then you are just kidding yourself.


----------



## Fissiks

Thuganomics said:


> I don't think Memorial day is considered to be an actual holiday


yeah it kind of is. most people get a 3-day weekend and TV ratings usually dip down. Even something as big as Game of Thrones doesn't show a new episode in Memorial Day weekend because last time they did their viewership dropped considerably and it was an "Episode 9" episode which are usually the best ones in a given season.


----------



## Twisted14

Not to mention that bringing back those sorts of part time or retired guys would only be for a one or at the most a two week stint and are only going to pop a higher rating for that week. If the ratings continue to drop and things get bad, they actually need to bring back someone who will be on TV full time. That's where CM Punk comes in. Sure he's not some mega draw, (there are only about 5 of those people in the history of the business so expecting Punk to be one is stupid) but he'll be adequate to bring ratings back up but more importantly, keep them at a consistent level by being around full time.


----------



## Happenstan

Twisted14 said:


> That's where CM Punk comes in.


How so? Even if Punk returned it would be temporary. Punk himself has said numerous times he was gonna retire soon. If he did come back it would just be to finish out his contract. That's what...6 months tops retroactively. Punk's done as a full time year round act. At best he's poor man's Jericho...here for a few months then gone for who knows how long. And honestly the second he does that he becomes a huge hypocrite. I wonder how many of those fans chanting for Punk would turn on him if they knew Punk was only gonna come back for a short period of time. I guess you could cite Jericho as proof of fans not caring about part timed-ness BUT Jericho has never gone full bore against part timers like Punk has. Also Jericho just dips his toes in the main event scene when he comes back part time...would Punk be willing to spend the majority of his time back in the mid to upper card? I doubt Vince would give Punk a lengthy title run after he left the way he did. Backstage morale would jump off a cliff. Can you imagine a guy like Sandow busting his ass all along and then seeing a quitter like Punk stroll back in after leaving everyone in a lurch and holding the WWEWHC for any length of time? Austin never really got back to the tip top of the mountain he was at after he left. We'll probably never find out the answer to these questions as I think Punk's done...a year earlier than he said but done none the less.


----------



## Twisted14

Well of course we don't know what Punk's status is and what his schedule would be like if he came back. Just speaking hypothetically really. My point is that he would be sticking around for longer than the retired guys like The Rock, SCSA, HBK, Hogan etc. and would be on each show and would be having regular matches, even if only for a 6 month period. It would help over a longer period than those guys showing up for one or two weeks as they likely would. 

I'm also not going to get involved in any debates over Punk's status because I've said my piece too many times and all too often do arguments devolve into hateful drivel, I won't bother. If you don't like the guy or the reasons he may have left, fine. I'm not going to be able to convince you otherwise. I will continue to be okay with what he did and support him and hope for a return. 

I'm just here to talk about the rating and Punk's possible impact on the rating.


----------



## e1987p

Superhippy said:


> Meanwhile every week there are still CM Punk chants and he people are still really wanting him to come back, even months after he left. Punk is a big draw.


:stupid:


----------



## dmccourt95

They should have done Stable Wars with Evolution vs The Shield vs The Wyatts, Wyatts vs Shield that shit was money

WWE need something massive, guys like Rock and Austin are obviously megastars but unless they came back full time it would make not alot of difference, its turning into a cliche but a well written and thought out Cena heel turn looks like the only thing that could see a ratings growth


----------



## Bfo4jd

The midget is sitting home with two world titles, all the credible top stars are locked in a stable wars feud which is getting repetitive, Cena/Wyatt is stale as fuck and wasn't drawing to begin with. How is this shit show suppose to draw? If they'd stripped him off the titles and set up an exciting tournament, atleast there would some interest to draw viewers but nope, we're going to go two whole months without any of the world titles. 

In the past, dire times like these is when guys Edge, Punk, Jericho, Shawn Michaels etc.. offered some valuable starpower. Obviously now, without them and WWE's failure at building next generation of stars to credibly replace them, RAW is just failing hard. Alicia fox could only do so much to keep up the interest.


----------



## Starbuck

:lol at everybody losing their shit over the post Mania lull. 6 of the top names are involved in the same feud which = 1 segment. There is no champion and the guy pulling the highest ratings for the past few months is out injured. Cena is involved in a stale program. They have nothing to fill out the rest of the show with and it isn't Wrestlemania season any more. It was also Memorial Day. Of course things are going to be down. Give it 2 months. Things will be back up again like they always are heading into Summerslam. 

In other words, RELAX PEOPLE.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Superhippy said:


> That's a miserably bad Raw rating. I said when Punk left that the WWE wouldn't feel the effects right away because it was Mania season and there was alot of other stuff going on that was well worth watching, but now that he are well beyond Mania AND Bryan is hurt they are really missing him.
> 
> Some other people here mentioned the stock bombing happening at the same time as the ratings falling, but those 2 things are the effect of the same problem. The product is terrible and has pushed away a ton of the people in the demographic that the TV stations are worried about the most (18-49). The ratings are bad for the same reason. Most people in that age group would much rather watch playoff basketball, or pretty much anything else then a boring ass 3 hours of Raw. I was going to saw a boring ass 3 hours of wrestling, but there is only about 40 minutes of wrestling per week and the rest of filler and extremely drawn out segments. Steph + HHH, Wyatt + Cena, Bryan + Steph, and Evolution v. Shield contract signing took up an easy hour of air time and when you factor in the commercials, it equals out to about half of the show.
> 
> 
> The thing I am wondering now is this though. Ussually the WWE's ratings after Mania are pretty solid as the product is normally pretty good after Mania through Summerslam. Then after Summerslam, NFL season starts and the ratings normally drop off. I have a feeling that Raw this fall is going to see some some catastrophic ratings. Like getting dangerously close to 2.0 ratings, and if that is the case, don't be shocked if you see Vince back the money truck up to bring Punk back, *and the WWE seriously consider dropping PG*.


WWE dropping the PG rating wouldn't do anything, and it could drop to the 1.0's, they still wouldn't even consider dropping the PG rating. 

People are overreacting to a low rating on a HOLIDAY. It's pretty funny to watch, but holy shit people, calm your tits.


----------



## Yes Era

Twisted14 said:


> Well of course we don't know what Punk's status is and what his schedule would be like if he came back. Just speaking hypothetically really. My point is that he would be sticking around for longer than the retired guys like The Rock, SCSA, HBK, Hogan etc. and would be on each show and would be having regular matches, even if only for a 6 month period. It would help over a longer period than those guys showing up for one or two weeks as they likely would.
> 
> I'm also not going to get involved in any debates over Punk's status because I've said my piece too many times and all too often do arguments devolve into hateful drivel, I won't bother. If you don't like the guy or the reasons he may have left, fine. I'm not going to be able to convince you otherwise. I will continue to be okay with what he did and support him and hope for a return.
> 
> I'm just here to talk about the rating and Punk's possible impact on the rating.


No kidding he would stick around longer. U know why? He ain't got shit to do. The Rock is a owner, CEO, father, and is a top centerpiece actor who makes 10-15 million a project...works out hard every day. Punk is just some guy who goes to Hawks games these days and talks to Cubs commentators. He ain't half the man the Rock is. Never was. He is a quitter. That's what he amounted to. He would come back and wouldn't draw again. Cena can turn heel and it damn sure wouldn't draw.


----------



## Darkness is here

Things are turning out to be as I expected.
Db won't get the blame this time but if the show does well everyone will ride on his dick.

And nobody is even mentioning cena being in the highest rated hour.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Darkness is here said:


> Things are turning out to be as I expected.
> Db won't get the blame this time but if the show does well everyone will ride on his dick.
> 
> And nobody is even mentioning cena being in the highest rated hour.


That's because no ratings breakdown was posted yet. 

And what? How does that work exactly? If the rating suddenly gets low, why would we blame it on the guy who has proven himself to be the top ratings draw? That's like saying a company is losing money because of the person who makes the most money for them.

Only a moron at this point would put any sort of blame on Bryan for the low ratings.


----------



## fulcizombie

Darkness is here said:


> Things are turning out to be as I expected.
> Db won't get the blame this time but if the show does well everyone will ride on his dick.
> 
> And nobody is even mentioning cena being in the highest rated hour.


Daniel Bryan carrying the 2 belts is one of the funniest things i have ever watched on raw so he should stay champ for a long time . He is like a 5 year old kid wearing clothes 2 sizes too large .


----------



## Darkness is here

^ well not to disrespect bryan in any manner but he does indeed look odd with both the titles.



TheGMofGods said:


> That's because no ratings breakdown was posted yet.
> 
> And what? How does that work exactly? If the rating suddenly gets low, why would we blame it on the guy who has proven himself to be the top ratings draw? That's like saying a company is losing money because of the person who makes the most money for them.
> 
> Only a moron at this point would put any sort of blame on Bryan for the low ratings.


yeah, like if ratings were been good, you would've stayed silent and wouldn't have credited bryan for it.


----------



## antdvda

I think a lot of you are overestimating how many wrestlers have actually 'drawn' higher ratings on a consistent level. 

I would argue that in the modern Era only Hogan, nWo, Austin, Rock and maybe Cena have consistently increased ratings above what wrestling or the WWE brand itself typically draws.

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## MaybeLock

Product is bad right now. Shield vs Evolution is the same segment every week, Bryan's run as champion is being awful, with so many setbacks. All the weeks he has been out for his wedding, his father's dead, the injury, his feud with Kane not being good... It was his time to shine and he hasn't been able to do it. It kind of reminds me of Ziggler and his WHC run. On the other hand, Bray and Cena are developing good segments right now, but they've been feuding for like 4 months or so.

I remember people saying that the product was great without Punk, so we didn't need him. FFS, it was Wrestlemania season, of course the product is going to be good. Look at the product now... It's really pathetic that they need to milk Bryan out (for the company, not for Bryan of course) because they literally have nothing else right now. They needed to put him in two matches in WM and now he has to keep showing up with a neck injury because there is nobody to hold those titles except for him. The same that happened with Punk in 2012... I don't remember WWE having these type of problems 4-5 years ago. Hope we learn the lesson: Take all the starpower you can, because you will need it at some point. I don't doubt Bryan can carry a show, but look at what happens when the ONE guy who can carry the show gets injured...


----------



## hag

This happens almost every year from Wrestlemania till after Payback.


Cool it, people.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Darkness is here said:


> yeah, like if ratings were been good, you would've stayed silent and wouldn't have credited bryan for it.


I can't even give a proper response to this because your wording is terrible. Were been good? The fuck does that even mean? But I'll do my best.

If you're saying that if the ratings were good then I wouldn't have given Bryan any credit and would have stayed silent, then you're not only wrong but you're basically saying this with no evidence (and not to mention that doesn't even make any sense given that Bryan is currently the top ratings draw). If you look through the thread and the past ratings thread, I am clearly seen giving Bryan credit for the times when WWE not only had good ratings, but actually had ratings that were better than last years. So that alone shoots down your argument right there. And if Bryan wasn't the main ratings draw then I wouldn't have said anything in regards to him, but I would however have no problem giving credit to the people that did contribute to the higher ratings. 

If you were trying to say that if the ratings WEREN'T good, I would have stayed silent and wouldn't have credited Bryan for it, you're once again wrong. First off the ratings currently aren't good. But I can say with certainty that for this particular episode of Raw, a lot of it had to do with Memorial Day. But apart from that, I can't say with certainty what drew the viewers away if that was indeed the case since we don't have a ratings breakdown posted yet. So of course I'm not going to blame anyone yet. But at this point, it would be idiotic to blame Bryan since in the past two months, he has, for the most part, drawn the highest rating segments for Raw, so there's a very good chance that this isn't Bryan's fault by any means. The same exact thing would apply to any other person if they were in Bryan's position.


----------



## Naka Moora

hag said:


> This happens almost every year from Wrestlemania till after Payback.
> 
> 
> Cool it, people.


Yup Yup.


----------



## Darkness is here

TheGMofGods said:


> *I can't even give a proper response to this because your wording is terrible. Were been good? The fuck does that even mean? But I'll do my best.*
> 
> If you're saying that if the ratings were good then I wouldn't have given Bryan any credit and would have stayed silent, then you're not only wrong but you're basically saying this with no evidence (and not to mention that doesn't even make any sense given that Bryan is currently the top ratings draw). If you look through the thread and the past ratings thread, I am clearly seen giving Bryan credit for the times when WWE not only had good ratings, but actually had ratings that were better than last years. So that alone shoots down your argument right there. And if Bryan wasn't the main ratings draw then I wouldn't have said anything in regards to him, but I would however have no problem giving credit to the people that did contribute to the higher ratings.
> 
> If you were trying to say that if the ratings WEREN'T good, I would have stayed silent and wouldn't have credited Bryan for it, you're once again wrong. First off the ratings currently aren't good. But I can say with certainty that for this particular episode of Raw, a lot of it had to do with Memorial Day. But apart from that, I can't say with certainty what drew the viewers away if that was indeed the case since we don't have a ratings breakdown posted yet. So of course I'm not going to blame anyone yet. But at this point, it would be idiotic to blame Bryan since in the past two months, he has, for the most part, drawn the highest rating segments for Raw, so there's a very good chance that this isn't Bryan's fault by any means. The same exact thing would apply to any other person if they were in Bryan's position.


I was just waiting for this to happen.
Lol you are even more predictible than wwe.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Darkness is here said:


> I was just waiting for this to happen.
> Lol you are even more predictible than wwe.


You were waiting for me to call you out on how stupid your logic is?

Thank you? 

And you just dodged my entire post and ignored my points. You're more predictable than I am.


----------



## Cobalt

People can blame "post Mania season" which most of the time is a fair enough reason for the product being on the downer.

But to be fair Bryan's reign as champion has been far from ideal, a lot of it has to do with some very very bad luck and I totally understand and that has made it extremely unfortunate but besides that you have HHH who isn't a full time wrestler in the Evolution vs Shield feud, Batista is now leaving for a few months, only Randy Orton will be a singles maineventer again out of the 3. The Shield are still together as a unit, Cena vs Wyatt has become horribly stale and pretty repetitive. So you have maybe, Cena, Orton, Wyatt, and the 3 Shield memebers as the maineventers for the company at this time. It looks rather thin for me at the top of the card. Especially when Wyatt isn't even a solidified maineventer and could be buried at Payback and no one knows what the future holds for The Shield.

The product is far from good, it promised so much after Mania and has failed to deliver, people can say yea it happens every year but this is the worst it's been in a long while IMO. People were saying the product is fine without Punk, I think now or very soon the full effect of his departure will be felt.

I hope it picks up around the summer time like it does because I can't even sit through the whole 3 hours of Raw anymore.


----------



## #Mark

Last year the main feud during this time was Cena/Ryback. The year before that it was Cena/Show/Johnny Ace. The product is always in a lull after Mania before the summer. In fact, i'd say what we have with Steph/Bryan, Wyatt Family/Cena & Usos, BNB/RVD, Cesaro/Sheamus and Shield/Evolution is better than anything going on this time last year and the year prior. Expect things to pick up at MITB and during the build to Summerslam with Lesnar, Bryan, Cena, HHH, Batista, Orton, Wyatt, Cesaro, Reigns, Rollins and Ambrose all competing in high profile matches. 

I think it's silly to suggest that the state of the product has anything to do with Punk. WM 30 was the best Mania in several years and was actually improved because Punk walked out. That is evidence that the WWE has the talent and creative to put on a spectacular show with the roster as is.


----------



## Dopeeey

Things are getting pretty interesting in WWE, ratings should go up as we are expecting to see more swerves and turns in the future.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Dopeeey said:


> Things are getting pretty interesting in WWE


:done


----------



## D.M.N.

Total Divas hits season high: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...gh-in-total-viewers-for-finale-at-9pm/269656/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Bryan now a proven ratings draw on E as well as USA network. Bryan draws against Payback whilst appearing on both shows in the same hour. That GOAT. Truly this a legendary moment. :bryan :dazzler


----------



## JY57

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_78776.shtml#.U4z5Xxa4klI



> WWE's Payback PPV was down 23 percent in Nielsen's Twitter TV Ratings compared to last month's Extreme Rules PPV.
> 
> Payback registered a unique Twitter audience of 1.440 million, down 23 percent from 1.872 for Extreme Rules.
> 
> Sunday's show was more in-line with February's Elimination Chamber PPV, which registered 1.511 million uniques.
> 
> Also, Payback's total impressions were 13.855 million, down 9 percent from Extreme Rules and down 18 percent from E. Chamber.
> 
> - On TV Sunday night, Payback ranked #3 among series and specials, trailing "Game of Thrones" on HBO and "The Bachelorette" on ABC.
> 
> If Payback were compared to one-off sports programming, the PPV would have ranked well behind Game 7 of the NHL Playoffs between the Blackhawks and Kings and slightly behind ESPN's Major League Baseball game.


----------



## Starbuck

Martell/Clegane > The entire Payback card to be fair.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

> WWE's Payback PPV was down 23 percent in Nielsen's Twitter TV Ratings compared to last month's Extreme Rules PPV.
> 
> Payback registered a unique Twitter audience of 1.440 million, down 23 percent from 1.872 for Extreme Rules.
> 
> Sunday's show was more in-line with February's Elimination Chamber PPV, which registered 1.511 million uniques.
> 
> Also, Payback's total impressions were 13.855 million, down 9 percent from Extreme Rules and down 18 percent from E. Chamber.
> 
> - On TV Sunday night, Payback ranked #3 among series and specials, trailing "Game of Thrones" on HBO and "The Bachelorette" on ABC.
> 
> If Payback were compared to one-off sports programming, *the PPV would have ranked well behind Game 7 of the NHL Playoffs between the Blackhawks and Kings* and slightly behind ESPN's Major League Baseball game.


Well of course it would've, CM Punk was at the game.


----------



## Bfo4jd

IDONTSHIV said:


> Bryan now a proven ratings draw on E as well as USA network. Bryan draws against Payback whilst appearing on both shows in the same hour. That GOAT. Truly this a legendary moment. :bryan :dazzler


The episode featuring his marriage was the lowest rated of the series.


----------



## #Mark

Bfo4jd said:


> The episode featuring his marriage was the lowest rated of the series.


The episode featuring his marriage was last night..


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Bfo4jd said:


> The episode featuring his marriage was the lowest rated of the series.


You clearly dont watch the show, so perhaps you should refrain from commenting on something upon which you demonstrate rank ignorance.


----------



## THANOS

Bfo4jd said:


> The episode featuring his marriage was the lowest rated of the series.


Absolutely cringeworthy fpalm, do you even read before you post? Last night's episode of Total Divas was the season high, and it featured Bryan and Brie's wedding as the main storyline.


----------



## Bfo4jd

Whatever! Who cares about garbage like total divas? It was season finale episode apparently, always draws big.


----------



## Happenstan

Bfo4jd said:


> The episode featuring his marriage was the lowest rated of the series.


:shocked: Oh. That post has to be more than a little embarrassing for you.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Bfo4jd said:


> Whatever! Who cares about garbage like total divas? It was season finale episode apparently, always draws big.


----------



## Reaper

Bfo4jd said:


> Whatever! Who cares about garbage like total divas? It was season finale episode apparently, always draws big.


----------



## Happenstan

Bfo4jd said:


> Whatever! Who cares about garbage like total divas? It was season finale episode apparently, always draws big.


The next Sonnen Says. You're gonna be quite entertaining, aren't you?


----------



## Naka Moora

fpalm


----------



## hbgoo1975

Oh, and Eva Marie and her death metal screaming boyfriend drew higher ratings?! fine.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Source: PWInsider
WWE reported today that *WrestleMania XXX drew 690,000 pay-per-view buys*. They previously announced almost 400,000 domestic buys for the event so this updated number may be with international buys included.

As noted, WWE had *667,000 Network subscribers at the time of WrestleMania XXX* so more than *1.35 million* fans tuned into WrestleMania XXX this year.



This reminds me of how Summerslam 2013 kept growing after the initial numbers came in. Looking at Mania again, the show which was built upon Bryan and his title chase drew, and drew big. Bryan's drawing power is like an iceberg. At first glance, you just cant see how substantial it really is. It is a shame he got hurt just as he started to flex those drawing powers. Bryan drew, who knew? only 5'8' and not the greatest promo. Who cares? Bryan draws despite the flaws! :bryan :bryan :bryan


----------



## Cliffy

PPV is a dying business :maury

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

IDONTSHIV said:


> Source: PWInsider
> WWE reported today that *WrestleMania XXX drew 690,000 pay-per-view buys*. They previously announced almost 400,000 domestic buys for the event so this updated number may be with international buys included.
> 
> As noted, WWE had *667,000 Network subscribers at the time of WrestleMania XXX* so more than *1.35 million* fans tuned into WrestleMania XXX this year.
> 
> 
> 
> This reminds me of how Summerslam 2013 kept growing after the initial numbers came in. Looking at Mania again, the show which was built upon Bryan and his title chase drew, and drew big. Bryan's drawing power is like an iceberg. At first glance, you just cant see how substantial it really is. It is a shame he got hurt just as he started to flex those drawing powers. Bryan drew, who knew? only 5'8' and not the greatest promo. Who cares? Bryan draws despite the flaws! :bryan :bryan :bryan


90% of them bought it hoping for a Skinny Jeans Sighting :batista3


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

WWE Entertainment USA 9:00 PM 4482 1.6
WWE Entertainment USA 10:00 PM 3925 1.5
WWE Entertainment USA 8:00 PM 4033 1.4


Raw increases after a ppv and with no NBA competition. What a shock said no one.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

IDONTSHIV said:


> Source: PWInsider
> WWE reported today that *WrestleMania XXX drew 690,000 pay-per-view buys*. They previously announced almost 400,000 domestic buys for the event so this updated number may be with international buys included.
> 
> As noted, WWE had *667,000 Network subscribers at the time of WrestleMania XXX* so more than *1.35 million* fans tuned into WrestleMania XXX this year.
> 
> 
> 
> This reminds me of how Summerslam 2013 kept growing after the initial numbers came in. Looking at Mania again, the show which was built upon Bryan and his title chase drew, and drew big. Bryan's drawing power is like an iceberg. At first glance, you just cant see how substantial it really is. It is a shame he got hurt just as he started to flex those drawing powers. Bryan drew, who knew? only 5'8' and not the greatest promo. Who cares? Bryan draws despite the flaws! :bryan :bryan :bryan


Nice. The big Taker/Lesnar match combined with Bryan's hot storyline leads to what looks to be a huge WM number. :taker :brock :bryan

... Of course really, there's no way to tell what caused it and we have nothing to compare it to, but at least the news is good.

Also, good numbers for Raw, although I expect things to once again slump down starting next week, and outside of the post-PPV bump for MITB, things will probably keep going down until the build to Summerslam starts. 9PM doing the highest might point to Steph's announcement topping the night, unless maybe the overrun beats it. But what else was in hour 2? I can't remember.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

IDONTSHIV said:


> Source: PWInsider
> WWE reported today that *WrestleMania XXX drew 690,000 pay-per-view buys*. They previously announced almost 400,000 domestic buys for the event so this updated number may be with international buys included.
> 
> As noted, WWE had *667,000 Network subscribers at the time of WrestleMania XXX* so more than *1.35 million* fans tuned into WrestleMania XXX this year.
> 
> 
> 
> This reminds me of how Summerslam 2013 kept growing after the initial numbers came in. Looking at Mania again, the show which was built upon Bryan and his title chase drew, and drew big. Bryan's drawing power is like an iceberg. At first glance, you just cant see how substantial it really is. It is a shame he got hurt just as he started to flex those drawing powers. Bryan drew, who knew? only 5'8' and not the greatest promo. Who cares? Bryan draws despite the flaws! :bryan :bryan :bryan


Very impressive considering they only put any type of solid build into the Bryan storyline. The build for everything else was AWFUL.

:bryan


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I wonder how many people bought the show after the fact just to see Taker lose and Bryan win? Had to be the primary drivers for late views.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

IDONTSHIV said:


> Source: PWInsider
> WWE reported today that *WrestleMania XXX drew 690,000 pay-per-view buys*. They previously announced almost 400,000 domestic buys for the event so this updated number may be with international buys included.
> 
> As noted, WWE had *667,000 Network subscribers at the time of WrestleMania XXX* so more than *1.35 million* fans tuned into WrestleMania XXX this year.
> 
> 
> 
> This reminds me of how Summerslam 2013 kept growing after the initial numbers came in. Looking at Mania again, the show which was built upon Bryan and his title chase drew, and drew big. Bryan's drawing power is like an iceberg. At first glance, you just cant see how substantial it really is. It is a shame he got hurt just as he started to flex those drawing powers. Bryan drew, who knew? only 5'8' and not the greatest promo. Who cares? Bryan draws despite the flaws! :bryan :bryan :bryan


Is this a joke post?

This number is line with what's expected. The international buys were only 339,000 which is lower than some of the bigger Wrestlemania's in recent years (actually probably all of them since they started counting them) and domestic buys were 351,000. The domestic number is understandable since a huge chunk of the domestic viewership is thanks to them giving away the WWE Network subscription for a really cheap price which really hurt the domestic buys. In the short-term, this is a pretty shitty figure for them because they've gambled big on the network and it will cost them (or it's safe to say it already has). What really matters is whether they're able to make the network a success in the long-term and they retain subscribers.

His title chase didn't draw anything unexpected. This number is in line with the decline displayed from last year.

If they don't make the Network count, this is only going to be worse in hindsight.


----------



## DoubtGin

I probably made mistakes, but I think it went like this:

First hour

Opening segment with Evolution, Batista quits
RVD/Sheamus vs BNB/Cesaro
Sandow/Big Show segment
Bo Dallas vs Kofi Kingston

Second hour

Steph/Cena segment
Kane vs Cena
Los Matadores vs Slater/McIntyre
Nikki Bella vs Aksana & Alicia Fox
Harper & Rowan promo
Zeb Colter promo, Jack Swagger vs Adam Rose
Usos promo

Third Hour

Usos vs Harper & Rowan
Dolph Ziggler vs Alberto Del Rio
Goldust/Sin Cara vs Rybaxel
Lana/Rusev ceremony
Roman Reigns vs Randy Orton, Rollins heel turn

:cena2


----------



## kokepepsi

Is that PPV stuff true?

Holy shit they lost a ton of Int buys
:maury


----------



## Cmpunk91

kokepepsi said:


> Is that PPV stuff true?
> 
> Holy shit they lost a ton of Int buys
> :maury


Any one surprised by that? One of the worst booked wm's for a while.


----------



## kokepepsi

Cmpunk91 said:


> Any one surprised by that? One of the worst booked wm's for a while.


Nah they just needed
:rock4


----------



## vanboxmeer

Rock was the biggest international draw in the history of WWE PPV business, it was going to happen.


----------



## JamesK

Cmpunk91 said:


> Any one surprised by that? *One of the worst booked wm's for a while.*


:ti :ti :ti


----------



## Cmpunk91

JamesK said:


> :ti :ti :ti


Don't think I made a joke.....


----------



## RabidCrow

The only think well booked in WM was Bryan and HHH, everything else was a fail. (Taker losing his streak, Shield in and squash match, Cena burying Bray, etc)


----------



## Bfo4jd

300,000 International buys, lost over 100K buys from previous mania. This is why they need proper special attraction matches to boost the numbers, this entire mania was relying on a single feud and everything else being god awful. Streak never draws non-wrestling fans like The Rock did for past manias.


----------



## JamesK

Cmpunk91 said:


> Don't think I made a joke.....


That's the joke about it...


----------



## LilOlMe

Bfo4jd said:


> 300,000 International buys, lost over 100K buys from previous mania. This is why they need proper special attraction matches to boost the numbers, this entire mania was relying on a single feud and everything else being god awful. Streak never draws non-wrestling fans like The Rock did for past manias.


Yeah, people are celebrating the network numbers combined with the traditional buys, but what does that really prove? There are plenty of people who paid $10 who wouldn't pay $60.

There's no way to really compare this to previous Wrestlemanias. Aside from international buys, I guess, though obviously some people overseas found ways to get the network.


----------



## Fissiks

LilOlMe said:


> Yeah, people are celebrating the network numbers combined with the traditional buys, but what does that really prove? There are plenty of people who paid $10 who wouldn't pay $60.
> 
> There's no way to really compare this to previous Wrestlemanias. Aside from international buys, I guess, though obviously some people overseas found ways to get the network.


that 1.3 million people spend 60 bucks to watch WM.


----------



## LilOlMe

No they didn't. They paid sixty bucks to get WM, Summerslam, MITB, old PPVs, etc. You don't know the motivation for everybody. Some may have been willing to spend $60 for just WM, others wouldn't.

Either way, 1.35 million people didn't shell out for just Wrestlemania. It's disingenuous to try to compare this to WM past.

However, it's not surprising that people would try to use the same old formulas, even with the network throwing a monkeywrench in to all of those stupid arguments.


----------



## Goldusto

RAW 6/2/14	

4,147,000 Average, Up some half mil from last week	

Hour 1 : 4,033,000	
Hour 2 : 4,482,000	
Hour 3 : 3,925,000

Hour 3 in free fall again, I expect it was MUCH lower until the shield turned up.


----------



## DoubtGin

:cena3 draws


----------



## Cack_Thu

IDONTSHIV said:


> You clearly dont watch the show, so perhaps *you should refrain from commenting on something upon which you demonstrate rank ignorance.*


Then goes on to post this



IDONTSHIV said:


> Source: PWInsider
> WWE reported today that *WrestleMania XXX drew 690,000 pay-per-view buys*. They previously announced almost 400,000 domestic buys for the event so this updated number may be with international buys included.
> 
> As noted, WWE had *667,000 Network subscribers at the time of WrestleMania XXX* so more than *1.35 million* fans tuned into WrestleMania XXX this year.
> 
> 
> 
> This reminds me of how Summerslam 2013 kept growing after the initial numbers came in. Looking at Mania again, the show which was built upon Bryan and his title chase drew, and drew big. Bryan's drawing power is like an iceberg. At first glance, you just cant see how substantial it really is. It is a shame he got hurt just as he started to flex those drawing powers. Bryan drew, who knew? only 5'8' and not the greatest promo. Who cares? Bryan draws despite the flaws! :bryan :bryan :bryan


To which he is taken to school by,The Caped Crusader.



The Caped Crusader said:


> *Is this a joke post?*
> 
> This number is line with what's expected. The international buys were only 339,000 which is lower than some of the bigger Wrestlemania's in recent years (actually probably all of them since they started counting them) and domestic buys were 351,000. The domestic number is understandable since a huge chunk of the domestic viewership is thanks to them giving away the WWE Network subscription for a really cheap price which really hurt the domestic buys. In the short-term, this is a pretty shitty figure for them because they've gambled big on the network and it will cost them (or it's safe to say it already has). What really matters is whether they're able to make the network a success in the long-term and they retain subscribers.
> 
> His title chase didn't draw anything unexpected. This number is in line with the decline displayed from last year.
> 
> If they don't make the Network count, this is only going to be worse in hindsight.


:lol What a day. just :lol


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Goldusto said:


> RAW 6/2/14
> 
> 4,147,000 Average, Up some half mil from last week
> 
> Hour 1 : 4,033,000
> Hour 2 : 4,482,000
> Hour 3 : 3,925,000
> 
> Hour 3 in free fall again, I expect it was MUCH lower until the shield turned up.


Rusev's segment probably didn't help matters.


----------



## JY57

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_78824.shtml#.U4954Ra4klI



> WWE World Hvt. champion Daniel Bryan was involved in the top-rated segment on Monday's Raw without being present.
> 
> The segment with Stephanie McMahon discussing Bryan's WWE Title status - teasing a potential Bryan appearance - and John Cena's interruption boosted the second hour and overall show, as it was by far the highest-rated segment until the over-run.
> 
> Stephanie-Bryan-Cena in Q5 scored a 2.32 m18-49 rating, which compared favorably to a 2.41 over-run rating for the teased Randy Orton vs. Roman Reigns match that turned into Seth Rollins turning on The Shield to join Evolution.
> 
> The actual meat of the Stephanie-Bryan-Cena segment outdrew the over-run, as the 9:06 to 9:12 p.m. block drew 1.584 million viewers versus 1.519 million viewers for the over-run. Also, the peak viewership in Q5 topped peak viewership in the over-run.
> 
> Raw Break Down - key demo of m18-49
> 
> - Overall Show: 2.00 rating / 1.257 million viewers
> 
> - Q1: Raw started slow in m18-49 following the Payback PPV, opening with a low 1.76 rating for Evolution addressing their loss to The Shield and Batista quitting, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q2: Raw declined to a show-low 1.70 rating for the first-half of Sheamus & RVD vs. Barrett & Cesaro in tag action, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q3: Raw increased to a 1.82 rating for the end of the tag match, Damien Sandow's skit with Big Show, and two full commercial breaks.
> 
> The quarter-hour was boosted by the Sandow-Show skit to overcome two commercials. The tag match ended with just 1.224 million viewers, while the meat of the NBA skit was in the mid-1.3 million range, peaking with 1.375 million viewers.
> 
> - Q4: Raw increased to a 1.91 rating for Bo Dallas vs. Kofi Kingston, Stephanie backstage, and one commercial.
> 
> There was no significant movement in the quarter-hour until the one-minute backstage segment with Stephanie. Bo vs. Kofi was steady at 1.28 million viewers, then Stephanie's segment jumped to 1.369 million viewers at 8:55 p.m. EST leading into commercial.
> 
> - Q5: Raw got a big top-of-the-hour bump to a 2.32 rating (25 percent increase from Q4) for the Stephanie-Bryan-Cena segment.
> 
> The peak audience was 1.643 million viewers at 9:11 p.m. before Raw cut to break.
> 
> - Q6: Raw began a steady decline with a 2.10 rating for the follow-up John Cena vs. Kane match, and one commercial.
> 
> It was still the second-highest-rated segment of the show until the over-run, peaking with 1.554 million viewers at 9:21 p.m. when the match segment ended.
> 
> - Q7: Raw slid to a 1.95 rating for another round of Los Matadores vs. 3MB, Nikki Bella vs. Alicia Fox & Aksana, and two commercials as WWE began rapid-firing through undercard matches.
> 
> - Q8: Raw bumped up to a 2.03 rating for Adam Rose vs. Jack Swagger, one commercial, and the first portion of The Usos vs. Wyatts.
> 
> Rose-Swagger carried the quarter-hour, peaking with 1.511 million viewers at 9:52 p.m. before the Usos delivered a pre-commercial backstage promo.
> 
> - Q9: Raw did not get a top-of-the-hour bump, scoring a 2.01 rating for the middle of the Usos-Wyatts match, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q10: Raw returned to a 2.03 rating for the end of Usos-Wyatts, one commercial, and Dolph Ziggler vs. Alberto Del Rio in a high-stakes MITB qualifying match.
> 
> The end of the tag match carried the quarter-hour, peaking with 1.502 million viewers at 10:16 p.m. The peak for Ziggler-Del Rio was 1.333 million viewers for the match finish at 10:29 p.m.
> 
> - Q11: Raw fell to a 1.89 rating for two commercial breaks and Goldust & Sin Cara vs. Rybaxel.
> 
> - Q12: Raw increased to a 2.03 rating for Rusev's skit, one commercial, and main event ring introductions.
> 
> Rusev's "celebration" and main event intros equally carried the weight of the segment, registering in the mid-1.3 million viewers range.
> 
> - Over-Run: Raw jumped to a 2.41 rating for the teased Orton-Reigns main event that turned into The Shield breaking up.
> 
> Included was peak viewership of 1.602 million viewers at 11:04 p.m. Raw then slipped into the mid-1.5 million viewers range before signing off with 1.522 million viewers at 11:08 p.m.
> 
> Caldwell's Analysis: Stephanie is performing at a high level, the Steph-Bryan segments have been a big draw over the past few months, and Cena interrupting on Bryan's behalf provided the star power necessary to keep the m18-49 audience tuned in for a potential resolution to the WWE Title situation. Bryan returning next week should deliver a strong rating, depending on how WWE sets up Bryan's appearance.


top 3 rated segments for 18-49 male demo: The Shield/Evolution, Stephanie/Cena, & Cena vs Kane


----------



## Fissiks

Cena mooching off Bryan's draw power 

Vince is going to take it as people want to see more John Cena and he is going to be awarded the title...


----------



## Starbuck

A wild breakdown appears.



> WWE World Hvt. champion Daniel Bryan was *involved *in the top-rated segment on Monday's Raw *without being present*.


The fuck is this? That doesn't even make sense :lmao. 

The Authority carrying the show as usual. 

:steph :trips2


----------



## DoubtGin

"WWE World Hvt. champion Daniel Bryan was involved in the top-rated segment on Monday's Raw without being present." shows that PWTorch is kinda biased (regardless of it being true or not). Any reason they didn't actually do these breakdowns the previous two weeks, btw?

What I got from that:

- Despite the whole situation dragged on for way too much, Daniel Bryan and the future of the World title draws the most at the moment. People are obviously interested in whether Bryan gets stripped or not
- Opening segments don't do really well. Neither do the midcard titles and its champions, I guess. Viewers don't seem to care about anything but the main event stuff, actually.
- Lowcard is uninteresting for the viewers and who blames them. Rose might be an exception to this, but we'll see since this is the first time he's appeared in a breakdown, I think.
- It's difficult to rank in the Shield segment, because the whole thing was in the overrun. They usually do well enough, though.
- :steph is the GOAT draw.

:bryan3 :steph :hhh2 :ambrose3 :reigns :rollins rton2 :batista3 are the biggest draws, at the moment. Not unsuprising, the stories that get the spotlight the most draw the highest number. But I guess it also matters that those two are the only decent storylines going on, at the moment.

I'm not so sure about Cena. He did well this RAW, but his stuff with Bray didn't draw AT ALL. Also, the viewership dropped during his match with Kane. Either people don't care about Cena anymore or they just didn't care about him feuding with Bray.


----------



## Starbuck

Do we have a Rusev smiley yet because DAT RUSSIAN CELEBRATION held up well. Admittedly I thought it was hilarious, if a little long, but I knew so many people would be complaining about it on here. I'm surprised it didn't turn out to be a huge channel changer for the yanks though. 

bama

And yes, :steph drawing power is criminally underrated. She got that McMahon TV gene; everybody loves to hate them. Since she first came back she's been one of their most consistent ratings draws no matter who she's in there with.


----------



## JustJoel

Bo Dallas poppin' numbers(Y)


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

-Bryan draws when he isn't there, lol (although I suppose there is SOME merit to it since it was regarding his titles)
-9PM does great
-Overrun does well
-Opener does poorly, even coming off the PPV and with Evolution. :lmao
-Sandow comes in and thanks to his blackness finally being shown, managed to pull in a bunch of people.


----------



## Happenstan

> WWE World Hvt. champion Daniel Bryan was involved in the top-rated segment on Monday's Raw without being present.
> 
> The segment with Stephanie McMahon discussing Bryan's WWE Title status - teasing a potential Bryan appearance - and John Cena's interruption boosted the second hour and overall show, as it was by far the highest-rated segment until the over-run.
> 
> Stephanie-Bryan-Cena in Q5 scored a 2.32 m18-49 rating, which compared favorably to a 2.41 over-run rating for the teased Randy Orton vs. Roman Reigns match that turned into Seth Rollins turning on The Shield to join Evolution.
> 
> The actual meat of the Stephanie-Bryan-Cena segment outdrew the over-run, as the 9:06 to 9:12 p.m. block drew 1.584 million viewers versus 1.519 million viewers for the over-run. Also, the peak viewership in Q5 topped peak viewership in the over-run.


:lmao Half the IWC is bitching about Bryan holding the title while injured meanwhile casuals are riveted by it. How can you not find this funny?


----------



## CookiePuss

:lel at Bryan marks saying the highest rated segment of the show was due to Bryan. Boy, some of you guys are predictable as hell :lol


----------



## Goldusto

MYGALL THE POLARASANG CHAMPEEN JAWWN CENAAHH







IS HERE MYGULL!!!

'YOU'RE RIGHT JBL!THE FANS ARE GOING WILD FOR JOHN CHEENA







!" HE OVER CAME THE ODDS AND HAD MOST INTEREST LAST WEEK! WHAddya Think King? "

' huh these burritos are good wonder how many John Cena can fit in his pants?

WWErawspot : Did You Know ? John Cena is the highest rated segment every raw this year getting eleventy billion viewers a week?









Did You Know? John was partly responsible for the Yes Movement?








Did You Know ? John Cena is the best dancer in the roster in a recent poll?








Did you know John Cena think Russia are big poopy heads?









DID YOU KNOW JOHN's 14 TITLE REIGNS were rated the greatest of all time?? 








DID YOUUU KNOW???










expect something like that next week.


----------



## #Mark

cookiepuss said:


> :lel at Bryan marks saying the highest rated segment of the show was due to Bryan. Boy, some of you guys are predictable as hell :lol


Actually, the writers at the torch who provided the breakdown said the rating was due to the Bryan angle. And how is it any different than Taker marks claiming the Brock/Heyman segment on the post Mania RAW was due to Taker despite his absence? 

Anyways, not surprised the segment addressing the title did well. Two months ago Bryan/Steph/Kane were consistently getting the highest rated segments of the night. Looks like nothing has changed since then. Love seeing how the angle is universally panned on here but the majority of the WWE audience can't get enough of it. I mean, Brie got a bigger pop on Payback then anybody else on the roster has in weeks :lmao :yes


----------



## MaybeLock

cookiepuss said:


> :lel at Bryan marks saying the highest rated segment of the show was due to Bryan. Boy, some of you guys are predictable as hell :lol


:lel at Taker mark being butthurt since Wrestlemania with Bryan because his title win ended up being the main reason for Raw after WM good ratings.

The segment was about Bryan, it doesnt matter if he showed up or not, because nobody knew if he would.


----------



## Born of Osiris

While I'm happy that Bryan continues to be a huge draw it also depresses me because Cena was involved and I just know he's going to end up taking the titles soon.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

at all the butthurt Bryan marks and the future butthurt about this post, and then the cover-up attempt at the butthurt by claiming I'm a butthurt Taker mark, which I'll answer with this:










There, I just saved us all a page or two worth of bickering. All praise me!


----------



## Goldusto

Sachiko Shinozaki said:


> While I'm happy that Bryan continues to be a huge draw it also depresses me because Cena was involved and I just know he's going to end up taking the titles soon.


I wouldn't be surprised as has been previously mentioned they are building for Cena/Bryan 2, with cena claiming he was injured so he let him win, He was responsible for all of Bryans' success ( even though it was Rumble/Cm punk) and how he deserves all the credit.

But this is WWE so it will most likely end up just how Th last kane angle did and have Cena leech off Bryan's popularity until he ends up like Ryder.


----------



## CookiePuss

MaybeLock said:


> :lel at Taker mark being butthurt since Wrestlemania with Bryan because *his title win ended up being the main reason for Raw after WM good ratings.
> 
> The segment was about Bryan, it doesnt matter if he showed up or not, because nobody knew if he would.*


:lol you can keep telling yourself that. And calling me "butthurt mark" doesn't make any of these posts less funny.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

#BadNewsSanta said:


> at all the butthurt Bryan marks and the future butthurt about this post, and then the cover-up attempt at the butthurt by claiming I'm a butthurt Taker mark, which I'll answer with this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There, I just saved us all a page or two worth of bickering. All praise me!


I don't think they were talking about you... That's a bit narcissistic...


----------



## Fissiks

cookiepuss said:


> :lol you can keep telling yourself that. And calling me "butthurt mark" doesn't make any of these posts less funny.


than you concede the Heyman/Lesnar segment success was because of Taker? cookiepuss stop trying to be that guy. you're not funny you're not clever you're not good enough to be that guy on these forums.


----------



## Bfo4jd

LOL at you fools crediting Cena and Stephanie's performance to the midget. Last few weeks when RAW was advertised on title situation, it drew the lowest numbers of the year. :ti


----------



## CookiePuss

Fissiks said:


> than you concede the Heyman/Lesnar segment success was because of Taker? *cookiepuss stop trying to be that guy. you're not funny you're not clever you're not good enough to be that guy on these forums*.


:lol get off my dick already. You made the same comment to me back in the RAW thread like a month ago, and you're saying it again now. I'm glad I've had that much of an effect on you for you to keep spewing the same garbage at me, but find someone else to stalk. You seem like you want to be "that guy" or whoever the hell "that guy" is on these forums.


----------



## #Mark

Bfo4jd said:


> LOL at you fools crediting Cena and Stephanie's performance to the midget. Last few weeks when RAW was advertised on title situation, it drew the lowest numbers of the year. :ti


Actually, the main angle opening and closing RAW the past month has been Evolution/Shield and the ratings have been abysmal. When Bryan was actively feuding with Kane and Stephanie before his surgery that angle was consistently pulling in the highest numbers despite not being placed in the overrun. It's safe to assume that the audiences have not been enamored with your precious Evolution/Shield feud. 

I also love the double standard on here. When Taker isn't there he's credited with the numbers but when a segment is directly addressing Daniel Bryan he deserves no credit. At least it makes it easier for me to determine who the trolls are.


----------



## THANOS

#Mark said:


> Actually, the main angle opening and closing RAW the past month has been Evolution/Shield and the ratings have been abysmal. When Bryan was actively feuding with Kane and Stephanie before his surgery that angle was consistently pulling in the highest numbers despite not being placed in the overrun. It's safe to assume that the audiences have not been enamored with your precious Evolution/Shield feud.
> 
> I also love the double standard on here. When Taker isn't there he's credited with the numbers but when a segment is directly addressing Daniel Bryan he deserves no credit. At least it makes it easier for me to determine who the trolls are.


Well said :clap.


----------



## CookiePuss

#Mark said:


> Actually, the main angle opening and closing RAW the past month has been Evolution/Shield and the ratings have been abysmal. When Bryan was actively feuding with Kane and Stephanie before his surgery that angle was consistently pulling in the highest numbers despite not being placed in the overrun. It's safe to assume that the audiences have not been enamored with your precious Evolution/Shield feud.
> 
> I also love the double standard on here. When Taker isn't there he's credited with the numbers but when a segment is directly addressing Daniel Bryan he deserves no credit. At least it makes it easier for me to determine who the trolls are.


There's no double standard. No one was arguing Taker was popping ratings for weeks not being on TV. The biggest and most popular streak in pro wrestling was broken at a big Wrestlemania anniversary. More people tuned into RAW _for one night_ because that was the most shocking thing coming out of Wrestlemania, coupled with the fact that it was the show after the biggest event of the year. People were curious. I don't know why this is so hard to grasp.


----------



## MaybeLock

cookiepuss said:


> :lol you can keep telling yourself that. And calling me "butthurt mark" doesn't make any of these posts less funny.


Stephanie is in a feud with Bryan and she comes out to cut a promo about his titles. Therefore people showing interest in that segment are interested in Daniel Bryan, even though they knew he wasnt coming out, which wasnt the case, so its pretty clear that Bryan deserves a lot of credit for that, in the same way you credit Undertaker for a show he wasnt in either. At least be coherent.

Im sorry but Bryan is one of the only top full timers who has shown no weaknesses as far as drawing ratings go. People trying to discredit him in this aspect right now are making themselves look bad. Said this, people might lose all the interest in him tomorrow, but today? Bryan is a drawing machine right now, thats why they made him wrestle twice in WM and thats why he is still champion even though he is injured and should probably rest as much as he could.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

cookiepuss said:


> There's no double standard. No one was arguing Taker was popping ratings for weeks not being on TV. The biggest and most popular streak in pro wrestling was broken at a big Wrestlemania anniversary. More people tuned into RAW _for one night_ because that was the most shocking thing coming out of Wrestlemania, coupled with the fact that it was the show after the biggest event of the year. People were curious. I don't know why this is so hard to grasp.


Because the ratings breakdowns show that this clearly wasn't the case. What part of this are you not understanding?


----------



## Bfo4jd

#Mark said:


> Actually, the main angle opening and closing RAW the past month has been Evolution/Shield and the ratings have been abysmal. *When Bryan was actively feuding with Kane and Stephanie before his surgery that angle was consistently pulling in the highest numbers despite not being placed in the overrun.* It's safe to assume that the audiences have not been enamored with your precious Evolution/Shield feud.
> 
> I also love the double standard on here. When Taker isn't there he's credited with the numbers but when a segment is directly addressing Daniel Bryan he deserves no credit. At least it makes it easier for me to determine who the trolls are.


LOL No it wasn't. Ratings have been down since Bryan won the title. Evolution/Shield was always highest rated part of the show, including this week. LOL @ "audience not being enamored" non sense, Sheild/Evo has been essentially carrying RAW since Mania, despite the fact Bryan is holding both world titles. Bryan's title reign so far has been a total joke and you know it. 

Once again, this is Cena/Stephanie's performance. Nothing to do with Bryan, he was never advertised nor was he "teased". Infact they didn't even advertise Stephanie's response to Brie's slap before the show was on-air. Stephanie's been carrying this shit from day one.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

Bfo4jd said:


> LOL at you fools crediting Cena and Stephanie's performance to the midget. Last few weeks when RAW was advertised on title situation, it drew the lowest numbers of the year. :ti


A taped show and a show on a popular holiday.


----------



## Bfo4jd

CenaBoy4Life said:


> A taped show and a show on a popular holiday.


Being taped has never had any effect on RAW ratings. This is an established fact.


----------



## Happenstan

Why is it the most passionate Bryan haters seem to have the collective IQ of a raisin? Not a box, just a single raisin.



Bfo4jd said:


> Being taped has never had any effect on RAW ratings. This is an established fact.


I'd brush the above off as a poor attempt at trolling but I'm not convinced you're capable of accomplishing things that mentally taxing yet.


----------



## Starbuck

Oh dear. Bryan marks with that obnoxious Punk mark level posting going on right now. Guys really? During the peak of the Steph/Cena segment it was beyond clear that Bryan wasn't coming out by that stage. The credit goes to Stephanie and Cena, not Bryan. And this segment had the peak minutes of the show but it was not the highest rated segment of the show. That was the overrun. Steph/Cena 2.3. Overrun 2.4. It really shouldn't be this difficult and it's the same for the majority of the title stuff vs. Shield/Evolution stuff. Bryan/Steph gets peak minutes but Shield/Evo is still the higher rated segment. Either that or they switch. I really don't get what's so hard to understand or accept about that, especially since in most cases we're talking about 0.2 or 0.1 of a difference. Yet some of you Bryan boys are doing exactly what all the Punk marks did a few years back. It's actually pretty funny watching the cycle repeat itself. I thought you were all better than that. Obviously not. 

:dazzler


----------



## vanboxmeer

Bryan haters have little reason to even complain about, his face headlining run isn't going to be very long with the absolute maximum being a couple of months to Summerslam and the minimum being MITB. Vince already sees him as a peaked babyface character that can only go down from here, so he's perfectly fine pressuring him to work through the injury knowing he's picked Reigns to take Bryan's spot this year regardless of what happens.


----------



## kokepepsi

Starbuck said:


> Oh dear. Bryan marks with that obnoxious Punk mark level posting going on right now. Guys really? During the peak of the Steph/Cena segment it was beyond clear that Bryan wasn't coming out by that stage. The credit goes to Stephanie and Cena, not Bryan. And this segment had the peak minutes of the show but it was not the highest rated segment of the show. That was the overrun. Steph/Cena 2.3. Overrun 2.4. It really shouldn't be this difficult and it's the same for the majority of the title stuff vs. Shield/Evolution stuff. Bryan/Steph gets peak minutes but Shield/Evo is still the higher rated segment. Either that or they switch. I really don't get what's so hard to understand or accept about that, especially since in most cases we're talking about 0.2 or 0.1 of a difference. Yet some of you Bryan boys are doing exactly what all the Punk marks did a few years back. It's actually pretty funny watching the cycle repeat itself. I thought you were all better than that. Obviously not.
> 
> :dazzler


:bow


----------



## funnyfaces1

Hey! Us Bryan marks learned it from the Rock marks.


----------



## Darkness is here

I always knew cadwell is a bryan mark.
Btw Still a draw :cena2


----------



## Rick Sanchez

Starbuck said:


> I thought you were all better than that. Obviously not.
> 
> :dazzler


Why would you think that? Punk and Bryan have mostly the same fans.


----------



## Waffelz

Overrun segment really shouldn't even be counted what with randoms tuning in for the next show.


----------



## Chokeline

*Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*


----------



## joeycalz

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*

In b4 Rock vs. Austin mark wars. GETS POPCORN.


----------



## RustyPro

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*

Psh Austin and Rock marks, we all know it was Shane O Mac drawing in them viewers!


----------



## Jingoro

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*

why do people start threads about another possible wrestling boom being possible? look at those ratings. that shit aint ever happening again. it was lightning caught in a bottle. it will never again draw in the casuals like it did back then.


----------



## vacuous

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*

ya i bet paige gets more ratings but wwe wont say so cuz they love rocxk and there sexest


----------



## xD7oom

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*

:rock GOAT :rock


----------



## DanielWyatt

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*

Damn rock is king of ratings


----------



## KingJohn

The Rock vs Val Venis is #3 all time, damn, The Rock really is the GOAT.


----------



## Happenstan

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



joeycalz said:


> In b4 Rock vs. Austin mark wars. GETS POPCORN.


What war? If that list is accurate we're talking about a straight up rape. :rock5


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



Jingoro said:


> why do people start threads about another possible wrestling boom being possible? look at those ratings. that shit aint ever happening again. it was lightning caught in a bottle. it will never again draw in the casuals like it did back then.


average raw viewership in 1999-2000 was 6.7 million viewers while big by today standards (raw averaged 4.7 million viewers in 2012 when dvr playback was added) its still not impossible that we see those levels again. lets not forget that raw and nitro combined were averaging 4 million in 1995 and by early 1999 that had tripled to 12 million.

for reference when the business was hot in the uk back in late 70s to mid 80s wrestling was averaging 8 million viewers on itv every week and big matches like daddy and haystacks attracted 18 million viewers...thats in a country of 60 million (1/5th the population of the us)


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



validreasoning said:


> average raw viewership in 1999-2000 was 6.7 million viewers while big by today standards (raw averaged 4.7 million viewers in 2012 when dvr playback was added) its still not impossible that we see those levels again. lets not forget that raw and nitro combined were averaging 4 million in 1995 and by early 1999 that had tripled to 12 million.
> 
> for reference when the business was hot in the uk back in late 70s to mid 80s wrestling was averaging 8 million viewers on itv every week and big matches like daddy and haystacks attracted 18 million viewers...thats in a country of 60 million (1/5th the population of the us)


proof?
and even if avarage raw viewership in 1999-2000 was 6.7 million viewers it doesn't matter because smackdown was getting 10 million + viwers every week so wwe was getting 17 millon people watching their product every week

i don't think wwe is gonna get those king of numbers for a long long time


----------



## Bfo4jd

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



Happenstan said:


> What war? If that list is accurate we're talking about a straight up rape. :rock5


Its not really the Rock. He just happen to become the top face when the product was hitting its peak with Austin forced to leave and WCW becoming a one hour show and a complete joke of a wrestling show leaving WWF with no competition. Bischoff recently talked about it in JR's podcast.




validreasoning said:


> lets not forget that raw and nitro combined were averaging 4 million in 1995 and *by early 1999 that had tripled to 12 million.*


Which is the point right? How do you think pro-wrestling in the US is ever going to get back to averaging 12 million viewers?


----------



## Rocky Mark

:rock there's no stopping to this great man is there ?


----------



## Naka Moora

Rocky Mark said:


> :rock there's no stopping to this great man is there ?


You're right, Rocky! Rocky!


----------



## WWE

Cm punk tho

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## The Zeitgeist

On the other hand, does anyone have information on the lowest ratings in Raw history?


----------



## Goldusto

to think this old creeper was responsible for the 3rd highest rating in wrestling history.


----------



## validreasoning

uknoww said:


> proof?
> and even if avarage raw viewership in 1999-2000 was 6.7 million viewers it doesn't matter because smackdown was getting 10 million + viwers every week so wwe was getting 17 millon people watching their product every week


way off with your numbers there. wwe themselves state that sd was averaging 6.6 million in 1999-2000 in their sec report to wallstreet at the time http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1091907/000095013000004115/0000950130-00-004115-0001.txt



Bfo4jd said:


> Which is the point right? How do you think pro-wrestling in the US is ever going to get back to averaging 12 million viewers?


i can't tell the future. if you asked me in 2001 if ufc would destroy wwe attitude era ppv buyrates by 2009 i would have said you were crazy. if you asked me in 1995 if i thought steve austin would outdraw hulk hogan in his peak by 1999 i would have said you were crazy.



The Zeitgeist said:


> On the other hand, does anyone have information on the lowest ratings in Raw history?


raw scored a 1.8 in october 96 and again in march 97 off the top of my head.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

validreasoning said:


> raw scored a 1.8 in october 96 and again in march 97 off the top of my head.


And yet those shows were probably better most of todays. Which is why ratings have never mattered to me.


----------



## Sonnen Says

validreasoning said:


> way off with your numbers there. wwe themselves state that sd was averaging 6.6 million in 1999-2000 in their sec report to wallstreet at the time http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1091907/000095013000004115/0000950130-00-004115-0001.txt
> 
> 
> 
> i can't tell the future. *if you asked me in 2001 if ufc would destroy wwe attitude era ppv buyrates by 2009 i would have said you were crazy*. if you asked me in 1995 if i thought steve austin would outdraw hulk hogan in his peak by 1999 i would have said you were crazy.
> 
> 
> 
> raw scored a 1.8 in october 96 and again in march 97 off the top of my head.


But I think UFC counts the international numbers too. The AE era only counts domestic.


----------



## KingLobos

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



Chokeline said:


>


----------



## Bfo4jd

Sonnen Says said:


> But I think UFC counts the international numbers too. The AE era only counts domestic.


Nope, domestic only.


----------



## WorldWrestlingFed

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



Chokeline said:


>


Extra Fact, #10 Undertaker/Steve Austin was an Overrun, should not be on that list, whatever is listed as #11 is really 10th place.

Rock was the draw of the Attitude era, WWE revisionist history is disproven, and the myth that the Attitude era only had "heels", that there was no "face/heel" sides, when that it isn't true, Face/Heel is always apart of the business, that's why WCW messed up, lacked happy babyface endings.

The Rock is a man who worked hard and for that was truly blessed by God(YHWH(The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit)

Stone Cold was not a draw, that myth is finally put to rest.


----------



## Cobalt

Most Bryan marks are all old Punk marks, how can the delusion of their opinion be such a surprise. :lmao:lmao


----------



## Darkness is here

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



WorldWrestlingFed said:


> Extra Fact, #10 Undertaker/Steve Austin was an Overrun, should not be on that list, whatever is listed as #11 is really 10th place.
> 
> Rock was the draw of the Attitude era, WWE revisionist history is disproven, and the myth that the Attitude era only had "heels", that there was no "face/heel" sides, when that it isn't true, Face/Heel is always apart of the business, that's why WCW messed up, lacked happy babyface endings.
> 
> The Rock is a man who worked hard and for that was truly blessed by God(YHWH(The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit)
> 
> *Stone Cold was not a draw, that myth is finally put to rest.*


You can't be serious, are you?
Iam not denying the fact rock is a huge draw but saying austin is not one is being plain & simple stupid.

Raw getting huge rating after 98 was all austin's doing, he was bringing the company back to it's lost glory, going neck to neck wcw and bringing in alot of viewers and when he finally made wwf the the clear #1 company, the unfortunate injury came and rock took advatage of it.

Not just that but there were a lot of other reasons wwf was doing great back then, like wcw putting a shit product, AE having a great roster full of starpower and a storyling for everyone, the product was at it's peak around 99-00.
And the fact that raw got those rating show that the WHOLE SHOW was attracting viewers, as it would be foolish to give credit to any one man for those ratings.


----------



## uknoww

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



Darkness is here said:


> You can't be serious, are you?
> Iam not denying the fact rock is a huge draw but saying austin is not one is being plain & simple stupid.
> 
> Raw getting huge rating after 98 was all austin's doing, he was bringing the company back to it's lost glory, going neck to neck wcw and bringing in alot of viewers and when he finally made wwf the the clear #1 company, the unfortunate injury came and rock took advatage of it.
> 
> Not just that but there were a lot of other reasons wwf was doing great back then, like wcw putting a shit product, AE having a great roster full of starpower and a storyling for everyone, the product was at it's peak around 99-00.
> And the fact that raw got those rating show that the WHOLE SHOW was attracting viewers, as it would be foolish to give credit to any one man for those ratings.


the rock was a bigger draw


----------



## WorldWrestlingFed

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



Darkness is here said:


> You can't be serious, are you?


Yes I am being serious, look for yourself, 










And #10 shouldn't be there, as that's an Overrun, random viewers tuning in for the next show don't count as a ratings draw.



Darkness is here said:


> Iam not denying the fact rock is a huge draw but saying austin is not one is being plain & simple stupid.
> 
> Raw getting huge rating after 98 was all austin's doing,


No it wasn't, late 1998 - 1999 was Rock's year, Rock was bringing in those ratings, so much so that they had to make a show named after him. Austin winning matches doesn't make him a draw, just like Triple H winning matches in the RA era.



Darkness is here said:


> he was bringing the company back to it's lost glory, going neck to neck wcw and bringing in alot of viewers and when he finally made wwf the the clear #1 company, the unfortunate injury came and rock took advatage of it.


Incorrect, April 1998 finally broke WCW's streak, because Mcmahon(Not Austin) stepped in the ring, then Jan 4, 1999, Rock vs Mankind took over the ratings

The Rock already drew the highest rated segment of all time before Austin left. Rock's video was the #1 video in the summer of 99. 

Look at Rock's promo when he turned heel & joined the corporation in 1998(In 1998), "Why Rock why?"



Darkness is here said:


> Not just that but there were a lot of other reasons wwf was doing great back then, like wcw putting a shit product, AE having a great roster full of starpower and a storyling for everyone, the product was at it's peak around 99-00.
> 
> And the fact that raw got those rating show that the WHOLE SHOW was attracting viewers,
> as it would be foolish to give credit to any one man for those ratings.


You're contradicting your statements, first you say Austin was "the draw and savior" of the era, now you're saying the whole show.

Don't fall for WWE revisionist history, The Rock was the main character and top draw from 1998-2002


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Didn't the Taker/Austin overrun get a 9.1 or something like that? I thought the 6.8 was the non-overrun number?


----------



## Rap God

:clap


----------



## Naka Moora

I was under the beleif that the highest rated RAW segment was this one, it's been said on several interviews by differant superstars.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

And just like that....another mark war thread emerges. fpalm


----------



## #Mark

Cobalt said:


> Most Bryan marks are all old Punk marks, how can the delusion of their opinion be such a surprise. :lmao:lmao


It's the other way around. Punk marks immediately started hating Bryan when he reached the top.

As for the highest rated RAW segments, Rock is the greatest of all time so none of that surprises me. Still, seeing him carry Val Venis to the third highest rated segment of all time is pretty impressive.


----------



## JamesK

Cobalt said:


> Most Bryan marks are all old Punk marks, how can the delusion of their opinion be such a surprise. :lmao:lmao


What's the problem to be fan of both??


----------



## Rick Sanchez

JamesK said:


> What's the problem to be fan of both??


There isn't.

Some posters think they know so much about other fans. The mark crap that gets thrown around on here is so pathetic. I don't know a single Punk fan personally who wasn't marking out for Bryan at XXX. Some people just gotta be negative.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



WorldWrestlingFed said:


> Extra Fact, #10 Undertaker/Steve Austin was an Overrun, should not be on that list, whatever is listed as #11 is really 10th place.
> 
> Rock was the draw of the Attitude era, WWE revisionist history is disproven, and the myth that the Attitude era only had "heels", that there was no "face/heel" sides, when that it isn't true, Face/Heel is always apart of the business, that's why WCW messed up, lacked happy babyface endings.
> 
> The Rock is a man who worked hard and for that was truly blessed by God(YHWH(The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit)
> 
> *Stone Cold was not a draw, that myth is finally put to rest.*


Sorry but nothing that has been posted here has proven that Austin wasn't a draw. This tells us that he wasn't as big of a draw as The Rock was (or at least tells us the Rock was involved in the highest rated segments, but I believe the first part), but it doesn't tell us that Austin was never a major draw.


----------



## Darkness is here

@ gm
don't bother replying to him.
I also didn't after he said vince was the draw in 98 and not austin.


----------



## WorldWrestlingFed

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



TheGMofGods said:


> Sorry but nothing that has been posted here has proven that Austin wasn't a draw.


Incorrect, Ratings went down after the "3:16" promo, no draw until WWF changed direction and then Mcmahon and the all the automobiles, swerves, and backstage stuff.

DX was the draw in 1997, and 1998 was Mcmahon, Austin was in a cookie cutter role, whereas Rock drew due to the talent God(YHWH: The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit) gave him.



TheGMofGods said:


> This tells us that he wasn't as big of a draw as The Rock was (or at least tells us the Rock was involved in the highest rated segments, but I believe the first part), but it doesn't tell us that Austin was never a major draw.





Darkness is here said:


> @ gm
> don't bother replying to him.
> I also didn't after he said vince was the draw in 98 and not austin.


Because Vince did draw, the very reason that WCW lost it's ratings streak was because Vince stepped in the ring on 04-13-98.

What happened to Austin without Mcmahon? wasn't drawing, Mcmahon was the draw. you may like Stone Cold after the Mcmahon story, but that's subjective, doesn't make him a draw.


----------



## Cobalt

#Mark said:


> It's the other way around. Punk marks immediately started hating Bryan when he reached the top.
> 
> As for the highest rated RAW segments, Rock is the greatest of all time so none of that surprises me. Still, seeing him carry Val Venis to the third highest rated segment of all time is pretty impressive.


I don't hate Bryan but I just think his plain boring and way over rated and can't get into him, personal opinion. No hate.



JamesK said:


> What's the problem to be fan of both??


Cause I don't like Bryan, Punk in my eyes is far superior.

You can like both, but you will be very hard pressed to find many on here who like both equally, most former Punk marks have turned on him by now and most die hard Punk marks can't stand the sight of Bryan.


----------



## The.Great......One

*Re: Top 10 highest rated RAW's in history.*



Chokeline said:


>


The rock is responsible for the 9 highest rated raws in history :bow:bow
The last one does not count as it was an overrun segment, no doubt if this is your life was the mainevent and it went over time it would have done a 10+ rating, but even then I wouldn't count that as it is an overrun segment. Anyways, I knew the guy was the draw from 99-02 but holy shit, i never knew he was that big of a draw. It is understandable though, he did produce the highest rated segment of all time the night after he became world champ in 98 and then broke it again in 99 with the this is your life. It's astonishing how he produced the 3rd highest rated raw while versing val venus lol


----------



## #Mark

Cobalt said:


> I don't hate Bryan but I just think his plain boring and way over rated and can't get into him, personal opinion. No hate.


I share a similar opinion about Punk. His promos are long-winded and boring and he's very sloppy in the ring.


----------



## Tardbasher12

#Mark said:


> I share the a similar opinion about Punk. His promos are long-winded and boring and he's very sloppy in the ring.


(Y)


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

No Punk or Bryan to be kicked around in this thread anymore.The war has been placed on indefinite hiatus. Time to see if anyone other than HHH and Steph can become a consistent draw.


----------



## THANOS

IDONTSHIV said:


> No Punk or Bryan to be kicked around in this thread anymore.The war has been placed on indefinite hiatus. Time to see if anyone other than HHH and Steph can become a consistent draw.


At this point it's doubtful, but it will be interesting to see. I'm expecting, and hoping for, Seth Rollins' segment to do well, along with Ambrose and Reigns' segment. Hopefully the match with Cena bombs (it likely won't ), so WWE will think twice in the future about placing Cena with over acts.

Having said all this, I'm definitely still expecting the address of Bryan and the championship segment to get the biggest ratings, which will be consistent with what we've seen since the beginning of the year. If something involves Bryan or addresses him in some fashion, than it will likely do very very well.


----------



## DoubtGin

pwtorch will probably skip doing breakdowns since Bryan is out for a bit :


----------



## funnyfaces1

:lmao I've seen it all. What kind of dumbass thinks Austin isn't a draw?


----------



## NastyYaffa

Cobalt said:


> most former Punk marks have turned on him by now and most die hard Punk marks can't stand the sight of Bryan.


fpalm One of the most idiotic things I've seen you ever write.


----------



## RabidCrow

#Mark said:


> *It's the other way around. Punk marks immediately started hating Bryan when he reached the top.*
> 
> As for the highest rated RAW segments, Rock is the greatest of all time so none of that surprises me. Still, seeing him carry Val Venis to the third highest rated segment of all time is pretty impressive.



This is incoherent, the people who hate Bryan took an instinctive rejection for him only because his marks starting to put his boring ass in a place that he doesn't deserve.


----------



## THANOS

RabidCrow said:


> This is incoherent, the people who hate Bryan took an instinctive rejection for him only because his marks starting to put his boring ass *in a place that he doesn't deserve.*


This is opinion, and not a widely held opinion either. If it were than ratings for his segments wouldn't be consistently topping the night (or near the top), his reactions wouldn't be universally positive and by far the largest in every crowd, and sports teams across the world wouldn't be using Bryan's visage along with the chant to instruct fans to begin using it. Fact is, the majority of paying consumers want Bryan in that position, and anyone who doesn't is irrelevant to WWE's business.


----------



## #Mark

RabidCrow said:


> This is incoherent, the people who hate Punk took an instinctive rejection for him only because his marks starting to put his boring ass in a place that he doesn't deserve after his abysmal two year title reign.


Completely agreed.


----------



## Choke2Death

Cobalt said:


> I don't hate Bryan but I just think his plain boring and way over rated and can't get into him, personal opinion. No hate.
> 
> Cause I don't like Bryan, Punk in my eyes is far superior.


Question, when and why did you turn on Bryan? I could swear before Wrestlemania you talked about how him (and Punk obviously) deserve to main event WM and that it is his time now. Hell, I remember you even made a list of your top 10 favorite wrestlers of all time and Bryan was on it.

But suddenly WM30 happens and you start posting negatively about Bryan. Why do I get the feeling that you're just bitter because you wish that was Punk in his position?


----------



## RabidCrow

THANOS said:


> This is opinion, and not a widely held opinion either. If it were than ratings for his segments wouldn't be consistently topping the night (or near the top), his reactions wouldn't be universally positive and by far the largest in every crowd, and sports teams across the world wouldn't be using Bryan's visage along with the chant to instruct fans to begin using it. Fact is, the majority of paying consumers want Bryan in that position, and anyone who doesn't is irrelevant to WWE's business.


No one won't deny that Bryan's reaction is awesome, not sure if he's really satisfying the need of consumers since Vince Mcmahon has been losing a lot of money recently, but is a fact that a lot of fans love him and want him having success.. Same with guys like Cesaro, BNB or Ziggler.

But it doesn't change the facts, Daniel Bryan is an glorified upper midcarder , he is great in the ring, but he's bad at everything else, he's boring as fuck and can't carried a feud when he's not in the underdog spot with a great heel like HHH being the top dog. His marks fail when they can't accept this.



#Mark said:


> Completely agreed.


This is what i'm talking about, you won't even to waste your time to defend Daniel Bryan.

You just are going to try to bash the guy that everybody considered better than him, Cm Punk. This where the Cm Punk vs Daniel Bryan mark wars began.


----------



## Rap God

RabidCrow said:


> No one won't deny that Bryan's reaction is awesome, not sure if he's really satisfying the need of consumers since Vince Mcmahon has been losing a lot of money recently, but is a fact that a lot of fans love him and want him having success.. Same with guys like Cesaro, BNB or Ziggler.
> 
> But it doesn't change the facts, Daniel Bryan is an glorified upper midcarder , he is great in the ring, *but he's bad at everything else*, he's boring as fuck and can't carried a feud when he's not in the underdog spot with a great heel like HHH being the top dog. His marks fail when they can't accept this.
> 
> 
> 
> This is what i'm talking about, you won't even to waste your time to defend Daniel Bryan.
> 
> You just are going to try to bash the guy that everybody considered better than him, Cm Punk. This where the Cm Punk vs Daniel Bryan mark wars began.










He has Mic skills and hes impproving.Hopefully he works on them while hes injjured.Boring as fuck :ti.


----------



## Happenstan

RabidCrow said:


> he's boring as fuck


Highest rated segments each week.



RabidCrow said:


> and can't carried a feud when he's not in the underdog spot with a great heel like HHH being the top dog.


And you know this how? Oh, that's right you don't. You pulled that out of your ass the same way you do with every other post you make.




RabidCrow said:


> You just are going to try to bash the guy that everybody considered better than him, Cm Punk. This where the Cm Punk vs Daniel Bryan mark wars began.


Again you don't know what you are talking about. That "war" began when Bryan started feuding with the Authority and every Punktard like yourself started making multiple threads demanding Punk take Bryan's spot. Do you enjoy always being wrong?


----------



## DoubtGin

:lmao :lmao :lmao

btw



> WWE Raw's Nielsen Twitter TV Rating declined nine percent on Monday night, one week removed from their latest PPV.
> 
> Raw drew a unique Twitter audience of 1.593 million, down from 1.750 million following Payback.
> 
> Total Impressions were 8.848 million, down 19 percent from last week's Raw. Impressions were slightly higher than the Payback lead-in Raw two weeks ago.
> 
> Raw ranked #2 among series and specials, trailing "Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta" on VH1. Raw also would have ranked #2 if compared to one-time sports programming, trailing the Kings vs. Rangers Stanley Cup game.


----------



## Reaper

Cobalt said:


> Most Bryan marks are all old Punk marks, how can the delusion of their opinion be such a surprise. :lmao:lmao


Lol. There have been some converts, but mostly I've seen exclusive Punk and Bryan marks at each others' throats while I just sit there going "WHY THE FUCK CAN'T YOU LIKE BOTH, YOU MARKS!!" 

That said, since I'm a Bryan, Punk, HHH, Batista, Orton, Reigns, Rollins and Ambrose mark, I feel kinda like a special snowflake 'cuz noone can categorize me


----------



## Starbuck

Reaper Jones said:


> Lol. There have been some converts, but mostly I've seen exclusive Punk and Bryan marks at each others' throats while I just sit there going "WHY THE FUCK CAN'T YOU LIKE BOTH, YOU MARKS!!"
> 
> That said, since I'm a Bryan, Punk, HHH, Batista, Orton, Reigns, Rollins and Ambrose mark, I feel kinda like a special snowflake 'cuz noone can categorize me


I mark for :rock4 :trips2 :brock :cena6. 










Nobody got shit to say to me 8*D. 

Punk and Bryan marks should unite. Last year you had both of them. This year you have none. 

:vince2


----------



## Happenstan

Starbuck said:


> I mark for :rock4 :trips2 :brock :cena6.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody got shit to say to me 8*D.
> 
> Punk and Bryan marks should unite. Last year you had both of them. This year you have none.
> 
> :vince2



Cena? :damn This is like that time when I thought I found the Easter Bunny and my Uncle shot and ate him. Poor little apparently tasty bunny.


----------



## Rap God

Starbuck said:


> I mark for :rock4 :trips2 :brock :cena6.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody got shit to say to me 8*D.
> 
> Punk and Bryan marks should unite. Last year you had both of them. This year you have none.
> 
> :vince2


I mark for El Torito and Hornswoggle.I like their funny segments


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Just to stir the pot a bit: Let the record show that Daniel Bryan saved Wrestlemania and had one of the great performances with his two show-saving matches. Let the record show that after Mania XXX, Bryan had two things that Punk lacked: a Mania main event, and judging by his neck surgery, *a spine*. Hail and Farewell to the once and future WWE champion. :bryan


----------



## CHIcagoMade

Long gone are the days when Bryan marks said they don't care about ratingz.

:ti


----------



## Happenstan

CHIcagoMade said:


> Long gone are the days when Bryan marks said they don't care about ratingz.
> 
> :ti


And when did we ever say we didn't care about them?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Hour 1- 3.893
Hour 2- 4.217
Hour 3- 4.247

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/06/10/monday-cable-ratings-love-hip-hop-atlanta-wins-night-wwe-raw-major-crimes-hit-the-floor-longmire-more/272103/

Went up throughout, which I guess is a good sign, although it started pretty low, much like last week. Guess the Shield+Cena/Wyatts main event and/or Rollins promo did the 2nd and 3rd hours justice.


----------



## DoubtGin

pretty much the same as last week overall

I bet the Shield segments drew pretty well.


----------



## RabidCrow

Happenstan said:


> Highest rated segments each week.


Great arguments! Let's act like this is true, what it changes? He still boring and Raw has been getting poor ratings lately. unk2



Happenstan said:


> And you know this how? Oh, that's right you don't. You pulled that out of your ass the same way you do with every other post you make.


:clap You totally destroy my arguments. I think you have serious problems with accept the facts.




Happenstan said:


> Again you don't know what you are talking about. That "war" began when Bryan started feuding with the Authority and every Punktard like yourself started making multiple threads demanding Punk take Bryan's spot. Do you enjoy always being wrong?





This is monumental bullshit, the people who wanted Punk in the place of Daniel Bryan were just thought that him suited better in the anti-authority character. This wasn't a middle finger for anybody, you're the only one that are crying about this

I don't remember the last time that a handful of Cm Punk fans agreed to using an entire thread just to bash Daniel Bryan. And if you look closely to the first pages of this thread, you'll find something really embarrassing and obsesive from many D.Bryan marks. It's like, you are the only reason of why this "wars" are getting place.



Jarsy1 said:


> He has Mic skills and hes impproving.Hopefully he works on them while hes injjured.Boring as fuck :ti.



Are you sure he has been improving? At least in ROH, he doesn't cut bland and boring promos with that fucking goofy smile on his face and this embarrassing crowd pandering.

Bryan acting and talking is under average and this won't change. But i respect your optimism.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

RabidCrow said:


> Great arguments! *Let's act like this is true,* what it changes? He still boring and Raw has been getting poor ratings lately. unk2


It is true...there's clearly sources and evidence here that is pointing to it being true.

Your post here tells us all that you're blatantly denying facts even when they're being put right in front of your face. 



RabidCrow said:


> :clap You totally destroy my arguments. I think you have serious problems with accept the facts.


How was what you said in any way a fact? Especially when there's evidence that shows that what you just said clearly wasn't true? 



RabidCrow said:


> This is monumental bullshit


No it's not. It's literally what happened. 



RabidCrow said:


> I don't remember the last time that a handful of Cm Punk fans agreed to using an entire thread just to bash Daniel Bryan. And if you look closely to the first pages of this thread, you'll find something really embarrassing and obsesive from many D.Bryan marks.


You mean people laughing at the ass whooping that Punk marks got by the OP? Half of said people btw who weren't even Bryan marks? How is that obsessive and embarrassing behavior? 




Are you sure he has been improving? At least in ROH, he doesn't cut bland and boring promos with that fucking goofy smile on his face and this embarrassing crowd pandering.

Bryan acting and talking is under average and this won't change. But i respect your optimism.[/QUOTE]


----------



## O Fenômeno

RabidCrow said:


> This is incoherent, the people who hate Bryan took an instinctive rejection for him only because his marks starting to put his boring ass in a place that he doesn't deserve.


YAWN..

So people hate Bryan because of some marks ??

WRONG...if you're so petty to dislike a guy because of that then you were never a fan of Bryan to begin...


----------



## #Mark

O Fenômeno said:


> YAWN..
> 
> So people hate Bryan because of some marks ??
> 
> WRONG...if you're so petty to dislike a guy because of that then you were never a fan of Bryan to begin...


I'm pretty sure dude marks for Jeff Hardy but he claims Bryan is bad on the mic :ti

It's easy to see why he dislikes him.. Bryan surpassed all of his favorites with ease.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Cobalt said:


> You can like both, but you will be very hard pressed to find many on here who like both equally, most former Punk marks have turned on him by now and most die hard Punk marks can't stand the sight of Bryan.


I like both Bryan and Punk. I think both are good superstars, but have weaknesses as well.


----------



## kokepepsi

DoubtGin said:


> pretty much the same as last week overall
> 
> *I bet the Shield segments drew pretty well*.


:maury
(Y)


----------



## Happenstan

RabidCrow said:


> It's like, you are the only reason of why this "wars" are getting place.


I'd respond but, as the above quote clearly demonstrates, I don't understand the language of Tard.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

:jericho4:ddp:usangleunk2:ambrose3:heyman4:ramon:dazzler

I used to mark out a lot. Not as much anymore.


----------



## Cobalt

NastyYaffa said:


> fpalm One of the most idiotic things I've seen you ever write.


Your one of the worst posters on this site, shut up. 



Choke2Death said:


> Question, when and why did you turn on Bryan? I could swear before Wrestlemania you talked about how him (and Punk obviously) deserve to main event WM and that it is his time now. Hell, I remember you even made a list of your top 10 favorite wrestlers of all time and Bryan was on it.
> 
> But suddenly WM30 happens and you start posting negatively about Bryan. Why do I get the feeling that you're just bitter because you wish that was Punk in his position?


Turn? It was simply a sugar coating man, I'm serious. If no one wants to believe me fine. I never really "marked" for Bryan like I do Punk, NEVER. I used to not truly express my feelings due to not being bothered for arguments and probably getting my head chopped off for disrespecting the "almighty" Bryan.

No doubt I said that, and I still stand by the fact that a Punk vs Bryan mainevent would be a dream of mine, two indy darlings closing the biggest show of the year.

Nope, never I respect and admire Bryan's work in ring but no way did I post him as top 10 ever , maybe top 10 of the current roster but no more. His an amazing in ring talent and....... that's about as far as it goes for me, extremely boring and bland character, repetitive, and plain and simple boring. I don't understand his hype and yes I agree his over achieved way to much and I believe Punk should have gotten what Bryan has. The Bryan marks on here not gonna name names but they are a large reason why I actually express my distaste for his position nowadays, it's unbearable, people used to whinge about us Punk marks and I know I wasn't delusional but some Bryan marks here are borderline psychotic, like literally.

Plain in simple, I really do dislike Bryan and his fans add fuel to the fire and his over achieved way too much for me.



Reaper Jones said:


> Lol. There have been some converts, but mostly I've seen exclusive Punk and Bryan marks at each others' throats while I just sit there going "WHY THE FUCK CAN'T YOU LIKE BOTH, YOU MARKS!!"
> 
> That said, since I'm a Bryan, Punk, HHH, Batista, Orton, Reigns, Rollins and Ambrose mark, I feel kinda like a special snowflake 'cuz noone can categorize me


Your alright, there's some in particular who are unbearable and think people like me forget about them being Punk marks who now rag on the guy and hate on him at any chance possible because they have a new found lover boy in Bryan.

You should be happy that you can get into so many talents like that, I sure as hell cannot.



Warrior said:


> I like both Bryan and Punk. I think both are good superstars, but have weaknesses as well.


Exactly, Punk outweighs Bryan in some departments and IMO and it is MY opinion I think Bryan only pips Punk in one area, and that is in ring.


----------



## NastyYaffa

Cobalt said:


> Your one of the worst posters on this site, shut up.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Cobalt said:


> Your one of the worst posters on this site, shut up.





NastyYaffa said:


>











CM Punk mark getting pinned clean.
:banderas


----------



## Cobalt

NastyYaffa said:


>


Prime example of what we are talking about here ladies and gentlemen, another fuckwit of a Bryan mark.... with his boyfriend.

If you can't win an argument don't resort to picking on something so miniscule as the grammar of a word.

I've met some twats on here who get under my skin but you sir are by far and away the biggest and that is saying something.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Cobalt said:


> I don't hate Bryan but I just think his plain boring and way over rated and can't get into him,* personal opinion.* No hate.





Cobalt said:


> Prime example of what we are talking about here ladies and gentlemen, another fuckwit of a Bryan mark.... with his boyfriend.
> 
> If you can't *win an argument* don't resort to picking on something so miniscule as the grammar of a word.


What argument? There was just an exchange of opinions. An argument requires reasoning.


----------



## Cobalt

Tardbasher12 said:


> What argument? There was just an exchange of opinions. An argument requires some form of persuasion or reasoning.


Exactly, what argument. Him responding to my thoughts in anyway would be an argument, hence why he opted for the cheap way out as he had nothing constructive (as per usual) to bring to the table.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Cobalt said:


> Exactly, what argument. *Him responding to my thoughts in anyway would be an argument*, hence why he opted for the cheap way out as he had nothing constructive (as per usual) to bring to the table.





> a course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating a truth or falsehood; the methodical process of logical reasoning





> In logic and philosophy, an argument is an attempt to persuade someone of something, by giving reasons for accepting a particular conclusion as evident.


Read.


----------



## Cobalt

Tardbasher12 said:


> Read.


Oh, I'm sorry I must have missed the part where I quoted Tardbasher to start a general conversation.

Could you show me where I asked for your invalid opinion?

I think he can fight his own battles, thanks for your useless input.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Cobalt said:


> Oh, I'm sorry I *must have missed the part where I quoted Tardbasher to start a general conversation.
> *
> Could you show me where I asked for your *invalid opinion*?
> 
> I think he can fight his own battles, thanks for your useless input.


fpalmfpalmfpalmfpalmfpalmfpalmfpalmfpalmfpalm


----------



## Starbuck

Happenstan said:


> Cena? :damn This is like that time when I thought I found the Easter Bunny and my Uncle shot and ate him. Poor little apparently tasty bunny.


The fuck you got against CENA? He's GOAT. He's the real face of the company, not little one armed Danny B. Cena doesn't even need 2 arms. He can beat everybody based on the strength of his resolve alone. CENATION > YES MOVEMENT.

:cena2



Cobalt said:


> Prime example of what we are talking about here ladies and gentlemen, another fuckwit of a Bryan mark.... with his boyfriend.
> 
> If you can't win an argument don't resort to picking on something so miniscule as the grammar of a word.
> 
> I've met some twats on here who get under my skin but you sir are by far and away the biggest and that is saying something.












Punk marks always get so damn wound up over everything and nothing :lol.


----------



## Happenstan

:lol When did Cobalt become Sonnen Says? Tardbasher's living up to his name and his mark doesn't even get it. Too funny.




Starbuck said:


> The fuck you got against CENA? He's GOAT. He's the real face of the company, not little one armed Danny B. Cena doesn't even need 2 arms.


I actually have a lot of respect for him due to his tireless charity work. That's a guy who is really making a difference in the world as opposed to us living our everyday lives between bitching on this board.



Starbuck said:


> He can beat everybody based on the strength of his resolve alone.


And that's the problem. A Santino match is more unpredictable for me than Cena's tired act these days.



Starbuck said:


> CENATION > YES MOVEMENT.


:cuss: Lies!!! Lies!!!!


----------



## Born of Osiris

This thread :trips5

Shit is more entertaining than the product.


----------



## Joshi Judas

Why are Punk marks and Bryan marks still fighting when both won't be on the shows :lmao

How did the Shield segments do? Anyone got the info? Are they drawing well?


----------



## Vyer

RAINNMAKAHH said:


> Why are Punk marks and Bryan marks still fighting when both won't be on the shows :lmao
> 
> How did the Shield segments do? Anyone got the info? Are they drawing well?


The breakdown hasn't been posted yet.

Here were the viewers per hour that were posted on page 70:
Hour 1- 3.893
Hour 2- 4.217
Hour 3- 4.247

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...e-more/272103/


The final rating to add to the information was 2.93 which is about the same as last week (2.94).


----------



## RabidCrow

TheGMofGods said:


> It is true...there's clearly sources and evidence here that is pointing to it being true.
> 
> Your post here tells us all that you're blatantly denying facts even when they're being put right in front of your face.
> 
> 
> How was what you said in any way a fact? Especially when there's evidence that shows that what you just said clearly wasn't true?


It could be false, it could be true.. I dont pay much attention to this because like i said.. This doesn't proves nothing. Lol.. Evidence? Where? 

At the end, you know that a bunch of Bryan marks love to start threads just to talk about Cm Punk.
This is embarrassing and show the obsession from you over somebody that isn't even in the company
Almost every Punk mark here doesn't give a fuck about Daniel Bryan..




#Mark said:


> I'm pretty sure dude marks for Jeff Hardy but he claims Bryan is bad on the mic :ti
> 
> It's easy to see why he dislikes him.. *Bryan surpassed all of his favorites with ease.*


:maury
We still talking about Daniel Bryan!? Daniel Bryan?

Do you really, seriously. Be honest man.. Dou you really thing that Bryan is better than anybody?
At least Hardy have the unique look and charisma and he didn't need a shitty catchphrases to get over... Assuming that i'm a big fan.. Something that's totally false.




Happenstan said:


> I'd respond but, as the above quote clearly demonstrates, I don't understand the language of Tard.



Yeah, this is all what you need to do, when people have nothing to say, they just shut the fuck up.


----------



## Bushmaster

Sachiko Shinozaki said:


> This thread :trips5
> 
> Shit is more entertaining than the product.


More sad than entertaining imo.


----------



## Choke2Death

Cobalt said:


> Nope, never I respect and admire Bryan's work in ring but *no way did I post him as top 10 ever *, maybe top 10 of the current roster but no more. His an amazing in ring talent and....... that's about as far as it goes for me, extremely boring and bland character, repetitive, and plain and simple boring. I don't understand his hype and yes I agree his over achieved way to much and I believe Punk should have gotten what Bryan has. The Bryan marks on here not gonna name names but they are a large reason why I actually express my distaste for his position nowadays, it's unbearable, people used to whinge about us Punk marks and I know I wasn't delusional but some Bryan marks here are borderline psychotic, like literally.
> 
> Plain in simple, I really do dislike Bryan and his fans add fuel to the fire and his over achieved way too much for me.


Really? I even managed to find that post with a quick google search. I remembered it pretty well because other than Punk and Bryan, everybody you had on your list was also on my top 10 from the same thread.



Cobalt said:


> 1. CM Punk
> 2. The Rock
> 3. SCSA
> 4. HBK
> 5. Undertaker
> 6. Brock Lesnar
> 7. Chris Benoit
> 8. Y2J
> 9. Eddie Guerrero
> *10. Daniel Bryan*


----------



## NastyYaffa

Choke2Death said:


> Really? I even managed to find that post with a quick google search. I remembered it pretty well because other than Punk and Bryan, everybody you had on your list was also on my top 10 from the same thread.


:banderas

Bandwagoner exposed


----------



## A-C-P

Choke2Death said:


> Really? I even managed to find that post with a quick google search. I remembered it pretty well because other than Punk and Bryan, everybody you had on your list was also on my top 10 from the same thread.


----------



## RatedR10

Sachiko Shinozaki said:


> This thread :trips5
> 
> Shit is more entertaining than the product.


The sad thing is that it's usually this way. :lmao



Choke2Death said:


> Really? I even managed to find that post with a quick google search. I remembered it pretty well because other than Punk and Bryan, everybody you had on your list was also on my top 10 from the same thread.


:ti

Oh snap.


----------



## Happenstan

Choke2Death said:


> Really? I even managed to find that post with a quick google search. I remembered it pretty well because other than Punk and Bryan, everybody you had on your list was also on my top 10 from the same thread.


:bow:bow:bow:bow:bow 

Perfect.




RabidCrow said:


> At least Hardy have the unique look and charisma and he didn't need a shitty catchphrases to get over... Assuming that i'm a big fan.. Something that's totally false.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, this is all what you need to do, when people have nothing to say, they just shut the fuck up.



And you're clearly as drugged out of your skull as Hardy.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Choke2Death said:


> Really? I even managed to find that post with a quick google search. I remembered it pretty well because other than Punk and Bryan, everybody you had on your list was also on my top 10 from the same thread.


He's gonna have to change his name to *asphalt* because you just steamrolled his ass.:clap


----------



## krai999

fucking morons all of you.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Choke2Death said:


> Really? I even managed to find that post with a quick google search. I remembered it pretty well because other than Punk and Bryan, everybody you had on your list was also on my top 10 from the same thread.


----------



## RabidCrow

Choke2Death said:


> Really? I even managed to find that post with a quick google search.* I remembered it pretty well because other than Punk and Bryan, everybody you had on your list was also on my top 10 from the same thread.*


Nah, say the truth, you're stalking him. :jordan


Happenstan said:


> Perfect.
> 
> And you're clearly as drugged out of your skull as Hardy.


Dude, just stop posting and show some autorespect for yourself. :kobe


----------



## Gretchen

:ti 

This thread is so pathetic. And before the DB marks get all wound up and accuse me of "being mad" b/c that's seemingly the go to thing to say in here for those with dissenting opinions, I'm making a casual observation. Have no interest in joining in on the conversation. I do happen to be of the opinion that this bickering and competition among wrestling fans is rather pathetic.

"Oh look at me, my guy drew better ratings than yours last week!!!1111"

"Well, mine is responsible for more PPV buys than yours ever was!!!111"

It's wrestling. Scripted fighting. I mean, come on. I've been in a few heated arguments on here when defending someone or something, so I'm not entirely blameless, but this thread is rather pathetic, tbh. And I understand this is pretty much the one thread in here where trolling isn't just allowed, even encouraged, but reading through some of the most recent pages... fpalm. 

Please don't be offended Tardbasher, NastyYaffa, Happenstan, etc, I certainly wouldn't like to be subject to your usual circle jerk "argument" that's so typical to this thread, so I'll stop. I'm not arguing in favor of Bryan or Punk. I just don't get why some of you take this so seriously, having multi-paragraph arguments pertaining to ratings. 

I would like to add that "Punktard" is among the more cringeworthy insults I've come across on here. unk2


----------



## xdryza

I don't care much for this thread, but that was some ownage there. lol.


----------



## Tardbasher12

RFWHC said:


> *I just don't get why some of you take this so seriously, having multi-paragraph arguments* pertaining to ratings.


:faint: Irony.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> Really? I even managed to find that post with a quick google search. I remembered it pretty well because other than Punk and Bryan, everybody you had on your list was also on my top 10 from the same thread.


Well, it looks like (due to a lack of response) that Cobalt just got choked to death!

...

...

...
*cricket*


----------



## Gretchen

Tardbasher12 said:


> :faint:


:lmao

"Multi-paragraph arguments". Meaning the arguing goes on with multi-paragraph responses each time. 

I posted one multi-paragraph opinion which was clearly intended to be nothing more than my two cents. But what do you know, unsurprisingly enough, you just had to respond, didn't you? :lol

When you've got nothing of value to add, add nothing at all. Don't get annoyed by that post, pls. It's an opinion. Take it as that.


----------



## Shenroe

unk5
Damn, i wouldn't want to be in Cobalt shoes right now for 10 millions$


----------



## Happenstan

RFWHC said:


> :ti
> 
> This thread is so pathetic. And before the DB marks get all wound up and accuse me of "being mad" b/c that's seemingly the go to thing to say in here for those with dissenting opinions, I'm making a casual observation. Have no interest in joining in on the conversation. I do happen to be of the opinion that this bickering and competition among wrestling fans is rather pathetic.
> 
> "Oh look at me, my guy drew better ratings than yours last week!!!1111"
> 
> "Well, mine is responsible for more PPV buys than yours ever was!!!111"
> 
> It's wrestling. Scripted fighting. I mean, come on. I've been in a few heated arguments on here when defending someone or something, so I'm not entirely blameless, but this thread is rather pathetic, tbh. And I understand this is pretty much the one thread in here where trolling isn't just allowed, even encouraged, but reading through some of the most recent pages... fpalm.
> 
> Please don't be offended Tardbasher, NastyYaffa, Happenstan, etc, I certainly wouldn't like to be subject to your usual circle jerk "argument" that's so typical to this thread, so I'll stop. I'm not arguing in favor of Bryan or Punk. I just don't get why some of you take this so seriously, having multi-paragraph arguments pertaining to ratings.


Weren't you one of the first to claim ratings and buyrates when the initial numbers for SS 2013 came in? Let's be honest here. If the numbers favored your guy (clearly seems to be Punk given you have his face plastered all over your account) you'd be copy/pasting those quotes like a crazy person and you know it. _Input your denial here._



RFWHC said:


> I would like to add that "Punktard" is among the more cringeworthy insults I've come across on here. unk2


Yeah, I wouldn't want that shoe to fit me either. :


----------



## Tardbasher12

RFWHC said:


> :lmao
> 
> "Multi-paragraph arguments". Meaning the arguing goes on with multi-paragraph responses each time.
> 
> I posted one multi-paragraph opinion which was clearly intended to be nothing more than my two cents. But what do you know, unsurprisingly enough, you just had to respond, didn't you? :lol
> 
> *When you've got nothing of value to add, add nothing at all.* Don't get annoyed by that post, pls. It's an opinion. Take it as that.


So do you want me to start searching for your previous posts and prove that what I've quoted from you is completely ironic or not? And that bolded portion is a completely subjective statement, perhaps even theoretical, as you have no proof of my post being "nothing of value," to someone else. But, back to the main point, do you want me to search for some of your multi-paragraph, 100% serious arguments, or not?

Edit: Waiting for RFWHC to post another essay, fixing some grammatical issues.
Edit 2: RFWHC's essay is probably going to contain a quote of his post on page 73.


----------



## Gretchen

Happenstan said:


> Weren't you one of the first to claim ratings and buyrates when the initial numbers for SS 2013 came in? Let's be honest here. If the numbers favored your guy (clearly seems to be Punk given you have his face plastered all over your account) you'd be copy/pasting those quotes like a crazy person and you know it. _Input your denial here._


Erm... no. When did they come in? I honestly don't remember. If it was this spring, I might have written a few sentences or so acknowledging Punk, even though I doubt that was even the case. If it was during the fall, I really, really doubt it b/c I rarely ever talk about ratings on this forum. I enjoy wrestling, not fucking viewer statistics and PPV buy numbers. 

I'll be honest with you. The only period I've really been defensive of Punk was for a good bit after he walked out, b/c the negativity surrounding him on here was getting to me. And I admit that. But even then, I was mostly arguing with posts that claimed that he was of no value to the company or that he never made any impact, not posts that discussed ratings. I mean, I may have made a few remarks here and there, but nothing more than that. 



> Yeah, I wouldn't want that shoe to fit me either. :


So mature, I see. I could call you a "Bryantard" but I don't exactly wish to look like a massive numpty. Please keep the playground insults out of this. 



Tardbasher12 said:


> So do you want me to start searching for your previous posts and prove that what I've quoted from you is completely ironic or not? And that bolded portion is a completely subjective statement, perhaps even theoretical, as you have no proof of my post being "nothing of value," to someone else. But, back to the main point, do you want me to search for some of your multi-paragraph, 100% serious arguments or not?


No, I don't. I already admitted that I'm not entirely blameless and that I was pretty annoyed at times when it came to what I felt was blind hate towards Punk. No need to "prove" that. I was just dropping my two cents in terms of this thread and what I've seen in here. Some of the arguments in here are far more lengthy than anything else I've seen on this forum.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

were aree the ratnigs


----------



## Happenstan

RFWHC said:


> Erm... no. When did they come in? I honestly don't remember. If it was this spring, I might have written a few sentences or so acknowledging Punk, even though I doubt that was even the case. If it was during the fall, I really, really doubt it b/c I rarely ever talk about ratings on this forum. I enjoy wrestling, not fucking viewer statistics and PPV buy numbers.


It was the end of 2013-ish and you were still using Rhodes for WHC user name at the time I believe. You and your fellow Punk fans were pissy that Bryan was going all Anti-Authority when that was supposed to be Punk's birthright. :lmao




RFWHC said:


> So mature, I see. I could call you a "Bryantard" but I don't exactly wish to look like a massive numpty. Please keep the playground insults out of this.


That sounds about right. Stealing something from your betters and failing miserably at it....just like Punk.


----------



## Gretchen

> lol @ the people already laughing despite the fact that one can't really blame one person or another for these numbers. SummerSlam not only had Bryan VS Cena, but also Brock VS Punk. Last year's SummerSlam wasn't so heavily centered around Bryan, but Cena wasn't in the Main Event slot, either. So one can't really place all the blame on Bryan, when Lesnar, Punk, and Cena were also focal points of the PPV. It's uncertain that DB is to blame here. It's unknown whether fans' interest had waned in Lesnar from the previous year, as well. Can't tell for sure.
> 
> NOC was worse in terms of buyrates b/c it was painfully clear it would be awful. From the start to the end of the small build-up to it, it was clear that it would suck.
> 
> Glad to see MITB climbing in buys. It's a PPV that consistently impresses.


Ok, I just found this. So yeah, like I said I defended Punk on this occasion. But this is a rarity and I'm fairly certain I didn't make many more posts than defending him from the blind hate I already claimed to do for a bit after he walked out.

EDIT: This was in late February after he walked out.


----------



## O Fenômeno

RabidCrow said:


> It could be false, it could be true.. I dont pay much attention to this because like i said.. This doesn't proves nothing. Lol.. Evidence? Where?
> 
> At the end, you know that a bunch of Bryan marks love to start threads just to talk about Cm Punk.
> This is embarrassing and show the obsession from you over somebody that isn't even in the company
> Almost every Punk mark here doesn't give a fuck about Daniel Bryan..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :maury
> We still talking about Daniel Bryan!? Daniel Bryan?
> *
> Do you really, seriously. Be honest man.. Dou you really thing that Bryan is better than anybody?
> At least Hardy have the unique look and charisma and he didn't need a shitty catchphrases to get over... Assuming that i'm a big fan.. Something that's totally false.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, this is all what you need to do, when people have nothing to say, they just shut the fuck up.


:maury

Poor kid doesn't know what charisma means...

*cha·ris·ma
noun \kə-ˈriz-mə\

: a special charm or appeal that causes people to feel attracted and excited by someone (such as a politican)
Full Definition of CHARISMA
1
: a personal magic of leadership arousing special popular loyalty or enthusiasm for a public figure (as a political leader)
2
: a special magnetic charm or appeal <the charisma of a popular actor>
See charisma defined for English-language learners »
See charisma defined for kids »*

Bryan has no unique look? Really? His whole appearance is something that even the clowns on this forum talk about...him not looking like some typical roided up Hulk is a unique look kid.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

O Fenômeno said:


> Bryan has no unique look? Really? His whole appearance is something that even the clowns on this forum talk about...*him not looking like some typical roided up Hulk is a unique look kid*.


Not when it describes half the damn roster.


----------



## #Mark

RabidCrow said:


> It could be false, it could be true.. I dont pay much attention to this because like i said.. This doesn't proves nothing. Lol.. Evidence? Where?
> 
> At the end, you know that a bunch of Bryan marks love to start threads just to talk about Cm Punk.
> This is embarrassing and show the obsession from you over somebody that isn't even in the company
> Almost every Punk mark here doesn't give a fuck about Daniel Bryan..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :maury
> We still talking about Daniel Bryan!? Daniel Bryan?
> 
> Do you really, seriously. Be honest man.. Dou you really thing that Bryan is better than anybody?
> At least Hardy have the unique look and charisma and he didn't need a shitty catchphrases to get over... Assuming that i'm a big fan.. Something that's totally false.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, this is all what you need to do, when people have nothing to say, they just shut the fuck up.


Yeah, Bryan is definitely better than that drugged spot monkey and the sloppy, long-winded promo, 2.2 rating Punk from Chicago. Judging by the metrics, I'm sure the vast majority of the WWE's audience would agree. So continue being mad that Bryan headlined the most successful Mania of all time while Hardy wastes away at TNA playing some shitty character and Punk sulks at home.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Cobalt said:


> *Exactly, what argument.* Him responding to my thoughts in anyway would be an argument, hence why he opted for the cheap way out as he had nothing constructive (as per usual) to bring to the table.


You just got done claiming it was an argument. Now it suddenly never happened? Please, make up your mind. 



RabidCrow said:


> It could be false, it could be true.. I dont pay much attention to this because like i said.. This doesn't proves nothing.


What?? Do you not understand how this works? If A proves that B is true, then B is true. There's absolutely no way around it. And it literally proves everything when it corrects the statement that you're TRYING TO PROVE IS WRONG. You're basically telling me that you're starting a random argument just to deny everything and ignore any of the evidence that's presented to you. So why the hell should any of us even take you seriously from this point on? 



RabidCrow said:


> Lol.. Evidence? Where?


Why don't you try reading...or even do a simple google search. 



RabidCrow said:


> At the end, you know that a bunch of Bryan marks love to start threads just to talk about Cm Punk.


I haven't seen a single Daniel Bryan mark make a thread to talk about Cm Punk in at least three weeks. And it could easily be longer than that. 



RabidCrow said:


> This is embarrassing and show the obsession from *you* over somebody that isn't even in the company


From me? When have I made any thread about Cm Punk since he has left where I talked about him in a negative (or positive) way apart from his interview? Don't try to classify me with the imaginary people that you claim are doing this. It just gives us a reason to not take you seriously. And quite frankly, and I hate to throw your own words back at you (well actually I don't but that's besides the point), it's pretty embarrassing. Most people are at least aware of how ridiculous they sound. Somehow that part of the game has flown right past you. 



RabidCrow said:


> Almost every Punk mark here doesn't give a fuck about Daniel Bryan..


LOL absolute bullshit. Don't even try to ponder that crap onto any of us and expect us to actually believe you. We already know Sonnen Says cares about him (as evidence by his posts), we know Colbat cares about him, the thing you seem to somehow have a difficult time understanding is that most Cm Punk fans are Daniel Bryan fans. And most Daniel Bryan fans are Cm Punk fans as well. There's a reason for that. So don't give me that "Punk marks don't care about Bryan" bullshit in an idiotic attempt to make Bryan marks look like obsessive children who denounce anyone who praises anyone other than Bryan. It's insulting to everyone's intelligence. 



RabidCrow said:


> :maury
> We still talking about Daniel Bryan!? Daniel Bryan?


You made this about Daniel Bryan. So of course people responding to points that correlate with your posts are going to be about Daniel Bryan. It's fucking common sense 101. 



RabidCrow said:


> Do you really, seriously. Be honest man.. Dou you really thing that Bryan is better than anybody?
> At least Hardy have the unique look and charisma and he didn't need a shitty catchphrases to get over...


Just stop already. You can throw out any excuses you want and any obvious bullshit like Bryan needing a catchphrase to get over (which he didn't), but in any real world with logic and reasoning, Daniel Bryan is better than Jeff Hardy and it's not even close. The only thing Hardy even comes close to Bryan in is charisma, and Bryan has proven himself to be almost as good, if not better than Hardy in that department.

In mic work Daniel Bryan flat out wins. 

In the ring, it's one of the most incredibly one sided comparisons in history. Daniel Bryan easily wins with just his fucking left leg alone. 



RabidCrow said:


> Yeah, this is all what you need to do, when people have nothing to say, they just shut the fuck up.


Oh please, that post has more logic and meaning to it than anything you've posted in this thread so far. Wanna prove me wrong? Then fucking do it already and stop posting idiotic bullshit.



#Mark said:


> Yeah, Bryan is definitely better than that drugged spot monkey and the sloppy, long-winded promo, 2.2 rating Punk from Chicago. Judging by the metrics, I'm sure the vast majority of the WWE's audience would agree. So continue being mad that Bryan headlined the most successful Mania of all time while Hardy wastes away at TNA playing some shitty character and Punk sulks at home.


I love Bryan more...but

Punk>Bryan imho.


----------



## O Fenômeno

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> Not when it describes half the damn roster.


Fair enough, bama

However WWE plays on Bryan's look though,and his beard. As far a typical WWE champion I would say YES...he does look unique.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

RFWHC said:


> I'm a sensitive Punk mark.


:jordan


----------



## MaybeLock

Damn, Punk and Bryan have left a mark in this forum that will last forever. They will retire and Punk Bryan mark wars still will be a thing :ti 

Also, TheGMofGods is back with his long ass posts. :mark: People with a 56kbps modem, you are warned. :


----------



## Chrome

IDONTSHIV said:


> He's gonna have to change his name to *asphalt* because you just steamrolled his ass.:clap


I prefer *assfault.* Obviously misspelled, but way funnier.


----------



## WWE

Is it too late to join this fiasco?


----------



## RabidCrow

#Mark said:


> Yeah, Bryan is definitely better than that drugged spot monkey and the sloppy, long-winded promo, 2.2 rating Punk from Chicago. Judging by the metrics, I'm sure the vast majority of the WWE's audience would agree. So continue being mad that Bryan headlined the most successful Mania of all time while Hardy wastes away at TNA playing some shitty character and Punk sulks at home.


:tii :tii The audience would agree? You're the only fucking retarded troll in the planet that could post something so rediculous.

Punk is better than Bryan in almost everything, everybody knows that, even you. His "sloppy" work put 3 MOTY candidates, yeah.. Even burned, injured and lacking of mobility his game was above Daniel Brya (that's supossed to be in his prime)

His "long and boring" promos are consider top 5 of all time, muuuuuch better than your fucking "Oh, lizten do dis people!" :lol. Who fucking cares if Raw drew 2.5 or 8.6 while he was champion? He did more money to Vince Mcmahon that year that Daniel Bryan ever. This fucking gnomo make him lose 340 millions in one day. :lol

As for Jeff Hardy, the guy is incredibly hated here, but i'm sure a lot of people here would agree that he still much more charismatic and has much more personality than Daniel Bryan.
Mic work? Both sucks tbh. unk2

Just stop trolling, you're embarrassing yourself and the rest of the D Bryan mark in this forum.





O Fenômeno said:


> :maury
> 
> Poor kid doesn't know what charisma means...
> 
> *cha·ris·ma
> noun \kə-ˈriz-mə\
> 
> : a special charm or appeal that causes people to feel attracted and excited by someone (such as a politican)
> Full Definition of CHARISMA
> 1
> : a personal magic of leadership arousing special popular loyalty or enthusiasm for a public figure (as a political leader)
> 2
> : a special magnetic charm or appeal <the charisma of a popular actor>
> See charisma defined for English-language learners »
> See charisma defined for kids »*
> 
> Bryan has no unique look? Really? His whole appearance is something that even the clowns on this forum talk about...him not looking like some typical roided up Hulk is a unique look kid.




You post this paragraph without even analyze it.. Why do you think Bryan is charismatic? Because a lot of folks in the crowd loves to rise up and chanting yes? :kobe

He looks like a fucking small old tramp or like a nerd without the beard. I don't refer to this exactly as "unique look". Hardy is one of those guy that make you follow him and mark for him only to looking him, he's for sure, authentically charismatic. Daniel Bryan isn't. 

In other aspect, Bryan can eat and spit Hardy in the ring, no one won't deny that.. But again, i dont even know why we are talking about Jeff Hardy..

I would respond to other guy.. "TheGMofGods"... Maybe, some day.. I don't know, i got lazy.


----------



## WWE

Bryan can't draw tho

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Happenstan

Parker said:


> Bryan can't draw tho
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Well let's see...

Highest rated segments on RAW each week Pre-Injury: Daniel Bryan
Post Injury: Daniel Bryan and Shield
Most watched Wrestlemania in History headlined by and showcased: Daniel Bryan

If that is the definition of "can't draw", I feel bad for everyone else.


----------



## Londrick

RFWHC said:


> :ti
> 
> This thread is so pathetic. And before the DB marks get all wound up and accuse me of "being mad" b/c that's seemingly the go to thing to say in here for those with dissenting opinions, I'm making a casual observation. Have no interest in joining in on the conversation. I do happen to be of the opinion that this bickering and competition among wrestling fans is rather pathetic.
> 
> "Oh look at me, my guy drew better ratings than yours last week!!!1111"
> 
> "Well, mine is responsible for more PPV buys than yours ever was!!!111"
> 
> It's wrestling. Scripted fighting. I mean, come on. I've been in a few heated arguments on here when defending someone or something, so I'm not entirely blameless, but this thread is rather pathetic, tbh. And I understand this is pretty much the one thread in here where trolling isn't just allowed, even encouraged, but reading through some of the most recent pages... fpalm.
> 
> Please don't be offended Tardbasher, NastyYaffa, Happenstan, etc, I certainly wouldn't like to be subject to your usual circle jerk "argument" that's so typical to this thread, so I'll stop. I'm not arguing in favor of Bryan or Punk. I just don't get why some of you take this so seriously, having multi-paragraph arguments pertaining to ratings.
> 
> I would like to add that "Punktard" is among the more cringeworthy insults I've come across on here. unk2


Would it be better if Bryan marks instead got mad at a couple randoms on youtube making fun of them?


----------



## Born of Osiris

Londrick said:


> Would it be better if Bryan marks instead got mad at a couple randoms on youtube making fun of them?


Off topic but Eva looks 10x better with black hair than red :ex:


----------



## Cobalt

Choke2Death said:


> Really? I even managed to find that post with a quick google search. I remembered it pretty well because other than Punk and Bryan, everybody you had on your list was also on my top 10 from the same thread.


LMAO, ok wow. Seeing as you know so much and obviously like to have a good stalk, when did I post that? And I'm pretty sure it was before Mania, anyways times have changed and he certainly ain't in the top 10 anymore. Times change and things change, oh well. Like it's been documented my dislike for him became much more apparent after Mania 30.




Happenstan said:


> :bow:bow:bow:bow:bow
> 
> Perfect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you're clearly as drugged out of your skull as Hardy.


Yea, thanks for your input man. Atleast he actually got me unlike you, you've been trying to rip on me for the past year and haven't, atleast his good at it unlike you. 

And can't say I am surprised to see you jump on his cock, good old Happenstan living up to his usually low standards.



#BadNewsSanta said:


> Well, it looks like (due to a lack of response) that Cobalt just got choked to death!
> 
> ...
> 
> ...
> 
> ...
> *cricket*


Unlike many on here I am not from the US and am from Australia, also I have better things to do then to live on this forum conversing with morons hence why the response has taken a while, but yea I am so upset over it all, wow.


----------



## Happenstan

Cobalt said:


> Yea, thanks for your input man. Atleast he actually got me unlike you, you've been trying to rip on me for the past year and haven't, atleast his good at it unlike you.


First you stalk me all over the forum now you pull out the old divide and conquer routine. So sad ASSphalt. So sad.


----------



## WWE

Happenstan said:


> Well let's see...
> 
> Highest rated segments on RAW each week Pre-Injury: Daniel Bryan
> Post Injury: Daniel Bryan and Shield
> Most watched Wrestlemania in History headlined by and showcased: Daniel Bryan
> 
> If that is the definition of "can't draw", I feel bad for everyone else.


But he can't draw tho

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Cobalt

Happenstan said:


> First you stalk me all over the forum now you pull out the old divide and conquer routine. So sad ASSphalt. So sad.


:banderas Stalk you? Seriously? If only you were so lucky. How the fuck is that stalking? You quoted me like you do in every other thread and I responded to you, you wish I stalked, but unfortunately for you I have better things to do. "Stalking" my oh my I have heard it all from you. fpalm

"Assphalt", awesome, that's one of your best....... oh wait you didn't even think of it. :clap:clap


----------



## CHIcagoMade

Cobalt! If you post in this thread one more time, I will beat your ass.


----------



## Cobalt

CHIcagoMade said:


> Cobalt! If you post in this thread one more time, I will beat your ass.


Sorry, what was that?


----------



## #Mark

RabidCrow said:


> :tii :tii The audience would agree? You're the only fucking retarded troll in the planet that could post something so rediculous.
> 
> Punk is better than Bryan in almost everything, everybody knows that, even you. His "sloppy" work put 3 MOTY candidates, yeah.. Even burned, injured and lacking of mobility his game was above Daniel Brya (that's supossed to be in his prime)
> 
> His "long and boring" promos are consider top 5 of all time, muuuuuch better than your fucking "Oh, lizten do dis people!" :lol. Who fucking cares if Raw drew 2.5 or 8.6 while he was champion? He did more money to Vince Mcmahon that year that Daniel Bryan ever. This fucking gnomo make him lose 340 millions in one day. :lol
> 
> As for Jeff Hardy, the guy is incredibly hated here, but i'm sure a lot of people here would agree that he still much more charismatic and has much more personality than Daniel Bryan.
> Mic work? Both sucks tbh. unk2
> 
> Just stop trolling, you're embarrassing yourself and the rest of the D Bryan mark in this forum.


Ahhh, I do feel a little bad arguing with someone who clearly has some sort of mental deficiency but this mind-numbingly dumb post can not be ignored. The metrics, you know ratings and buyrates, prove just how little the WWE's mainstream audience cared for CM Punk. The guy was losing hundreds of thousands of viewers during the peak of his push. Your lord and savior had people actively changing the channel whenever he would appear on screen. Punk was responsible for the lowest quarter since 1997 :lmao. Compare that to Bryan who would top the night on a consistent basis during the height of his push. That's why Bryan headlined Wrestlemania during the first year of his push while Punk had real stars like Cena, Rock and even the Miz headline over Punk all three years he was on "top". I don't even have to address crowd reactions. Remember, the last image of Punk in the WWE is him layed out through a table while the entire audience chants for Bryan. Of course, you shouldn't expect Punk to get any type of crowd reaction as loud as Bryan does when he isn't in his hometown. He simply doesn't have the natural charisma that Bryan does.

You bring up Vince losing 350 mill this year, okay, I can also bring up the fact that during Bryan's run as the top babyface the stock it hits *highest* point and Vince became a billionaire again for the first time in 15 years. Only a fool would attribute either of them to Bryan exclusively but i'm willing to turn my brain off for the sake of this argument. 

I'm not sure if I should address Jeff Hardy but that's low hanging fruit so I might as well. I don't even hate Hardy and did like him during the AE but if you honestly think Jeff Hardy is better than Bryan at any facet of pro wrestling then I must have underestimated how retarded you truly are. Wearing colorful outfits and armbands doesn't make you charismatic but a wrestler getting over enough to the point where an entire crowd turns on the Royal freaking Rumble because he wasn't in it is the literal definition of charisma.


----------



## Cohle

Not going to read but what's this all about? Punk marks calling out Bryan marks because he doesn't draw shit? Bryan marks calling out Punk marks because he didn't drew shit during his reign of terror? They're not draws, they didn't changed this business like a Bruno, Hogan, Rock, Austin, Savage, Warrior, Undertaker, Andre, Sting, Hall, Nash or any all time great did so it's pointless to talk about them being ratings draws when the ratings decrease year by year. The wrestlers that i mentioned didn't had to rely on breaking kayfabe and calling other wrestlers by their real name or throwing their fingers in the air and act like fucking retards chanting that fucking retarded word. The crowds these days are retarded, 50 year old mens throwing fingers in the air? Seriously? No wonder that wrestling has fallen that bad, isn't main stream anymore and if you talk about it or have a wrestling shirt on the street people will look at you and say that you're a twit. 



Happenstan said:


> Well let's see...
> 
> Highest rated segments on RAW each week Pre-Injury: Daniel Bryan
> Post Injury: Daniel Bryan and Shield
> Most watched Wrestlemania in History headlined by and showcased: Daniel Bryan
> 
> If that is the definition of "can't draw", I feel bad for everyone else.


Most watched WrestleMania in history because of D-Bryan :maury. There was a guy when the WrestleMania buys came out that exposed you marks and crashed the YES party in that thread. This was nowhere near the most watched WM in history with the Network there. There were many people that didn't trust how the Network would run during the show and ordered on PPV because of fear of crashing. And it's not like being the 30th anniversary, Hogan as host, Austin, Rock, Undertaker, Lesnar and Cena had anything to do with it being "the most watched WM in history" no?


----------



## WWE

Can someone make me some popcorn

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Tardbasher12

Londrick said:


> Would it be better if Bryan marks instead got mad at a couple randoms on youtube making fun of them?


----------



## Gretchen

Londrick said:


> Would it be better if Bryan marks instead got mad at a couple randoms on youtube making fun of them?


Lots of salt over a casual aside, I see. Can't say the anything negative about this thread otherwise the usual deviants will get their panties in a bunch. Guess I must have hit hard if you had to resort to this weak cliche. :banderas 

I'm out, would rather actually discuss wrestling instead of spending hours "dissing marks" and bragging about numbers. But I do know it's guaranteed I'll get at least another weak response for this post. :mark:


----------



## Choke2Death

Cobalt said:


> LMAO, ok wow. Seeing as you know so much and obviously like to have a good stalk, when did I post that? And I'm pretty sure it was before Mania, anyways times have changed and he certainly ain't in the top 10 anymore. Times change and things change, oh well. Like it's been documented my dislike for him became much more apparent after Mania 30.


Stalk? Lol, I just remember things pretty well and it wasn't even that long ago. I don't even have a problem with you as I've said numerous times that you seem to be one of the better Punk marks in this site. It's just your completely negative, anti-Bryan attitude that seemingly came out of nowhere after WM30 caught me off-guard so I had to bring that up.

You can check the date for that post by clicking the red button next to the username in the quote.


----------



## NastyYaffa

Choke2Death said:


> Stalk? Lol, I just remember things pretty well and it wasn't even that long ago. I don't even have a problem with you as I've said numerous times that you seem to be one of the better Punk marks in this site. It's just your completely negative, anti-Bryan attitude that seemingly came out of nowhere after WM30 caught me off-guard so I had to bring that up.


Many Punk fangirls turned on Bryan after WM, because they are simply just jealous of his success. Doesn't surprise me at all :duck


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Chicago > Aberdeen, Washington
AJ Lee > Brie Bella
Above average height skinny-fatness > Mexican lettuce picker sized skinny-fatness
Punks shitty fake MMA kicks > Bryans shitty fake MMA kicks

CM "Phil Brooks" Punk > Broken Neckson


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

I think everyone ITT needs a cute nickname :mark:

Happenstan - CRAPenstan

THANOS - uhhhhh....I'll come back to this one later

IDONTSHIV - IDONTSHOWER

Tardbasher12 - Balderdasher420

RFWHC - Chodes 4 Turd Scantyweight Crampion Codyrhodessucks

TheGMofGods - TheBMofClods

CHIcagoMade - ChicagoMaid (he is a Dominican woman)

Starbuck - Barslut, Starfucker, Ahabs Bitch (BMofClods will get that one)

THANOS - CRAPenstan


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> I think everyone ITT needs a cute nickname :mark:
> 
> Happenstan - CRAPenstan
> 
> THANOS - uhhhhh....I'll come back to this one later
> 
> IDONTSHIV - IDONTSHOWER
> 
> Tardbasher12 - Balderdasher420
> 
> RFWHC - Chodes 4 Turd Scantyweight Crampion Codyrhodessucks
> 
> TheGMofGods - TheBMofClods
> 
> CHIcagoMade - ChicagoMaid (he is a Dominican woman)
> 
> Starbuck - Barslut, Starfucker, Ahabs Bitch (BMofClods will get that one)
> 
> THANOS - CRAPenstan



Idontshower is pretty good.

How about Anthonymichaelshallow or the more lascivious anthonymichaelswallows.


----------



## Happenstan

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> I think everyone ITT needs a cute nickname :mark:
> 
> Happenstan - CRAPenstan
> 
> THANOS - uhhhhh....I'll come back to this one later
> 
> IDONTSHIV - IDONTSHOWER
> 
> Tardbasher12 - Balderdasher420
> 
> RFWHC - Chodes 4 Turd Scantyweight Crampion Codyrhodessucks
> 
> TheGMofGods - TheBMofClods
> 
> CHIcagoMade - ChicagoMaid (he is a Dominican woman)
> 
> Starbuck - Barslut, Starfucker, Ahabs Bitch (BMofClods will get that one)
> 
> THANOS - CRAPenstan



Dammit. How did you figure out I was Thanos? It was such a cleverly designed mult too.


----------



## RabidCrow

#Mark said:


> Ahhh, I do feel a little bad arguing with someone who clearly has some sort of mental deficiency but this mind-numbingly dumb post can not be ignored. The metrics, you know ratings and buyrates, prove just how little the WWE's mainstream audience cared for CM Punk. The guy was losing hundreds of thousands of viewers during the peak of his push. Your lord and savior had people actively changing the channel whenever he would appear on screen. Punk was responsible for the lowest quarter since 1997 :lmao. Compare that to Bryan who would top the night on a consistent basis during the height of his push. That's why Bryan headlined Wrestlemania during the first year of his push while Punk had real stars like Cena, Rock and even the Miz headline over Punk all three years he was on "top". I don't even have to address crowd reactions. Remember, the last image of Punk in the WWE is him layed out through a table while the entire audience chants for Bryan. Of course, you shouldn't expect Punk to get any type of crowd reaction as loud as Bryan does when he isn't in his hometown. He simply doesn't have the natural charisma that Bryan does.
> 
> You bring up Vince losing 350 mill this year, okay, I can also bring up the fact that during Bryan's run as the top babyface the stock it hits *highest* point and Vince became a billionaire again for the first time in 15 years. Only a fool would attribute either of them to Bryan exclusively but i'm willing to turn my brain off for the sake of this argument.
> 
> I'm not sure if I should address Jeff Hardy but that's low hanging fruit so I might as well. I don't even hate Hardy and did like him during the AE but if you honestly think Jeff Hardy is better than Bryan at any facet of pro wrestling then I must have underestimated how retarded you truly are. Wearing colorful outfits and armbands doesn't make you charismatic but a wrestler getting over enough to the point where an entire crowd turns on the Royal freaking Rumble because he wasn't in it is the literal definition of charisma.


Do you still responding? :lol
Your opinions have no value, you don't have any credibility here, you're probably the most delusional and stupid Bryan in this site, you can't even accept the facts that your boy isn't enough talented and you just can't avoid to fall in the abysm to contradict yourself. :lol
You're enough biased to attribute all the low ratings that Raw got in 2012 to Cm Punk and all the success that WM and the post-WM had to Daniel Bryan, (even when you know that the network plays the most here), but is not fair to you that someone brings the fact that the company *lost more millions than ever during his title reign.* unk2 

Obviously, no one will say that he's the reason of why the stock was at the highest point, he wasn't even in the title picture back then,so it would be totally fucking incoherent. 

Punk's title reign did pretty well overall in terms of PPV buyrates and he's already proved, because unlike Bryan his title reigns surpassed the one month. :lol Also Punk's merch was top seller, at some point surpassing even John Cena, his brand still top selling even when he's not in the company, something that Daniel Bryan isn't capable to do, even with his "yes movement" bullshit. Vince knows that Punk worth much more money than your hairy gnomo, the fact that guys like him or the miz main event Wrestlemania over Cm Punk is just an unfortunate coincidence, and you know that.

Lol You're the same guy that said that Daniel has more charisma in his pinky than Punk and Cesaro. You don't know a shit about charisma, dude :lol Seriously, GTFO.


----------



## THANOS

Happenstan said:


> Dammit. How did you figure out I was Thanos? It was such a cleverly designed mult too.


:lmao :lmao

As far as nicknames for me go? The Mad Titan, Ruler of the Universe, or God, will do just fine .


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

THANOS said:


> :lmao :lmao
> 
> As far as nicknames for me go? The Mad Titan, Ruler of the Universe, or God, will do just fine .


Actual footage of Thanos being outed here today:


----------



## Born of Osiris

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> I think everyone ITT needs a cute nickname :mark:
> 
> Happenstan - CRAPenstan
> 
> THANOS - uhhhhh....I'll come back to this one later
> 
> IDONTSHIV - IDONTSHOWER
> 
> Tardbasher12 - Balderdasher420
> 
> RFWHC - Chodes 4 Turd Scantyweight Crampion Codyrhodessucks
> 
> TheGMofGods - TheBMofClods
> 
> CHIcagoMade - ChicagoMaid (he is a Dominican woman)
> 
> Starbuck - Barslut, Starfucker, Ahabs Bitch (BMofClods will get that one)
> 
> THANOS - CRAPenstan


What about me brah :kobe I know I'm a jobber in this thread compared to others but still :side:


----------



## funnyfaces1

AnthonyMichaelHall has filled in the void left by Billion Dollar Man so well.


----------



## Cobalt

Choke2Death said:


> Stalk? Lol, I just remember things pretty well and it wasn't even that long ago. I don't even have a problem with you as I've said numerous times that you seem to be one of the better Punk marks in this site. It's just your completely negative, anti-Bryan attitude that seemingly came out of nowhere after WM30 caught me off-guard so I had to bring that up.
> 
> You can check the date for that post by clicking the red button next to the username in the quote.


Fair enough, and I respect that. I try to be as non "delusional" as possible but like you have said the hate has come out of no where? Not so much, I'm sick of every thread these days being ruined by fucking twats (not you) more the Bryan marks going on like he is the greatest wrestler to ever grace the ring and in the middle of it shit on Punk and Punk fans with their usual drawings and ratings shit.

I don't give a fuck about ratings, I watch what I watch because it appeals to me, I honestly do not care about others opinions on what I like because then we would all have to be the same.

My hate for Bryan has come more to the floor since his marks which are undoubtedly on their way to being as fucked up as us Punk marks is becoming more and more evident.

Every thread it happens in, and it's the same narcissistic idiots who carry on like what they say is truth and gospel. Good, you read the ratings and care but many others don't.

Anyways, I've got my point across, this place is becoming horrendous to post on. Forget about having some civilized conversations anymore, cause it'll come down to if your guy draws or not. Great! fpalm


----------



## JamesK

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> I think everyone ITT needs a cute nickname :mark:
> 
> Happenstan - CRAPenstan
> 
> THANOS - uhhhhh....I'll come back to this one later
> 
> IDONTSHIV - IDONTSHOWER
> 
> Tardbasher12 - Balderdasher420
> 
> RFWHC - Chodes 4 Turd Scantyweight Crampion Codyrhodessucks
> 
> TheGMofGods - TheBMofClods
> 
> CHIcagoMade - ChicagoMaid (he is a Dominican woman)
> 
> Starbuck - Barslut, Starfucker, Ahabs Bitch (BMofClods will get that one)
> 
> THANOS - CRAPenstan


Calm your titties you little wannabe troll


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

RabidCrow said:


> :tii :tii The audience would agree? You're the only fucking retarded troll in the planet that could post something so rediculous.


No sane person thinks that Jeff Hardy is better than Daniel Bryan apart from marks. 



RabidCrow said:


> Punk is better than Bryan in almost everything, everybody knows that, even you. His "sloppy" work put 3 MOTY candidates, yeah.. Even burned, injured and lacking of mobility his game was above Daniel Brya (that's supossed to be in his prime)


Bryan>Punk in the ring and it's not even close. And I'm almost certain Punk himself has admitted this. 



RabidCrow said:


> This fucking gnomo make him lose 340 millions in one day. :lol


Um, no he didn't. Where the hell do you get your facts from, wikipedia?



RabidCrow said:


> As for Jeff Hardy, the guy is incredibly hated here, but i'm sure a lot of people here would agree that he still much more charismatic and has much more personality than Daniel Bryan.


Bryan>Hardy in the charisma department. Bryan actually knows Pro Wrestling so well that he found a way to get over. Hardy was the product of a gimmick given to him and he took advantage of it. Bryan is more over than Hardy ever was.

And Bryan is still better than him in the ring and on the mic.

So, Bryan>Hardy.



RabidCrow said:


> Just stop trolling, you're embarrassing yourself and the rest of the D Bryan mark in this forum.


The only person embarrassing themselves here is you because you're the only person here who thinks that anything he's saying right now is making sense. You aren't even comprehending how incredibly idiotic the things you are saying sound. 



RabidCrow said:


> You post this paragraph without even analyze it.. Why do you think Bryan is charismatic? Because a lot of folks in the crowd loves to rise up and chanting yes? :kobe


Did you even read what he posted?



RabidCrow said:


> He looks like a fucking small old tramp or like a nerd without the beard. I don't refer to this exactly as "unique look". Hardy is one of those guy that make you follow him and mark for him only to looking him, he's for sure, authentically charismatic. Daniel Bryan isn't.


Bryan isn't authentically charismatic and yet the things you just said to describe what Jeff Hardy does is exactly what Daniel Bryan does, only much better. So you're full of shit. 



RabidCrow said:


> In other aspect, Bryan can eat and spit Hardy in the ring, no one won't deny that.. But again, i dont even know why we are talking about Jeff Hardy..


Weren't you the one who brought him up? 



RabidCrow said:


> I would respond to other guy.. "TheGMofGods"... Maybe, some day.. I don't know, i got lazy.


Which is sign language for "I have no argument".


----------



## Gretchen

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> I think everyone ITT needs a cute nickname :mark:
> 
> Happenstan - CRAPenstan
> 
> THANOS - uhhhhh....I'll come back to this one later
> 
> IDONTSHIV - IDONTSHOWER
> 
> Tardbasher12 - Balderdasher420
> 
> RFWHC - Chodes 4 Turd Scantyweight Crampion Codyrhodessucks
> 
> TheGMofGods - TheBMofClods
> 
> CHIcagoMade - ChicagoMaid (he is a Dominican woman)
> 
> Starbuck - Barslut, Starfucker, Ahabs Bitch (BMofClods will get that one)
> 
> THANOS - CRAPenstan


Credit to AnthonyMichaelHall for being the only troll on this website I find entertaining.


----------



## RabidCrow

TheGMofGods said:


> No sane person thinks that Jeff Hardy is better than Daniel Bryan apart from marks.


No sane person thinks Jeff Hardy is better than Bryan in the ring, but any smart person would agree that he's much more charismatic and he was more entertaining to watch on his prime.


> Bryan>Punk in the ring and it's not even close. And I'm almost certain Punk himself has admitted this.


Bryan being SLIGHTLY better than Punk in the ring is something really debatable. He may be better technician and definitely is more athletic, but Punk has a better psychology, selling ability and in my opinion, a better and complete moveset.



> Um, no he didn't. Where the hell do you get your facts from, wikipedia?





> *-WWE CEO Vince McMahon Loses $350 Million, A Third Of His Fortune, In A Day*





> *The WWE Network hasn't reached the number of subscribers that the company had estimated*


Source: PWtorch.
There are great losses for Vince Mcmahon in the last months that resulted in a massive release of superstars like Evan Bourne, Drew Mcntyre, , Aksa, Curt Hawkins, JTG, etc.

All this things are facts that happened during the "age of GOAT-face" 
Maybe the wwe audience isn't so interested in him as you his marks claims to be. 



> Bryan>Hardy in the charisma department. Bryan actually knows Pro Wrestling so well that he found a way to get over. Hardy was the product of a gimmick given to him and he took advantage of it. Bryan is more over than Hardy ever was.
> 
> And Bryan is still better than him in the ring and on the mic.
> 
> So, Bryan>Hardy.


Jeff Hardy overness is attributed to his natural aura and charisma, since day one, with the Hardy boyz he was considerably over, unlike Daniel Bryan, that got an insane increase in the crowd reactions only after start with his catchphrase. Like you said, he didn't found a way to be more charismatic, he found a way to have a better crowd connection.

Both are really bad in the mic work department, at least Hardy didn't look cheesy and bland in every promo. I would say that there's not really much difference between both.



> The only person embarrassing themselves here is you because you're the only person here who thinks that anything he's saying right now is making sense. You aren't even comprehending how incredibly idiotic the things you are saying sound.


:lol Okay.



> Did you even read what he posted?


Yes, i did.
Charisma =/= crowd connection.



> Bryan isn't authentically charismatic and yet the things you just said to describe what Jeff Hardy does is exactly what Daniel Bryan does, only much better. So you're full of shit.



What the hell are you talking about?



> Weren't you the one who brought him up?


Nope, read before you post.



#Mark said:


> I'm pretty sure dude marks for Jeff Hardy but he claims Bryan is bad on the mic :ti
> 
> It's easy to see why he dislikes him.. Bryan surpassed all of his favorites with ease.


Obviously this guy here have a serious problem with defend his arguments without unnecessarily bring other wrestlers to the discussion. :cool2
Funny is i'm not even a big fan of Jeff Hardy.



> Which is sign language for "I have no argument".


No, this is me telling you that your fucking long posts and your thousands multiquotes got me lazy. 
:bron4


----------



## funnyfaces1

Did somebody just say that Jeff Hardy didn't look cheesy in every promo?


----------



## WWE

Watch the ratings skyrocket next week now that Bryan is no longer champion


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

RabidCrow said:


> No sane person thinks Jeff Hardy is better than Bryan in the ring, but any smart person would agree that he's much more charismatic and he was more entertaining to watch on his prime.


No they wouldn't, because this is a matter of opinion. The fact you just said this tells us all you aren't a smart person by any means. And not to mention all you have to do is go to youtube to figure out that Daniel Bryan is more charismatic than Jeff Hardy ever was. The rate he's over at right now is bigger than Jeff Hardy ever was. 



RabidCrow said:


> Bryan being SLIGHTLY better than Punk in the ring is something really debatable. He may be better technician and definitely is more athletic, but Punk has a better psychology, selling ability and in my opinion, a better and complete moveset.


Bryan is a much better storyteller than Punk was, who was excellent in that category. That alone makes him a better in ring performer than Punk ever was.



RabidCrow said:


> Source: PWtorch.
> There are great losses for Vince Mcmahon in the last months that resulted in a massive release of superstars like Evan Bourne, Drew Mcntyre, , Aksa, Curt Hawkins, JTG, etc.
> 
> All this things are facts that happened during the "age of GOAT-face"
> Maybe the wwe audience isn't so interested in him as you his marks claims to be.


And none of them have anything to do with the product that's being put on display, or the amount of ratings or money Daniel Bryan has been drawing. So again I will ask you, where the hell did you get that bullshit from because what you just gave me doesn't tell us anything. It just tells us how fucking clueless you are. 



RabidCrow said:


> Jeff Hardy overness is attributed to his natural aura and charisma


...No it isn't. 



RabidCrow said:


> since day one, with the Hardy boyz he was considerably over, unlike Daniel Bryan, that got an insane increase in the crowd reactions only after start with his catchphrase. Like you said, he didn't found a way to be more charismatic, he found a way to have a better crowd connection.


That's what charisma is dude. This isn't that hard to figure out. You find ways to elect a response from a crowd. Daniel Bryan did this. But the thing is, that's only half the battle. If people don't give a shit about you or don't like you, they aren't going to chant along with you. People loved Daniel Bryan, and his 18 second loss to Sheamus is what ignited the yes phenomenon. Jeff Hardy jumped off of high places and kids and girls loved him while smarks absolutely despised him (you know, like that warm respective welcome he got from the ROH fans?)



RabidCrow said:


> Both are really bad in the mic work department, *at least Hardy didn't look cheesy and bland in every promo.* I would say that there's not really much difference between both.


:lmao :lmao what?!

And not only did he look that way, Jeff Hardy WAS cheesy and bland in each promo. And Bryan isn't bad on the mic by any means. He's not great, but he's certainly not bad. And even then, there's a pretty big difference. You're trying to compare Bryan to one of the worst mic workers in the history of Pro Wrestling. Think about that for a moment. 



RabidCrow said:


> Yes, i did.
> Charisma =/= crowd connection.


Good. You have now just contradicted yourself. 

"he didn't found a way to be more charismatic, he found a way to have a better crowd connection."

You're making this way too easy for me. 



RabidCrow said:


> What the hell are you talking about?


You were just saying that Daniel Bryan only got over because of something outside of his realm of ability. The same exact thing applied to Jeff Hardy, who, when he first started out, wasn't over at all, but once he and Matt became famous for their high risk offense, aka jumping off of high places, they got over at an incredible rate. And yet the yes chant was something Bryan himself thought of after watching a UFC fight, Hardy on the other hand was told to do this. 

It's not rocket science. 



RabidCrow said:


> Nope, read before you post.


I did and I'm pretty sure it was you.



RabidCrow said:


> No, this is me telling you that your fucking long posts and your thousands multiquotes got me lazy.
> :bron4


So you're saying you have no argument?


----------



## DoubtGin

Seriously does pwtorch only care about breakdowns if they show Bryan draws or is there a reason those don't get posted sometimes?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DoubtGin said:


> Seriously does pwtorch only care about breakdowns if they show Bryan draws or is there a reason those don't get posted sometimes?


Hm, maybe they only post breakdowns whenever Bryan does well. :cool2


----------



## #Mark

RabidCrow said:


> Do you still responding? :lol
> Your opinions have no value, you don't have any credibility here, you're probably the most delusional and stupid Bryan in this site, you can't even accept the facts that your boy isn't enough talented and you just can't avoid to fall in the abysm to contradict yourself. :lol
> You're enough biased to attribute all the low ratings that Raw got in 2012 to Cm Punk and all the success that WM and the post-WM had to Daniel Bryan, (even when you know that the network plays the most here), but is not fair to you that someone brings the fact that the company *lost more millions than ever during his title reign.* unk2
> 
> Obviously, no one will say that he's the reason of why the stock was at the highest point, he wasn't even in the title picture back then,so it would be totally fucking incoherent.
> 
> Punk's title reign did pretty well overall in terms of PPV buyrates and he's already proved, because unlike Bryan his title reigns surpassed the one month. :lol Also Punk's merch was top seller, at some point surpassing even John Cena, his brand still top selling even when he's not in the company, something that Daniel Bryan isn't capable to do, even with his "yes movement" bullshit. Vince knows that Punk worth much more money than your hairy gnomo, the fact that guys like him or the miz main event Wrestlemania over Cm Punk is just an unfortunate coincidence, and you know that.
> 
> Lol You're the same guy that said that Daniel has more charisma in his pinky than Punk and Cesaro. You don't know a shit about charisma, dude :lol Seriously, GTFO.


:ti

I have no credibility? Wow, that's rich coming from you. 

Of course i'm attributing the low ratings to Punk you dimwit, the ratings breakdown proves that the masses were turning the program off or changing the channel whenever Punk was on screen. Now, compare that to Bryan who was topping the night on a consistent basis during his big push and you'll see that Punk doesn't even compare to Bryan when it comes to ratings. As for merch, Bryan is second in merch sales behind Cena despite having merchandise that isn't aesthetically pleasing. Bryan also headlined a successful house show tour, something the WWE couldn't trust Punk to do. Punk's run produced successful PPV buyrates? How can you attribute that to Punk when he was in the midcard during his entire run :lmao That just proves how much Vince values Bryan over Punk. Bryan's first PPV title defense main evented against Kane with Batista, HHH, Randy Orton, and John Cena all in the mid-card while Punk couldn't even main event over John Laurinaitis. This shouldn't even be a discussion :lmao

Also, since you love to bring up Vince losing 350 million dollars (even though that has nothing to do with the on-screen product) i'll play along. The WWE's stock hit it's all time highest point and Vince became a billionaire again for the first time since the Attitude Era in mid-March during the thick of Bryan's feud with HHH, Batista, and Orton before Mania. Bryan was the top face at the time so by using your brain dead logic, Bryan was responsible for the surge in WWE's stock. Vince lost the 350 million dollars in mid-May, a week after Bryan announced his neck injury. So, Vince lost all that money right after Bryan announced his injury. According to you, Bryan is the biggest draw in WWE history  

Of course Bryan is more charismatic than Punk and Cesaro. Bryan has gotten deafening reactions all over the country while Punk only seems to be relevant in Chicago. If you could post some of Punk's reactions that compare to Bryan's outside of Chicago then maybe we'll have something to discuss but I understand those are few and far between so I wouldn't waste my time. Cesaro's a great worker but he doesn't have Bryan's charisma.


----------



## Dynamite madness

Daniel bryan is better than Jeff hardy But he Is One of the most talented Wrestlers i have ever seen, But don't undermine Jeff hardy's Ability in the Ring. Wrestling is not only Technical wrestling even though Jeff can do it, and good too. Daniel Bryan however Is not more charismatic. Jeff hardy is Nicknamed the Charismatic Enigma and not for no reason. Daniel Bryan is Insanely over but Not more than Jeff hardy. These two are The most over wrestlers since 2005 besides John Cena but Jeff takes the lead. Jeff did Something that Daniel Bryan could no do And that's Dominate John Cena in Merchendise.

Every wrestler gets over on something and Jeff hardy's was Being a Daredevil. It was like Mic Foley's Violence with Athleticism. Like A Kamikaze plane. It helped that he is one of the greatest Sellers of all time and made people think that he was hurt. Smarks hate everyone that makes it. In the late 90s and Early 00s, They called him the Next HBK and then he got lazy and The ROH fans Always loved out Smarking each other and Used his pre match comments about him losing his passion an Excuse to hate him. In Late 2007 and 2008, they were praising him for In ring work and the roll he was on. As soon as he became his own brand like Cena and became larger than life, they turned on him in a Second.

They were both cheesy and Average on Mic work, but they could rile a crowd up like nobody's business. Remember Daniel Bryan calling John cena a Parody or wrestling or Jeff hardy seeing the world in grey promo in 2008? Saying Jeff hardy is one of the worst is Criminal in a world of Scott Steiners. Just look at Willow, Anti christ of pro wrestling or his Fued with Edge and Cm punk.

Jeff was told to jump off ladders? Told? How in the Fuck Was he told? He was ALWAYS a Daredevil. That was just stupid. How does management come to you and say "Ummm. Jeff we need you to Jump off a ladder tonight."


----------



## TheStig

We have only seen m 18-49 breakdowns and sometimes nothing since october last year so theres not really a clear picture of the overall ratings breakdown. With a avg of maybe 1.5m(?) out of 4m+ there is alot of ppl not accounted for in your assements.


----------



## funnyfaces1

#Mark said:


> :ti
> 
> I have no credibility? Wow, that's rich coming from you.
> 
> Of course i'm attributing the low ratings to Punk you dimwit, the ratings breakdown proves that the masses were turning the program off or changing the channel whenever Punk was on screen. Now, compare that to Bryan who was topping the night on a consistent basis during his big push and you'll see that Punk doesn't even compare to Bryan when it comes to ratings. As for merch, Bryan is second in merch sales behind Cena despite having merchandise that isn't aesthetically pleasing. Bryan also headlined a successful house show tour, something the WWE couldn't trust Punk to do. Punk's run produced successful PPV buyrates? How can you attribute that to Punk when he was in the midcard during his entire run :lmao That just proves how much Vince values Bryan over Punk. Bryan's first PPV title defense main evented against Kane with Batista, HHH, Randy Orton, and John Cena all in the mid-card while Punk couldn't even main event over John Laurinaitis. This shouldn't even be a discussion :lmao


Except for that final sentence, everything you said is false. During Punk's title reign when he was treated as a main eventer, Punk would consistently get both the highest gains and highest ratings on the show, even in non-main event segments. Would you like me to show you ten examples of this? And when Punk wasn't headlining RAW in his title reign, he was still main eventing house shows, including shows where Cena was also on the card. TLC 2011, MITB 2012 (recall that the main feud at the time was Punk/Bryan), NoC 2012, and HIAC 2012 all did very well with Punk being in the major storyline.

EDIT: Actually, give me a couple weeks or so and I'll try to aggregate the ratings breakdown of all CM Punk segments starting from the time he regularly main evented RAW during the buildup of MITB 2012 all the way to when he lost the title to The Rock. Maybe that would be better for everyone.

EDIT #2: Wow, even your final sentence isn't a full truth. Punk actually main evented his first PPV title defense as well. Man, guys like you give us Daniel Bryan fans a really bad name.


----------



## Starbuck

funnyfaces1 said:


> Except for that final sentence, everything you said is false. During Punk's title reign when he was treated as a main eventer, Punk would consistently get both the highest gains and highest ratings on the show, even in non-main event segments. Would you like me to show you ten examples of this? And when Punk wasn't headlining RAW in his title reign, he was still main eventing house shows, including shows where Cena was also on the card. TLC 2011, MITB 2012 (recall that the main feud at the time was Punk/Bryan), NoC 2012, and HIAC 2012 all did very well with Punk being in the major storyline.
> 
> EDIT: *Actually, give me a couple weeks or so and I'll try to aggregate the ratings breakdown of all CM Punk segments* starting from the time he regularly main evented RAW during the buildup of MITB 2012 all the way to when he lost the title to The Rock. Maybe that would be better for everyone.
> 
> EDIT #2: Wow, even your final sentence isn't a full truth. Punk actually main evented his first PPV title defense as well. Man, guys like you give us Daniel Bryan fans a really bad name.


I'd rather do that than watch them. unk

Are you really going to do that though? Seems a bit extreme. unk

Shouldn't you be watching Punk matches rather than watching his ratings? unk

CMPUNKCMPUNKCMPUNKPMCUNKCPMUNKCMPUNKCMPUNK unk

If you do this for him you have to do it for Bryan and everybody else or you have nothing for super important comparative ratings analysis bet you didn't think about that funnyfaces1.


----------



## Cliffy

Why are you guys arguing with this RabidCrow rejoiner ? :lol


----------



## RabidCrow

TheGMofGods said:


> *No they wouldn't, because this is a matter of opinion.* The fact you just said this tells us all you aren't a smart person by any means. And not to mention all you have to do is go to youtube to figure out that
> 
> Daniel Bryan is more charismatic than Jeff Hardy ever was. The rate he's over at right now is bigger than Jeff Hardy ever was.
> 
> Bryan is a much better storyteller than Punk was, who was excellent in that category. That alone makes him a better in ring performer than Punk ever was.


So let's take this things that are your opinion.. Your opinion is wrong, Cm Punk is better in ring story teller than Daniel Bryan and Jeff Hardy is still more charismatic than Daniel Bryan.



> And none of them have anything to do with the product that's being put on display, or the amount of ratings or money Daniel Bryan has been drawing. So again I will ask you, where the hell did you get that bullshit from because what you just gave me
> doesn't tell us anything. It just tells us how fucking clueless you are.


Oh fuck, you just take everything to your convenience.
Byan marks logic.
-WWE loses a lot of money during his push, the stock plummet, the investors get back... But it doesn't have anything to do with the product.
-The WWE network helped WMXXX to be successful and avoid being a fiasco, Daniel Bryan is a draw.
-Bryans merch never can't sell like Cm Punk or John Cena, besides all the massive fucking publicity of the "Yes movement".. 
Is because the merch is awful.
-Raw get mediocre ratings.. Who cares, Bryan is in the highest rated segment, he's a big a draw. 

I'm the clueless? unk2




> That's what charisma is dude. This isn't that hard to figure out. You find ways to elect a response from a crowd. Daniel Bryan did this. But the thing is, that's only half the battle. If people don't give a shit about you or don't like you, they
> aren't going to chant along with you. People loved Daniel Bryan, and his 18 second loss to Sheamus is what ignited the yes phenomenon. Jeff Hardy jumped off of high places and kids and girls loved him while smarks absolutely despised him (you know, like that warm respective welcome he got from the ROH fans?)


Dude there's something that you are ignoring or maybe is just hard to you accept it. But Daniels Bryan reaction would have never got to be as insane without the Yes chant, i'm sure you know that. Jeff Hardy, despite the opinion of many people here, had the presence of a rockstar, his high risk moves helped him to get over? Yeah, like any other wrestler. It doesn't means that every spot monkey is as charismatic or as over as Jeff Hardy, because he has natural charisma, , Remember how people 
cheer for CM Punk on ECW, Survivor series 2006? Even when he was an irelevant midcarder? He has natural charisma. I'm not seying Daniel Bryan isn't charismatic, i'm saying he isn't as charismatic as you are pretending to 
make him look. 




> :lmao :lmao what?!
> 
> And not only did he look that way, Jeff Hardy WAS cheesy and bland in each promo. And Bryan isn't bad on the mic by any means. He's not great, but he's certainly not bad. And even then, there's a pretty big difference. You're trying to compare Bryan to one of the worst mic workers in the history of Pro Wrestling. Think about that for a moment.


I'm gonna end with the fact that both are pretty bad.




> Good. You have now just contradicted yourself.
> "he didn't found a way to be more charismatic, he found a way to have a better crowd connection."
> 
> Youre making this way too easy for me.


There are ways to get a good crowd reaction without being charismatic.
Do you remember Fandango?




> You were just saying that Daniel Bryan only got over because of something outside of his realm of ability. The same exact thing applied to Jeff Hardy, who, when he first started out, wasn't over at all, *but once he and Matt became famous for
> their high risk offense, aka jumping off of high places, they got over at an incredible rate*. And yet the yes chant was something Bryan himself thought of after watching a UFC fight, Hardy on the other hand was told to do this.


It doesn't make sense, they were been doing this all his career, 




> I did and I'm pretty sure it was you.



Well read again without using your ass then, this guy brought Hardy to the discussion after i said that Bryan is bad on the mic.



> So you're saying you have no argument?


You can interpret it as you like broh. :bron4




#Mark said:


> :ti
> 
> I have no credibility? Wow, that's rich coming from you.
> 
> Of course i'm attributing the low ratings to Punk you dimwit, the ratings breakdown proves that the masses were turning the program off or changing the channel whenever Punk was on screen. Now, compare that to Bryan who was topping the night on a
> consistent basis during his big push and you'll see that Punk doesn't even compare to Bryan when it comes to ratings. As for merch, Bryan is second in merch sales behind Cena despite having merchandise that isn't aesthetically pleasing. Bryan also headlined a successful house show tour, something the WWE couldn't trust Punk to do. Punk's run produced successful PPV buyrates? How can you attribute that to Punk when he was in the midcard during his entire run :lmao That just proves how much
> 
> Vince values Bryan over Punk. Bryan's first PPV title defense main evented against Kane with Batista, HHH, Randy Orton, and John Cena all in the mid-card while Punk couldn't even main event over John Laurinaitis. This shouldn't even be a discussion
> 
> :lmao
> 
> Also, since you love to bring up Vince losing 350 million dollars (even though that has nothing to do with the on-screen product) i'll play along. The WWE's stock hit it's all time highest point and Vince became a billionaire again for the first time since the Attitude Era in mid-March during the thick of Bryan's feud with HHH, Batista, and Orton before Mania. Bryan was the top face at the time so by using your brain dead logic, Bryan was responsible for the surge in WWE's stock. Vince lost the 350 million dollars in mid-May, a week after Bryan announced his neck injury. So, Vince lost all that money right after Bryan announced his injury. According to you, Bryan is the biggest draw in WWE history
> 
> Of course Bryan is more charismatic than Punk and Cesaro. Bryan has gotten deafening reactions all over the country while Punk only seems to be relevant in Chicago. If you could post some of Punk's reactions that compare to Bryan's outside of
> Chicago then maybe we'll have something to discuss but I understand those are few and far between so I wouldn't waste my time. Cesaro's a great worker but he doesn't have Bryan's charisma.​


:lol There are numbers that shows how Cm Punk has been boosting the ratings in segments even with Curtis Axel.
What say this exactly? Also what means Bryan in the highest rated segment when the ratings are still mediocres?
Either Bryan or Punk are big draws when it comes about ratings, there's not any current wrestler that can make a big difference in the audience apart of The Rock. You just can't accept that? The breakdowns were always useless and they are much more useless right now with the USA network tv deal.
You using and over-using this argument only shows how desperate you are. 
Of course he would get the fucking main event, he has the two big titles. :lol

When the stock reached the highest point John Cena and Randy were disputing the WWE title, with Batista as the Royal Rumble winner while Daniel Bryan was in the upper mid card role. Do you want to attribute this to him too? :lol
Also the stock were falling since WM, if you want to say Bryan's injury was the reason of why Vince Mcmahon lose 350 millions, you need much better arguments.

"Punk only seems to be relevant in Chicago"

:tii

And you claims to have any credibility with things like that? He get his name cheered every week even when he's not in the company... But he's only over in chicago. unk2
Maybe you're upset because Punk get cheered even in Bryan's segments. :lmao




Cliffy Byro said:


> Why are you guys arguing with this RabidCrow rejoiner ? :lol


Rejoiner? You seems to know me pretty well, maybe you should know that people argue with other people because they don't agree?


----------



## Born of Osiris

Wow :maury


----------



## Happenstan

RabidCrow said:


> I'm the clueless?


Kinda says it all, doesn't it?

Let me clarify all this in RabidCrow speak: Wrong is the color of your home planet. Opinion makes beautiful bowl of soup not truth. Jeff Hardy drugs fry eggs in skillet of skull. You take many of those I think. Please to be embarrassing yourself further for our amusement. Happy dance. unk3



funnyfaces1 said:


> Except for that final sentence, everything you said is false. During Punk's title reign when he was treated as a main eventer, Punk would consistently get both the highest gains and highest ratings on the show, even in non-main event segments. Would you like me to show you ten examples of this? And when Punk wasn't headlining RAW in his title reign, he was still main eventing house shows, including shows where Cena was also on the card. TLC 2011, MITB 2012 (recall that the main feud at the time was Punk/Bryan), NoC 2012, and HIAC 2012 all did very well with Punk being in the major storyline.
> 
> EDIT: Actually, give me a couple weeks or so and I'll try to aggregate the ratings breakdown of all CM Punk segments starting from the time he regularly main evented RAW during the buildup of MITB 2012 all the way to when he lost the title to The Rock. Maybe that would be better for everyone.
> 
> EDIT #2: Wow, even your final sentence isn't a full truth. Punk actually main evented his first PPV title defense as well. Man, guys like you give us Daniel Bryan fans a really bad name.


Not in 2012 he didn't. Someone posted a ton of quotes from Torch breakdowns of all the times Punk lost ratings as champion earlier this year....like a freaking page load of quotes. There were numerous times he lost viewers. Now after his feud with Rock in Jan of 2013 he started doing like you said and gaining viewers (Rock gave punk a huge credibility boost. Something I've bitched about with regards to the new gen multiple times) but during 2012 itself Punk routinely shit the bed. Do your breakdown if you like though it will probably take some time and people on here will fact check you and scrutinize your work if you rely on opinions and not raw data. It might be easier to just search out that post I was talking about first but it was a while back so it might be to far back to find.


----------



## O Fenômeno

RABIDCROW failed so fucking hard...

You bring up Fandango but notice no one gives a fuck about him now though right?

Bryan has had the crowd behind him for the past year..that is charisma buddy...


----------



## RabidCrow

Happenstan said:


> Kinda says it all, doesn't it?
> 
> Let me clarify all this in RabidCrow speak: Wrong is the color of your home planet. Opinion makes beautiful bowl of soup not truth. Jeff Hardy drugs fry eggs in skillet of skull. You take many of those I think. Please to be embarrassing yourself further for our amusement. Happy dance. unk3


:clap

I would like to see how your great grammar extends in other languages. 




O Fenômeno said:


> RABIDCROW failed so fucking hard...
> 
> You bring up Fandango but notice no one gives a fuck about him now though right?
> 
> Bryan has had the crowd behind him for the past year..that is charisma buddy...


It only shows that catchphrases works better than theme songs.


----------



## DoubtGin

:|


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

LONG MOTHER FUCKING POST INCOMING (but it's full of pwnage). 



Dynamite madness said:


> Daniel bryan is better than Jeff hardy But he Is One of the most talented Wrestlers i have ever seen, But don't undermine Jeff hardy's Ability in the Ring. Wrestling is not only Technical wrestling even though Jeff can do it, and good too.


Why do you and others keep falling back to technical wrestling a reason for us thinking Bryan is great in the ring? I have never stated this. Not once. He's great in the ring because he's one of the best storytellers in this day and age. Jeff Hardy wasn't. He was atrocious. He had his gems (his one on one match with Triple H at No Mercy), but otherwise he very rarely ever told a story. 



Dynamite madness said:


> Daniel Bryan however Is not more charismatic. Jeff hardy is Nicknamed the Charismatic Enigma and not for no reason. Daniel Bryan is Insanely over but Not more than Jeff hardy. These two are The most over wrestlers since 2005 besides John Cena but Jeff takes the lead. Jeff did Something that Daniel Bryan could no do And that's Dominate John Cena in Merchendise.


How the hell does this prove that Hardy was more charismatic than Bryan? It doesn't. The much bigger crowd reactions and crowd interactions that Bryan gets than Jeff ever did however prove that Bryan is more charismatic. Why don't you try using actual proof rather than pointing out Hardy's nickname and irrelevant factors when trying to argue this. Maybe you'd get somewhere. 



Dynamite madness said:


> It helped that he is one of the greatest Sellers of all time


:lmao what? I won't deny that Hardy was a great seller, but one of the best of all time? Just no. 



Dynamite madness said:


> Smarks hate everyone that makes it.


Really? Explain Daniel Bryan. 



Dynamite madness said:


> In the late 90s and Early 00s, They called him the Next HBK


Literally no one called him the next HBK. 



Dynamite madness said:


> and then he got lazy and The ROH fans Always loved out Smarking each other and Used his pre match comments about him losing his passion an Excuse to hate him. In Late 2007 and 2008, they were praising him for In ring work and the roll he was on. As soon as he became his own brand like Cena and became larger than life, they turned on him in a Second.


The amount of bullshit you just made up here cannot go unnoticed. First off there were a lot of people who were smarks at the time who hated him. And don't try to give us that bullshit that Hardy was overally loved and then turned on later on. It was the same exact case that Bryan went through now. People who were fans of him saw that he was having a major break through, and had the opportunities taken away from him numerous times. Sometimes it was his own fault and other times it was WWE holding the opportunity back from him. There were a shit load of people who wanted him to succeed. But, however, there were a shitload of people who hated him unlike Bryan. And they were a lot more critical. Don't try to make it seem like it was a case of "Smarks doing the cool thing and turning on their favorite wrestler" bullshit. They never do. It's called people who have a reason to be critical coming out and having a reason to complain about them. 



Dynamite madness said:


> They were both cheesy and Average on Mic work


No. Bryan was average. Hardy was horrible on a whole other level that I have yet to see anyone reach. 



Dynamite madness said:


> Saying Jeff hardy is one of the worst is Criminal in a world of Scott Steiners. Just look at Willow, Anti christ of pro wrestling or his Fued with Edge and Cm punk.


No it's not. It's a pretty accurate statement. And what about those? At what points did he ever cut a good promo while feuding with them or using those gimmicks? 



Dynamite madness said:


> Jeff was told to jump off ladders? Told? How in the Fuck Was he told? He was ALWAYS a Daredevil. That was just stupid. How does management come to you and say "Ummm. Jeff we need you to Jump off a ladder tonight."


It's not that hard. All you need to do is think for a moment. 

When he first started out in the WWE, he was told to stay away from doing those kinds of stunts out of safety concerns. Once they went further into the attitude era, Jeff was asked to wrestle a more daredevil-like style in order to make the Hardy's stand out more as a tag team. I don't remember which DVD this was stated in, but if I actually gain an ability to give a shit, I'd probably attempt to find it.



RabidCrow said:


> So let's take this things that are your opinion.. Your opinion is wrong, Cm Punk is better in ring story teller than Daniel Bryan and Jeff Hardy is still more charismatic than Daniel Bryan.


Except it doesn't work like that. You have to provide an argument and reasoning for why this is the case. If you were smart then you would realize this. 



RabidCrow said:


> Oh fuck, you just take everything to your convenience.


No I don't. I get my facts straight so I don't post stupid shit like you do. 



RabidCrow said:


> Byan marks logic.
> -WWE loses a lot of money during his push, the stock plummet, the investors get back... But it doesn't have anything to do with the product.


Of course it has nothing to do with the product because IT WAS CLEARLY STATED THAT THIS WASN'T THE CASE. You post these sources and for what ever reason you don't even bother to read them. 



RabidCrow said:


> -The WWE network helped WMXXX to be successful and avoid being a fiasco, Daniel Bryan is a draw.


No he's a draw because he's been drawing WWE's highest rated segments for the past three months now and has done a great job in merchandise sales. 



RabidCrow said:


> -Bryans merch never can't sell like Cm Punk or John Cena, besides all the massive fucking publicity of the "Yes movement"..
> Is because the merch is awful.


It is awful, but no one is claiming this is the reason. In fact no one is making any reasons. Because everyone knows what the reason is, it's because he's just starting out after getting his big break as champion, so of course he isn't going to sell like Punk or Cena did, who both sold merchandise at an incredible rate. It's going to take time. 



RabidCrow said:


> -Raw get mediocre ratings.. Who cares, Bryan is in the highest rated segment, he's a big a draw.


You mean despite the fact that Raw was getting noticeably better ratings this year compared to last year at around this time? Right.

And even then, that doesn't disprove Bryan's drawing ability. If he's in the highest rated segments, then of course that mean's he's a big draw. How the hell does this mean he isn't? That's like saying Lebron James isn't the best player on his team despite contributing the most on his team in most games. 



RabidCrow said:


> I'm the clueless? unk2


Yes, you are "the" clueless. Seriously, your grammar is absolutely awful. There were so many moments in your random fuckfest of a post where you made such horrible errors but decided not to point it out. 

But that's besides the point. In all seriousness, yes, you are clueless. You are literally about as clueless as they get. If you had any possible idea what you were talking about, then you wouldn't be clueless. But you have no clue what the flying fuck you are talking about, there for, by the laws of logic, you are about as clueless as they get.



RabidCrow said:


> Dude there's something that you are ignoring or maybe is just hard to you accept it.


Wrong on both accounts.



RabidCrow said:


> But Daniels Bryan reaction would have never got to be as insane without the Yes chant, i'm sure you know that.


And whether or not you like it, this simply is not true.

Bryan got the incredible crowd reactions because of what has been happening to him in the past three years.

Look at where he was not too long ago. He won the MITB in 2011 in surprising fashion. He already had a huge following at this point. And then he went on to become World Heavyweight Champion. Bryan started doing yes chants during this time, but how much of a reaction did he get out of it? Oh yea that's right, he didn't. 

Then he lost at Wrestlemania 28 in his infamous match with Sheamus in 18 seconds in the opener and lost his World Heavyweight Title. And this started the Yes Phenomenon. 

You can say Bryan wouldn't be as over without the yes chants, but the simple fact of the matter is, Bryan got over because people wanted him to succeed and he took absolute advantage of it. People cared about him. His 18 second loss pissed off the living shit out of the people who cared for Bryan and wanted him to succeed and were huge fans of him. And when he started his Team Hell No program with Kane, it just pissed people off even more. They wanted him back in the main event scene. And for two years, they kept chanting in hopes that he would go back. They made their voices be heard through chanting yes, as a way to support Daniel Bryan. And Bryan took full advantage of it. He tweaked his gimmick in ways that actually made it work and actually got himself more over than he was before using the yes chants. And when he lost the WWE title that he had just won from John Cena at Summerslam, this set the yes movement to incredibly new heights, because at this point, Bryan was so over that basically everyone wanted him to succeed. But the thing is, before all of this, before Bryan even started doing the yes chants, Bryan was already over, which is something you are continuing to ignore. 

So enough with the bullshit that Bryan needed the yes chants to get over. This isn't true, and it's an insult to our intelligence when you point this out. People had a reason to care for Bryan from the very start, and Bryan took advantage of that and got himself over. He gave fans a reason to chant for him. You're using the yes chants as if they were a second party that came in to help Bryan. No. BRYAN thought of it. It was all his own idea. So don't give me that bullshit that he couldn't get over without the yes chants. BRYAN got himself over, not the yes chants, because the yes chants were HIS idea. 



RabidCrow said:


> Jeff Hardy, despite the opinion of many people here, had the presence of a rockstar, his high risk moves helped him to get over? Yeah, like any other wrestler.


Yea, because Sin Cara was always so incredibly over right? 



RabidCrow said:


> It doesn't means that every spot monkey is as charismatic or as over as Jeff Hardy, because he has natural charisma, , Remember how people
> cheer for CM Punk on ECW, Survivor series 2006? Even when he was an irelevant midcarder? He has natural charisma.


No one is denying that Jeff Hardy has charismatic ability, he, just like Daniel Bryan, took advantage of what he had going very well. 



RabidCrow said:


> I'm not seying Daniel Bryan isn't charismatic, i'm saying he isn't as charismatic as you are pretending to
> make him look.


And you're doing a terrible job of proving how. All you're doing at this point is blindly pointing out the reasons WHY Bryan is charismatic, and you're making up complete bullshit as to why Hardy was charismatic and are ignoring the actual reasons. 



RabidCrow said:


> I'm gonna end with the fact that both are pretty bad.


Dude, if you want to think that, then by all means think that, but until you provide me with some promos that give me a reason to agree with you, you're just going to have people disagree with you. Because Bryan has a done a pretty good job on the mic this past year, even if he's had some pretty bad promos as well. 



RabidCrow said:


> There are ways to get a good crowd reaction without being charismatic.
> Do you remember Fandango?


You mean the guy who had a smark filled crowd singing along with his theme song on ONE NIGHT? Yea, no, you're going to have to do better than that. 




RabidCrow said:


> It doesn't make sense, they were been doing this all his career,


fpalm

Again, your grammar is just awful. Please, read your posts before you post them. It gives us all a headache to have to read the things you type up. 

Anyways, no they weren't. Remember the New Brood? Remember their times being managed by Michael Hayes? They did some high flying moves during their time starting out, but it wasn't until they became Team Xtreme that they actually became known for doing high flying daredevil-like moves and actually got over big. 



RabidCrow said:


> Well read again without using your ass then, this guy brought Hardy to the discussion after i said that Bryan is bad on the mic.


Actually I was kidding there, but I'll give you this one because the first time I wasn't. 



RabidCrow said:


> You can interpret it as you like broh. :bron4


Interpreting and seeing past your obvious bullshit are two different things.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Speaking of long posts... decided to gather the majority of segments Punk was a part of from late August-December 2012, pretty much when he was officially the main event storyline. Now my comments are in parenthesis and I'm sure some will disagree with what I labeled as good, for one reason or another. All of these segments though, from my best recollection, had a good amount of Punk in it. I tried to avoid backstage segments/short skits unless it was the only thing he did for the show, and I left him out of things I thought he didn't deserve an ounce of credit for. I know it's probably pointless and won't change anyone's mind on anything, but here we go:

---

12/31: The segment with CM Punk, Paul Heyman and Vince McMahon gained 465,000 viewers for a 2.5 quarter rating in the 9pm time slot. (Show averaged 2.32 as it was New Years Eve, so rating number was good, gain was good, so overall a good one)

12/24: The segment with CM Punk, Paul Heyman and Ryback also gained 140,000 viewers, doing a 2.5 quarter rating in the 10pm timeslot and being the highest-rated segment of the show. (Show averaged 2.2 due to being Christmas Eve, so good rating, but a mediocre gain. However, it topped the night and wasn't the overrun, so overall a good one)

12/17: The Ric Flair segment with John Cena, CM Punk and Paul Heyman gained 605,000 viewers for a 3.20 quarter rating at 9pm. (Show got a 2.87, Slammy show, a great gain and really good rating, so overall a great one)

12/10: Alicia Fox vs. Eve Torres and the segment with CM Punk and Paul Heyman gained 223,000 viewers. (I'm using this one because it's the only segment Punk appeared in on this show. Happened in an odd quarter, so it's really good it gained, but I have no idea how long the segment was, as if it was only like a 30 second-minute segment, can't really give credit to Punk. I doubt Alicia/Eve was responsible... but who knows? I'll go neutral on this one)

12/3: The lie detector segment (with Punk) and Shield beat down of Miz, Kane and Bryan and Ryback save gained 509,000 viewers to a 2.86. (2.55 rating show, so good rating, good gain, and overall another good one)

11/26: The C.M. Punk vs. Kane main event gained 592,000 viewers with the early part of the match doing a 2.28 and it going up at 11 p.m. to a 2.66 overrun. (This one's a tricky one. 2.7 rated show, so the fact the overrun number falls below that is bad, nevermind the fact it started off very low and didn't pick up until the overrun. The gain itself is good, but overall this one was a bad one for Punk)

11/19: The C.M. Punk 365th day in-ring celebration gained 419,000 viewers to a 2.87 overrun. (2.73 rated show, so a good overrun rating, along with a good gain, makes this a good one, although I will point out it was beat out by the opener by .04, which isn't a big difference and everyone ended up coming back for the end, so I'd still say it's a good one0

11/12: The lowest point of the whole show came at the beginning of CM Punk vs. John Cena. The first half of that match lost 313,000 viewers and did a 2.42 quarter hour rating. It picked up at 11pm for the overrun, finishing with a 2.99 quarter rating after gaining 528,000 viewers. (2.86 rated show, so the overrun did well with the gain and the rating. However, the fact the first half of the match lost over 300,000 viewers and was the lowest point of the show is a big negative, that I think outweighs the positive of the overrun and we'll score this one up as a bad one. Also to note, Punk was a part of the Jerry Lawler return segment that did extremely well, but I'm not counting that segment to Punk for obvious reasons)

11/5: John Cena & Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler & C.M. Punk gained 1,084,000 viewers to a 3.22 overrun. (2.78 rated show, so great overrun number, and an awesome gain. Great one for this)

10/29: 
1) In the segment-by-segment, the show opened with the C.M. Punk promo and Mick Foley coming out first quarter doing a 3.21 (2.95 rated show and it opened with this great number, so great one here)
2) The Punk/Foley team announcement gained 708,000 viewers to a show high 3.26 overrun. (Brought everyone and more back from the opener, and topped the night. Also a great gain, so another great quarter here)

10/22: 
1) John Cena doing his promo for Ryback and C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman coming out gained 530,000 viewers. (Great gain here, no rating number though)
2) C.M. Punk vs. Sheamus in the champion vs. champion lumberjack match gained 1,058,000 viewers finishing at 2.89. (Awesome gain, show did a 2.48 rating so the overrun rating is great as well. Missed out by a little bit on topping the night, so overall another great one)

10/15: The final segment with Vince, Ryback, Punk and John Cena gained 766,000 viewers for a 3.10 overrun rating. (Show was overall rated 2.81, so good rating, along with an excellent gain.)

10/8: Vince McMahon vs. CM Punk in the main event gained 1,233,000 viewers for a 3.46 overrun rating. (Show was rated 2.8, so excellent overrun number with an incredible gain, great one here)

10/1: 
1) the long interview segment with C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman, Vickie Guerrero, Dolph Ziggler, A.J. Lee, Kane and Daniel Bryan opened at a 2.74 and gained 4,000 viewers. (2.54 rated show, so the opening rating was good, and it seemed to gain going into the second quarter, so I'd a good one here)
2) The show was laid out for the 10 p.m. segment to be the Jim Ross Appreciation Night with Punk, Heyman and Ryback at the end. Instead, they didn’t really get going until the 10:15 p.m. death spot, but instead of a huge loss, it gained 461,000 viewers to a show-topping 2.89 quarter. (Great rating in comparison to the show, topped the night, and great gain. However, it does mention it not doing too well until the quarter after the 10PM... but without any exact numbers, tough to say what it did at the 10PM. Assuming .1 rating is equal to about 100,000 viewers, that would be pretty bad. I'll go neutral on this one)
3) The Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. Dolph Ziggler & C.M. Punk main event gained 532,000 viewers to a 2.70 overrun. (Pretty good overrun number for the show average, and a good gain, but this does get negated as it wasn't even a top 2 segment of the night, which for an overrun is bad. I'll go neutral on this one as well)

9/24:
1) In the segment breakdown, they opened with the second strongest segment of the show with Paul Heyman, CM Punk, AJ Lee and Brad Maddox at a 2.99 quarter. (Show did a 2.72 rating, so a really good opener)
2) The segment with Punk and Mick Foley at 9pm gained 877,000 viewers, one of the best growth segments in weeks for a 3.22 quarter rating. (Great rating, awesome gain, so overall a great one)
3) The final segment with John Cena, Punk and Heyman gained 428,000 viewers for a 2.74 quarter rating (Good gain, but bad rating as it's only just above the overall average, and there were several quarters above it... bad one here)

9/17: Sheamus and John Cena vs. CM Punk and Alberto Del Rio in the main event did the best growth for a quarter in a while - gaining 823,000 viewers for a 3.14 overrun rating. (Overall rating was a 2.86, so good rating plus an awesome gain makes for another great one)

9/10: 
1) CM Punk vs. Randy Orton gained 555,000 viewers at 9pm (Great gain, but no rating number. I'm guessing it did at least a 3.0, but can't tell. Overall though, a good one)
2) The final segment with Bret Hart, John Cena and CM Punk gained 407,000 viewers for a 3.11 overrun rating. (Good gain, good rating as overall was a 2.89, so a good good one)

9/3: The stuff with CM Punk, Jerry Lawler and Sheamus opened strong with a 2.90 quarter rating. (Opened with a 2.90, overall show is a 2.83, so that's a plus. Not much to go off of except that, so a good showing)

8/27: C.M. Punk vs. Jerry Lawler gained 479,000 viewers and did a 3.35 overrun. (3.13 show rating, so good overrun rating, good gain, overall good)

---

So overall I've got:

8 great
12 good
3 bad

Punk's not the rating drawing GOD, and even with all of this he's not as good of a draw as Bryan, but he's a good, reliable draw and was keeping the shows as high as he could as champion in the main event, while things were getting dire roster wise. Punk can only do so much on his own, much like Bryan can only do so much on his own, much like Cena can only do so much on his own... so on, so fourth. Attributing the overall terrible numbers during this time to Punk is as idiotic as putting the blame on Bryan for the decline and awful numbers last year when he was in the title scene. Punk held his own generally and could help pull in some big numbers. 

Hopefully this puts that to the rest (yeah, right :lol ).


----------



## Rick Sanchez

All this emotion over numbers. Good thing I love Punk AND Bryan, otherwise I'd be forced to choose a side.


----------



## Bushmaster

The Outlaw Josey Wales said:


> All this emotion over numbers. Good thing I love Punk AND Bryan, otherwise I'd be forced to choose a side.


Or you could just love :cena5 the supposed only draw in wrestling. Who appears on every Raw and every PPV but when they do bad it's because of everyone else 8*D


----------



## O Fenômeno

RabidCrow said:


> :clap
> 
> I would like to see how your great grammar extends in other languages.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It only shows that catchphrases works better than theme songs.


*
cha·ris·ma
noun \kə-ˈriz-mə\

: a special charm or appeal that causes people to feel attracted and excited by someone (such as a politican)
Full Definition of CHARISMA
1
: a personal magic of leadership arousing special popular loyalty or enthusiasm for a public figure (as a political leader)
2
: a special magnetic charm or appeal <the charisma of a popular actor> *

No it means Bryan is more charismatic..

It's as simple as that troll...whichever reason people are drawn to Bryan...they're drawn to him....I know sucks to swallowbut yes people are drawn to Bryan..

Even if you come up with that idiotic "His catchphrase is just over"....

Let's disregard the several times the crowed has cheered for Daniel Bryan,and disregard the fans support,and how Bryan was forced into the Main Event...

Not even Punk could garner up fan support such as that...and that dude fans are fucking cult-like,and he was the most popular guy probably since Hardy a couple years before him.

:lol @ the one poster bringing up "Charismatic Enigma" ...a name that was given before Daniel Bryan...how the fuck does that mean he is more charismatic than Hardy? Just based on fan support alone...Bryan is more charismatic....PROOF?

The past 2 years of WWE programming...


----------



## MaybeLock

#BadNewsSanta said:


> THE TRUTH


Pretty much what everyone who is not blind thinks. Punk worked great as far as drawing goes. Only Bryan has been a more regular draw in the main full time roster, and still they are both very close IMO. And of course, Cena, who I haven't seen getting much better ratings numbers, but he obviously bangs everyone else as far as selling merchandising and shows attendance go.


----------



## Dynamite madness

Ok. I won't start with technical wrestling. Daniel Bryan is a great storyteller, but so is Jeff hardy. You are Trying to sell Jeff hardy short by only mentioning one match. He had that Classic with Undertaker in a ladder match or his steel cage match with CM Punk. How was he horrible if he had his "gems". You just contradicted yourself. You keep throwing out how bad he is and not showing ANY evidence. There is a difference between rarely telling a story and Telling a good one when he does. The point i am trying to make here is Daniel Bryan is Awesome and successful but don't undermine Jeff hardy's greatness.

Are you Fucking blind? Jeff hardy has charisma oozing out of him. Charisma is not about mic skills (in which Jeff hardy is not bad at) its about how the person can rile a crowd up and something that makes people gravitate to them. Jeff hardy has that "IT", Daniel Bryan does too. You are trying to prove a point undermining Jeff hardy.

He is one of the great sellers. How many times did he sell a body part after a big match to show that he went through hell. In his last WWE match he had people at the Edge of their seats even when people knew the outcome because of spoilers. Or when he had his match with Edge after Extreme rules. He was the guy that made Edge's Spear look Deadly.

My mistake. They don't like wrestlers that have not been through the modern day Indies. They also used his Drug problems as a Excuse. Jeff went through kinda the same route as those Indy darling. He went through Omega and Other Indy companies, Went through Japan, Mexico and Puerto rico and they still hate him because that's not where they knew him from. They are trying to hipsters and get away from knowing as much as casual fans.

They did. JR also mentioned it, When HBK was facing Jeff hardy, Royal rumble 2001 and a couple other times that I can't recall when he said it. You don't have to say literally. Would it be Figuratively?:lmao

There were no Smarks? The ECW crowd was all Smarks and Tape traded. He was turned on a couple times. The 
Smarks during that found out that he lost his passion and when they were booing him it was just a competitive to see if they would out smark each other. They hated him from 2003 to 2006, Then he returned and got behind him again. I am not saying it was Roses and Waterfalls and everyone loved him, There were people that hated him but the majority loved him. The ones that hated him always talked about his "Demons" and his past Lazy ness.

WTF. This is so stupid. How is he the worst or one of the worst. Go watch His Promo on a Smackdown against the Undertaker. It was on Smackdown 11/14/08. 

Watch them. You have Something called the fucking Internet. Jeff broke in 1998 at the Attitude eras peak and became focused on much more.


----------



## Happenstan

RabidCrow said:


> :clap
> 
> I would like to see how your great grammar extends in other languages.


Sure thing. How about we start with sign language.













O Fenômeno said:


> *
> cha·ris·ma
> noun \kə-ˈriz-mə\
> 
> : a special charm or appeal that causes people to feel attracted and excited by someone (such as a politican)
> Full Definition of CHARISMA
> 1
> : a personal magic of leadership arousing special popular loyalty or enthusiasm for a public figure (as a political leader)
> 2
> : a special magnetic charm or appeal <the charisma of a popular actor> *


As many times as that definition has been quoted someone should just make it their signature. Maybe seeing it everyday will help it sink in to the more intellectually challenged.


----------



## A-C-P

Wanna know the saddest part here....This thread is actually more entertaining than most of the WWE shows.

:maury


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Dynamite madness said:


> Ok. I won't start with technical wrestling. Daniel Bryan is a great storyteller, but so is Jeff hardy.


No he's not. 



Dynamite madness said:


> You are Trying to sell Jeff hardy short by only mentioning one match. He had that Classic with Undertaker in a ladder match or his steel cage match with CM Punk.


Neither of those were classics. And not to mention you're giving me two no DQ matches. All this tells me is that Jeff Hardy didn't know how to tell a story if he couldn't put on a good match without the no DQ stip. 



Dynamite madness said:


> How was he horrible if he had his "gems". You just contradicted yourself.


How the hell did I contradict myself? Saying that he's had his gems doesn't by any way mean that I'm contradicting myself. Terrible wrestlers can have great matches (Savage/Warrior is a perfect example of this). You can't just sit there and claim someone is contradicting themselves when there is clearly no evidence of me doing so. It doesn't work like that. 



Dynamite madness said:


> You keep throwing out how bad he is and not showing ANY evidence.


That's funny because in the numerous rants I've made about Jeff, I've pointed out NUMEROUS instances where he showed that he's nothing more than a spot monkey. You can go ahead and find those posts if you'd like, but I'm not repeating myself. I shouldn't need to. 



Dynamite madness said:


> There is a difference between rarely telling a story and Telling a good one when he does.


There's also a difference between two guys putting on a great match and a blatantly obvious carry job. 



Dynamite madness said:


> The point i am trying to make here is Daniel Bryan is Awesome and successful but don't undermine Jeff hardy's greatness.


What greatness? I can't undermine something that doesn't exist. 



Dynamite madness said:


> Are you Fucking blind? Jeff hardy has charisma oozing out of him.


When did I ever claim he didn't have charisma? 



Dynamite madness said:


> Charisma is not about mic skills (in which Jeff hardy is not bad at)


Just stop already. 

Seriously, you've lost all credibility with this statement. Jeff Hardy isn't bad on the mic? I hope that isn't what you're saying and that you're just referring to the charisma part. If not though, then you're trolling. Hard. Jeff Hardy is without a doubt one of the worst mic workers in the history of Pro Wrestling. It's nearly impossible to argue against it, and it's going to take a special kind of debater to do so. 



Dynamite madness said:


> its about how the person can rile a crowd up and something that makes people gravitate to them. Jeff hardy has that "IT", Daniel Bryan does too. You are trying to prove a point undermining Jeff hardy.


No I'm not. I'm pointing out the facts. 



Dynamite madness said:


> He is one of the great sellers. How many times did he sell a body part after a big match to show that he went through hell.


There's literally fifteen other guys right now in the WWE who do the same. Again, Hardy was a great seller, but he's no where near one of the all time greats. 



Dynamite madness said:


> In his last WWE match he had people at the Edge of their seats even when people knew the outcome because of spoilers. Or when he had his match with Edge after Extreme rules. He was the guy that made Edge's Spear look Deadly.


It's not that hard to make someone's spear look deadly when it's happening from the top of a ladder. 



Dynamite madness said:


> My mistake. They don't like wrestlers that have not been through the modern day Indies.


Explain Bray Wyatt. 



Dynamite madness said:


> They also used his Drug problems as a Excuse. Jeff went through kinda the same route as those Indy darling. He went through Omega and Other Indy companies, Went through Japan, Mexico and Puerto rico and they still hate him because that's not where they knew him from. They are trying to hipsters and get away from knowing as much as casual fans.


That's not why they hated him. They hated him because he wasn't good. It was as simple as that. You'd be surprised at how many smarks back then thought Jeff Hardy sucked. You'd be surprised at how many felt this way in 2008-2009. 



Dynamite madness said:


> They did. JR also mentioned it, When HBK was facing Jeff hardy, Royal rumble 2001 and a couple other times that I can't recall when he said it. You don't have to say literally. Would it be Figuratively?:lmao


No, they really didn't. No sane person said this. Not one. Nice try. But no.

And no, I would have said literally, because it literally did not happen (no pun intended). 



Dynamite madness said:


> There were no Smarks? The ECW crowd was all Smarks and Tape traded. He was turned on a couple times. The
> Smarks during that found out that he lost his passion and when they were booing him it was just a competitive to see if they would out smark each other. They hated him from 2003 to 2006, Then he returned and got behind him again. I am not saying it was Roses and Waterfalls and everyone loved him, There were people that hated him but the majority loved him. The ones that hated him always talked about his "Demons" and his past Lazy ness.


You just wasted your time typing up this bullshit because I never once stated there were no smarks. I don't know where you found that in my post but it's clearly obvious you weren't reading correctly. 



Dynamite madness said:


> WTF. This is so stupid. How is he the worst or one of the worst. Go watch His Promo on a Smackdown against the Undertaker. It was on Smackdown 11/14/08.


Do you seriously need me to explain this to you? (And btw I know what promo you're talking about, and it was horseshit).

Mic work is about being able to tell a story. To give your fans a reason to believe in you. To put insight on something that casuals wouldn't be able to think of. Jeff Hardy NEVER did any of those three main things, and those were the main components of mic work. He was awful. He made it incredibly obvious that he was simply saying words he remembered off of a script.

His mic work was one of, if not, the most forced you would ever see.

His delivery was absolutely atrocious.

He was always extremely awkward.

This promo right here basically explains what I'm talking about.






His promo is at 6:40. Listen to Christian. Look at what he's doing. He's making up clear and obvious bullshit excuses but is doing so over a legitimate complaint that he has, and the way he is acting and the way he is delivering his lines is great. You feel like he's actually mad. His behavior is appropriate. He's trying to convince himself of what he's saying but you can tell he's absolutely full of it. He's making what he's saying come across as forced and yet at the same time you can tell it's all an act. And I'm not talking about his gimmick. He's making it believable. And the best part about it is, it's giving the fans a reason to be sick of him. He's got something that he's allowed to be angry about, and he's taking it one step further. It's great mic work. 

Jeff Hardy does not do this. He doesn't do any of this. Never has Hardy ever done this in a single promo that he has had in his career. He might have done one or two of those things, not at a good or even decent level or anything mind you, but he might have done them. But so far, he has never to this day done a promo that is even close to this. And you had better do some digging if you want to prove me wrong. 

And don't even get me started on Hardy's face mic work. 



Dynamite madness said:


> Watch them. You have Something called the fucking Internet. Jeff broke in 1998 at the Attitude eras peak and became focused on much more.


I'm not going to look for something that I don't want to look for. I don't like his mic work. Hell the fact that I found one was hard enough for me, although to be fair it wasn't that difficult to find a shitty promo from him. If you think I'm wrong, then prove that to me. Don't tell me to look. If you can't find those, then you are wrong. End of story. 

Please, don't waste my time.

Edit: Really? The heel promo from Hardy isn't working? Too bad, because I'm not looking for it again.


----------



## Afnorok

Hour 1 - 3.93	
Hour 2 - 4.20	
Hour 3 - 4.25

Average - 4.13m Viewers

Last week, 

Hour 1- 3.89
Hour 2- 4.21
Hour 3- 4.24

Average - 4.11m viewers

Pretty much the same, even the week before the previous one(4.14m Average). Champion? No champion? It's all just the same. Nothing matters anymore in WWE, except for wrestlemania.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

So ratings didn't drop even without DAT RATINGS DRAW D-BRYAN? :bryan


----------



## Happenstan

Afnorok said:


> Pretty much the same, even the week before the previous one(4.14m Average). Champion? No champion? It's all just the same. Nothing matters anymore in WWE, except for wrestlemania.


Without Daniel Bryan there's no point in tryin'. 




The Boy Wonder said:


> So ratings didn't drop even without DAT RATINGS DRAW D-BRYAN? :bryan


WTF? He wasn't there last week either.


----------



## WWE

No Punk.. No Bryan... Oh boy I wonder how these weeks are going to go.


----------



## Darkness is here

AH! DAT HUGE RATINGS DRAW HAS NO AFFECT AT ALL ON THE RATINGS IN HIS ABSENCE. :TI


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wow, surprised we haven't seen and drop back below 4 million yet. Not only that, but viewership increases as the show progresses. Usually starts off weak with the weekly Authority stuff leading off and whatever is in the first hour, but then takes a jump in the second hour and continues steady through he third. Wonder how the battle royal did.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Happenstan said:


> Without Daniel Bryan there's no point in tryin'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF? He wasn't there last week either.


No, I'm saying ratings stayed the same even though fans knew well in advanced that Bryan would not be there. If ratings last night were much lower than last week don't you think Bryan fans would be saying "No Bryan = lower ratings"?


----------



## O Fenômeno

Suprised more people didn't turn the channel when Cena overcame Kane..

Didn't bother watching...I know the outcome...

:cena3 won didn't he?



The Boy Wonder said:


> No, I'm saying ratings stayed the same even though fans knew well in advanced that Bryan would not be there. If ratings last night were much lower than last week don't you think Bryan fans would be saying "No Bryan = lower ratings"?


bama

That or blame Kevin Hart...

Either way it's a fucking joke it takes the title being vacant to actually make the title entertaining. It seems every champion will have lame ass reigns,with random bullshit feuds.

The fight for who will be champion is exciting...especially if Cena fucking stays out of the MITB match.


----------



## A-C-P

O Fenômeno said:


> Suprised more people didn't turn the channel when Cena overcame Kane..
> 
> Didn't bother watching...I know the outcome...
> 
> :cena3 won didn't he?
> 
> 
> 
> bama
> 
> That or blame Kevin Hart...


I would try and lie to you, but I doubt you would fall for it.

It must have been that "puking segment" that drew the viewers in :vince3


----------



## O Fenômeno

A-C-P said:


> I would try and lie to you, but I doubt you would fall for it.
> 
> It must have been that "puking segment" that drew the viewers in :vince3


Cena is a cancer...I have no interest in seeing him in a match...

Only match I wanted to see him in was CENA/Undertaker...as it would've been shocking to see if Cena had the balls to agree to beating the streak if Taker let him,or seeing Cena lose clean.

Outside of that, Cena will win all of his future feuds with Roman Reigns possibly winning to take the torch,but I don't think that'll happen this year.

:cena3 DAT GOAT


:jay


----------



## Naka Moora

*The Monday, June 16th edition of WWE RAW scored 4.13 million viewers, up slightly from the previous week's 4.12 million viewers.

The hourly breakdown for this week's show is as follows:

Hour One: 3.93 million viewers
Hour Two: 4.20 million viewers
Hour Three: 4.25 million viewers

The final number, which should be out shortly, will likely fall around a 2.9.*

Damn, I was late, my bad. lol.


----------



## Happenstan

The Boy Wonder said:


> No, I'm saying ratings stayed the same even though fans knew well in advanced that Bryan would not be there. If ratings last night were much lower than last week don't you think Bryan fans would be saying "No Bryan = lower ratings"?


Only the stupid ones since he hasn't been on the show since May.


----------



## Naka Moora

Bryan & Punk = Ratings unk2


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I demand more ratings from Roman Reigns, the maestro of the mic,the king of cardio, and the wazir of workrate.


----------



## DoubtGin

first hour had authority opening segment, rollins vs ziggler, ambrose vs bnb, the first reigns segment with vicky (i think) and the wyatt promo (at least the beginning of it) and still sucked when compared to the second and third hour

CENA DRAWS LOL


----------



## wwe4universe

hmmm no nhl and nba. Let me guess it must be the world cup. People must be watching wolrd cup recap and dvr of it or got too drunk to watch raw. Product is perfectly fine. Blame world cup.


----------



## wwe4universe

hmmm no nhl and nba. Let me guess it must be the world cup. People must be watching wolrd cup recap and dvr of it or got too drunk to watch raw. Product is perfectly fine. Dont blame the prdocut, blame someone else.


----------



## Londrick

The Boy Wonder said:


> So ratings didn't drop even without DAT RATINGS DRAW D-BRYAN? :bryan


They went up the first RAW w/o him as champ. Guess no one wants to see a midget hobo wearing the title.


----------



## chronoxiong

Vince McMahon comedy = ratings. That Stephanie vomitting on Vickie segment must've drew in the viewers.


----------



## #Mark

Darkness is here said:


> AH! DAT HUGE RATINGS DRAW HAS NO AFFECT AT ALL ON THE RATINGS IN HIS ABSENCE. :TI





The Boy Wonder said:


> So ratings didn't drop even without DAT RATINGS DRAW D-BRYAN? :bryan


I see you imbeciles are ignoring the fact that Bryan hasn't been on RAW in nearly a month.


----------



## Darkness is here

A month????????
Does your calender have 2 weeks in a month?


----------



## Bushmaster

Darkness is here said:


> A month????????
> Does your calender have 2 weeks in a month?


:lmao


----------



## CookiePuss

:cena3 the GOAT keeping things in tact


----------



## Happenstan

Darkness is here said:


> A month????????
> Does your calender have 2 weeks in a month?


??? Mark is right. Bryan hasn't been on Raw since the Memorial Day episode last month (4 Raws ago).


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Darkness is here said:


> A month????????
> Does your calender have 2 weeks in a month?


Just to keep things factual, Bryan has only been on one of the last five Raws. He missed 5/19, appeared on 5/26, and has missed the last three 6/02,6/09 and 6/16.


----------



## #Mark

Darkness is here said:


> A month????????
> Does your calender have 2 weeks in a month?


So May 26th was two weeks ago?


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Darkness is here said:


> A month????????
> Does your calender have 2 weeks in a month?


Are you trolling or just stupid?


----------



## The Boy Wonder

#Mark said:


> I see you imbeciles are ignoring the fact that Bryan hasn't been on RAW in nearly a month.


Again, you guys are missing the point. Last week no one really knew if Bryan was going to be on RAW or not. In the opening segment Stephanie/HHH announced that Bryan would be stripped of the title and that he wasn't going to be on RAW b/c of his injury. So right there WWE wrote his character off for the immediate future. The rating for last week's show had an increase in hour 2 and 3 compared to hour 1. That's usually not the case. So that means fans didn't "tune out" once they realized Bryan wasn't going to be on. This week's Monday Night RAW rating did a similar # to last week. Meaning fans didn't go away because Bryan wasn't there.



> - Monday night's WWE RAW ranked #1 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen's new Twitter TV ratings. RAW had a unique audience of 2,303,000, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This was up from the previous week. RAW had total impressions of 13,214,000, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was also way up from the previous week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Bottom line is even without Bryan, numbers are still doing just as well as they were with him once Mania season/fever was over. Numbers also were sinking even when he was there anyway, despite his own numbers doing really well. The overall numbers going up or down have very little-nothing to do with Bryan.


----------



## hag

You people in this thread are delusional. How could one person be a draw in today's day?

Get real. Why not look at everyone together as a whole? Last time I checked, it was a team effort.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Its almost like people watch for the WWE brand and don't care if its a boring broken necked midget or ****** Superman or Blandy Spraytanorton holding da belt


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> Its almost like people watch for the WWE brand and don't care if its a boring broken necked midget or ****** Superman or Blandy Spraytanorton holding da belt


I applaud your eloquence. You are truly a master of the written word. :bow


----------



## WWE

hag said:


> You people in this thread are delusional. How could one person be a draw in today's day?
> 
> Get real. Why not look at everyone together as a whole? Last time I checked, it was a team effort.



....

too...


logical...

error...


----------



## Bushmaster

hag said:


> You people in this thread are delusional. How could one person be a draw in today's day?
> 
> Get real. Why not look at everyone together as a whole? Last time I checked, it was a team effort.


It's been like this since the Rock came back. It will never change.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

The Boy Wonder said:


> Again, you guys are missing the point. Last week no one really knew if Bryan was going to be on RAW or not. In the opening segment Stephanie/HHH announced that Bryan would be stripped of the title and that he wasn't going to be on RAW b/c of his injury. So right there WWE wrote his character off for the immediate future. The rating for last week's show had an increase in hour 2 and 3 compared to hour 1. That's usually not the case. So that means fans didn't "tune out" once they realized Bryan wasn't going to be on. This week's Monday Night RAW rating did a similar # to last week. Meaning fans didn't go away because Bryan wasn't there.


So we're just gonna ignore the whole Kevin Hart thing? You know, a celebrity that people actually like?


----------



## Afnorok

hag said:


> You people in this thread are delusional. How could one person be a draw in today's day?
> 
> Get real. Why not look at everyone together as a whole? Last time I checked, it was a team effort.


In that case, perhaps one person shouldn't be a world champion anymore in WWE yeah? Everyone should be considered champions of the world. so why does Bryan gets to run around with both titles?


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

IDONTSHIV said:


> I applaud your eloquence. You are truly a master of the written word. :bow


MUH BOI IDONTSHOWER WHAT IT DO PIMPIN :gun::gun::gun:

Anyone remember Pharells big hat? Maybe they're hiding the breakdowns in the big hat. Pharells that is.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> MUH BOI IDONTSHOWER WHAT IT DO PIMPIN :gun::gun::gun:
> 
> Anyone remember Pharells big hat? Maybe they're hiding the breakdowns in the big hat. Pharells that is.


I am almost starting to believe Bryan was the one releasing all of the breakdowns. Expect the next one when he returns.


----------



## HBK for ever

who was the bigger draw in 2001? Jericho or Angle?


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

HBK for ever said:


> who was the bigger draw in 2001? Jericho or Angle?


Well that question came out of nowhere. But I assume it was Angle, no?


----------



## Bob the Jobber

The one thing I've noticed WWE has been better at is riding momentum. Bryan's rise was huge rating draw segments, it also got a lot of eyes on other talent. Now with SHIELD's split and rise of all three (not to mention guys like Bray) has allowed those guys to become hypothetically consistent draws. So with Bryan's absence it's not as if the entire show has disappeared, there's other guys to grab the wheel. If they can continue to ride that wave with each up and comer, they'll lay a extremely strong foundation for the future. It actually reminds me of how the Attitude Era took off slowly but surely (not on the same scale at all, mind you) with a handful of guys bringing in ratings and hot crowds which in turn pushed everyone else through the roof.


----------



## kokepepsi

HBK for ever said:


> who was the bigger draw in 2001? Jericho or Angle?


Austin/Rock


----------



## #Mark

> - WWE's website shattered any of their previous records in April of this year with 31.9 million unique visitors. This is up from 18.3 million uniques in April of 2013.
> 
> - WWE's shop website averaged 1,200 orders per day in April of this year, up from 867 orders per day in April of 2013.
> 
> - WWE RAW averaged a 3.29 rating with 4.56 million viewers for the month of April this year. This is up from an average of 3.16 and 4.35 million viewers in April 2013.





> - WWE's merchandise sales have been rising, with WWEShop.com's daily orders up from 867 a day to 1,200 a day. The reason for the increase is unknown, but it could be because of the fact that WWE website is up 74% over the past year (due to the launch of the WWE Network).
> 
> John Cena is still the top seller at live events with Daniel Bryan at a close second.


Thoughts?


----------



## AJ_Styles_P1

Daniel Bryan close behind Cena, that's with the way everything is slanted in Cena's favor.

No doubt he could make more money than Cena if they got behind him like they do Cena, no reason for him to continue to be on top really.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

HBK for ever said:


> who was the bigger draw in 2001? Jericho or Angle?


Probably Angle, considering he was the #2 face of the Invasion angle and one of the top stars throughout the entire year.


----------



## HBK for ever

kokepepsi said:


> Austin/Rock


read my comment again.


----------



## HBK for ever

Y2J said at his book that he/Austin/Rocky were the top sellers in 2001.
this is the reason for my question.


----------



## jj60

*Do the current Raw ratings validate Daniel Bryan's star?*

2 months ago, Raw was getting around 5 million viewers. The past Raw had only 4 million viewers. Do you think that the fall in ratings will mean that Bryan will get an extended title run?


----------



## O Fenômeno

*Re: Do the current Raw ratings validate Daniel Bryan's star?*



jj60 said:


> 2 months ago, Raw was getting around 5 million viewers. The past Raw had only 4 million viewers. Do you think that the fall in ratings will mean that Bryan will get an extended title run?


Eh 

I mean I think Bryan will get his title reign again...just because he is a proven star and is the number two guy behind Cena.

Ratings aren't stuggling that much...

SHIELD and Bryan have been carrying RAW for awhile now...Ambrose,Rollins,Reigns are picking up the slack...while Cena is still Cena....


----------



## Arca9

I'm more inclined to believe that it's the absence of a champion moreso than it is Bryan, although that isn't me saying it's not Bryan, I just would have thought a lack of champion has done it.

It could just as much be Bryan though in which case, I'm sure he'll have his spot waiting for him when he returns but this news shouldn't be a means of rushing him back before he is ready.


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: Do the current Raw ratings validate Daniel Bryan's star?*

it's that time of the year when WWE is at it's lowest point of interest, so i don't know if that has anything to do with bryan's presence or lack thereof. i do know that they have trouble following up the stories they hotshot and fail to keep the viewers interested with shows that have about 70% filler on them. biggest stories coming out of wrestlemania: bryan's title reign and brock beating the streak both of which right now have next to no impact on current storylines, right now they are concentrating on the shield members which was a great team, but a team that just 2 months ago were stuck in a meaningless feud with the old age outlaws. 

ratings will grow with consistancy. if the WWE give people a reason to invest in current storylines and write the stories logically, ratings should do better with or without bryan. bryan being on the show would certainly help.


----------



## RiC David

*Re: Do the current Raw ratings validate Daniel Bryan's star?*

Why go by something so full of variables as that when you can go by the fact that, per quarter hour breakdowns, Bryan was the highest drawing segment on Raw and Smackdown *for months* in all demographics but the (I might get this bracket wrong) 18-35s the most. Regardless of whether he was in a segment with Triple H or in a cold (no build up) match with Del Rio, he was the highest rated *by far*.

This trend only ceased the week he had those godawful bad horror cliché segments with Kane - that week and the week after The Shield took the top draw and after that he was out for surgery/recovery.

If you want to analyse ratings, you can get a far more accurate reading with the quarter hour breakdowns than broad correlation like this. Not saying you're wrong in your conclusions, just that it's far less reliable.


----------



## Afnorok

*Re: Do the current Raw ratings validate Daniel Bryan's star?*



ViolentRiC said:


> Why go by something so full of variables as that when you can go by the fact that, per quarter hour breakdowns, Bryan was the highest drawing segment on Raw and Smackdown *for months* in all demographics but the (I might get this bracket wrong) 18-35s the most. Regardless of whether he was in a segment with Triple H or in a cold (no build up) match with Del Rio, he was the highest rated *by far*.


LOL NO, that isn't true. Shield Vs Evolution was always the highest rated quarter, Bryan and Stephanie more often than not held up their end though.


----------



## kokepepsi

HBK for ever said:


> Y2J said at his book that he/Austin/Rocky were the top sellers in 2001.
> this is the reason for my question.


That's the point why I said Rock/Austin

How would you even figure out who is a bigger draw between Jericho/Angle? 

You would need to look at:
Merch sales (we can't find out those figures all we know Austin/Rock were top)
Ratings (segment breakdowns from those times are hard to find)
Live attendance records (this we can find but will be impacted by Austin/Rock)
PPV buys(again Austin/Rock being on the card will impact the numbers)

For what is worth off the top of my head
Jericho vs Benoit vs Austin( KOTR2001) out drew both Taker(Kane) vs Austin(HHH) PPV matches (Backlash/Judgmentday)

Jericho>Taker in 2001
:ti


----------



## Punkholic

*Re: Do the current Raw ratings validate Daniel Bryan's star?*



jj60 said:


> 2 months ago, Raw was getting around 5 million viewers. The past Raw had only 4 million viewers. Do you think that the fall in ratings will mean that Bryan will get an extended title run?


Of course Raw was averaging more viewers two months ago than it is today, it was Wrestlemania season. The ratings would have increased regardless of who was in Bryan's place. But yes, he will get the title back when he gets back.


----------



## D.M.N.

With two Raw's left of quarter two (April to June) over, here are how things are provisionally looking percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q2 2007):

- the previous quarter (Q1 2007)
- one year earlier (Q2 2006)
- two years earlier (Q2 2005)

The most successful quarter two's were:

+7.4 - 2005
+5.5 - 2009
+5.5 - 2006
-2.7 - 2007
-2.8 - 2012
-3.2 - 2014 (provisionally - will end up around -5.0)
-3.7 - 2011
-4.4 - 2004
-5.5 - 2010
-7.7 - 2013
-12.6 - 2008

The Money in the Bank go-home show and post-Money in the Bank show however may actually help things - especially if we have a surprise champion (i.e. not Cena).


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: Do the current Raw ratings validate Daniel Bryan's star?*



SVETV988_fan said:


> it's that time of the year when WWE is at it's lowest point of interest,


Don't ratings get even worse in the fall? especially with football and all


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

#Mark said:


> Thoughts?


Holy shit that's a pretty big increase.


----------



## THANOS

#Mark said:


> Thoughts?


And yet another piece of news further illustrating that Bryan equals money for the company, and yet fools believe he's responsible for the unsatisfying tv deal fpalm.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

THANOS said:


> And yet another piece of news further illustrating that Bryan equals money for the company, and yet *fools* believe he's responsible for the unsatisfying tv deal fpalm.


----------



## Starbuck

THANOS said:


> And yet another piece of news further illustrating that Bryan equals money for the company, and yet fools believe he's responsible for the unsatisfying tv deal fpalm.


Come on now. The website traffic is obviously due to the network and has absolutely nothing to do with Bryan. The merch you can make a case for though, absolutely nothing wrong with claiming that.


----------



## THANOS

Starbuck said:


> Come on now. The website traffic is obviously due to the network and has absolutely nothing to do with Bryan. The merch you can make a case for though, absolutely nothing wrong with claiming that.


I don't disagree but I think looking at several of the metrics we've been privy to for awhile such as quarter hour ratings, the WM 30 intake, merchandise rise, etc. I'd say it's fair to point out that there could be a very strong correlation with Bryan. That's obviously not to trace it completely to him because that would silly, but it certainly can be used in tandom with the growing pile of deliverables that have been helping Bryan's case for awhile now, in order to further strengthen it.

The fact is that there was a huge increase around WM time due to the Network and Bryan's merchandise has now risen from 5x less than Cena, to slightly behind him while he's out injured even, which could suggest that people went to order the Network and decided to drop money on Bryan at an alarming rate. A correlation can certainly be made I believe.


----------



## Starbuck

THANOS said:


> I don't disagree but I think looking at several of the metrics we've been privy to for awhile such as quarter hour ratings, the WM 30 intake, merchandise rise, etc. I'd say it's fair to point out that there could be a very strong correlation with Bryan. That's obviously not to trace it completely to him because that would silly, but it certainly can be used in tandom with the growing pile of deliverables that have been helping Bryan's case for awhile now, in order to further strengthen it.


The website traffic is indisputably related to the network. There's no way around that imo. You're not talking about a small jump you're talking about a HUGE jump compared to the prior year. That's all on the network and has nothing to do with Bryan. You're reaching with that one lol. But go crazy on the merch thing. You got plenty of room there.


----------



## Darkness is here

THANOS said:


> And yet another piece of news further illustrating that Bryan equals money for the company, and yet fools believe he's responsible for the unsatisfying tv deal fpalm.


REALLYYYY?


----------



## #Mark

The merch numbers and the fact that ratings were significantly higher this april than they were last april should be credited to Bryan.


----------



## Phantom Martyr

*Ratings Are Overrated!*

I am always seeing "ratings this, ratings that" on this forum. Shut the fuck up about ratings! They don't fucking matter. And here's why.

RATINGS ARE ONLY COUNTED BY FAMILIES WHO OWN NIELSEN BOXES.

Seriously, that's why. If you don't have a Nielsen Box, your viewership doesn't matter. It isn't included in overall ratings. And there are only a few thousand people with Nielsen Boxes. Each box accounts for about 4000 views, I think. That means whatever show has the highest ratings has those ratings because of the select few with the Nielsen Boxes that watch that show, not because of its overall popularity.

Wrestling is probably at its most popular that it's ever been, what with social media and what not. I see more wrestling fans than I ever did in the Attitude Era, and yet people always bring up ratings when discussing this. It's just that the number of people with Nielsen Boxes watching wrestling has decreased. The actual number of people watching wrestling has probably stayed the same or even increased.

So, if you're one of those retards that bring up ratings, your opinion immediately doesn't matter and you have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## gamegenie

*Re: Ratings Are Overrated!*

If AOL TimeWarner had never pulled WCW from TNT and TBS, 

I'm pretty sure TV viewership of wrestling would have quadrupled by today. 


I wouldn't be surprised if Pro-Wrestling highlights would get feature on ESPN and Fox Sports like the other leagues. 



damn you AOL TimeWarner exec who probably long since got fired from his position and moved on to ruin other businesses. Capitalism.


----------



## Phantom Martyr

*Re: Ratings Are Overrated!*



gamegenie said:


> If AOL TimeWarner had never pulled WCW from TNT and TBS,
> 
> I'm pretty sure TV viewership of wrestling would have quadrupled by today.
> 
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if Pro-Wrestling highlights would get feature on ESPN and Fox Sports like the other leagues.
> 
> 
> 
> damn you AOL TimeWarner exec who probably long since got fired from his position and moved on to ruin other businesses. Capitalism.


Possibly. That'd be pretty awesome. I wouldn't be surprised if viewership has gone up tremendously though. Like I said, ratings are incredibly flawed.


----------



## Phantom Martyr

*Re: Ratings Are Overrated!*

I mean seriously, with over 300,000,000 Americans, do you honestly thing the highest rated shows only have a few million viewers?


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Ratings Are Overrated!*

Doesn't matter it's the same system that was used in 91, 95, 99, 04, 09 and now 2014. Today's guy are being held by the same standard as yesterday's.

As far as your viewership theory goes well that goes in the toilet once you look at average attendance. In 2000 they were averaging 12k an event today it's in the 6k range.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Not saying this is the case because I haven't seen a detailed breakdown but merchandise sales could be attributed to Cena. It's said he's outselling everyone 5-1 right now which is pretty absurd and wasn't even close to being the case when Punk was hot. Considering that his clothing line just hit the stores that could possibly explain the increase.


----------



## #Mark

Meltzer just reported this week that Bryan is "very close" to matching Cena's merch sales. Mind you he hasn't even been on TV or in a relevant story in over a month. That figure of 5-1 is absurd and has never been verified.


----------



## GillbergReturns

#Mark said:


> Meltzer just reported this week that Bryan is "very close" to matching Cena's merch sales. Mind you he hasn't even been on TV or in a relevant story in over a month. That figure of 5-1 is absurd and has never been verified.


It's not absurd at all when you factor in that John Cena's gear is being sold at a national retailer. That isn't the case for Bryan, Sheamus, Punk or anyone else. 

The report about Bryan says at live events but it's a 74% increase of WWEShop that they're highlighting as the reason for the spike.


----------



## #Mark

GillbergReturns said:


> It's not absurd at all when you factor in that John Cena's gear is being sold at a national retailer. That isn't the case for Bryan, Sheamus, Punk or anyone else.
> 
> The report about Bryan says at live events but it's a 74% increase of WWEShop that they're highlighting as the reason for the spike.


That national deal was announced within the last year so it's a little disingenuous to highlight Punk's merch sales in 2011 when he didn't have to compete with a national retailer.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

I would expect Bryan to beat out Cena in merch sales this year.


----------



## vanboxmeer

I would expect Bryan to not have the momentum he had and fizzle out in merch sales to a lower level.


----------



## vanboxmeer

#Mark said:


> Meltzer just reported this week that Bryan is "very close" to matching Cena's merch sales. Mind you he hasn't even been on TV or in a relevant story in over a month. That figure of 5-1 is absurd and has never been verified.


Meltzer was the one who said it was 5-1 at one point. Merch numbers can greatly fluctuate every week, only a fool or a agenda-biased guy would discard one number that doesn't fit their motive and highlight the number that looks good for the campaign trial to spew. Like using a number a year ago to attempt to parlay into what's currently happening like certain marks.


----------



## Happenstan

vanboxmeer said:


> I would expect Bryan to not have the momentum he had and fizzle out in merch sales to a lower level.


Yet another one of your genius predictions where the exact opposite ends up occurring? Most people learn from their (numerous) mistakes.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Happenstan said:


> Yet another one of your genius predictions where the exact opposite ends up occurring? Most people learn from their (numerous) mistakes.


No, simple economics and knowledge of ebbs and flows.

For example, a new Cena brand colour scheme could be released during a time a Bryan brand has had several weeks on the market. It goes to expectations that this fresh off release Cena brand will then get a surge of sales thus greatening the gap. This works the other way too, but Cena has always been at a higher level of the two since the entirety of Daniel Bryan's WWE career. Bryan would have to have a surge of popularity significantly greater than his WM 30 quarter to truly overtake Cena, and that's simply not in the books.

This is not even taking into consideration any other potential brands for other superstars that can alter the market.
-------------------------

But I guess if I need to be the "bad guy" to rail against to keep Bryan in the thoughts of the rest of his fans, then that's what I'll do. Hopefully, the blind faithful won't simply "accept" anything less than the #1 spot and if that doesn't occur simply give up and settle for #3 or #4 as a "good spot to have, like so and so a legend".

Afterall, isn't that the core driving motivation of the entire argument?


----------



## GillbergReturns

#Mark said:


> That national deal was announced within the last year so it's a little disingenuous to highlight Punk's merch sales in 2011 when he didn't have to compete with a national retailer.


That's not what I did though. You were crediting Bryan for the increased sales for the prior year but I'm not sure if that's the case. That's why I brought up Cena outselling everyone by 5x. It might be Cena's retail deal. Then again you could be right or it could be the Network or all 3 factoring in.

Like I said from the start I really haven't seen a detailed break down on how Cena's retail brand is doing or effecting the company.


----------



## Naka Moora

*Re: Ratings Are Overrated!*



Phantom Martyr said:


> I am always seeing "ratings this, ratings that" on this forum. Shut the fuck up about ratings! They don't fucking matter. And here's why.
> 
> RATINGS ARE ONLY COUNTED BY FAMILIES WHO OWN NIELSEN BOXES.
> 
> Seriously, that's why. If you don't have a Nielsen Box, your viewership doesn't matter. It isn't included in overall ratings. And there are only a few thousand people with Nielsen Boxes. Each box accounts for about 4000 views, I think. That means whatever show has the highest ratings has those ratings because of the select few with the Nielsen Boxes that watch that show, not because of its overall popularity.
> 
> Wrestling is probably at its most popular that it's ever been, what with social media and what not. I see more wrestling fans than I ever did in the Attitude Era, and yet people always bring up ratings when discussing this. It's just that the number of people with Nielsen Boxes watching wrestling has decreased. The actual number of people watching wrestling has probably stayed the same or even increased.
> 
> So, if you're one of those retards that bring up ratings, your opinion immediately doesn't matter and you have no idea what you're talking about.


Hm Interesting.


----------



## validreasoning

the kpis have extreme rules in may doing 107,000 buys on traditional ppv down from the 228,000 at the same point last year.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

WWE Entertainment 4330 (10PM)
WWE Entertainment 4041 (9PM)
WWE Entertainment 3723 (8PM)


----------



## Starbuck

Vickie/Steph will top the night I bet.

:steph


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

This is what? The 3rd or 4th week in a row where the numbers get better throughout the night? Even if the number is down from last week, it's something. I guess generally people are finding the beginning of the shows to be the time to tune out, which could be down to The Authority/Evolution opening/taking center stage of the first hour for a few weeks in a row and people getting tired of it, or some other factor. Maybe people figure the first hour in general just doesn't have much going on. Maybe the allure of Steph wrestling and HHH announcing MITB contract participants later in the night made people tune out until those things happened (and in the case of last week, the battle royal/Cena winning his MITB Title match spot being what brought people in later).

Who knows, but I do think it's a little bit better to see something like 3.7 mil hour 1, 4 mil hour 2 and 4.3 mil hour 3, than 4.3 mil hour 1, 4.0 mil hour 2 and 3.7 mil hour 3. Just the idea the show gains viewers throughout instead of lose is a good sign, although obviously there are many factors at play here. And hell, without breakdowns, we can't really pinpoint why these numbers are happening and if perhaps there is a saving grace in the hour ones of the last few weeks.


----------



## chronoxiong

Vickie vs Stephanie equals ratings!


----------



## Shenroe

Well i'm not surprised, the first hour was surprisingly weak in upper/main eventer. It ws a bunch of mid card matches although storyline driven, were not strong enough to capture viewers attention. Had they put the intlcontinental match first or just after the tag match, a Sheamus vs Orton bout, the first hour would have drew similar to last week. All in all it's great news i think, the ratings are still consistent.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

#BadNewsSanta said:


> This is what? The 3rd or 4th week in a row where the numbers get better throughout the night? Even if the number is down from last week, it's something. I guess generally people are finding the beginning of the shows to be the time to tune out, which could be down to The Authority/Evolution opening/taking center stage of the first hour for a few weeks in a row and people getting tired of it, or some other factor. Maybe people figure the first hour in general just doesn't have much going on. Maybe the allure of Steph wrestling and HHH announcing MITB contract participants later in the night made people tune out until those things happened (and in the case of last week, the battle royal/Cena winning his MITB Title match spot being what brought people in later).
> 
> Who knows, but I do think it's a little bit better to see something like 3.7 mil hour 1, 4 mil hour 2 and 4.3 mil hour 3, than 4.3 mil hour 1, 4.0 mil hour 2 and 3.7 mil hour 3. Just the idea the show gains viewers throughout instead of lose is a good sign, although obviously there are many factors at play here. And hell, without breakdowns, we can't really pinpoint why these numbers are happening and if perhaps there is a saving grace in the hour ones of the last few weeks.



Yeah I've noticed that too that hours 2 and 3 are higher. That hasn't always been the case.


----------



## kokepepsi

Holy shit how did I miss this


> Cena & Batista vs. Rhodes & DiBiase lost 46,000 viewers and the 3.01 main event rating has to be one of the lowest main event ratings of the past ten years


:maury
Rhodes still being punished 6 years later


----------



## Darkness is here

vanboxmeer said:


> Meltzer was the one who said it was 5-1 at one point. Merch numbers can greatly fluctuate every week, *only a fool or a agenda-biased guy would discard one number that doesn't fit their motive and highlight the number that looks good for the campaign trial to spew.* Like using a number a year ago to attempt to parlay into what's currently happening like certain marks.


which............every bryan fan does.


----------



## Lastier

*Re: Ratings Are Overrated!*



Phantom Martyr said:


> Shut the fuck up about ratings! They don't fucking matter. And here's why.


Is this your first day watching wrestling?

In almost every interview with WWE executives and people who have been in the business for decades when this or similar topics come up it is mentioned how important ratings are and how they influence the product.


----------



## TromaDogg

*Re: Ratings Are Overrated!*



Phantom Martyr said:


> Wrestling is probably at its most popular that it's ever been, what with social media and what not.


:duck



Phantom Martyr said:


> I see more wrestling fans than I ever did in the Attitude Era,


Yes, only because the internet is a lot more accessible now than it was 14 years ago. A lot of people who comment online about it either don't watch WWE anymore, or barely watch it nowadays.



Phantom Martyr said:


> So, if you're one of those retards that bring up ratings, your opinion immediately doesn't matter and you have no idea what you're talking about.


WWE executives bring up ratings all the time. Retards, the lot of them.


----------



## Tardbasher12

*Re: Ratings Are Overrated!*



Phantom Martyr said:


> Wrestling is probably at its most popular that it's ever been, what with social media and what not.


----------



## KingLobos

I'm sure you have seen more wrestling fans now than in the Attitude Era. Probably because you weren't born and don't know what the hell you are talking about Phanton Martr. Kids these days.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Darkness is here said:


> which............every bryan fan does.


Literally no Bryan fan does that. 

Bryan marks however...


----------



## #Mark

Darkness is here said:


> which............every bryan fan does.


I hope the irony of this post isn't lost on anyone.


----------



## #Mark

I thought Bryan wasn't a draw?



> The other tour opened on 6/21 in Reading, PA, before 3,000 fans. 6/22 in Newark, DE, drew 2,000 fans. The Blue tour crowds are noticeably down without Bryan headlining and with Orton and the former Shield as the top guys.


Per Meltzer.


----------



## JY57

Smackdown viewership up to 2.966 million highest in awhile


----------



## The XL

#Mark said:


> I thought Bryan wasn't a draw?
> 
> 
> 
> Per Meltzer.


That could be less of Bryan being a draw than the other guys drawing below usual numbers for top guys. Everyone knows Orton is a ratings killer and the Shield guys aren't established as single competitors yet.


----------



## #Mark

The XL said:


> That could be less of Bryan being a draw than the other guys drawing below usual numbers for top guys. Everyone knows Orton is a ratings killer and the Shield guys aren't established as single competitors yet.


Which is why it's funny that people suggest WWE should depush Bryan when he's one of their few top acts. Bryan is the first guy since Batista to actually headline a successful house show tour opposite of Cena. Orton has been pushed for over a decade and he can't even sustain what Bryan was drawing.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Hour 1: 4158
Hour 2: 4348
Hour 3: 4490

The trend continues of Hour 2 and 3 being higher than Hour 1.


----------



## DoubtGin

> Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with the fallout from Money In the Bank, drew 4.332 million viewers. This is up from the previous week's 4.031 million viewers.
> 
> For this week's show, the first hour drew 4.158 million viewers, the second hour drew 4.348 million viewers and the final hour drew 4.490 million viewers. RAW was #3 on cable behind the World Cup and Love & Hip-Hop.


.


----------



## Starbuck

JY57 said:


> Smackdown viewership up to 2.966 million highest in awhile


:rollins :trips2 rton2

Raw numbers are SOLID. Upward trend is always better than a downward one. Awesome show too so well deserved.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

HHH has been a big draw all year. I think it's funny though, that he has to sit at ringside so he can lay claim to that rating for the segment.


----------



## D.M.N.

Highest Raw number since end of April.

For Q2

- 2012 - 4.47 million
- 2013 - 4.13 million
- 2014 - 4.24 million


----------



## Starbuck

IDONTSHIV said:


> HHH has been a big draw all year. I think it's funny though, that he has to sit at ringside so he can lay claim to that rating for the segment.


I was talking about SD with those smilies lol.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Triple H talking gangsta to Cena last night was one of my favorite segments on Raw in a very long time. Triple H has been GOATing it up all 2014.

:hhh2


----------



## Starbuck

:hunter internet face turn this year has been weird as fuck. Everybody loves the guy now. It's pretty :lol when you think about it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Really good numbers. 

:HHH ain't a draw though, he's destroyed the first hour and has made it consistently the weakest of the three. He should just stay in his office, run NXT, and bring more old timers in.


----------



## Starbuck

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Really good numbers.
> 
> unk3 ain't a draw though, he's destroyed the WWE title and made it the weakest it had ever been during his shitty 434 reign. He should just stay in Chicago, read comics, and get fatter.


I know what you mean. 8*D


----------



## Darkness is here

Starbuck said:


> :hunter internet face turn this year has been weird as fuck. Everybody loves the guy now. It's pretty :lol when you think about it.


waiting for a face turn for :cena3 :draper2


----------



## Starbuck

Darkness is here said:


> waiting for a face turn for :cena3 :draper2


What do you mean? :cena3 is the face of the company and biggest hero they have. Good guy John is the ultimate good guy.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Starbuck said:


> :hunter internet face turn this year has been weird as fuck. Everybody loves the guy now. It's pretty :lol when you think about it.


He's good in my book. Just keep protecting the newest honorary member of the Clique: 

:rollins


----------



## Starbuck

ROLLINS said:


> He's good in my book. Just keep protecting the newest honorary member of the Clique:
> 
> :rollins


:rollins :ambrose :reigns are all safe forever. Paul Levesque guys don't fuck about. Once you're in that club you're made. 

:batista4 rton2

:trips5


----------



## Darkness is here

Starbuck said:


> What do you mean? :cena3 is the face of the company and biggest hero they have. Good guy John is the ultimate good guy.


I meant an IWC face turn for :cena3 similar to :hhh2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> I know what you mean. 8*D


Huh, something looks different about my post in that quote. :side:


----------



## Darkness is here

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Huh, something looks different about my post in that quote. :side:


Call the SHERLOCK HOLMES of this forum a.k.a HEADLINER.
Iam sure he will solve the case.


----------



## Starbuck

Darkness is here said:


> I meant an IWC face turn for :cena3 similar to :hhh2


Never say never. The fact that people are now referring to HHH as a jobber is something I'd never thought I'd see. If Cena put over even 2 guys in a row I reckon a lot of people would change their tune. Either that or he finally turns heel. 

Heel turn on the marks = face turn for the smarks. 



#BadNewsSanta said:


> Huh, something looks different about my post in that quote. :side:


Sorry, you're right. Punk isn't _that _fat.


----------



## Darkness is here

Starbuck said:


> Never say never. The fact that people are now referring to HHH as a jobber is something I'd never thought I'd see. If Cena put over even 2 guys in a row I reckon a lot of people would change their tune. Either that or he finally turns heel.
> 
> *Heel turn on the marks = face turn for the smarks. *
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, you're right. Punk isn't _that _fat.


:mark:
that would be the day cena will FINALLY #RISEABOVEIWC'SHATE :cena5


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Never say never. The fact that people are now referring to *HHH as a jobber* is something I'd never thought I'd see. If Cena put over even 2 guys in a row I reckon a lot of people would change their tune. Either that or he finally turns heel.


Why not? He has less wins this year than Damien Sandow... and less wins last year than Damien Sandow... and less wins the year before that. In fact, wouldn't shock me if HHH jobs to Sandow in a Superstars main event: "Battle of the Jobbers" and Sandow impersonates HHH.

It's all the truth. :HHH2


----------



## Darkness is here

^ :lol


----------



## Starbuck

:ti


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Pssh, he needed four other guys with him in the ring to take down the mighty McMandow!


----------



## D.M.N.

Some YouTube hit numbers, make for interesting reading:

- 347k - Chris Jericho and The Miz return to WWE
- 252k - Jack Swagger defends America against Rusev
- 225k - John Cena & Roman Reigns vs. Randy Orton & Kane
- 212k - Paige vs. AJ Lee - Divas Championship Match
- 208k - Seth Rollins attempts to cash in
- 160k - Dolph Ziggler vs. Fandango
- 141k - The Great Khali vs. Damien Sandow
- 138k - Rob Van Dam vs. Seth Rollins
- 110k - Sheamus & The Usos vs. The Wyatt Family
- 100k - Nikki Bella vs. The Funkadactyls - 2-on-1 Handicap Match
- 93k - Bo Dallas calls for a moment of silence
- 85k - Kofi Kingston vs. Cesaro
- 79k - Adam Rose brings the party to Santino Marella's barbecue

Swagger and Rusev doing very well near the top!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Swaggie the YouTube draw!

Also, WWE's YouTube team are full of idiots. Khali didn't wrestle Damien Sandow, he wrestled *Mr. McMandow*. Dolts.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

D.M.N. said:


> Some YouTube hit numbers, make for interesting reading:
> 
> - 347k - Chris Jericho and The Miz return to WWE
> - 252k - Jack Swagger defends America against Rusev
> - 225k - John Cena & Roman Reigns vs. Randy Orton & Kane
> - 212k - Paige vs. AJ Lee - Divas Championship Match
> - 208k - Seth Rollins attempts to cash in
> - 160k - Dolph Ziggler vs. Fandango
> - 141k - The Great Khali vs. Damien Sandow
> - 138k - Rob Van Dam vs. Seth Rollins
> - 110k - Sheamus & The Usos vs. The Wyatt Family
> - 100k - Nikki Bella vs. The Funkadactyls - 2-on-1 Handicap Match
> - 93k - Bo Dallas calls for a moment of silence
> - 85k - Kofi Kingston vs. Cesaro
> - 79k - Adam Rose brings the party to Santino Marella's barbecue
> 
> Swagger and Rusev doing very well near the top!


How the fuck does Ziggler vs Fandango have more views than RVD vs Seth Rollins?!


----------



## THANOS

TheGMofGods said:


> How the fuck does Ziggler vs Fandango have more views than RVD vs Seth Rollins?!


Ziggler's longevity as a singles star is quite long, which has enabled him to build a solid fanbase. That's my guess.


----------



## D.M.N.

With quarter two (April to June) over, here is how the quarter rated versus previous years. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q2 2007):

- the previous quarter (Q1 2007)
- one year earlier (Q2 2006)
- two years earlier (Q2 2005)

Which gives us:

2003	- 3.7 rating / 3.20 million households
2004	- 3.7 rating / 3.25 million households (-4.4%)
2005	- 4.0 rating / 3.52 million households (+7.4%)
2006	- 4.1 rating / 3.68 million households (+5.5%)
2007	- 3.8 rating / 3.51 million households (-2.7%)
2008	- 3.2 rating / 3.11 million households (-12.6%)
2009	- 3.6 rating / 3.58 million households (+5.5%)
2010	- 3.2 rating / 3.21 million households (-5.5%)
2011	- 3.3 rating / 3.29 million households (-3.7%)
2012	- 3.1 rating / 3.13 million households (-2.8%) [4.47 million viewers / 2.14 million A18-49]
2013	- 3.0 rating / 2.98 million households (-7.7%) [4.13 million viewers / 1.84 million A18-49]
2014	- 3.0 rating / 2.96 million households (-3.9%) [4.24 million viewers / 1.90 million A18-49]

And from a percentage point of view, the most successful quarter one's were:

+7.4 - 2005
+5.5 - 2009
+5.5 - 2006
-2.7 - 2007
-2.8 - 2012
-3.7 - 2011
-3.9 - 2014
-4.4 - 2004
-5.5 - 2010
-7.7 - 2013
-12.6 - 2008

Coming off WrestleMania, quarter two is always a bit of a rut as WWE has fought to keep the viewers, and on only three occasions - 2005, 2006 and 2009 have they actually succeeded. 2005 needs no introduction as it coincided with the rise of Batista and John Cena, whilst quarter two in 2006 seen the re-birth of ECW and the DX reunion, both big ratings movers at the time. 2009's high numbers are down to the guest host concept, and also the first commercial free Raw, which drew over six million viewers, a massive number for WWE.

It says a lot about 2008 that I don't remember much about it, although I seem to remember William Regal being King of the Ring.... and promptly being suspended by WWE for 60 days. Michaels vs Jericho I think began in June that year, but post-WrestleMania in 2008 can best be summarised as a disaster. Last year also did quite poor with Cena as champion facing various people.

2014 is middle of the road. Statistically, it is the lowest household number since before the Attitude Era for quarter two, however the raw viewing numbers have increased versus 2013 - which suggests that more people are watching Raw together than in previous years. I think they will be pleased with the numbers, as it shows for me that what they're doing - and more importantly, who they are pushing, is working. It says a lot how in 2013 we had three Raw's in June under 4 million, yet this year, all four are above 4 million. Good news for WWE.

And, whether people like it or not, Cena vs Lesnar at SummerSlam for the title _will_ more than likely draw fairly big TV numbers for the company into August.


----------



## CesaroSection

Would the overall rating being lower now be partly down to the fact that Raw is 3 hours and not two? When WWE used to run the 3 hours specials they'd be lower rated overall compared to the 2 hour shows.


----------



## Fissiks

TheGMofGods said:


> How the fuck does Ziggler vs Fandango have more views than RVD vs Seth Rollins?!


I never saw RVD vs Seth Rollins on my front Youtube subscription page. There is a lot of videos they uploaded that don't get updated on to your page so you have to go the channel manually and look for them.


----------



## -Skullbone-

D.M.N. said:


> And, whether people like it or not, Cena vs Lesnar at SummerSlam for the title _will_ more than likely draw fairly big TV numbers for the company into August.


It makes you wonder what the situation would be if the WWE didn't blow their load the first time around and give the win to Cena in their brief 2012 feud with next to no follow up. Will some viewers be turned off by the potential of a predictable outcome, with Lesnar likely squaring the ledger at 1-1, or possibly tune out at the thought of another Cena win?


----------



## Alo0oy

The XL said:


> That could be less of Bryan being a draw than the other guys drawing below usual numbers for top guys. Everyone knows Orton is a ratings killer and the Shield guys aren't established as single competitors yet.












rton2


----------



## TheGreatBanana

Alo0oy said:


> rton2


I knew someone was going to use that. 

WWE much like any other businesses has trends. It doesn't matter who is champion at what point, business will continue following that trend.

If you give this graph any credence you're just stupid.


----------



## Alo0oy

TheGreatBanana said:


> I knew someone was going to use that.
> 
> WWE much like any other businesses has trends. It doesn't matter who is champion at what point, business will continue following that trend.
> 
> If you give this graph any credence you're just stupid.


You would be correct if we're talking about one fluke title reign, but EVERY SINGLE TIME Orton wins the belt, business starts soaring, this isn't some coincidence that just happened out of nowhere.

Orton is the perfect heel, everyone hates him, everyone wants him to lose the belt, which creates an interesting dynamic of the babyface chasing the title, once that babyface wins the title, tension & drama die down & the babyface starts cutting generic good guy promos, long title reigns should always be kept for heels & short ones for babyfaces. The longer a heel holds the belt, the more hated he becomes, conversely the babyface chasing him will be liked more & more, just look at Orton's last reign, people started hating him more & more the longer he held the belt, & Bryan was getting more & more over the longer he was chasing the belt.


----------



## JamesK

Alo0oy said:


> You would be correct if we're talking about one fluke title reign, but EVERY SINGLE TIME Orton wins the belt, business starts soaring, this isn't some coincidence that just happened out of nowhere.
> 
> Orton is the perfect heel, everyone hates him, everyone wants him to lose the belt, which creates an interesting dynamic of the babyface chasing the title, once that babyface wins the title, tension & drama die down & the babyface starts cutting generic good guy promos, long title reigns should always be kept for heels & short ones for babyfaces.


I agree with the other guy.. Lets see what was happening when Orton was champ

The first one.. The program started picking up steam with from RR to mania.. It was a well written storyline and his staff with Legacy was good so i will give him that..

The other two.. You had one of the hottest angles with Nexus.. So many viewers started to watch the Nexus angle and it's logical that the revenue of the company to grow...Also he was a babyface in that period..

About the last one.. The people wanted to see Bryan.. Orton was an afterthought to the rivarly.. Actually the main rivarly was Bryan vs Triple H/Authority.. So of course i will not give credit to Orton for that...


----------



## Alo0oy

JamesK said:


> I agree with the other guy.. Lets see what was happening when Orton was champ
> 
> The first one.. The program started picking up steam with from RR to mania.. It was a well written storyline and his staff with Legacy was good so i will give him that..
> 
> The other two.. You had one of the hottest angles with Nexus.. So many viewers started to watch the Nexus angle and it's logical that the revenue of the company to grow...Also he was a babyface in that period..
> 
> About the last one.. The people wanted to see Bryan.. Orton was an afterthought to the rivarly.. Actually the main rivarly was Bryan vs Triple H/Authority.. So of course i will not give credit to Orton for that...


You are absolutely right, every time Orton won the title & business picked up, it was because of other factors. Orton was just the luckiest man in WWE, 2009? It wasn't because he was punting everybody left & right, it was because Vince, HHH, Batista, & Cena were gracing Orton with their presence, despite them being there in everybody else's reign, it picked up during Randy's reign because reasons. 2010? It wasn't because he was fresh off a face turn when he was absolutely red hot, it was because a group of rookies graced him with their presence, despite them being there for MONTHS before his reign started, it started picking up when he won the belt because reasons.



Spoiler: Spoiler



That was sarcasm, if you couldn't tell.


----------



## Leon Knuckles

Cena's promo on RAW was great, and I dont even like Cena.


----------



## Naka Moora

Leon Knuckles said:


> Cena's promo on RAW was great, and I dont even like Cena.


They usually are. But Cena haters just put him down at any given point.


----------



## JamesK

Alo0oy said:


> You are absolutely right, every time Orton won the title & business picked up, it was because of other factors. Orton was just the luckiest man in WWE, 2009? It wasn't because he was punting everybody left & right, it was because Vince, HHH, Batista, & Cena were gracing Orton with their presence, despite them being there in everybody else's reign, it picked up during Randy's reign because reasons. *2010? It wasn't because he was fresh off a face turn when he was absolutely red hot, it was because a group of rookies graced him with their presence, despite them being there for MONTHS before his reign started, it started picking up when he won the belt because reasons.*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> That was sarcasm, if you couldn't tell.


:ti :ti :ti

Seriously now.. You claim that the people watched the product because of Orton and not about the Nexus angle??? 

:lmao :lmao :lmao

Seriously i can't even argue with a stupid claim like this....


----------



## Alo0oy

JamesK said:


> :ti :ti :ti
> 
> Seriously now.. You claim that the people watched the product because of Orton and not about the Nexus angle???
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> Seriously i can't even argue with a stupid claim like this....


Yup, Orton is just the luckiest man in the world. Title reigns come & go with interesting things happening in-between with no significant increase in revenue, yet every single time Orton wins the title & business picks up, it's because of other things that are happening.

You would have a point if it happened once, but there is a pattern here, if you take off the anti-Orton goggles, you'd see that pattern yourself, this isn't a one-off thing. If it was JUST this one time in 2010, I'll be willing to concede that it was a fluke, but ever since he started doing his Viper persona, business picks up when he's champion. 

I don't even know why you feel threatened by it, Bryan is still a draw & the stock plummeting has nothing to do with Bryan & everything to do with the under-performance of the network & their new TV deal. There's no need to run someone down to elevate Bryan's position, Bryan is still a deservedly top guy, there's no need to feel threatened.


----------



## #Mark

Orton was really hot in 2010. I don't think people remember how over he was.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

Alo0oy said:


> rton2


This is genuinely one of the dumbest graphs that I've seen. Don't be stupid enough to actually try and use this in a serious discussion. It's like a bunch of kids who don't understand business got together to try and analyse something.


----------



## Alo0oy

The Caped Crusader said:


> This is genuinely one of the dumbest graphs that I've seen. Don't be stupid enough to actually try and use this in a serious discussion. It's like a bunch of kids who don't understand business got together to try and analyse something.


Yup, you understand business more than investors writing for Forbes.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

Alo0oy said:


> Yup, you understand business more than investors writing for Forbes.


Maybe you should go read the reports WWE themselves put up on their corporate website for all to read which have their own comments and give you a ton of information in regards to their revenue streams and how it all works. It would save you from looking like an idiot by using a fucking Forbes article of all things which has next to no analysis in it. But maybe that's asking too much because it'd entail you having to actually use your brain rather than just linking some shitty article because it fits an agenda you agree with.


----------



## Alo0oy

The Caped Crusader said:


> Maybe you should go read the reports WWE themselves put up on their corporate website for all to read which have their own comments and give you a ton of information in regards to their revenue streams and how it all works. It would save you from looking like an idiot by using a fucking Forbes article of all things which has next to no analysis in it. But maybe that's asking too much because it'd entail you having to actually use your brain rather than just linking some shitty article because it fits an agenda you agree with.


Wow, you're really invested in hating Orton, calm down man, Orton increasing company revenue isn't the end of the world, you can still hate on the guy even if revenue increases every time he wins the belt. :lol

I know this information turned your world upside down, so all I'm gonna say is: get over it. rton2


----------



## Choke2Death

Alo0oy said:


> rton2


And these jokes have the nerve to question WWE's decision of pushing Orton non-stop over the last decade. :lol

Have to lol @ the red line nearly reaching the top when The Rock and Brock were around in first half of 2012 only to nose-dive into the very bottom in the second half. :lol


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Alo0oy said:


> Wow, you're really invested in hating Orton, calm down man, Orton increasing company revenue isn't the end of the world, you can still hate on the guy even if revenue increases every time he wins the belt. :lol
> 
> I know this information turned your world upside down, so all I'm gonna say is: get over it. rton2


You were literally doing the exact same thing you are accusing this guy of doing when it came to Daniel Bryan. Cut it with the hypocritical bullshit.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So... just to be clear, we all just trollin'/jokin' with that chart, right?


----------



## elhijodelbodallas

Alo0oy said:


> Yup, you understand business more than investors writing for Forbes.


"investors"? :lmao Go read the full article please. That chart is completely meaningless and even the own author of it admits its flaws.

Also remember that some Forbes online articles also seriously considered that the WWE Network could get as high as 6 million subscribers. That's says a lot about their credibility.


----------



## Randy Lahey

WWE cant even pull a 3.0 against no competition right now. When Monday Night Football comes back in a few weeks...forget about it. Ratings going to continue to tank no matter who is champ. Wrestling is dead. 2014 will be the lowest TV ratings since like 1994. Fewer people are watching wrestling now than ever before. The pissing match about guys that would be at the bottom of the card if they had come up during the AE is comical. 

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2014-ratings/


----------



## Randy Lahey

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Really good numbers.


Compared to what? Being higher than the worst ratings of all time? :lmao


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Randy Lahey said:


> Compared to what? Being higher than the worst ratings of all time? :lmao


----------



## Alo0oy

TheGMofGods said:


> You were literally doing the exact same thing you are accusing this guy of doing when it came to Daniel Bryan. Cut it with the hypocritical bullshit.


Go ahead & search my post history, I've made it very clear that I'm a big fan of DB, I just don't like some of his extreme marks.


Gotta love all the posters in this thread being butthurt over that chart though. :lmao


----------



## MaybeLock

I dont really know how much credit we should give to that graph. Wasnt WM27 the best selling Wm of all time? Why is revenue going down then by that time?


----------



## DoubtGin

> Friday's episode of WWE SmackDown featured Chris Jericho's return to the show and drew 1.881 million viewers, down from last week's 2.966 million viewers. SmackDown was #1 on cable for the night. These numbers were low due to the 4th of July holiday.


.


----------



## Goldusto

elhijodelbodallas said:


> "investors"? :lmao Go read the full article please. That chart is completely meaningless and even the own author of it admits its flaws.
> 
> Also remember that some Forbes online articles also seriously considered that the WWE Network could get as high as 6 million subscribers. That's says a lot about their credibility.



the reason for that is they were told bare face lies about the entire thing, EVERYONE believed that the network was going to be the holy netflix type grail of wrasslin' then it turned out to be full of shit everyone including forbes re evaluated that and WWE are where they were at a year ago.

and some million less viewers this week, 4th of july too stronk


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I saw the SD numbers and I was like...










... then I remembered and it said it was fourth of July :jericho3



> I dont really know how much credit we should give to that graph. Wasnt WM27 the best selling Wm of all time? Why is revenue going down then by that time?


Quite simply, the graph is useless when trying to figure who's "best for business" because there are a TON of factors when it comes to revenue that the champion himself is a miniscule part.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Wrong thread


----------



## Alo0oy

MaybeLock said:


> I dont really know how much credit we should give to that graph. Wasnt WM27 the best selling Wm of all time? Why is revenue going down then by that time?


You're confusing WM28 with WM27.



#BadNewsSanta said:


> Quite simply, the graph is useless when trying to figure who's "best for business" because there are a TON of factors when it comes to revenue that the champion himself is a miniscule part.


That would be true in some cases, especially outliers, but when looking at a repeated pattern, it's no longer a coincidence. That's how it works in every business not just WWE, a revenue spike can happen in any business for other reasons besides their flagship product, but when revenue increases every time you advertize a certain product, it's pretty clear that product is the reason revenue increases.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Alo0oy said:


> You're confusing WM28 with WM27.
> 
> 
> 
> That would be true in some cases, especially outliers, but when looking at a repeated pattern, it's no longer a coincidence. That's how it works in every business not just WWE, a revenue spike can happen in any business for other reasons besides their flagship product, but when revenue increases every time you advertize a certain product, it's pretty clear that product is the reason revenue increases.


If you want a pattern, look no further than the fact all of the quarter 4's had an increase in business, which happened to coincide with 3 of Orton's reigns as champion. Frankly, that alone shows it had nothing to do with Orton, and more to do with many many factors outside of who happens to be champion at the time (especially when the champion at times wasn't even the main part of the show). 

Frankly, the only point you might be able to credit Orton with having anything to do with increasing revenue is for quarter 2 in 2009, which going by the chart is the only quarter 2 to increase in revenue over the previous quarter. But didn't the guest host stuff start that quarter? If so, you can't really say whether Orton was a factor or not but if it wasn't in play yet, then that's the only time period you could point to and say Orton maybe helped out business.

And even then, there are still too many outside factors to really do that.


----------



## MaybeLock

Alo0oy said:


> You're confusing WM28 with WM27.
> 
> 
> 
> That would be true in some cases, especially outliers, but when looking at a repeated pattern, it's no longer a coincidence. That's how it works in every business not just WWE, a revenue spike can happen in any business for other reasons besides their flagship product, but when revenue increases every time you advertize a certain product, it's pretty clear that product is the reason revenue increases.


But at that point WM27 beat all the records as far as Im concerned. Then 28 did beat 27. But it still doesn't make sense that revenue was going down.

I think BadNewsSanta is spot on. First Orton reign in 2009 is really remarkable because business usually goes down in that quarter. The rest it seems it only follows the pattern. All of this if we credit the champ for the revenue, which might be a long shot tbh, specially when there were bigger things going on away from the title feud.


----------



## Alo0oy

#BadNewsSanta said:


> If you want a pattern, look no further than the fact all of the quarter 4's had an increase in business, which happened to coincide with 3 of Orton's reigns as champion. Frankly, that alone shows it had nothing to do with Orton, and more to do with many many factors outside of who happens to be champion at the time (especially when the champion at times wasn't even the main part of the show).
> 
> Frankly, the only point you might be able to credit Orton with having anything to do with increasing revenue is for quarter 2 in 2009, which going by the chart is the only quarter 2 to increase in revenue over the previous quarter. But didn't the guest host stuff start that quarter? If so, you can't really say whether Orton was a factor or not but if it wasn't in play yet, then that's the only time period you could point to and say Orton maybe helped out business.
> 
> And even then, there are still too many outside factors to really do that.


I don't think you read that Forbes article, that chart was normalized, every quarter was averaged with the three previous years of the same quarter, not the previous quarter of the same fiscal year. If you don't want to bother reading the article, I'll copy the relevant part:



> In order to adjust for the event’s impact on company financials, I averaged the three quarters prior to each Q2 WrestleMania and found that company revenue in the second quarters of 2009, 2011, 2012 and 2013 rose by an average 25% over the previous three quarters (these were relatively consistent increases, too, ranging from 22% to 33%). I then adjusted the numbers to diminish the perceived impact of WrestleMania on second-quarter revenues, which flattens out the sharp peaks seen above:





MaybeLock said:


> *But at that point WM27 beat all the records as far as Im concerned. Then 28 did beat 27. But it still doesn't make sense that revenue was going down.*
> 
> I think BadNewsSanta is spot on. First Orton reign in 2009 is really remarkable because business usually goes down in that quarter. The rest it seems it only follows the pattern. All of this if we credit the champ for the revenue, which might be a long shot tbh, specially when there were bigger things going on away from the title feud.


Again, you're confusing that with WM28 & WM29, both broke records, not WM27, as for the second paragraph, see above.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Alo0oy said:


> Go ahead & search my post history, I've made it very clear that I'm a big fan of DB, I just don't like some of his extreme marks.
> 
> 
> Gotta love all the posters in this thread being butthurt over that chart though. :lmao


Oh trust me, I've read your post history.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

Goldusto said:


> the reason for that is they were told bare face lies about the entire thing, EVERYONE believed that the network was going to be the holy netflix type grail of wrasslin' then it turned out to be full of shit everyone including forbes re evaluated that and WWE are where they were at a year ago.
> 
> and some million less viewers this week, 4th of july too stronk


It's because the people writing those articles on Forbes have no clue what they're talking about. 6 million subscribers is fucking idiotic regardless of what WWE says. WWE's own regular audience doesn't reach that. Wrestlemania manages a million buys with big time stars like The Rock. So how would the Network gather 6 million subscriptions? What clown would even think to make such a prediction with what is essentially a niche entertainment? The articles are bullshit made by armchair analysts. 

What makes this all worse is, that unlike other industries where information isn't fully available, WWE actually has a corporate website where they have their reports available and provide their analysis and comments. They literally give you everything to see. You get a breakdown of their revenue streams, how many live events they do, their licenses, sponsorhips, merchandise etc. but no one ever looks at them. Most of you all just rely on dirstsheet crap and having false information spoonfed to you. It's why people are dumb enough to believe Cena somehow makes $100 million for the company on a yearly basis, and are now lending credence to a graph about correlating champions with business income when that hasn't mattered since 2008 or so.

Wrestling fans are a caricature of themselves.


----------



## Punkholic

> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	4447	1.6
> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4514	1.5
> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4183	1.3


*Source:* http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...lf-switched-at-birth-the-fosters-more/280549/



> The 7/7 episode did 4,381,000 viewers, up from last week's 4,332,000 viewers.


*Source:* http://pwinsider.com/article/86796/raw-audience-up-from-last-week-.html?p=1


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wow, numbers are actually holding steady, and up from last year's numbers of the same week. Honestly, wasn't expecting the average to be at this level until the build to Summerslam.


----------



## validreasoning

basically averaging 4.4 million over 3 hours is very strong for july especially leading into what is essentially a throw-away ppv. i wonder whats driving numbers last 2 weeks. its easy to say cena as champion but cena was champion this time last year and numbers were nowhere near as strong and monday beat out a number of raws (including the final show before mania 29 which was overflowing with starpower) during the rocks title reign last year.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Wow, numbers are actually holding steady, and up from last year's numbers of the same week. Honestly, wasn't expecting the average to be at this level until the build to Summerslam.


Bolieve in Roman Reigns perhaps? He's been pushed the hardest.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The Boy Wonder said:


> Bolieve in Roman Reigns perhaps? He's been pushed the hardest.


Wish we could tell, but no friggin breakdowns. 

It would make sense to an extent, although his spot this week was in the worst hour. However, a breakdown may have proved he held the hour up with his quarter.

Actually, it had to be Sandhart who drew people in as he was in the highest hour. Yeah, they should push that guy ASAP l. :sandow


----------



## D.M.N.

Year on year for the past six weeks:

- 3.68m vs 4.15m
- 3.99m vs 4.12m
- 4.15m vs 4.12m
- 3.98m vs 4.03m
- 3.96m vs 4.33m
- 4.17m vs 4.38m

In fact, you want to know how good last week's and this week's numbers were? WWE never averaged more than 4.3 million once between May and December last year. Yet they've just done it two weeks in a row.

They are a good few hundred thousand lower than 2012 though, but that was before the three hour era.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

What happened in the 2nd hour to have more ratings?


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

SóniaPortugal said:


> What happened in the 2nd hour to have more ratings?


It was Orton-Ambrose at the top of the hour. Then Bret Hart. Then the beginning of Jericho-Miz.



The Boy Wonder said:


> Bolieve in Roman Reigns perhaps? He's been pushed the hardest.


While that's certainly possible, I suspect the numbers are up largely because of Jericho and (to a far lesser extent) Cena as champion.


----------



## Jerichoholic4Life

Soul Man Danny B said:


> It was Orton-Ambrose at the top of the hour. Then Bret Hart. Then the beginning of Jericho-Miz.
> 
> While that's certainly possible, I suspect the numbers are up largely because of Jericho and (to a far lesser extent) Cena as champion.


Unfortunately, Jericho has never been a ratings draw though. His return in 2012 was a lot bigger than this one and he was immediately losing viewers back then so I doubt he's suddenly a huge draw now.


----------



## BrownianMotion

SóniaPortugal said:


> What happened in the 2nd hour to have more ratings?


Dean Ambrose match. The guy is a fucking draw!


----------



## Shenroe

BrownianMotion said:


> Dean Ambrose match. The guy is a fucking draw!


Believe that! But more seriously this hour was stacked as it were.


----------



## Selfdestructo

The last 4 Raws have been an undeniable improvement over the status quo. I keep expecting them to revert back to their constant highlights from "earlier tonight" but they have been doing much less of it. There's more wrestling in the product, and they're even putting their midcard guys in feuds. Fandango vs. Dolph Ziggler feud now? This is a good idea for a feud and the Raw writers from literally 2 months ago would have chosen to do nothing with either guy.

I don't know what caused the improvement, but let's hope it stays.


----------



## LOL-ins

:ambrose :reigns

Ratings Reigns and Dean Numbrose does it again. :mark::mark::mark::mark::mark:


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I think the good ratings have something to do with the new talent being push in the main event scene. Guys like Reigns, Ambrose and Rollins.


----------



## Londrick

Can't even break 5 million. That Cena mega drawing power. :ti


----------



## RKO 4life

I see Orton once again bring in the ratings. 

Also guys the ratings will only get higher with Bryan and Punk not coming back as I stand for what I know and I know if you push one of those two guys it turns most fans off.


----------



## Shenroe

Orton? :ti


----------



## superuser1

Randall Keith Orton bringing in that revenue and ratings


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Orton definitely makes me want to draw a hot bath and flog my molly like CRAZY


----------



## uknoww

the G.O.A.T randy orton bringing in them ratings


----------



## BrownianMotion

Are you guys referring to Orton The Legend Ratings Killer?


----------



## RKO 4life

uknoww said:


> the G.O.A.T randy orton bringing in them ratings


and he will always draw, the thing is the company never gives him anything to work with and he shits on them every time even half ass'ing shit and coming out smelling like roses and he is indeed the GOAT with Hogan second.

To think they gave the belt to Cena, my god I'm so sick of them not doing the right feuds. Ol'well his-Orton match with Reigns will out do Cena vs part timer at Summerslam.


----------



## Shenroe

:jordan5 Yeah Orton, suddenly a rating draw.


----------



## validreasoning

average live raw viewership first 27 weeks of 2013 = 4.343 million viewers
average live raw viewership first 27 weeks of 2014 = 4.342 million viewers

thats insanely consistent, there can't be anything else on tv that consistent surely


----------



## Joshi Judas

The consistency is impressive too, considering no Punk or Bryan. Cena's there of course. The Shield seem to be holding up the ratings well in Bryan's absence.


----------



## Super Sonic

That's a good thing actually, less pressure to bring D-Bry back too soon, assuming he does come back of course.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Jesus Christ, 1000 less viewers? Where's the fucking panic button???! !!1


----------



## superuser1

BrownianMotion said:


> Are you guys referring to Orton The Legend Ratings Killer?


nah orton the guy who brings in more revenue than cena and punk


----------



## Londrick

Even after ten years of being pushed Orton still can't draw a circle. :ti


----------



## Choke2Death

Londrick said:


> Even after ten years of being pushed Orton still can't draw a circle. :ti


That's not true at all!

He drew a perfectly shaped circle on Bryan's gut last year.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*REPORT: The Daniel Bryan Effect - How Bryan's injury absence has affected Raw TV ratings since Extreme Rules, plus comparison to post-Mania Season in past years* 





> C.M. Punk and Daniel Bryan are still on Raw TV - if you go by to a boilerplate USA Network blurb released this weekend promoting their upcoming TV line-up.
> 
> If only Bryan were still available. Since May 5 - the night after Bryan's last WWE match at Extreme Rules - WWE has not tasted a 3.0 rating. Not even going back to John Cena as WWE champion has produced a 3.0.
> 
> The May 5 Raw scored a 3.02 rating, then Raw slipped below the psychological 3.0 level the following week when Bryan began to be written off TV due to his injury status.
> 
> Raw fell as far as a 2.64 rating on May 26 in the meat of the NBA Playoffs, rebounded to a 2.94 rating the night after Payback, fell back to a 2.84 rating before Money in the Bank, and rebounded to a 2.94 and 2.90 rating the past two weeks following MITB.
> 
> Now, WWE's business was not centered on Bryan, even when he was champion. It was still about the brand, John Cena, and then Bryan. But, Bryan is one of the few WWE wrestlers of the past five years to truly impact WWE's ratings.
> 
> Whether it was a long-form match, a verbal exchange with Triple H, a verbal exchange with Stephanie McMahon, a backstage skit with Kane, or anything else involving Bryan, people flocked to his segments. His versatility made him extremely valuable to WWE, creatively.
> 
> Leading up to WrestleMania 30, Raw's TV ratings were at times singlehandedly boosted by whatever Bryan was doing a particular week. The long-term build-up - by today's standards - of getting Bryan to the top of the mountain at WM30 endeared him to the audience, created a new top star, and set up WWE for a strong follow-through after WrestleMania.
> 
> But, The Injury surfaced, WWE was forced to go back to Cena as WWE champion without much of a story or title quest to re-engage the audience, and WWE broke up The Shield earlier than anticipated.
> 
> The follow-up question is how WWE has fared in past years during the traditional WrestleMania lull season. Is the rating staying below a 3.0 simply a seasonal adjustment compounded by the effect of the NBA Playoffs, DVR'ing, and fragmented cable TV market? Let's examine.
> 
> - First, in 2014, from the period of post-Extreme Rules to the current point in the beginning of July, no episode has scored above a 3.0 rating since May 5.
> 
> - Last year, four Raw episodes scored above a 3.0 during the same time period. The episodes were June 10, June 17, July 8, and July 15 after WWE took a deep breath in May. The peak rating was a 3.08 on July 8.
> 
> - In 2012, six episodes scored above a 3.0 during the same time period. Raw was consistently above a 3.0, then took a huge hit on Memorial Day May 28 against the NBA Playoffs and Hatfield & McCoys, then reset the show and peaked with a 3.42 rating on June 18.
> 
> - In 2011, every episode except the Fourth of July was above a 3.0 rating during the period. The peak was a 3.42 rating on May 23, inflated for the first Raw after Randy Savage's death.
> 
> Each year, DVR'ing becomes more and more of a factor, but WWE strongly emphasized during TV contract negotiations earlier this year that their programming is "DVR-proof," citing a 90 percent live viewing experience. So, by their own admission, DVR'ing cannot be weighed too heavily in the comparison.
> 
> Another factor, the NBA Playoffs, should be weighed, as the NBA drew very strong ratings throughout each round, especially the memorably competitive First Round.
> 
> The one wild card is the WWE Network. Are subscribers to the new service getting enough WWE content that Raw has become skippable some weeks? Or, on the flip side, have fans dropped off from WWE because they either cannot, will not, or do not know how to access the Network?
> 
> All of these factors have to be weighed. *But, at the end of the day, the effect of Daniel Bryan's absence outweighs all of them based on how much of an impact he made before WrestleMania, how WWE went through on paying off his journey at WM30, and the number of opponents that were lined up for Bryan after Kane at Extreme Rules leading to Brock Lesnar at Summerslam.
> 
> WWE was forced to call an audible after Bryan's injury pushed him out of the WWE Title picture and all the way off TV. The follow-through has not made up for Bryan's absence.
> 
> July is usually when WWE picks up steam heading into Summerslam, but the post-MITB episode on June 30 and the post-Reset Raw episode on July 7 did not get Raw over the 3.0 hump. Perhaps WWE gets another taste after Battleground leading into Summerslam. But, without Bryan, it's been an uphill battle this season.*



Perhaps for the last time: *DAT DEMO DRAWING DRAGON DAZZLES DEM RATINGZ* :bryan


----------



## Shenroe

Choke2Death said:


> That's not true at all!
> 
> He drew a perfectly shaped circle on Bryan's gut last year.


I was mighty impressed that day :lol He must have practiced the move all week lol.


----------



## kokepepsi

IDONTSHIV said:


> *REPORT: The Daniel Bryan Effect - How Bryan's injury absence has affected Raw TV ratings since Extreme Rules, plus comparison to post-Mania Season in past years*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps for the last time: *DAT DEMO DRAWING DRAGON DAZZLES DEM RATINGZ* :bryan


Did this guy no sell the downtrend of ratings and the 3hour raw effect
:ti

You can even use the same info he used to make Punk look more important
But whatever I don't want to start a flame war between marks
Carry on my wayward sons

@Choke2Death
That was fucking hilarious


----------



## Shenroe

kokepepsi said:


> *Did this guy no sell the downtrend of ratings and the 3hour raw effect
> :ti*
> 
> You can even use the same info he used to make Punk look more important
> But whatever I don't want to start a flame war between marks
> Carry on my wayward sons
> 
> @Choke2Death
> That was fucking hilarious


He did:jordan4


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> That's not true at all!
> 
> He drew a perfectly shaped circle on Bryan's gut last year.


That's actually one fine ass circle.


----------



## DoubtGin

Not suprised someone at PWTorch released that article :lmao

They even only post ratings breakdowns if they can present Bryan as a huge draw.

Speaking of those, we need breakdowns again.


----------



## Shenroe

DoubtGin said:


> Not suprised someone at PWTorch released that article :lmao
> 
> They even only post ratings breakdowns if they can present Bryan as a huge draw.
> 
> Speaking of those, we need breakdowns again.



Must be sore the company didn't crumble from within during Bryan absence :jordan


----------



## The XL

No one in todays product really draws ratings. Not Bryan either. At least he doesn't seem to lose them, though.


----------



## DoubtGin

Yea Bryan is usually doing pretty well when compared to the others, to be honest. Nothing revolutionary, but people like to see him on TV.


----------



## RKO 4life

WWE stocks at an all time high when Orton was Champion.

You people talking like Bryan is a draw is full of shit. WWE indeed lost money right after WM, WWE making cuts because they lost the smart mind they once had which is sad.


----------



## DanielBryanFanXXX

People comparing CM Punk to Daniel Bryan, don't even do it,

Wrestlemania 30 is now the biggest domestic draw in wrestling history(correct me if I'm wrong), with around 1 million domestic buys, wow. I wonder how much they made worldwide.



His character was actually a phony, 

Did the Punk character ever have the balls to Occupy Raw like Daniel Bryan did?

No.

Did CM Punk ever follow up with his promise of change?

No, WWE remained almost the same in 2012 after his 2011 promises, No Ice Cream bars, Same product, No compelling storylines such as the present Authority storyline with Daniel Bryan.

the anti-authority gimmick ended in 2011 after Cm Punk failed to do what he said he was going to do, his pipebombs were the ones you find in GI Joes at Toys R Us, they were fake. 

Bring change to the WWE? Punk didn't cause it, just look at the year 2012, Daniel Bryan and The Shield brought change in 2013. 

Did Punk Put over anyone? Never happened, Ryback never went over Punk, the Ryback/Axel/Heyman feud failed, beat the entire Shield at once in a handicap match and almost brought them down.

Punk called himself the best in the world despite losing cleanly to the likes of The Undertaker, Rock, and Cena. his character was the embodiment of all talk, no substance, an insult to intelligence.

Daniel Bryan however brought change, Unlike Punk he beat Cena clean(No distractions), 

Daniel Bryan had pops that Punk never had in his life, 

People wanted to see Daniel Bryan win the Royal Rumble this year, not Cm Punk, 

People wanted Daniel Bryan to be WWE champion, not Cm Punk.

Daniel Bryan was the draw, the CM Punk thing from 2011 was nothing more than an experiment that failed to change or improve the product, The Shield and the Daniel Bryan/Authority angles brought change to WWE and led us to where we are now, even John Cena helped by lowering himself down the card, and putting over Daniel Bryan cleanly.

What did Punk do? Have failed angles with Ryback/Axel and Heyman, beat the Shield in a handicap match, never brought the change that said he would in 2011, never drew as much as Daniel Bryan has lately and never got a pop at big as Daniel Bryan's Yes chant.

Daniel Bryan is more of anti-abuse/anti-oppression character than Punk ever was, unlike Punk, Daniel Bryan drew and changed something, Daniel Bryan displayed more anti-abuse/oppression in his Occupy Raw segment alone than Cm Punk ever has.

And yes I miss Daniel Bryan, no one in modern times other than the Rock gave us that huge attitude era like(For example Occupy Raw) storyline than Daniel Bryan. 

CM Punk was a phony and his storyline was a tease.


----------



## Cobalt

DanielBryanFanXXX said:


> People comparing CM Punk to Daniel Bryan, don't even do it,
> 
> Wrestlemania 30 is now the biggest domestic draw in wrestling history(correct me if I'm wrong), with around 1 million domestic buys, wow. I wonder how much they made worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> His character was actually a phony,
> 
> Did the Punk character ever have the balls to Occupy Raw like Daniel Bryan did?
> 
> No.
> 
> Did CM Punk ever follow up with his promise of change?
> 
> No, WWE remained almost the same in 2012 after his 2011 promises, No Ice Cream bars, Same product, No compelling storylines such as the present Authority storyline with Daniel Bryan.
> 
> the anti-authority gimmick ended in 2011 after Cm Punk failed to do what he said he was going to do, his pipebombs were the ones you find in GI Joes at Toys R Us, they were fake.
> 
> Bring change to the WWE? Punk didn't cause it, just look at the year 2012, Daniel Bryan and The Shield brought change in 2013.
> 
> Did Punk Put over anyone? Never happened, Ryback never went over Punk, the Ryback/Axel/Heyman feud failed, beat the entire Shield at once in a handicap match and almost brought them down.
> 
> Punk called himself the best in the world despite losing cleanly to the likes of The Undertaker, Rock, and Cena. his character was the embodiment of all talk, no substance, an insult to intelligence.
> 
> Daniel Bryan however brought change, Unlike Punk he beat Cena clean(No distractions),
> 
> Daniel Bryan had pops that Punk never had in his life,
> 
> People wanted to see Daniel Bryan win the Royal Rumble this year, not Cm Punk,
> 
> People wanted Daniel Bryan to be WWE champion, not Cm Punk.
> 
> Daniel Bryan was the draw, the CM Punk thing from 2011 was nothing more than an experiment that failed to change or improve the product, The Shield and the Daniel Bryan/Authority angles brought change to WWE and led us to where we are now, even John Cena helped by lowering himself down the card, and putting over Daniel Bryan cleanly.
> 
> What did Punk do? Have failed angles with Ryback/Axel and Heyman, beat the Shield in a handicap match, never brought the change that said he would in 2011, never drew as much as Daniel Bryan has lately and never got a pop at big as Daniel Bryan's Yes chant.
> 
> Daniel Bryan is more of anti-abuse/anti-oppression character than Punk ever was, unlike Punk, Daniel Bryan drew and changed something, Daniel Bryan displayed more anti-abuse/oppression in his Occupy Raw segment alone than Cm Punk ever has.
> 
> And yes I miss Daniel Bryan, no one in modern times other than the Rock gave us that huge attitude era like(For example Occupy Raw) storyline than Daniel Bryan.
> 
> CM Punk was a phony and his storyline was a tease.


fpalm fpalm

The newest member to the already unbearable Bryan marks.


----------



## NastyYaffa

DanielBryanFanXXX said:


> People comparing CM Punk to Daniel Bryan, don't even do it,
> 
> Wrestlemania 30 is now the biggest domestic draw in wrestling history(correct me if I'm wrong), with around 1 million domestic buys, wow. I wonder how much they made worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> His character was actually a phony,
> 
> Did the Punk character ever have the balls to Occupy Raw like Daniel Bryan did?
> 
> No.
> 
> Did CM Punk ever follow up with his promise of change?
> 
> No, WWE remained almost the same in 2012 after his 2011 promises, No Ice Cream bars, Same product, No compelling storylines such as the present Authority storyline with Daniel Bryan.
> 
> the anti-authority gimmick ended in 2011 after Cm Punk failed to do what he said he was going to do, his pipebombs were the ones you find in GI Joes at Toys R Us, they were fake.
> 
> Bring change to the WWE? Punk didn't cause it, just look at the year 2012, Daniel Bryan and The Shield brought change in 2013.
> 
> Did Punk Put over anyone? Never happened, Ryback never went over Punk, the Ryback/Axel/Heyman feud failed, beat the entire Shield at once in a handicap match and almost brought them down.
> 
> Punk called himself the best in the world despite losing cleanly to the likes of The Undertaker, Rock, and Cena. his character was the embodiment of all talk, no substance, an insult to intelligence.
> 
> Daniel Bryan however brought change, Unlike Punk he beat Cena clean(No distractions),
> 
> Daniel Bryan had pops that Punk never had in his life,
> 
> People wanted to see Daniel Bryan win the Royal Rumble this year, not Cm Punk,
> 
> People wanted Daniel Bryan to be WWE champion, not Cm Punk.
> 
> Daniel Bryan was the draw, the CM Punk thing from 2011 was nothing more than an experiment that failed to change or improve the product, The Shield and the Daniel Bryan/Authority angles brought change to WWE and led us to where we are now, even John Cena helped by lowering himself down the card, and putting over Daniel Bryan cleanly.
> 
> What did Punk do? Have failed angles with Ryback/Axel and Heyman, beat the Shield in a handicap match, never brought the change that said he would in 2011, never drew as much as Daniel Bryan has lately and never got a pop at big as Daniel Bryan's Yes chant.
> 
> Daniel Bryan is more of anti-abuse/anti-oppression character than Punk ever was, unlike Punk, Daniel Bryan drew and changed something, Daniel Bryan displayed more anti-abuse/oppression in his Occupy Raw segment alone than Cm Punk ever has.
> 
> And yes I miss Daniel Bryan, no one in modern times other than the Rock gave us that huge attitude era like(For example Occupy Raw) storyline than Daniel Bryan.
> 
> CM Punk was a phony and his storyline was a tease.


Beautiful. And the Punk marks are already crying. :clap


----------



## Nasul

"Did the Punk character ever have the balls to Occupy Raw like Daniel Bryan did?"
what?


----------



## Shenroe

Here we go again Bryan-Punk marks war( featuring Orton marks) :ti


----------



## MaybeLock

Damn, the ratings thread is reaching a whole new level of awfulness. Breakdowns why did you leave us?


----------



## Tweener ken

DanielBryanFanXXX said:


> People comparing CM Punk to Daniel Bryan, don't even do it,
> 
> Wrestlemania 30 is now the biggest domestic draw in wrestling history(correct me if I'm wrong), with around 1 million domestic buys, wow. I wonder how much they made worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> His character was actually a phony,
> 
> Did the Punk character ever have the balls to Occupy Raw like Daniel Bryan did?
> 
> No.
> 
> Did CM Punk ever follow up with his promise of change?
> 
> No, WWE remained almost the same in 2012 after his 2011 promises, No Ice Cream bars, Same product, No compelling storylines such as the present Authority storyline with Daniel Bryan.
> 
> the anti-authority gimmick ended in 2011 after Cm Punk failed to do what he said he was going to do, his pipebombs were the ones you find in GI Joes at Toys R Us, they were fake.
> 
> Bring change to the WWE? Punk didn't cause it, just look at the year 2012, Daniel Bryan and The Shield brought change in 2013.
> 
> Did Punk Put over anyone? Never happened, Ryback never went over Punk, the Ryback/Axel/Heyman feud failed, beat the entire Shield at once in a handicap match and almost brought them down.
> 
> Punk called himself the best in the world despite losing cleanly to the likes of The Undertaker, Rock, and Cena. his character was the embodiment of all talk, no substance, an insult to intelligence.
> 
> Daniel Bryan however brought change, Unlike Punk he beat Cena clean(No distractions),
> 
> Daniel Bryan had pops that Punk never had in his life,
> 
> People wanted to see Daniel Bryan win the Royal Rumble this year, not Cm Punk,
> 
> People wanted Daniel Bryan to be WWE champion, not Cm Punk.
> 
> Daniel Bryan was the draw, the CM Punk thing from 2011 was nothing more than an experiment that failed to change or improve the product, The Shield and the Daniel Bryan/Authority angles brought change to WWE and led us to where we are now, even John Cena helped by lowering himself down the card, and putting over Daniel Bryan cleanly.
> 
> What did Punk do? Have failed angles with Ryback/Axel and Heyman, beat the Shield in a handicap match, never brought the change that said he would in 2011, never drew as much as Daniel Bryan has lately and never got a pop at big as Daniel Bryan's Yes chant.
> 
> Daniel Bryan is more of anti-abuse/anti-oppression character than Punk ever was, unlike Punk, Daniel Bryan drew and changed something, Daniel Bryan displayed more anti-abuse/oppression in his Occupy Raw segment alone than Cm Punk ever has.
> 
> And yes I miss Daniel Bryan, no one in modern times other than the Rock gave us that huge attitude era like(For example Occupy Raw) storyline than Daniel Bryan.
> 
> CM Punk was a phony and his storyline was a tease.


Nice to see that kayfabe is still alive.


----------



## D.M.N.

Extremely surprised to see PWTorch using ratings instead of viewership numbers, as viewing numbers wise, they're actually up year-on-year....



D.M.N. said:


> With quarter two (April to June) over, here is how the quarter rated versus previous years. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q2 2007):
> 
> - the previous quarter (Q1 2007)
> - one year earlier (Q2 2006)
> - two years earlier (Q2 2005)
> 
> Which gives us:
> 
> 2003	- 3.7 rating / 3.20 million households
> 2004	- 3.7 rating / 3.25 million households (-4.4%)
> 2005	- 4.0 rating / 3.52 million households (+7.4%)
> 2006	- 4.1 rating / 3.68 million households (+5.5%)
> 2007	- 3.8 rating / 3.51 million households (-2.7%)
> 2008	- 3.2 rating / 3.11 million households (-12.6%)
> 2009	- 3.6 rating / 3.58 million households (+5.5%)
> 2010	- 3.2 rating / 3.21 million households (-5.5%)
> 2011	- 3.3 rating / 3.29 million households (-3.7%)
> 2012	- 3.1 rating / 3.13 million households (-2.8%) [4.47 million viewers / 2.14 million A18-49]
> 2013	- 3.0 rating / 2.98 million households (-7.7%) [4.13 million viewers / 1.84 million A18-49]
> 2014	- 3.0 rating / 2.96 million households (-3.9%) [4.24 million viewers / 1.90 million A18-49]
> 
> And from a percentage point of view, the most successful quarter one's were:
> 
> +7.4 - 2005
> +5.5 - 2009
> +5.5 - 2006
> -2.7 - 2007
> -2.8 - 2012
> -3.7 - 2011
> -3.9 - 2014
> -4.4 - 2004
> -5.5 - 2010
> -7.7 - 2013
> -12.6 - 2008
> 
> Coming off WrestleMania, quarter two is always a bit of a rut as WWE has fought to keep the viewers, and on only three occasions - 2005, 2006 and 2009 have they actually succeeded. 2005 needs no introduction as it coincided with the rise of Batista and John Cena, whilst quarter two in 2006 seen the re-birth of ECW and the DX reunion, both big ratings movers at the time. 2009's high numbers are down to the guest host concept, and also the first commercial free Raw, which drew over six million viewers, a massive number for WWE.
> 
> It says a lot about 2008 that I don't remember much about it, although I seem to remember William Regal being King of the Ring.... and promptly being suspended by WWE for 60 days. Michaels vs Jericho I think began in June that year, but post-WrestleMania in 2008 can best be summarised as a disaster. Last year also did quite poor with Cena as champion facing various people.
> 
> 2014 is middle of the road. Statistically, it is the lowest household number since before the Attitude Era for quarter two, however the raw viewing numbers have increased versus 2013 - which suggests that more people are watching Raw together than in previous years. I think they will be pleased with the numbers, as it shows for me that what they're doing - and more importantly, who they are pushing, is working. It says a lot how in 2013 we had three Raw's in June under 4 million, yet this year, all four are above 4 million. Good news for WWE.
> 
> And, whether people like it or not, Cena vs Lesnar at SummerSlam for the title _will_ more than likely draw fairly big TV numbers for the company into August.


----------



## RabidCrow

NastyYaffa said:


> Beautiful. And the Punk marks are already crying. :clap


:maury


----------



## BrownianMotion

MaybeLock said:


> Damn, the ratings thread is reaching a whole new level of awfulness. Breakdowns why did you leave us?


I don't think you want to compare breakdowns between CM Punk and Daniel Bryan. Punk was getting outdrawn by Cena in segments/matches in which they had the same opponents (by a large margin.) Daniel Bryan has actually been able to have segments/matches where he has outdrawn Cena.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

DanielBryanFanXXX said:


> People comparing CM Punk to Daniel Bryan, don't even do it,


And yet, you just did.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

DanielBryanFanXXX said:


> People comparing CM Punk to Daniel Bryan, don't even do it,
> 
> Wrestlemania 30 is now the biggest domestic draw in wrestling history(correct me if I'm wrong), with around 1 million domestic buys, wow. I wonder how much they made worldwide.


Whilst I agree that CM Punk wasn't really a big star when it comes down to it in terms of drawing numbers, what you've said here is actually completely incorrect.

Wrestlemania 30 is the worst performing Wrestlemania WWE has had in the past decade. Since 19 if I was to be more specific. It had the worst international buyrate ever for Wrestlemania and the domestic buyrate was actually only about 351,000 which is also terrible.

The big chunk of claimed viewership is from the Network subscriptions which were over 600,000. However this has nothing to do with Bryan as those subcriptions were sold long before he was confirmed to be headlining Wrestlemania, and in addition to that, that's WWE giving away 6 months of PPVs (not just Wrestlemania) and lots of other content for $10 a month for 6 months. It has a knock-on effect of great proportions, especially considering the other costs going into the Network which have led to losses financially.

WWE tried their best to spin Wrestlemania 30's domestic viewership as 'the most watched Wrestlemania of all time domestically' but seeing as we don't know how many subscibers even tuned in, that the international buyrate was terrible, and even with the Network subscriptions, the overall number is lukewarm, if not terrible, considering the financial implications of the Network and how much sacrifice was made.

Basically, seeing how the Network is going at the moment, Wrestlemania 30 will be looked back upon as much less of a success. And WWE spin is trying their best for the moment.

Wrestlemania 30 basically continued the downward trend we saw from Wrestlemania 25-26 that displayed a lack of interest in the product in comparison to the bigger years of 2005-2008, which was avoided for the next three Wrestlemania shows (27, 28, 29) thanks to The Rock mostly. Now that his starpower is absent, we're back to the decline we saw before.


----------



## RabidCrow

BrownianMotion said:


> I don't think you want to compare breakdowns between CM Punk and Daniel Bryan. Punk was getting outdrawn by Cena in segments/matches in which they had the same opponents (by a large margin.) Daniel Bryan has actually been able to have segments/matches where he has outdrawn Cena.


Really? :cool2



> The main event with CM Punk vs. Big Show and John Cena teasing a Money in the Bank cash in gained 719,000 viewers for a 3.99 quarter rating.


And



> John Cena vs. Big Show gained 11,000 viewers in the main event, doing a 2.52 quarter rating.


----------



## Starbuck

Punk marks just can't let go. :lol


----------



## BrownianMotion

RabidCrow said:


> Really? :cool2
> 
> 
> 
> And


You are including a segment which included Cena and using that as a counterargument?

How about this: http://allwrestling.com/newswireitem/7193/wwe-news-ratings-viewership-every/



> *CM Punk vs. Tensai and Bryan Lost 105,000 Viewers For a Final 2.9 Rating*
> 
> As the report states, it is nearly impossible for the main event segment to be this low. People turning on the USA Network for the next show must not have been enough to make up for all the viewers who turned Raw off.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, for a final segment of Raw to lose viewers is nearly impossible. In the near 20 year history of Raw, I can't ever remember this happening. That is some serious (bad) history making numbers there.
> 
> 
> 
> For some quick history, check out these figures.
> 
> Last week's Raw ended with a 3.5 rating with Cena, John Laurinaitis, and Tensai.
> 
> The week before ended with a 3.8 rating with Cena and Lesnar.
> 
> 
> 
> The two weeks before that with Tensai vs. Cena drew a 3.4 rating.
> 
> Before that, Cena vs. Otunga received a 3.4 final rating. Yes, Otunga!
> 
> The excuse surely to be used this week of "the opponents for Punk were boring" is invalid. Sorry folks, weak heels seemed to draw just fine against Cena a few weeks ago!
> 
> Tensai vs. Cena performed well just last month. Even David Otunga vs. John Cena in the main event delivered a 3.4 rating a few weeks ago. Again, Otunga vs. Cena drew a 3.4 rating to end Raw.


----------



## RabidCrow

BrownianMotion said:


> You are including a segment which included Cena and using that as a counterargument?
> 
> How about this: http://allwrestling.com/newswireitem/7193/wwe-news-ratings-viewership-every/



You just said Cm Punk can't outdraw Cena in segments with the same wrestlers, and it prove you totally wrong.

And I dont know what are you trying to point here, Punk already proved that he can actually draw with boring opponents.



> CM Punk vs. Curtis Axel in the 9pm timeslot gained around 683,000 viewers for a 3.4 quarter rating, which are very good numbers.


This match with fucking *CURTIS AXEL *drew more than any single match of John Cena with him.

Also.


> CM Punk vs. Jerry Lawler in a steel cage main event match gained 479,000 viewers for a 3.35 overrun rating.





> CM Punk’s return to his hometown, promo with promo, Ryback brawl gained 364,000 for a huge 2.47 quarter rating in the ninth quarter.





> -The show opened at a 3.04 for the Alberto Del Rio, CM Punk and Paul Heyman segment.





> -Alberto Del Rio vs. CM Punk in the main event plus the post-match attacks from Dolph Ziggler and Brock Lesnar gained 636,000 viewers for a 3.42 overrun rating.





> Ryback vs. CM Punk in the TLC Match gained 515,000 viewers, a very good growth for 10pm right now. The first part of the match did a 3.52 quarter rating and the second part did a 3.44 quarter rating.


This guy gains a lot of viewers with guys like, Axel, Del Rio, Ryback and even Jerry Lawler. Who fucking cares how he did with Tensai?


----------



## BrownianMotion

RabidCrow said:


> You just said Cm Punk can't outdraw Cena in segments with the same wrestlers, and it prove you totally wrong.
> 
> And I dont know what are you trying to point here, Punk already proved that he can actually draw with boring opponents.
> 
> 
> 
> This match with fucking *CURTIS AXEL *drew more than any single match of John Cena with him.
> 
> Also.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This guy gains a lot of viewers with guys like, Axel, Del Rio, Ryback and even Jerry Lawler. Who fucking cares how he did with Tensai?


But John Cena was part of that CM Punk/Big Show match - he came out and threatened a cash in.

The Punk/Del Rio match had a Lesnar appearance. Of course it had a high ratings. People were well aware that the Lesnar/Punk feud would begin that night.

Other than that - Cena/Ryback outdrew Punk/Ryback by a large margin. http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe-ra...-for-july-29-cena-still-hot-shield-really-not


----------



## DanielBryanFanXXX

The Caped Crusader said:


> Wrestlemania 30 is the worst performing Wrestlemania WWE has had in the past decade. Since 19 if I was to be more specific. It had the worst international buyrate ever for Wrestlemania and the domestic buyrate was actually only about 351,000 which is also terrible.
> 
> The big chunk of claimed viewership is from the Network subscriptions which were over 600,000. However this has nothing to do with Bryan as those subcriptions were sold long before he was confirmed to be headlining Wrestlemania,


Of course there's going be a Lower Traditional PPV buyrate when there's the WWE network, it isn't a "terrible" as no viewers are lost, they simply gained them on the Network.

667,287 Network Subsribers + 350,000 Domestic PPV buys = About 1,017,287 Domestic buys, that is amazing,

Lets add that with about 300,000 international buys and you have an approximate total buyrate of 1,317,287

The international buys were down reportedly 120,000, not as bad as from Wrestlemania 28's 1,253,000 buyrate to Wrestlemania 29's 1,039,000 buyrate, that's 214000 buyrates lost from Wrestlemania 28 to Wrestlemania 29, and Rock was on both shows, whereas Wrestlemania 30 only lost around 120,000.

Total Number of people who bought the show combined(Domestic, WWE Network & International):

Wrestlemania 28 - 1,253,000 

Wrestlemania 29 - 1,048,000

Wrestlemania 30 - Approximately 1,300,000

To compare it with Mania's 25-26 is incorrect, XXX is going down as a top drawing Wrestlemania, Wrestlemania 28 is going down as the biggest PPV buyrate, Wrestlemania 29 is going down as the biggest live event revenue and Wrestlemania XXX is going down as most bought.

Also 3 questions,

#1, Proof that all 600,000+ buys were all sold Before he was confirmed? 

#2, It was clear that Daniel Bryan was going to main event Wrestlemania, even at Elimination Chamber, the ending where Michael Cole says "this has got to stop" gave it away.

#3 Daniel was confirmed to headline WMXXX on Occupy Raw, on March 10 2014, exactly Two weeks after the network launched, you meant to tell me that they got 600,000 subscribers in two weeks?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

People are still trying to act like Punk can't/didn't draw? :lmao

I think us Punk marks should just give up. Haters will think what they want, and the reality is even if Punk did well in a segment, to them it'll be down to the other guy.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

DanielBryanFanXXX said:


> Of course there's going be a Lower Traditional PPV buyrate when there's the WWE network, it isn't a "terrible" as no viewers are lost, they simply gained them on the Network.
> 
> 667,287 Network Subsribers + 350,000 Domestic PPV buys = About 1,017,287 Domestic buys, that is amazing,
> 
> Lets add that with about 300,000 international buys and you have an approximate total buyrate of 1,317,287
> 
> The international buys were down reportedly 120,000, not as bad as from Wrestlemania 28's 1,253,000 buyrate to Wrestlemania 29's 1,039,000 buyrate, that's 214000 buyrates lost from Wrestlemania 28 to Wrestlemania 29, and Rock was on both shows, whereas Wrestlemania 30 only lost around 120,000.
> 
> Total Number of people who bought the show combined(Domestic, WWE Network & International):
> 
> Wrestlemania 28 - 1,253,000
> 
> Wrestlemania 29 - 1,048,000
> 
> Wrestlemania 30 - Approximately 1,300,000
> 
> To compare it with Mania's 25-26 is incorrect, XXX is going down as a top drawing Wrestlemania, Wrestlemania 28 is going down as the biggest PPV buyrate, Wrestlemania 29 is going down as the biggest live event revenue and Wrestlemania XXX is going down as most bought.
> 
> Also 3 questions,
> 
> #1, Proof that all 600,000+ buys were all sold Before he was confirmed?
> 
> #2, It was clear that Daniel Bryan was going to main event Wrestlemania, even at Elimination Chamber, the ending where Michael Cole says "this has got to stop" gave it away.
> 
> #3 Daniel was confirmed to headline WMXXX on Occupy Raw, on March 10 2014, exactly Two weeks after the network launched, you meant to tell me that they got 600,000 subscribers in two weeks?


I don't think you understand how to analyse numbers.

Wrestlemania 30 had the worst international buyrate ever for Wrestlemania. That's a fact. The domestic buyrate was also pretty terrible without the subcriptions. Trying to obscure the overall figure using the Network subscriptions is stupid purely because of the fact that the Network isn't just Wrestlemania. It's 6 months of content at only $10 a month for several PPVs and a lot of infrastructure cost behind it. That infrastructure is currently kicking WWE up the ass due to the financial implications of it all and the losses they've suffered.

Trying to use 600,000 subscriptions to make it seem like Wrestlemania 30 is a great success is idiotic for that reason.

And asking for proof whether all 600,000+ subcriptions were sold before Bryan is confirmed further shows your lack of understanding. The people signing up for the Network aren't just doing it for Wrestlemania, nor are they doing just for Daniel Bryan. People weren't waiting to see, 'Will Daniel Bryan be headlining before I order?' The reason WWE priced the network so ridiculously cheap was to get lots of people to invest in it and sign up, and placing it before Wrestlemania was to try and appeal to people using it. They even offered a 1 week free trial when it laucnhed. It doesn't take a genius to know the majority of their subscriptions would have come very early, especially for those people looking to take advantage of the free trial. You can't attribute the Network viewership to Bryan. It's bloody stupid.

Raw averages around 4 million viewers. If WWE is offering their audience 6 months of content, including PPVs which are traditionally priced at $45 and $60 for Wrestlemania, only having 600,000 people sign up for 6 months isn't exactly amazing. Especially when they're offering Wrestlemania which even at it's worst in the past 10 years managed around 900,000 buys priced at $60 on its own.

And the downward trend is accurate because this is indicative of the figure we'd have expected from Wrestlemania 27 had The Rock all of a sudden not returned and had a mini-fued with Cena. The past three Wrestlemania shows were pretty much saved with his involvement.


----------



## BrownianMotion

The Caped Crusader said:


> I don't think you understand how to analyse numbers.
> 
> Wrestlemania 30 had the worst international buyrate ever for Wrestlemania. That's a fact. The domestic buyrate was also pretty terrible without the subcriptions. Trying to obscure the overall figure using the Network subscriptions is stupid purely because of the fact that the Network isn't just Wrestlemania. It's 6 months of content at only $10 a month for several PPVs and a lot of infrastructure cost behind it. That infrastructure is currently kicking WWE up the ass due to the financial implications of it all and the losses they've suffered.
> 
> Trying to use 600,000 subscriptions to make it seem like Wrestlemania 30 is a great success is idiotic for that reason.
> 
> And asking for proof whether all 600,000+ subcriptions were sold before Bryan is confirmed further shows your lack of understanding. The people signing up for the Network aren't just doing it for Wrestlemania, nor are they doing just for Daniel Bryan. People weren't waiting to see, 'Will Daniel Bryan be headlining before I order?' The reason WWE priced the network so ridiculously cheap was to get lots of people to invest in it and sign up, and placing it before Wrestlemania was to try and appeal to people using it. They even offered a 1 week free trial when it laucnhed. It doesn't take a genius to know the majority of their subscriptions would have come very early, especially for those people looking to take advantage of the free trial. You can't attribute the Network viewership to Bryan. It's bloody stupid.
> 
> Raw averages around 4 million viewers. If WWE is offering their audience 6 months of content, including PPVs which are traditionally priced at $45 and $60 for Wrestlemania, only having 600,000 people sign up for 6 months isn't exactly amazing. Especially when they're offering Wrestlemania which even at it's worst in the past 10 years managed around 900,000 buys priced at $60 on its own.
> 
> And the downward trend is accurate because this is indicative of the figure we'd have expected from Wrestlemania 27 had The Rock all of a sudden not returned and had a mini-fued with Cena. The past three Wrestlemania shows were pretty much saved with his involvement.


Correct me if I am wrong (because I can't remember) but are you not the same person who claimed Batista was a monstrous draw? How does that fit in with the, as you put it, terrible buyrate for an event he main evented?

Also, it's humorous that you would criticize someone else's data analysis skills when you tried to use annual revenue and attendance from live events as evidence of Batista's drawing power in comparison to Lesnar's. A competent data analyst would have collected data only on those live events headlined by the wrestler in question and run a regression analysis controlling for differences in city size and whatnot, in order to establish dependence and to explore the types of relationships between the variables in question. Looking simply at attendance and revenue is superficial and insufficient.


----------



## DanielBryanFanXXX

The Caped Crusader said:


> I don't think you understand how to analyse numbers.


What you think is not proof, present facts.



The Caped Crusader said:


> Wrestlemania 30 had the worst international buyrate ever for Wrestlemania. That's a fact. The domestic buyrate was also pretty terrible without the subcriptions.


:maury Assuming that the domestic buyrate would be low without the network, the reason why the Domestic PPV buyrate was low was because they Switched over to the Network.

Wrestlemania 30 only had about 100,000 less buys, compare that with Wrestlemania 29, where 214000 buys were lost from Wrestlemania 28



The Caped Crusader said:


> Trying to obscure the overall figure using the Network subscriptions is stupid purely because of the fact that the Network isn't just Wrestlemania. It's 6 months of content at only $10 a month for several PPVs and a lot of infrastructure cost behind it. That infrastructure is currently kicking WWE up the ass due to the financial implications of it all and the losses they've suffered.
> Trying to use 600,000 subscriptions to make it seem like Wrestlemania 30 is a great success is idiotic for that reason.


The Main selling point was Wrestlemania, hence why it came out Feb 24 with heavy promotion of Wrestlemania, rather than in January. the most watched show for months on the Network was Wrestlemania 30. enough rhetoric, present facts.



The Caped Crusader said:


> And asking for proof whether all 600,000+ subcriptions were sold before Bryan is confirmed further shows your lack of understanding. The people signing up for the Network aren't just doing it for Wrestlemania, nor are they doing just for Daniel Bryan. People weren't waiting to see, 'Will Daniel Bryan be headlining before I order?' The reason WWE priced the network so ridiculously cheap was to get lots of people to invest in it and sign up, and placing it before Wrestlemania was to try and appeal to people using it. They even offered a 1 week free trial when it laucnhed. It doesn't take a genius to know the majority of their subscriptions would have come very early, especially for those people looking to take advantage of the free trial. You can't attribute the Network viewership to Bryan. It's bloody stupid.


Doesn't refute the fact that your argument of 600,000 buys in 2 weeks doesn't work, Wrestlemania in every single Network ad was the main selling point,



The Caped Crusader said:


> Raw averages around 4 million viewers. If WWE is offering their audience 6 months of content, including PPVs which are traditionally priced at $45 and $60 for Wrestlemania, only having 600,000 people sign up for 6 months isn't exactly amazing. Especially when they're offering Wrestlemania which even at it's worst in the past 10 years managed around 900,000 buys priced at $60 on its own.


:floyd1 By that argument, any Wrestlemania which drew a million buys is bad because an average 4 million people watch Raw, you're trying too hard.



The Caped Crusader said:


> And the downward trend is accurate because this is indicative of the figure we'd have expected from Wrestlemania 27 had The Rock all of a sudden not returned and had a mini-fued with Cena. The past three Wrestlemania shows were pretty much saved with his involvement.


True, WWE was going downhill in late 2000s, Rock brought Wrestlemania buyrates, then Daniel Bryan drew the next one, How does WWE programming in 2013-2014 correlate to 2009-2010? That makes no sense, Wrestlemania XXX buys are up there with Rock mania's. Rock stopped the downhill trend and the Authority/Daniel Bryan storyline further stopped it, there's no downhill trend anymore.

Overall your argument contained absolutely no facts, made no sense and was desperate.


----------



## kokepepsi

2008


> Cena & Jeff Hardy vs. Umaga & JBL lost 44,000 viewers. That's amazing, because the 10 p.m. hour usually gains 300-500,000 new viewers.





> Cena & Jeff Hardy vs. Umaga & JBL lost 44,000 viewers. That's amazing, because the 10 p.m. hour usually gains 300-500,000 new viewers.





> Cena & Jeff Hardy vs. Umaga & JBL lost 44,000 viewers. That's amazing, because the 10 p.m. hour usually gains 300-500,000 new viewers.





> Cena & Jeff Hardy vs. Umaga & JBL lost 44,000 viewers. That's amazing, because the 10 p.m. hour usually gains 300-500,000 new viewers.





> Then, in the scary stat of the night, HHH vs. Jeff Hardy with Cena at ringside, plus the $250,000 giveaway lost 222,000 viewers. I can’t even remember the last time a Raw main event lost viewers in the overrun, or the last time the main event did a 2.99 rating.





> Then, in the scary stat of the night, HHH vs. Jeff Hardy with Cena at ringside, plus the $250,000 giveaway lost 222,000 viewers. I can’t even remember the last time a Raw main event lost viewers in the overrun, or the last time the main event did a 2.99 rating.





> Then, in the scary stat of the night, HHH vs. Jeff Hardy with Cena at ringside, plus the $250,000 giveaway lost 222,000 viewers. I can’t even remember the last time a Raw main event lost viewers in the overrun, or the last time the main event did a 2.99 rating.


SHUT UP CUZ ALL OF YOU TALKING SHIT
RATINGS DON"T MATTER
EVERYONE GAINS AND LOSES
STOP SAYING BUYRATE IT MEANS YOU ARE A DUMBASS
RIP UMAGA
:Jordan


----------



## Starbuck

buys




Buys




BUYS




*BUYS*

Buys


----------



## The Caped Crusader

BrownianMotion said:


> Correct me if I am wrong (because I can't remember) but are you not the same person who claimed Batista was a monstrous draw? How does that fit in with the, as you put it, terrible buyrate for an event he main evented?
> 
> Also, it's humorous that you would criticize someone else's data analysis skills when you tried to use annual revenue and attendance from live events as evidence of Batista's drawing power in comparison to Lesnar's. A competent data analyst would have collected data only on those live events headlined by the wrestler in question and run a regression analysis controlling for differences in city size and whatnot, in order to establish dependence and to explore the types of relationships between the variables in question. Looking simply at attendance and revenue is superficial and insufficient.


And are you not the person who tried to use the poor live attendance numbers of those years and try to make it seem like Lesnar is a massive draw and single handedly carried WWE when he was on Smackdown and Triple H and Goldberg were on Raw but apparently didn't matter? I wasn't claiming Batista was a monstrous draw, just that he was a bigger draw than Lesnar for the WWE. And I wasn't referring to Batista in 2014, I was referring to Batista between 2005-2010 when he was one of the main stars of the product. The same washed up has been managed to get a bigger viewership on his return than Lesnar did. And the fact that Batista, Cena, hell even Triple H were bigger draws than Lesnar was for the WWE is apparent to anyone sensible. But seeing as you were a butthurt Lesnar mark who couldn't argue, you decided to withdraw and disappear. After all, the only thing you could say was 'b-b-but UFC he was so big.' Too bad UFC isn't WWE and Lesnar's return has had about the impact of a rubber hammer.



DanielBryanFanXXX said:


> What you think is not proof, present facts.
> 
> :maury Assuming that the domestic buyrate would be low without the network, the reason why the Domestic PPV buyrate was low was because they Switched over to the Network.
> 
> Wrestlemania 30 only had about 100,000 less buys, compare that with Wrestlemania 29, where 214000 buys were lost from Wrestlemania 28
> 
> The Main selling point was Wrestlemania, hence why it came out Feb 24 with heavy promotion of Wrestlemania, rather than in January. the most watched show for months on the Network was Wrestlemania 30. enough rhetoric, present facts.
> 
> Doesn't refute the fact that your argument of 600,000 buys in 2 weeks doesn't work, Wrestlemania in every single Network ad was the main selling point,
> 
> :floyd1 By that argument, any Wrestlemania which drew a million buys is bad because an average 4 million people watch Raw, you're trying too hard.
> 
> True, WWE was going downhill in late 2000s, Rock brought Wrestlemania buyrates, then Daniel Bryan drew the next one, How does WWE programming in 2013-2014 correlate to 2009-2010? That makes no sense, Wrestlemania XXX buys are up there with Rock mania's. Rock stopped the downhill trend and the Authority/Daniel Bryan storyline further stopped it, there's no downhill trend anymore.
> 
> Overall your argument contained absolutely no facts, made no sense and was desperate.


At what point is it difficult for you to understand that trying to attribute Network subscriptions to Bryan is absurd? And that 6 months for $60 including several PPVs, isn't quite the same as paying $60 for Wrestlemania? Are you just stupid or do you not understand why that is a such ridiculous thing to do considering what is being provided with the Network and how it presented?

The only facts you can use for Wrestlemania 30 are that it has the worst international buyrate for Wrestlemania, ever. That's a clear decline. The domestic buyrate was also bad, but we can wave that off with the Network since that would obviously eat into it.

But when you try and attribute 667,000 Network subcriptions to Daniel Bryan, that's where you become a fucking moron.

I'll take kokepepsi's advice and shut up because discussing this kind of stuff with wrestling fans is like legitimately arguing with children. It makes you dumber for having done it.


----------



## BrownianMotion

The Caped Crusader said:


> And are you not the person who tried to use the poor live attendance numbers of those years and try to make it seem like Lesnar is a massive draw and single handedly carried WWE when he was on Smackdown and Triple H and Goldberg were on Raw but apparently didn't matter? I wasn't claiming Batista was a monstrous draw, just that he was a bigger draw than Lesnar for the WWE. And I wasn't referring to Batista in 2014, I was referring to Batista between 2005-2010 when he was one of the main stars of the product. The same washed up has been managed to get a bigger viewership on his return than Lesnar did. And the fact that Batista, Cena, hell even Triple H were bigger draws than Lesnar was for the WWE is apparent to anyone sensible. But seeing as you were a butthurt Lesnar mark who couldn't argue, you decided to withdraw and disappear. After all, the only thing you could say was 'b-b-but UFC he was so big.' Too bad UFC isn't WWE and Lesnar's return has had about the impact of a rubber hammer.


What did I have to be butthurt about? 

You didn't show anything other than that revenue from live events was higher in 2005 than it was in 2003. However, Batista did not headline every live event that year, nor did Brock in 2003. 

Go right ahead and use the appropriate data sets for each year and run a regression analysis controlling for confounding variables. If that yields results supporting your hypothesis then I will recant everything I said.


----------



## #Mark

The number of international buys for Mania was low, but that can also be attributed to the Network. Extreme Rules also had a low international number. It seems as if people are already proxying the network internationally.


----------



## Rap God

From the July 31 2012 Wrestling Observer Newsletter:


> "June 28, 1999: A match where Steve Austin won the WWF title from The Undertaker in Charlotte drew the largest rating and audience to ever witness a pro wrestling match or for that matter, any pro wrestling segment, ever on U.S. cable television. The match did a 9.5 rating, which was 10.72 million viewers. Perhaps the most impressive is that one out of every six television sets in the U.S. that had cable that was on during that time was watching that match. Because for more than a decade, Vince Russo has made it a talking point to say how the “The Is Your Life: Rock,” segment was the highest rated segment in history (it did an 8.4 quarter), to show how skits outdraw matches, it’s become a talking point how that was the highest rated segment in Raw history. Actually there were a handful of different quarter hours that beat that total, including most of the second hour of the May 10, 1999 show."


----------



## Rick Sanchez

I remember that. Good match too.


----------



## uknoww

Jarsy1 said:


> From the July 31 2012 Wrestling Observer Newsletter:


this is your life still remains the highest rated segment on raw since austin vs taker was an overrun

this is the only explanation seeing as wwe is also promoting 'this is your life' as the most watched segment in raw history


----------



## validreasoning

The Caped Crusader said:


> Raw averages around 4 million viewers. If WWE is offering their audience 6 months of content, including PPVs which are traditionally priced at $45 and $60 for Wrestlemania, only having 600,000 people sign up for 6 months isn't exactly amazing.


Homes and viewers are not the same thing. There was 670k HOMES subscribed to the network and there is 2.6 people per American home so potentially 1.7 million viewers of the network.

Raw did 4.4 million viewers last week for a 2.9 rating suggesting 1.5 people per home were tuned in. If the same number watched mania as a throwaway raw in July then some 1 million were tuned in on the network alone.

Domestically mania 30 did around same as mania 19 on ppv despite the fact it was available elsewhere for $10. Personally I find that amazing considering rock, Austin and Hogan all wrestled at 19.



uknoww said:


> this is your life still remains the highest rated segment on raw since austin vs taker was an overrun


Almost the entire second hour of the May 10th raw beat out this is your life. This is your life's rating ie 8.4 barely beat out the 2 hour rating ie 8.1 from May 10th


----------



## uknoww

> Almost the entire second hour of the May 10th raw beat out this is your life. This is your life's rating ie 8.4 barely beat out the 2 hour rating ie 8.1 from May 10th


well if the wwe says that 'this is your life' is the highest rated segment then what can you do


----------



## uknoww

plus if i'm not wrong on may 10th 1999 it was no nitro


----------



## #Mark

This was posted awhile ago:










Is this valid?


----------



## D.M.N.

validreasoning said:


> Homes and viewers are not the same thing. There was 670k HOMES subscribed to the network and there is 2.6 people per American home so potentially 1.7 million viewers of the network.


The best way to say this is 670k 'different accounts', in theory there can be multiple accounts attached to one home, but admittedly that is highly unlikely and I'm not sure why you would do that regardless.

It's the same with WrestleMania. 1.3 million buys = about 2.5 million households, potentially a lot more given that people are more likely to watch it in parties and clubs.


----------



## DoubtGin

> WWE Smackdown on Friday, July 11 scored a 1.78 rating, regaining some of the audience lost on the Fourth of July last week.
> 
> For comparisons, last week's show scored a 1.37 rating on the Fourth, the week before scored a 2.02 rating, and the average rating the previous two months was a 1.85 rating.
> 
> Smackdown drew 2.538 million viewers, regaining 35 percent of the audience from the Fourth.
> 
> - On cable TV Friday night, Smackdown ranked in the Top 5 behind Disney's "Girl Meets World" and other programming, but ranked #1 in the key male demographics.
> 
> - One year ago this week, Smackdown drew a 1.71 rating one week removed from a similar decline on Fourth of July weekend. The following week rebounded to a 1.85 rating.


:reigns rton2

(not really)


----------



## Shenroe

DoubtGin said:


> :reigns rton2
> 
> (not really)


:reigns


----------



## D.M.N.

WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	4229	1.4
WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4231	1.3
WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4000	1.3

A little down on previous weeks, but still above 4 million.


----------



## DoubtGin

pretty good, especially for a rather weak RAW


----------



## murder

validreasoning said:


> Domestically mania 30 did around same as mania 19 on ppv despite the fact it was available elsewhere for $10. Personally I find that amazing considering rock, Austin and Hogan all wrestled at 19.
> 
> 
> 
> Almost the entire second hour of the May 10th raw beat out this is your life. This is your life's rating ie 8.4 barely beat out the 2 hour rating ie 8.1 from May 10th


Mania 30 did 340.000 domestic buys, Mania 19 did 560.000 domestic buys. 

"Rock: This is your life" is the highest opposed rating ever. That's why it always gets brought up.


----------



## Marv95

#Mark said:


> This was posted awhile ago:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this valid?


As far as matches I'm certain it is. Especially the 1st one. That's when Raw had its highest rating ever right?


----------



## validreasoning

murder said:


> Mania 30 did 340.000 domestic buys, Mania 19 did 560.000 domestic buys.


mania 19 did not do 560,000 domestic. domestic was 431k. where did you get the mania 30 domestic number? wwe released a statement that the show did almost 400k in the us..


----------



## The Caped Crusader

validreasoning said:


> mania 19 did not do 560,000 domestic. domestic was 431k. where did you get the mania 30 domestic number? wwe released a statement that the show did almost 400k in the us..


560,000 is the domestic number for 19.


----------



## validreasoning

The Caped Crusader said:


> 560,000 is the domestic number for 19.


560k was total, 431k was domestic. had the show done 560k domestic wwe would have been happy

domestic ppv numbers for manias, didn't includes manias 1 thru 4 but none of those came close to mania 5 ppv numbers anyway and closed circuit took up alot of the viewers.

1. Wrestlemania 17 - 950,000
2. Wrestlemania 23 - 825,000
3. WrestleMania 16 - 808,000
4. WrestleMania 15 - 800,000
5. WrestleMania 20 - 734,000
6. WrestleMania 14 - 730,000
7. WrestleMania 28 - 715,000
8. WrestleMania 18 - 705,000
9. WrestleMania 24 - 697,000
10. WrestleMania 27 - 679,000
11. WrestleMania 29 - 662,000
12. WrestleMania 21 - 650,000
13. WrestleMania 5 - 650,000
14. WrestleMania 22 - 636,000
15. WrestleMania 25 - 605,000
16. WrestleMania 6 - 550,000
17. WrestleMania 26 - 495,000
18. WrestleMania 19 - 431,000
19. WrestleMania 9 - 430,000
20. WrestleMania 10 - 420,000
21. WrestleMania 7 - 400,000
22. WrestleMania 8 - 390,000
23. WrestleMania 11 - 340,000
24. WrestleMania 12 - 290,000
25. WrestleMania 13 - 237,000


----------



## kokepepsi

validreasoning said:


> 560k was total, 431k was domestic. had the show done 560k domestic wwe would have been happy
> 
> domestic ppv numbers for manias, didn't includes manias 1 thru 4 but none of those came close to mania 5 ppv numbers anyway and closed circuit took up alot of the viewers.
> 
> 1. Wrestlemania 17 - 950,000
> 2. Wrestlemania 23 - 825,000
> 3. WrestleMania 16 - 808,000
> 4. WrestleMania 15 - 800,000
> 5. WrestleMania 20 - 734,000
> 6. WrestleMania 14 - 730,000
> 7. WrestleMania 28 - 715,000
> 8. WrestleMania 18 - 705,000
> 9. WrestleMania 24 - 697,000
> 10. WrestleMania 27 - 679,000
> 11. WrestleMania 29 - 662,000
> 12. WrestleMania 21 - 650,000
> 13. WrestleMania 5 - 650,000
> 14. WrestleMania 22 - 636,000
> 15. WrestleMania 25 - 605,000
> 16. WrestleMania 6 - 550,000
> 17. WrestleMania 26 - 495,000
> 18. WrestleMania 19 - 431,000
> 19. WrestleMania 9 - 430,000
> 20. WrestleMania 10 - 420,000
> 21. WrestleMania 7 - 400,000
> 22. WrestleMania 8 - 390,000
> 23. WrestleMania 11 - 340,000
> 24. WrestleMania 12 - 290,000
> 25. WrestleMania 13 - 237,000


Source?
Never seen domestic figures for 18/19


----------



## The Caped Crusader

validreasoning said:


> 560k was total, 431k was domestic. had the show done 560k domestic wwe would have been happy
> 
> domestic ppv numbers for manias, didn't includes manias 1 thru 4 but none of those came close to mania 5 ppv numbers anyway and closed circuit took up alot of the viewers.
> 
> 1. Wrestlemania 17 - 950,000
> 2. Wrestlemania 23 - 825,000
> 3. WrestleMania 16 - 808,000
> 4. WrestleMania 15 - 800,000
> 5. WrestleMania 20 - 734,000
> 6. WrestleMania 14 - 730,000
> 7. WrestleMania 28 - 715,000
> 8. WrestleMania 18 - 705,000
> 9. WrestleMania 24 - 697,000
> 10. WrestleMania 27 - 679,000
> 11. WrestleMania 29 - 662,000
> 12. WrestleMania 21 - 650,000
> 13. WrestleMania 5 - 650,000
> 14. WrestleMania 22 - 636,000
> 15. WrestleMania 25 - 605,000
> 16. WrestleMania 6 - 550,000
> 17. WrestleMania 26 - 495,000
> 18. WrestleMania 19 - 431,000
> 19. WrestleMania 9 - 430,000
> 20. WrestleMania 10 - 420,000
> 21. WrestleMania 7 - 400,000
> 22. WrestleMania 8 - 390,000
> 23. WrestleMania 11 - 340,000
> 24. WrestleMania 12 - 290,000
> 25. WrestleMania 13 - 237,000


The Wrestlemania 19 figure of 560,000 is domestic. There were no international buys for it.


----------



## validreasoning

kokepepsi said:


> Source?
> Never seen domestic figures for 18/19


chris harrington aka mookieghana.










baffled how someone could possibly think 19 had no international buys when 17 had some, 18 had more and 20 had nearly 300k international.


----------



## kokepepsi

Thanks VR


----------



## HBK for ever

is there any wepsite that put all Raw's rating since 1995? i need it.


----------



## murder

validreasoning said:


> had the show done 560k domestic wwe would have been happy


Why would WWE be happy with 560.000 buys when they did 840.000 the year before and one million in 2001?! 

Mania 30 did 340.000 according to this site:
http://prowrestlinghistory.com/supercards/eventinfo.xls

Remember WWE stated almost 400.000 buys and they woud claim that if they did 301.000 buys.


----------



## validreasoning

murder said:


> Why would WWE be happy with 560.000 buys when they did 840.000 the year before and one million in 2001?!


mania 18 did 705 domestic so a drop of 145 wouldn't have been considered a total disaster which mania 19 was. 

wwe knew 17 was a one off coming a week after wcw going out of business which probably increased the buyrate by 25%, 18 had rock vs hogan so a big drop from those two was surely expected either way.



> Mania 30 did 340.000 according to this site:
> http://prowrestlinghistory.com/supercards/eventinfo.xls
> 
> Remember WWE stated almost 400.000 buys and they woud claim that if they did 301.000 buys.


i don't have excel so can't open that link but there hasn't been any confirmed breakdown of mania 30 numbers..there hasn't even been a proper prelim number yet. wwe didn't even list mania on last months kpis http://ir.corporate.wwe.com/Cache/1500061640.PDF?Y=&O=PDF&D=&fid=1500061640&T=&iid=4121687

all we know is mania 30 did "around" 690k on ppv.


----------



## RebelArch86

Why is there no debate about Reigns being able to draw? So far he hasn't done anything for numbers, mean while story line and match quality is going down in the ME.


----------



## Shenroe

> Friday's episode of WWE SmackDown, the final show before Battleground, drew 2.885 million viewers and was the highest-rated cable original for Friday night.
> This is up from last week's 2.54 million viewers


Lords of pain.


----------



## D.M.N.

WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	4521	1.5
WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4523	1.5
WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4254	1.4

Highest since end of April


----------



## Starbuck

:steph

:trips2

:brock

:heyman2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:brock bringing in DA RATINGS!


----------



## Alo0oy

Was there any doubt that Lesnar would bring in the ratings? :brock


----------



## Shenroe

:ti 

Now i'm waiting for someone saying " errr the show is shit err,ratings will plummet because my favorite isn't pushed/ doesn't win ehrhehrh".


----------



## RatedR10

dat BORK :brock


----------



## Londrick

Credit goes to Brie vs Steph. Hottest angle of the night plus getting like 10 recaps.


----------



## FITZ

Flo Rida obviously deserves all the credit...


----------



## WWE

No you're all stupid CM Punk said he was never ever coming back so obviously people tuned in to see if it was all a work CM PUNK #1


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Parker said:


> No you're all stupid CM Punk said he was never ever coming back so obviously people tuned in to see if it was all a work CM PUNK #1


Yeah this is probably right. It was all *Plan C*MPunk


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

No Cena, no problem.

:hhh2


----------



## #Mark

Where is Darkness is Here, Boy Wonder, and all the other marks incessantly gloating about how Bryan's absence didn't effect ratings. Cena misses one RAW and it's the highest rated show since April :ti


----------



## DoubtGin

#Mark said:


> Where is Darkness is Here, Boy Wonder, and all the other marks incessantly gloating about how Bryan's absence didn't effect ratings. Cena misses one RAW and it's the highest rated show since April :ti


You might wanna explain that one.


----------



## Tweener ken

:brock :trips :steph :heyman


----------



## Shenroe

Tweener ken said:


> :brock :trips :steph :heyman


Lol but ratings of sd and RAW are up since last month. the real diff here ( the extra 200k) is :brock and the :steph angle. But they would've done good regardless of that. The show was stacked.


----------



## JY57

final rating 3.15 highest (first above 3.0) since that Bryan injury angle with Kane to write him off TV


----------



## Tweener ken

JY57 said:


> final rating 3.15 highest (first above 3.0) since that Bryan injury angle with Kane to write him off TV


No surprise, It is SS time and it picks up during this time.
The show was also great from start to finish.


----------



## #Mark

DoubtGin said:


> You might wanna explain that one.


No explanation needed. Cena misses RAW and it's the highest in three months. Cena misses two months last fall and ratings were higher than the previous fall. My point remains, no single wrestler has an effect on the overall show rating. The WWE brand and the strength of the product is responsible for that. The trolls gloating about how ratings did not drastically decrease with Bryan on the shelf now have to eat crow.


----------



## chronoxiong

No Cena and Sheamus? No problem. Glad to hear about this week's rating. It was well deserved as I was entertained by it. The Authority helps play a huge role in all of this.


----------



## kokepepsi

Its simple math, gain more than lose and the rating goes up
Smart having that RomanvsKane/Orton match right after the opening
Real smart having Flo Rida segway right into steph getting arrested at 10pm
Even smarter having Cesaro vs Ambrose segway into the Overrun with Brock

Bret the Shitman Fart
:maury


----------



## The Caped Crusader

#Mark said:


> No explanation needed. Cena misses RAW and it's the highest in three months. Cena misses two months last fall and ratings were higher than the previous fall. My point remains, no single wrestler has an effect on the overall show rating. The WWE brand and the strength of the product is responsible for that. The trolls gloating about how ratings did not drastically decrease with Bryan on the shelf now have to eat crow.


But hasn't this been obvious for a few years now? The only real ratings or business mover is The Rock. Even for Lesnar, for as much hype as we give him, this isn't exactly an amazing number. Compare his return this year to Batista's earlier this year. Batista's appearance had average viewership jump nearly 500k with his hour peaking at 5.25 million viewership. Even Lesnar's return in 2012 didn't manage that kind of peak either. Lesnar obviously drummed up some interest here, but his starpower in the WWE is massively overrated.

If it wasn't obvious already, what's most important is the overall product and starpower. This means having multiple main eventers and interesting fueds. The product will fare better when they have all of Cena, Batista, Bryan, Lesnar, Orton, Triple H along with a good undercard in the Shield, Cesaro etc. WWE right now is having trouble getting their balance due to the lacking starpower in the overall roster.


----------



## joeycalz

I'm too lazy to make the meme but Stephanie McMahon was the real MVP on Monday night.


----------



## Naka Moora

Dat Lesnar.


----------



## D.M.N.

YouTube hits:

- 537k - Brie Bella has Stephanie McMahon arrested
- 326k - Stephanie McMahon confronts Brie Bella
- 319k - Triple H chooses John Cena's SummerSlam opponent
- 254k - Roman Reigns vs. Kane & Randy Orton - 2-on-1 Handicap Match
- 183k - AJ Lee & Paige vs. Natalya & Emma
- 181k - The Great Khali vs. Rusev
- 146k - Big E & Kofi Kingston vs. RybAxel
- 142k - Zack Ryder vs. Fandango
- 140k - Nikki Bella vs. Alicia Fox, Eva Marie, Cameron & Rosa Mendes - 4-on-1 Handicap Match
- 134k - Dolph Ziggler vs. The Miz
- 126k - Flo Rida deals with an interrupting Heath Slater
- 122k - Flo Rida gets in shoving match with Heath Slater
- 116k - Flo Rida performs
- 114k - Bo Dallas vs. Damien Sandow
- 112k - Dean Ambrose vs. Cesaro
- 98k - Bray Wyatt gloats after savagely assaulting Chris Jericho
- 86k - Goldust & Stardust ponder the wonders of the univers


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

how are the bellas drawing more than lesnar on youtube :lol


----------



## DoubtGin

:steph GOATing as usual.


----------



## WWE

Plz don't use YouTube as source of drawing 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## The_Workout_Buddy

D.M.N. said:


> YouTube hits:
> 
> - 537k - Brie Bella has Stephanie McMahon arrested
> - 326k - Stephanie McMahon confronts Brie Bella
> - 319k - Triple H chooses John Cena's SummerSlam opponent
> - 254k - Roman Reigns vs. Kane & Randy Orton - 2-on-1 Handicap Match
> - 183k - AJ Lee & Paige vs. Natalya & Emma
> - 181k - The Great Khali vs. Rusev
> - 146k - Big E & Kofi Kingston vs. RybAxel
> - 142k - Zack Ryder vs. Fandango
> - 140k - Nikki Bella vs. Alicia Fox, Eva Marie, Cameron & Rosa Mendes - 4-on-1 Handicap Match
> - 134k - Dolph Ziggler vs. The Miz
> - 126k - Flo Rida deals with an interrupting Heath Slater
> - 122k - Flo Rida gets in shoving match with Heath Slater
> - 116k - Flo Rida performs
> - 114k - Bo Dallas vs. Damien Sandow
> - 112k - Dean Ambrose vs. Cesaro
> - 98k - Bray Wyatt gloats after savagely assaulting Chris Jericho
> - 86k - Goldust & Stardust ponder the wonders of the univers


Are really people that sick that prefer watch Rusev vs Khali than Miz vs Dolph?


----------



## Londrick

D.M.N. said:


> YouTube hits:
> 
> - 537k - Brie Bella has Stephanie McMahon arrested
> - 326k - Stephanie McMahon confronts Brie Bella
> - 319k - Triple H chooses John Cena's SummerSlam opponent
> - 254k - Roman Reigns vs. Kane & Randy Orton - 2-on-1 Handicap Match
> - 183k - AJ Lee & Paige vs. Natalya & Emma
> - 181k - The Great Khali vs. Rusev
> - 146k - Big E & Kofi Kingston vs. RybAxel
> - 142k - Zack Ryder vs. Fandango
> - 140k - Nikki Bella vs. Alicia Fox, Eva Marie, Cameron & Rosa Mendes - 4-on-1 Handicap Match
> - 134k - Dolph Ziggler vs. The Miz
> - 126k - Flo Rida deals with an interrupting Heath Slater
> - 122k - Flo Rida gets in shoving match with Heath Slater
> - 116k - Flo Rida performs
> - 114k - Bo Dallas vs. Damien Sandow
> - 112k - Dean Ambrose vs. Cesaro
> - 98k - Bray Wyatt gloats after savagely assaulting Chris Jericho
> - 86k - Goldust & Stardust ponder the wonders of the univers


As much as I'm loving Ambrose vs Rollins this is proof Brie vs Steph is the hottest feud going right now.


----------



## LilOlMe

The_Workout_Buddy said:


> Are really people that sick that prefer watch Rusev vs Khali than Miz vs Dolph?


It's a shoddy way of judging. But all of this is, really.

The week that Summer Rae kissed Dolph, the screenshot of that moment was the thumbnail for the Dolph vs. Fandango match.

People were wondering why that match had so many views. Well there's your answer. People who had no idea what was going on, nor would otherwise have any interest whatsoever in watching that match, were now suddenly intrigued by that screenshot, I'm sure. And voila, then you have it being one of the highest watched matches.

It's a microcosm of why I think this thread is so crazy anyway. People trying to use ratings as some sort of "objective" fact, when really, there are so many variables. Stuff as silly as my example shows that. You never know what else may be going on.


----------



## Belladonna29

LilOlMe said:


> It's a shoddy way of judging. But all of this is, really.
> 
> The week that Summer Rae kissed Dolph, the screenshot of that moment was the thumbnail for the Dolph vs. Fandango match.
> 
> People were wondering why that match had so many views. Well there's your answer. People who had no idea what was going on, nor would otherwise have any interest whatsoever in watching that match, were now suddenly intrigued by that screenshot, I'm sure. And voila, then you have it being one of the highest watched matches.
> 
> *It's a microcosm of why I think this thread is so crazy anyway. People trying to use ratings as some sort of "unobjective" fact, when really, there are so many variables. Stuff as silly as my example shows that. You never know what else may be going on*.


Exactly.


----------



## Waffelz

What are the ratings like in the UK? Same for TNA if anyone knows for that, too.


----------



## D.M.N.

WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4.511	1.4
WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	4.051	1.4
WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4.391	1.4


----------



## Afnorok

Surprising to see the drop in the third hour. I know Jericho/Rollins was placed in third hour, was Kane/Reigns/Orton also in the third hour? Also, the start of Steph/Brie segment before leading to overrun. 

All three hours seem to have drawn a steady 1.4 in A18-49, overrun with the women might be biggest this week. Does Torch still report A18-49 demo quarter hour numbers? Would be interesting to see how this week did and what bombed big. I'm guessing Jericho/Rollins, it was a really long match and didn't have much heat with the live crowd until bray interfered.

How are those youtube views count looking like?


----------



## The Boy Wonder

The Orton/Reigns segment happened right at the end of hour 2 into hour 3.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

See, women can't be the main event! Look at that viewership drop from 2 to 3!

But seriously, this is the first time in awhile that hour 3 was the weakest, and that hour 1 wasn't. It looks like the allure of Jericho/Rollins, Reigns/Kane, and the Steph/Brie segment wasn't enough to keep the all around viewership up for the third hour. 

Actually, Bo's streak ending and Sandow's continuing probably caused a bunch of people to say "fuck this show" by the end of the second hour. Yeah... that's gotta be it. PUSH SANDOW AND BO!


----------



## Rap God

> Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with Stephanie McMahon and Brie Bella in the main event spot, drew 4.318 million viewers, down from last week's 4.433 million viewers.
> For this week's show, the first hour drew 4.391 million viewers, the second hour drew 4.511 million viewers and the final hour drew 4.051 million viewers, a 10% drop from the second hour.


Brie vs Stephanie is so hot indeed Londrick :vince5


----------



## Waffelz

HHH/Steph drew like a boss at the top of hour two. Absolute dons.


----------



## pointoforder

Londrick said:


> As much as I'm loving Ambrose vs Rollins this is proof Brie vs Steph is the hottest feud going right now.


Lost 100,000 viewers from the previous week. Really hot feud.

I know you like to bait and bait and then bait some more, but even this is to much for you now.


----------



## Afnorok

I don't think you can blame Stephanie/Brie for the drop when Jericho/Rollins took majority of the hour. And judging by the 18-49 demo rating, overrun might be the highest rated. Also, you can't expect women to outdraw the main event guys, at best you could only expect them to hold up just as good, which as it appears, they did manage to do.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Afnorok said:


> I don't think you can blame Stephanie/Brie for the drop when Jericho/Rollins took majority of the hour. And judging by the 18-49 demo rating, overrun might be the highest rated. Also, you can't expect women to outdraw the main event guys, at best you could only expect them to hold up just as good, which as it appears, they did manage to do.


We can't _really_ put the blame anything, especially without a breakdown. But what would this thread be then?


----------



## elhijodelbodallas

Brie doesn't deserve a place on Raw, let alone in the closing segment. You can't blame people for not wanting to watch talentless people like her closing the show, that's what the middle of the second hour is for.


----------



## Yes Era

Except it wasn't her fault. Forgot that part, huh?


----------



## elhijodelbodallas

Yes Era said:


> Except it wasn't her fault. Forgot that part, huh?


Then whose fault was it? Are you telling me that the final segment gained 600,000 viewers or more but the rest of the hour was so bad that it hurt the average? Not very likely.


----------



## JY57

final rating - 3.06

first time at back to back 3.0+ rating since Extreme Rules build.


----------



## murder

JY57 said:


> final rating - 3.06
> 
> first time at back to back 3.0+ rating since Extreme Rules build.


second time after last week


----------



## Londrick

Jarsy1 said:


> Brie vs Stephanie is so hot indeed Londrick :vince5


Last two weeks featured Brie vs Steph as the main feud and drew the highest ratings since the road to Extreme Rules. Don't see what the problem is. :draper2


----------



## hotrodmaniac

JY57 said:


> final rating - 3.06
> 
> first time at back to back 3.0+ rating since Extreme Rules build.


will wwe ever get a 4 rating again?


----------



## Rick Sanchez

I never really follow ratings, but 3.06? That rating kinda sucks. They don't deserve better though.


----------



## D.M.N.

YouTube stats:

- 413k - Brie Bella and Stephanie McMahon agree to battle at SummerSlam
- 224k - Roman Reigns vs. Kane
- 223k - John Cena vs. Cesaro
- 212k - Chris Jericho vs. Seth Rollins
- 198k - Paige addresses her attack on AJ Lee
- 153k - R-Truth vs. Bo Dallas
- 149k - Chris Jericho confronts The Authority
- 131k - Jack Swagger and Zeb Colter honor the American flag
- 112k - Natalya & Naomi vs. Cameron & Alicia Fox
- 96k - Diego vs. Fandango
- 94k - Adam Rose vs. Damien Sandow
- 93k - The Usos & Dolph Ziggler vs. RybAxel & The Miz
- 70k - Stardust maps a course for the cosmic key


----------



## JY57

Stone Cold Steve Austin said:


> I never really follow ratings, but 3.06? That rating kinda sucks. They don't deserve better though.


by WWE standards, its normal. the days of WWE getting a 4.0 or over are long gone (years ago).

the fall season is when its really bad for them. Rumble, Mania, & SSLAM season 3.0+ ratings is the norm.


----------



## Tweener ken

DAT Steph and brie bringing DEM views :vince2


----------



## Londrick

D.M.N. said:


> YouTube stats:
> 
> - 413k - Brie Bella and Stephanie McMahon agree to battle at SummerSlam
> - 224k - Roman Reigns vs. Kane
> - 223k - John Cena vs. Cesaro
> - 212k - Chris Jericho vs. Seth Rollins
> - 198k - Paige addresses her attack on AJ Lee
> - 153k - R-Truth vs. Bo Dallas
> - 149k - Chris Jericho confronts The Authority
> - 131k - Jack Swagger and Zeb Colter honor the American flag
> - 112k - Natalya & Naomi vs. Cameron & Alicia Fox
> - 96k - Diego vs. Fandango
> - 94k - Adam Rose vs. Damien Sandow
> - 93k - The Usos & Dolph Ziggler vs. RybAxel & The Miz
> - 70k - Stardust maps a course for the cosmic key


More proof that Brie vs Steph is the number one feud going right now. Suck it, haters.


----------



## D.M.N.

July's numbers...

- 2010 - 4.88m Total - 8 hours = 4 x 2 hours of programming
- 2011 - 4.44m Total - 8 hours = 4 x 2 hours of programming (4.68m excl. July 4th)
- 2012 - 4.90m Total - 12 hours = 3 x 2 hours and 2 x 3 hours of programming (4.62m excl. Raw 1000)
- 2013 - 4.00m Total - 15 hours = 5 x 3 hours of programming
- 2014 - 4.32m Total - 12 hours = 4 x 3 hours of programming


----------



## FITZ

hotrodmaniac said:


> will wwe ever get a 4 rating again?


I know that you're banned and everything but I'll answer anyway and say that they won't ever get ratings like that again. No matter what they do with their product in today's world of entertainment they aren't going to be able to get ratings like they used to. 

There are just so many more options now than even a few years ago. In 2008 the average American had 129 channels available. In 2013 they had 189.


----------



## murder

TaylorFitz said:


> There are just so many more options now than even a few years ago. In 2008 the average American had 129 channels available. In 2013 they had 189.


That sounds a lot like something Vince would say at a conference call.


----------



## WorrallJack

you want my opinion on last Monday's Raw go to my blog
http://worrallsworld.weebly.com/blog/monday-night-raw-review


----------



## JY57

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...last-year-wipeout-up-rising-star-flat/289755/

WM XXX NBC special garners highest rating in years with 4,000,000 viewers (really 3,900,000) highest in years

WM 27 - 3,630,000
WM 28 - 2,730,000
WM 29 - 1,920,000
WM 30 - 3,900,000


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DAT STREAK ENDING

:taker :brock :heyman 

oh, and Cena/Wyatt was on that too, right?

:cena2 :wyatt

I didn't personally watch it though, only heard that those two matches were the only ones that were going to be on it... those and the opening segment?

:austin :hogan2 :rock4


----------



## JY57

hotrodmaniac said:


> will wwe ever get a 4 rating again?


doubtful, wrestling just isn't what it used to be.


----------



## CJohn3:16

JY57 said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...last-year-wipeout-up-rising-star-flat/289755/
> 
> WM XXX NBC special garners highest rating in years with 4,000,000 viewers (really 3,900,000) highest in years
> 
> WM 27 - 3,630,000
> WM 28 - 2,730,000
> WM 29 - 1,920,000
> WM 30 - 3,900,000


Dat Streak effect.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

WOW! A 2 million viewer increase on the previous year... maybe Vince was right to end the streak.


----------



## JY57

#BadNewsSanta said:


> WOW! A 2 million viewer increase on the previous year... maybe Vince was right to end the streak.


WWE also smart to move it from Saturday Night to Sunday Night which is a lead in to the NFL Pre-Season Opener too.


----------



## RebelArch86

JY57 said:


> doubtful, wrestling just isn't what it used to be.


TV isn't what it used to be.


----------



## Starbuck

> The viewership for WWE’s world premiere of Wrestlemania 30 that aired Sunday on NBC has been adjusted down. While the overnight numbers came in at a viewing audience of 3,900,000, the numbers were adjusted down to 2,540,000 viewers. The adjustment is significant, making the audience the smallest [for the special] in the last three years.


:taker


----------



## JY57

Starbuck said:


> :taker


4,000,000 is overnight numbers. that adjusted number is for East Coast since the West Coast were getting News and than NFL game. WM XXX Special didn't appear till 10 PM Pacific (1 AM ET) in West Coast. And last year overall numbers were worst than this year's initial numbers (without overnight ones) @ 1,920,000


----------



## Starbuck

JY57 said:


> 4,000,000 is overnight numbers. that adjusted number is for East Coast since the West Coast were getting News and than NFL game. WM XXX Special didn't appear till 10 PM Pacific (1 AM ET) in West Coast. And last year overall numbers were worst than this year's initial numbers (without overnight ones) @ 1,920,000


.........................

:taker :taker :taker


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Well that makes a whole lot more sense. 2 million viewers on top of the previous year's would've been astronomical. Still, a half million increase over the previous year is great, especially when it's breaking a significant downtrend year after year. Still looks like a "success", even if not as much as it was.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

> The viewership for WWE’s world premiere of Wrestlemania 30 that aired Sunday on NBC has been adjusted down. While the overnight numbers came in at a viewing audience of 3,900,000, the numbers were adjusted down to 2,540,000 viewers. *The adjustment is significant, making the audience the smallest [for the special] in the last three years*.


Yikes.


----------



## Starbuck

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Well that makes a whole lot more sense. 2 million viewers on top of the previous year's would've been astronomical. Still, a half million increase over the previous year is great, especially when it's breaking a significant downtrend year after year. Still looks like a "success", even if not as much as it was.


:lmao you sound so upset .



ShowStopper said:


> Yikes.


Needs more :dazzler and :trips2 tbh.


----------



## JY57

ShowStopper said:


> Yikes.


last year was 1,920,000 with the Rock/Cena II bout. So that statement is BS.

http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/news/early-rating-s-for-the-nbc-wrestlemania-29-special


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> :lmao you sound so upset .


And you seem in denial that they didn't need :HHH for a good number :agree:


----------



## JY57

Starbuck said:


> :lmao you sound so upset .
> 
> 
> 
> Needs more :dazzler and :trips2 tbh.


wouldn't matter IMO. WM 26 had Taker/Shawn retirement match and only garnered 1.78 million & WM 25 Taker/Shawn had something below 2 million as well. These specials on Saturday night or Sunday night where football returns is stupid. 

WM 27, WM 28, & WM XXX only ones that drew well so far no brainer there since had Rock return, Rock/Cena, & Streak Ending. Look @ Rock/Cena II it did before $2 million


----------



## Starbuck

JY57 said:


> wouldn't matter IMO. WM 26 had Taker/Shawn retirement match and only garnered 1.78 million & WM 25 Taker/Shawn had something below 2 million as well. These specials on Saturday night or Sunday night where football returns is stupid.
> 
> WM 27, WM 28, & WM XXX only ones that drew well so far no brainer there since had Rock return, Rock/Cena, & Streak Ending. Look @ Rock/Cena II it did before $2 million


I'm joking lol. It's an NBC special. Nobody really cares although given the amount of outrage from the Bryan fans over his exclusion maybe they all banded together and didn't watch out of solidarity or something stupid like that.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

All those unemployed Bryan fans went on strike from something.


----------



## FITZ

murder said:


> That sounds a lot like something Vince would say at a conference call.


It's still true. And it just shows why we really can't compare ratings today from older ratings. 

If I said that ABC's market share was 1/10 of what it once was in the 1970s so it must mean ABC is doing terrible people call me an idiot and say that in the 70s there were like 5 channels. It's the same principle today. Other than sports (because there really isn't an alternative to that) I'm pretty sure TV shows in general have been on a steady decline in ratings (market share maybe not total viewers) for a while now. And that is probably a trend that will continue as in recent years you have channels like the History Channel, and AMC actually airing primtime shows that people watch now (Mad Men, Pawn Stars, Walking Dead, and so on). 



JY57 said:


> WWE also smart to move it from Saturday Night to Sunday Night which is a lead in to the NFL Pre-Season Opener too.


I ended up watching some of the special because of the NFL. I'm a Giants fan and wanted to see the start of the game because that's when the starters play. I turned the TV on 10 minutes before and the end of Undertaker/Brock was on and I watched it. They probably had a huge increase towards the end of the show.


----------



## D.M.N.

WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4075	1.3
WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4193	1.4
WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	3877	1.3

Lowest since June 23rd and down year-on-year for the first time in a while. Not surprised, one of their weakest Raw's in a while, plus no Cena, Lesnar or Heyman.


----------



## Waffelz

Main event doing well.


----------



## MaybeLock

D.M.N. said:


> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4075	1.3
> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4193	1.4
> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	3877	1.3
> 
> Lowest since June 23rd and down year-on-year for the first time in a while. Not surprised, one of their weakest Raw's in a while, plus no Cena, Lesnar or Heyman.


:lel

Actually good numbers for a WWE network 3 hours commercial.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Stephanie and Brie are killing the ratings. They did 4.5 million viewers last week and now look.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

See, this is what happens when you let women be the main part of the show. #sexist

But on a serious note, I'd think that the numbers would get higher as we get closer to Summerslam. Not sure how it was last year, but it seems like they're starting to go back to mediocre numbers way too quickly. Doesn't help that their two biggest draws in Lesnar and Cena didn't bother showing up, which also happens to be the entire WWE Title feud.


----------



## D.M.N.

One thing also: last night at the top of the 9pm hour was Ambrose/del Rio and at the top of the 10pm hour was Harper/Jericho. Neither of them are big enough to grow the audience, so the low numbers shouldn't be too surprising.


----------



## LilOlMe

Didn't preseason football air for the first time last night?

As always, look deeper, rather than just running with numbers with no context...


----------



## A-C-P

LilOlMe said:


> Didn't preseason football air for the first time last night?
> 
> As always, look deeper, rather than just running with numbers with no context...


No, football was Sunday Night, I am not surprised at all people turned off Raw after the 1st 2 hours.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

The ratings for last night's RAW:

9:00 PM: 4193	
*10:00 PM: 3877	*
8:00 PM: 4075

The rating the previous week:

9:00 PM: 4511
*10:00 PM: 4051*
8:00 PM: 4391

It's worth noting that early June hours 2 and 3 for RAW were generally higher than hour 1. Basically the upward trend from hour to hour was consistent for the last two weeks. But in the last two weeks hour 3's rating have dropped considerably.


----------



## WWE

Is life.


----------



## JY57

#BadNewsSanta said:


> See, this is what happens when you let women be the main part of the show. #sexist
> 
> But on a serious note, I'd think that the numbers would get higher as we get closer to Summerslam. Not sure how it was last year, but it seems like they're starting to go back to mediocre numbers way too quickly. Doesn't help that their two biggest draws in Lesnar and Cena didn't bother showing up, which also happens to be the entire WWE Title feud.


http://indeedwrestling.blogspot.com/2014/02/2013-raw-ratings.html

SSLAM build ratings pretty much similar (last year an extra week starting 7/15/13). First couple weeks this year been higher than last year and the 3rd week last year higher this year (which is this week)


----------



## Kabraxal

JY57 said:


> http://indeedwrestling.blogspot.com/2014/02/2013-raw-ratings.html
> 
> SSLAM build ratings pretty much similar (last year an extra week starting 7/15/13). First couple weeks this year been higher than last year and the 3rd week last year higher this year (which is this week)


I think the trend is worrying though.. this close to SS and you are dipping already. Shows that the two co main events aren't really pulling the fans in like they should. The WWE is probably thanking whatever wrestling gods that people will tune in next week just for Hogan.


----------



## RatedR10

This is the time that ratings should be higher than the norm, IMO, because it's the 2nd biggest PPV of the year and Summerslam usually has 2-3 main event matches. Officials should be worried about the trend.


----------



## JY57

Kabraxal said:


> I think the trend is worrying though.. this close to SS and you are dipping already. Shows that the two co main events aren't really pulling the fans in like they should. The WWE is probably thanking whatever wrestling gods that people will tune in next week just for Hogan.


just norm for SummerSlam build past few years. I noticed the highest RAW shows are the starting RAW, go home show, & Post-PPV RAW anyways. Nobody really cares for the middle 2-4 shows.

well its okay now because going to get real ugly in September - December. Not even The Rock can save WWE during the Fall season.


----------



## dougfisher_05

JY57 said:


> well its okay now because going to get real ugly in September - December. Not even The Rock can save WWE during the Fall season.


Agreed. Football I'd going to be non too kind to the WWE this fall. 



Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Marv95

dougfisher_05 said:


> Agreed. Football I'd going to be non too kind to the WWE this fall.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Which is why they need to do _something_ to spawn interest, and no it's not overpushing Cena. Been there done that. Football wasn't an excuse 10-15 years ago; it wasn't an excuse even in 2005 and 2006.


----------



## Diezffects

JY57 said:


> http://indeedwrestling.blogspot.com/2014/02/2013-raw-ratings.html
> 
> SSLAM build ratings pretty much similar (last year an extra week starting 7/15/13). First couple weeks this year been higher than last year and the 3rd week last year higher this year (which is this week)


Interesting.


----------



## Ziggler Mark

edit: wrong thread


----------



## dougfisher_05

Marv95 said:


> Which is why they need to do _something_ to spawn interest, and no it's not overpushing Cena. Been there done that. Football wasn't an excuse 10-15 years ago; it wasn't an excuse even in 2005 and 2006.


The question is what though? Regular season football always pounds raw in the ratings, but this year ESPN is hunkering down to try and steal the thunder back from Sunday night football and get some solid matchups to really bring in some ratings. 

Honestly I wouldn't want to any where near Vince McMahon this football season. They are already bleeding viewers, and that's with summer programming as competition. 

It's one thing to pop a rating, and it's another thing to grow from that rating. 

Its going to be a rough winter. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## metr0man

Stephanie the ratings killer.


----------



## Joshi Judas

That Brie/Steph feud's drawing power :banderas

2nd week in a row now.


----------



## Starbuck

Marv95 said:


> Which is why they need to do _something_ to spawn interest, and no it's not overpushing Cena. Been there done that. Football wasn't an excuse 10-15 years ago; it wasn't an excuse even in 2005 and 2006.


They'll dip from Sept to Dec and then come back up again from Jan to April. It always happens yet everybody always loses their shit when ratings start tanking in the winter. This is the way it goes now. So long as they stay in the high 2's they'll be fine. 

As for this week, and last for that matter, I wouldn't be surprised at all if this turned out to be another Big Show situation where everything in the final hour except his segment tanked yet everybody blamed him. Then the breakdowns came out and everybody got owned. 

2 months ago they were gaining viewers throughout the show. Recently they've started losing them. No big segments at 10pm is probably the reason why. If you don't get a big gain there then hour 3 tends to dip iirc. 

Anyway, with all the big boys back on next week things are likely to jump up again. 

:hogan2


----------



## A-C-P

Bellas killing it again this week (it meaning the viewership # :aj3)


----------



## Randy Lahey

RebelArch86 said:


> TV isn't what it used to be.


Tell that to The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones. HBO's audience for GOT dwarfs that of WWE. People still watch TV. They choose to watch good TV.

WWE has blown since 2002.


----------



## Joe88

Randy Lahey said:


> Tell that to The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones. HBO's audience for GOT dwarfs that of WWE. People still watch TV. They choose to watch good TV.
> 
> WWE has blown since 2002.



This is absolutley correct. Make the product good. If it is good people will be watching it. There is a reason why TNA is might be losing Spike, the product sucks. WCW lost the war and couldn't get television becuase there product sucked. There is a reson why the WWE network isn't has successful has it could be because the current product is boring and predictable. There are many extenuating circumstances in all of those but the bottom line they were not any good.

It has been mentioned but this fall might be even lower for WWE than usual. There is a good chance they will be without a world champion in Lesnar, or in a worse scenario and overbearing Cena as champ. Than you will have a mixture of Orton Reigns HHH and Batista in the main feud. That sounds pretty shitty and uninspiring.


----------



## JY57

Final Royal Rumble Buys - 517,000

(the initial was 445,000 but there were 72,000 late buys for Q1 as shown in the Q2 WWE Financials)

EC stayed the same @ 203,000

(this from Dave Metzler in the new Wrestling Observer)

still lower than last year (579,000 with Dwayne) but much higher than the years prior.


----------



## kokepepsi

JY57 said:


> Final Royal Rumble Buys - 517,000
> 
> (the initial was 445,000 but there were 72,000 late buys for Q1 as shown in the Q2 WWE Financials)
> 
> EC stayed the same @ 203,000
> 
> (this from Dave Metzler in the new Wrestling Observer)
> 
> still lower than last year (579,000 with Dwayne) but much higher than the years prior.


Holy shit that is a huge increase
Wonder why
:bigdave


----------



## D.M.N.

YouTube numbers...

- 400k - Brie Bella vs. Stephanie McMahon SummerSlam contract signing
- 248k - Heath Slater vs. Seth Rollins - Beat the Clock Challenge
- 237k - Roman Reigns vs. Kane - Last Man Standing Match
- 172k - Kane relinquishes his mask
- 146k - Dean Ambrose vs. Alberto Del Rio - Beat the Clock Challenge
- 114k - Chris Jericho vs. Luke Harper
- 114k - R-Truth vs. Bo Dallas
- 113k - Lana wishes U.S. President Barack Obama a happy birthday
- 109k - Mark Henry vs. Damien Sandow
- 100k - Dolph Ziggler vs. Cesaro
- 98k - Stardust & Goldust vs. RybAxel
- 82k - Diego vs. Fandango
- 61k - Adam Rose encounters the "Oculus" mirror


----------



## fabi1982

maybe vince was sitting in the back starting 359.000 new tabs with the video of his daughter  But interesting to see that they blame brie for the low numbers, but it is the most clicked segment again on Youtube...



D.M.N. said:


> YouTube numbers...
> 
> *- 400k - Brie Bella vs. Stephanie McMahon SummerSlam contract signing*
> - 248k - Heath Slater vs. Seth Rollins - Beat the Clock Challenge
> - 237k - Roman Reigns vs. Kane - Last Man Standing Match
> - 172k - Kane relinquishes his mask
> - 146k - Dean Ambrose vs. Alberto Del Rio - Beat the Clock Challenge
> - 114k - Chris Jericho vs. Luke Harper
> - 114k - R-Truth vs. Bo Dallas
> - 113k - Lana wishes U.S. President Barack Obama a happy birthday
> - 109k - Mark Henry vs. Damien Sandow
> - 100k - Dolph Ziggler vs. Cesaro
> - 98k - Stardust & Goldust vs. RybAxel
> - 82k - Diego vs. Fandango
> - 61k - Adam Rose encounters the "Oculus" mirror


----------



## Rick Sanchez

RebelArch86 said:


> TV isn't what it used to be.


TV is great right now, wrestling mostly sucks though. There was a time when wrestling was a huge part of tv every week, hell they even gave it a page in the TV Guide All-Time coffee book, which only included the biggest and most influential tv shows of all time. Now, it's just another show on tv and has no cultural relevence or buzz whatsoever.


----------



## A-C-P

D.M.N. said:


> YouTube numbers...
> 
> - *400k - Brie Bella vs. Stephanie McMahon SummerSlam contract signing*
> - 248k - Heath Slater vs. Seth Rollins - Beat the Clock Challenge
> - 237k - Roman Reigns vs. Kane - Last Man Standing Match
> - 172k - Kane relinquishes his mask
> - 146k - Dean Ambrose vs. Alberto Del Rio - Beat the Clock Challenge
> - 114k - Chris Jericho vs. Luke Harper
> - 114k - R-Truth vs. Bo Dallas
> - 113k - Lana wishes U.S. President Barack Obama a happy birthday
> - 109k - Mark Henry vs. Damien Sandow
> - 100k - Dolph Ziggler vs. Cesaro
> - 98k - Stardust & Goldust vs. RybAxel
> - 82k - Diego vs. Fandango
> - 61k - Adam Rose encounters the "Oculus" mirror


Well nobody stayed around to watch the segment live and then when they heard it was Steph dominating the Bellas, they then wanted to see it.


----------



## Algernon

Damn the ratings threads needs CM Punk and Daniel Bryan back in the worst way. This thread is as dead as the Smackdown forum.

And all the best TV shows are on cable or pay channels because they can get away with whatever the fuck they want. American Horror Story, Walking Dead and Game Thrones would suck if they were on NBC, CBS,ABC or FOX. A lot of these shows also produce anywhere from 10-15 shows per year. Comparing it to WWE is just apples and oranges. 

All that said, fuck this build up for Summerslam. It's the least excited Ive been for a major show ever, including WM 29.


----------



## Rap God

Algernon said:


> Damn the ratings threads needs CM Punk and Daniel Bryan back in the worst way. This thread is as dead as the Smackdown forum.
> 
> And all the best TV shows are on cable or pay channels because they can get away with whatever the fuck they want. American Horror Story, Walking Dead and Game Thrones would suck if they were on NBC, CBS,ABC or FOX. A lot of these shows also produce anywhere from 10-15 shows per year. Comparing it to WWE is just apples and oranges.
> 
> All that said, fuck this build up for Summerslam. It's the least excited Ive been for a major show ever, including WM 29.


Agree. I miss the Punk/Bryan mark wars in the ratings thread


----------



## Londrick

Seems youtube views are the new measuring stick for what draws. The ratings system has too many flaws and is too outdated to be taken seriously in 2014.


----------



## A-C-P

Londrick said:


> Seems youtube views are the new measuring stick for what draws. The ratings system has too many flaws and is too outdated to be taken seriously in 2014.


Translation: Whatever # supports the people I like most are the most accurate :jericho2

Sorry, I miss the mark wars in this thread


----------



## CM punker

JY57 said:


> Final Royal Rumble Buys - 517,000
> 
> (the initial was 445,000 but there were 72,000 late buys for Q1 as shown in the Q2 WWE Financials)
> 
> EC stayed the same @ 203,000
> 
> (this from Dave Metzler in the new Wrestling Observer)
> 
> still lower than last year (579,000 with Dwayne) but much higher than the years prior.


Holy shit that finally proves that nothing can compare to the drawing power of CM Punk vs The Rock.


----------



## Fissiks

fabi1982 said:


> maybe vince was sitting in the back starting 359.000 new tabs with the video of his daughter  But interesting to see that they blame brie for the low numbers, but it is the most clicked segment again on Youtube...


pretty sure the report you are talking about is pretty much BS. it doesn't even make sense that they would be angry over a Diva's segment not drawing as well as a Men's segment. Diva segments have historically never been draws.


----------



## murder

Fissiks said:


> pretty sure the report you are talking about is pretty much BS. it doesn't even make sense that they would be angry over a Diva's segment not drawing as well as a Men's segment. Diva segments have historically never been draws.


I can remember at least one time when the Diva Search was the highest rated segment on the entire Raw show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wow. Didn't realize the Brie/Steph segments bombed so hard consecutive weeks. Yikes.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

:steph doesn't draw.


----------



## RebelArch86

I guess I should be more clear about my TV comment. I was not referring to quality. I was referring to the delivery and landscape being different. Wrestlings diminished ratings aren't in a vacuum. It's across the board for all types of shows. Bc of tech people watch differently and neilsen ratings haven't caught up to tracking viewership. They finally get some numbers for DVR but only if watched within 24 hrs of airing and if you fast forward through a commercial you are not counted. Nielsen doesn't actually rate how many people are watching the show it's rating how many households are watching the commercials. It's a marketing tool.

Audiences are much bigger than Nielsen ratings are able to report. Prime time sitcoms ratings say they have a fraction of the audience they did 20 years ago. Yet the shows can afford bigger budgets and are making more money. It's bc the audience isn't tied to the Nielsen system. There is likely less viewers bc of variety of options but not close to the fractions Nielsen reports. People are watching on DVR, network websites, netflix, pirating, and the infamous waiting till seasons are over and marathoning the DVDS. The last one has cost networks hundreds of millions for not realizing nielsens limitations sooner and canceling hit shows. Two of the highest selling tv shows of all time are firefly and arrested development both of which were canceled bc to spite having monster audiences Nielsen was incapable of reporting their audiences accurately.

There are some stand outs as in everything like the walking dead that still gets double digit ratings. It's quality is so high and time slot so good people won't wait to consume it through alternate viewing options and tune in when it airs. Sure that'd be a great goal for every show but not every show can do that. TV is the best quality it's ever been, I meant the accuracy of Nielsen and show ratings aren't what it used to be. The important measuring stick is how much money is it making? WWE revenues are an all time high.

Sure attitude era ratings might have been bigger because the landscape was different, but like or not WWE makes more money now. I know they are having financial problems and cutting budgets but this was a financial investment problem. It's revenue stream is separate and has mad it's most money in the last 4 years.


----------



## murder

RebelArch86 said:


> Sure attitude era ratings might have been bigger because the landscape was different, but like or not WWE makes more money now.


.. but they made the most profit during the Attitude era. In 98/99 the profit was 56 million and in 99/2000 the profit was 69 million. In 2000/2001 they would have beaten that number, if not for the XFL disaster. The most profit of this era has been 2007 with 52 million.


----------



## RebelArch86

murder said:


> .. but they made the most profit during the Attitude era. In 98/99 the profit was 56 million and in 99/2000 the profit was 69 million. In 2000/2001 they would have beaten that number, if not for the XFL disaster. The most profit of this era has been 2007 with 52 million.


That may be right as I only have numbers for their gross revenue and don't know their current expenses.

I'm not sure if that's the right measurement to use though. When a movies success is judged total gross is used not gross minus budget, and everyone ignores inflation all though I personally disagree with that.

I'm in the camp of tickets sold is best measurement, but the more popular camp and very hard to argue is, cost you got people to pay for ticket matters more. What do you care I sold 100 tickets at a dollar if you convinced people to buy 50 tickets at 100 dollars?


----------



## murder

RebelArch86 said:


> I'm in the camp of tickets sold is best measurement,


I'm with you on that. But the studios sure care about profit. If a movie makes 100 million and cost 200 million, there won't be a sequel.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Londrick said:


> *Seems youtube views are the new measuring stick for what draws*. The ratings system has too many flaws and is too outdated to be taken seriously in 2014.


Such a terrible way to measure what draws. 

The night of RAW, WWE uploads SEVERAL videos, and the one that is uploaded last each time will get the most views because it's the first video their subscribers see the morning after RAW in their Que.


----------



## validreasoning

RebelArch86 said:


> That may be right as I only have numbers for their gross revenue and don't know their current expenses.


wwes current expenses are still way too high. 2014 will see record revenues but also record losses (due to the network start-up costs which are enormous).

but even without the network they are spending far too much money. they have way more people working for them now than at any time in the past. they run two private jets (one just for stephanie fpalm), they are spending millions on a developmental facility, millions on a movie division etc, they were paying talent something like $90,000 each a quarter for appearing in the video game when ufc paid their talent zero.


----------



## RebelArch86

validreasoning said:


> wwes current expenses are still way too high. 2014 will see record revenues but also record losses (due to the network start-up costs which are enormous).
> 
> but even without the network they are spending far too much money. they have way more people working for them now than at any time in the past. they run two private jets (one just for stephanie fpalm), they are spending millions on a developmental facility, millions on a movie division etc, they were paying talent something like $90,000 each a quarter for appearing in the video game when ufc paid their talent zero.


How did UFC get away with paying zero for the peoples likeness?


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 4.082m
Hour 2 - 4.360m
Hour 3 - 4.458m


----------



## Darkness is here

Finally the last hour does better than the other two.

I wonder who gets the credit here 8*D


----------



## A-C-P

Darkness is here said:


> Finally the last hour does better than the other two.
> 
> I wonder who gets the credit here 8*D


Obviously :hogan2 "Brother"


----------



## Fissiks

Brie Bella doing better than Reigns.


----------



## Londrick

Big Sexy still has that massive drawing power :banderas

Come on Vince, put the strap on him


----------



## wjd1989

Hogan was bound to draw. 

Still the best.


----------



## Bushmaster

I think a lot of people were tuning in to see if Del Rio would return or something.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Sith Rollins said:


> I think a lot of people were tuning in to see if Del Rio would return or something.


:duck


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Tardbasher12 said:


> :duck


We know for sure they weren't tuning in hoping to see broke-neck Bryan.


----------



## Fissiks

AnthonyMichaelHall said:


> We know for sure they weren't tuning in hoping to see broke-neck Bryan.


well yeah obviously the numbers would have been much higher if that was the case.


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

Fissiks said:


> well yeah obviously the numbers would have been much higher if that was the case.


Even If Wahniel Cryan pulled in the biggest weekly ratings in company history for the next year it would barely make a dent in the $400 million + that he owes the company.


----------



## creepytennis

murder said:


> .. but they made the most profit during the Attitude era. In 98/99 the profit was 56 million and in 99/2000 the profit was 69 million. In 2000/2001 they would have beaten that number, if not for the XFL disaster. The most profit of this era has been 2007 with 52 million.


Plus adjust for fourteen years of inflation! :lol You see why today's 'fed is a shadow of its former self. Both creatively and financially.


----------



## validreasoning

wwes annual revenue adjusted for inflation

1998-99 = $359 million
1999-00 = $516 million
2000-01 = $614 million
2001-02 = $541 million
2002-03 = $484 million
2003-04 = $473 million
2004-05 = $446 million
2005-06 = $472 milliom
2007 = $558 million
2008 = $582 million
2009 = $528 million
2010 = $522 million
2011 = $512 million
2012 = $502 million
2013 = $519 million

2007-08 really tells you how hot cena was during that period and why vince has been unwillingly to really stray far from him in the years following despite his drawing power (like everyones does) eventually falling off somewhat. vince is very loyal to those that make him alot of money hence why he was still using hogan above everyone else in 1993 and trying to squeeze the last drop of money out of rock and austin feud in 2003 (probably would be still in 2014 if they were full time lol)


----------



## murder

validreasoning said:


> wwes annual revenue adjusted for inflation
> 
> 1998-99 = $359 million
> 1999-00 = $516 million
> 2000-01 = $614 million
> 2001-02 = $541 million
> 2002-03 = $484 million
> 2003-04 = $473 million
> 2004-05 = $446 million
> 2005-06 = $472 milliom
> 2007 = $558 million
> 2008 = $582 million
> 2009 = $528 million
> 2010 = $522 million
> 2011 = $512 million
> 2012 = $502 million
> 2013 = $519 million
> 
> 2007-08 really tells you how hot cena was during that period and why vince has been unwillingly to really stray far from him in the years following despite his drawing power (like everyones does) eventually falling off somewhat. vince is very loyal to those that make him alot of money hence why he was still using hogan above everyone else in 1993 and trying to squeeze the last drop of money out of rock and austin feud in 2003 (probably would be still in 2014 if they were full time lol)


It's about profit, not revenue. Also, 2007/08 was when the Brand Extension was in full effect and PPV's had lots of main events, not just one featuring Cena. Of course, Cena was the number one guy in 2007 (not 2008, that was HHH), but the company didn't rely on just one man, like during most of Hogan's and Austin's runs.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

validreasoning said:


> wwes annual revenue adjusted for inflation
> 
> 1998-99 = $359 million
> 1999-00 = $516 million
> 2000-01 = $614 million
> 2001-02 = $541 million
> 2002-03 = $484 million
> 2003-04 = $473 million
> 2004-05 = $446 million
> 2005-06 = $472 milliom
> 2007 = $558 million
> 2008 = $582 million
> 2009 = $528 million
> 2010 = $522 million
> 2011 = $512 million
> 2012 = $502 million
> 2013 = $519 million
> 
> 2007-08 really tells you how hot cena was during that period and why vince has been unwillingly to really stray far from him in the years following despite his drawing power (like everyones does) eventually falling off somewhat. vince is very loyal to those that make him alot of money hence why he was still using hogan above everyone else in 1993 and trying to squeeze the last drop of money out of rock and austin feud in 2003 (probably would be still in 2014 if they were full time lol)


Those years were nothing like now. The brand split was in effect, and we had two good rosters. That's why WWE was so successful between 2005-2008. You had Cena on one show backed by Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Edge, Randy Orton, Big Show and Batista on the other show backed by Undertaker, Rey Mysterio, Kane, JBL, Booker T, MVP, Jeff Hardy etc.

If that period showed one thing, it was that Vince was very smart. Even if he didn't have one massive draw, he basically built two stars in Cena/Batista and had two distinct brands. As soon as those two started winding down, their business went down too.

I've said this before, but you only get a few years at your peak. After that, you're basically veteran status. You'll continue to be a big name due to legacy, but you won't draw like you once did. That's exactly what happened with Batista/Cena from 2009 onwards. Cena was basically useless on Raw for the first half of 2009, and Batista spent most of that time injured. It was also at that time that Batista was full-time on Raw so that obviously reflected on Smackdown suffering because it only had guys like Edge, Rey and the upcoming Jeff to carry it and they were never as big as him nor were they leading men. Jeff could have been good long-term if he didn't screw up but Smackdown started a massive decline during that time, and it showed too because Vince panicked and sent Batista back during late 2009 to help before Wrestlemania season started.

This is the biggest problem WWE has faced in the last few years. They didn't create new stars, or the ones they tried with ended up backfiring in some way (Kennedy, MVP, Jeff Hardy, Lashley). Realistically, Cena and Batista should have been entering Triple H/Taker/HBK status during 2009/2010 and someone else should have been ready to replace those two, but there was no one.

You need a strong roster of veterans, mid-carders and fresh leading faces to help the overall product. Cena/Batista were past their prime years by 2009, and WWE had no one to replace them. To make things worse, Batista and Shawn were gone the next year, and soon enough Triple H, Undertaker and Edge effectively were too. That's the five of the six biggest stars WWE had between 2005-2010. Only Cena was left. Orton too, but he wasn't anywhere near the level of Cena, Batista, Taker, Shawn and Triple H during that time anyway. He was more similar to Edge.

Funnily enough, this is about the time when WWE seems to have that potential if they don't screw it up. Daniel Bryan is absolutely capable as one of the leading men. If you add a future Roman Reigns, then veteran talent like Cena, Batista, Orton and upcoming guys like Ambrose, Rollins, Cesaro and Wyatt, and they'll be a lot better off than they have been between 2009-2013. Probably not as good as they had it between 2005-2007 because the overall roster was much stronger then but better than it has been for years now.

This is why they need to be careful with how they're booking Reigns, Rollins, Ambrose, Wyatt and Cesaro.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

Ratings in for Monday.

8:00pm - 4.281m
9:00pm - 4.330m
10:00pm - 3.972m

Source

I would have to think that's a disappointment. WWE must have been expecting a little better considering this was coming off a heavily promoted Cena/Lesnar match which ended with a new champion and the destruction of Cena. Not only is it down from last week, it's worse than last years post-Summerslam show. Like I said, Lesnar is way overhyped on these forums. Even becoming champion, I would've thought they'd get a better rating than this.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Even with the streak victory settling in and a fresh, dominant victory over Cena for the WWE Championship, Brock fails to draw viewers in for his segment. He truly does cost more than he makes for the WWE.


----------



## Darkness is here

validreasoning said:


> wwes annual revenue adjusted for inflation
> 
> 1998-99 = $359 million
> 1999-00 = $516 million
> 2000-01 = $614 million
> 2001-02 = $541 million
> 2002-03 = $484 million
> 2003-04 = $473 million
> 2004-05 = $446 million
> *2005-06 = $472 milliom
> 2007 = $558 million
> 2008 = $582 million
> 2009 = $528 million
> 2010 = $522 million
> 2011 = $512 million
> 2012 = $502 million
> 2013 = $519 million*
> 
> 2007-08 really tells you how hot cena was during that period and why vince has been unwillingly to really stray far from him in the years following despite his drawing power (like everyones does) eventually falling off somewhat. vince is very loyal to those that make him alot of money hence why he was still using hogan above everyone else in 1993 and trying to squeeze the last drop of money out of rock and austin feud in 2003 (probably would be still in 2014 if they were full time lol)


DAMN!
THOSE ARE FUCKING AE NUMBERS CENA WAS PULLING OFF.

No wonder vince doesn't give a SHIT about fans when it comes to cena.


----------



## Goldusto

raw hour 3 Hemorrhaged viewers, losing over 300K, I guess it bombed but spiked with ambrose etc


----------



## Londrick

The Caped Crusader said:


> Ratings in for Monday.
> 
> 8:00pm - 4.281m
> 9:00pm - 4.330m
> *10:00pm - 3.972m*
> 
> Source
> 
> I would have to think that's a disappointment. WWE must have been expecting a little better considering this was coming off a heavily promoted Cena/Lesnar match which ended with a new champion and the destruction of Cena. Not only is it down from last week, it's worse than last years post-Summerslam show. Like I said, Lesnar is way overhyped on these forums. Even becoming champion, I would've thought they'd get a better rating than this.


Good thing they're going with Reigns.


----------



## Darkness is here

Numbers are REALLY POOR.
Not even ONCE over 4.5M.


----------



## Diezffects

fpalm at any idiot still crediting Cena for 06-08 success. The company was on a momentum built up starting in 2005 with Batista's hot rise and USA network. This is similar to saying "Goldberg outdrew nWo in 1998"...no Goldie just headlined a already hot well established period in WCW thanks to the momentum built on nWo. 

Atleast Oldberg was super over and a drawing card for WCW, John Cena wasn't even that. He was getting ass booed out and failing to move PPV figures that Vince had to bring celebrities to headline Wrestlemanias and he still does, in a way, with Rock and Brock Lesnar. Look up 2006 PPV figures and compare to years before, you'll see how great a "draw" Cena was.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Monday Night Football was on and did a huge number. Yes, even a pre-season game.


----------



## Diezffects

The Caped Crusader said:


> Ratings in for Monday.
> 
> 8:00pm - 4.281m
> 9:00pm - 4.330m
> 10:00pm - 3.972m
> 
> Source
> 
> I would have to think that's a disappointment. WWE must have been expecting a little better considering this was coming off a heavily promoted Cena/Lesnar match which ended with a new champion and the destruction of Cena. Not only is it down from last week, it's worse than last years post-Summerslam show. Like I said, Lesnar is way overhyped on these forums. Even becoming champion, I would've thought they'd get a better rating than this.


Yes for a post summerslam show, these are a dissapointment. But wasn't Lesnar in hour 2 with the title presentation with Authority and all that? It seemed to have drawn the biggest.


----------



## A-C-P

The third hr lower viewership doesn't really surprise me after how the first 2 hours went


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## The Caped Crusader

Diezffects said:


> Yes for a post summerslam show, these are a dissapointment. But wasn't Lesnar in hour 2 with the title presentation with Authority and all that? It seemed to have drawn the biggest.


True, but my point was this number is worse than last year and last week too. Lesnar is booked and treated like a huge attraction but he really hasn't done anything significant for numbers since his return but people constantly harp on about how he's bigger than anyone else in the WWE right now but nothing is supporting that. 

For the night after he became champion, I would've expected a much stronger number. He broke the streak earlier this year, was in a heavily promoted feud with Cena and destroyed Cena to become champion. He has no competition on the show either. There is no Cena, Bryan or Batista to compete so I would expect his hour to be the highest but it's still a big disappointment in my opinion. Him winning clearly hasn't generated any real interest.


----------



## BloodUrineVomit

The Caped Crusader said:


> True, but my point was this number is worse than last year and last week too. Lesnar is booked and treated like a huge attraction but he really hasn't done anything significant for numbers since his return but people constantly harp on about how he's bigger than anyone else in the WWE right now but nothing is supporting that.
> 
> For the night after he became champion, I would've expected a much stronger number. He broke the streak earlier this year, was in a heavily promoted feud with Cena and destroyed Cena to become champion. He has no competition on the show either. There is no Cena, Bryan or Batista to compete so I would expect his hour to be the highest but it's still a big disappointment in my opinion. Him winning clearly hasn't generated any real interest.


There was an article outlining his value to the company posted in the General section the other day. He's certainly one of the top draws on the current roster.

The reason for the numbers is simple. NFL always outperforms WWE in the ratings, even in preseason. But especially last night with Johnny Manziel playing. The guy is a national sensation.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

BloodUrineVomit said:


> There was an article outlining his value to the company posted in the General section the other day. *He's certainly one of the top draws on the current roster.*
> 
> The reason for the numbers is simple. NFL always outperforms WWE in the ratings, even in preseason. But especially last night with Johnny Manziel playing. The guy is a national sensation.


I read that article and it also supports my opinion, which is the bold so I agree with that. He's a draw, alongside Cena and Triple H for example. He's not a much bigger draw than them though nor is he the biggest draw on the roster. It's what I see a lot of people say on this forum to support him though, that he's really big for business or bigger than anyone in the WWE, but it's simply not true. He's not doing anything that we don't see already. Cena or Bryan or even Orton to a lesser extent could do that.

The main thing though is that for someone who broke the streak earlier this year, and was then inserted into the biggest feud possible with Cena that was heavily promoted, the ratings have been lacklustre. The night after he becomes champion you'd expect something impressive after all this investment, and even his hour (let's ignore the others) didn't draw a very impressive viewership.


----------



## Right_To_Censor

The Caped Crusader said:


> I read that article and it also supports my opinion, which is the bold so I agree with that. He's a draw, alongside Cena and Triple H for example. He's not a much bigger draw than them though nor is he the biggest draw on the roster. It's what I see a lot of people say on this forum to support him though, that he's really big for business or bigger than anyone in the WWE, but it's simply not true. He's not doing anything that we don't see already. Cena or Bryan or even Orton to a lesser extent could do that.
> 
> The main thing though is that for someone who broke the streak earlier this year, and was then inserted into the biggest feud possible with Cena that was heavily promoted, the ratings have been lacklustre. The night after he becomes champion you'd expect something impressive after all this investment, and even his hour (let's ignore the others) didn't draw a very impressive viewership.


It's just a simple case of perception becoming reality. People perceive Lesnar to be a huge draw, so that's what he is. The facts don't matter.


----------



## Diezffects

The Caped Crusader said:


> True, but my point was this number is worse than last year and last week too. Lesnar is booked and treated like a huge attraction but he really hasn't done anything significant for numbers since his return but people constantly harp on about how he's bigger than anyone else in the WWE right now but nothing is supporting that.
> 
> For the night after he became champion, I would've expected a much stronger number. He broke the streak earlier this year, was in a heavily promoted feud with Cena and destroyed Cena to become champion. He has no competition on the show either. There is no Cena, Bryan or Batista to compete so I would expect his hour to be the highest but it's still a big disappointment in my opinion. Him winning clearly hasn't generated any real interest.



You're right. This is apparently the lowest post Summerslam viewership in 17 years. Ouch. 




> It's just a simple case of perception becoming reality. People perceive Lesnar to be a huge draw, so that's what he is. The facts don't matter.



True, I guess people kinda assumed that since he broke the streak.


----------



## The_Workout_Buddy

Stupid WWE without Cena the only thing that draws viewers is Big Show crying... guess they never learn.


----------



## Diezffects

The_Workout_Buddy said:


> Stupid WWE without Cena the only thing that draws viewers is Big Show crying... guess they never learn.


WWE isn't drawing any better with Cena, his previous title reign, the one he won by beating the rock at mania, drew abysmal. Nothing matters in WWE anymore.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Less than 4 million for the 3rd hour is terrible. Cant be blamed on MNF either because RG III and Manziel were out of the game by then.


----------



## superuser1

So wait the third hour bombs and no one is blaming the Rollins/Ambrose match? Lol thats funny to me seeing as how everyone was quick to blame Steph/Brie when they closed out the show.


----------



## Diezffects

Rollins has been consistently working the third hour for the past few weeks in long matches, and everytime he does the third hour draws the lowest. Dude just doesn't draw.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

While the number is down from last year's show, it did open stronger than the prior year (4.281 million this >4.076 million last year), which shows fans were probably invested at the start to see Lesnar, then they promoted that he'd be receiving a new belt. So extra people probably tuned out during or after that opening segment and figured Lesnar would be back for the end of the show (I know I and those that watched with me did)... of course then he comes out in the 9PM, does his thing, and that feels like the end of the show. While I'm sure a lot of those fans that tuned out probably tuned in for that segment when they heard Lesnar was on, I also think a good number of people missed the boat and didn't realize Lesnar was on until it was too late. At that point the lot of viewers that tuned into see Lesnar tuned out, and the third hour was riding on Ambrose/Rollins. And on that, while I don't necessarily think being just under 4 million is bad for a couple of guys who's feud has been treated as a mid-card feud for months now and only just suddenly got the main event, it still shows the feud even after going on for a couple of months still wasn't a big drawing feud, and probably wouldn't ever be unless maybe they put Seth's contract on the line. 

Of course all I can do is speculate and offer the opposite argument to what's already been put in this thread. Maybe Lesnar just isn't that big of a (TV) draw. He did well when he returned in 2012, but his feuds with Taker and HHH were actually disappointing in the numbers game, and those are two big draws in their own right, especially in Taker's case with it being Taker, the streak feud and all that. Lesnar's PPV numbers though have overall done well. His ER 2012 match with Cena did a great number, as did his SS and ER match with HHH, and the Taker match at Mania. Heck, you can maybe even attribute a little bit of the successful RR buyrate to him (although that was probably mostly down to Batista's return). The only one that didn't do well was his match with Punk.


----------



## The Bloodline

I don't really care about numbers but it's still sad that the main event didn't pull more because I really don't want creative using this as a excuse to not use those 2 for main event spots more often.


----------



## MaybeLock

The Caped Crusader said:


> I read that article and it also supports my opinion, which is the bold so I agree with that. He's a draw, alongside Cena and Triple H for example. He's not a much bigger draw than them though nor is he the biggest draw on the roster. It's what I see a lot of people say on this forum to support him though, that he's really big for business or bigger than anyone in the WWE, but it's simply not true. He's not doing anything that we don't see already. Cena or Bryan or even Orton to a lesser extent could do that.
> 
> The main thing though is that for someone who broke the streak earlier this year, and was then inserted into the biggest feud possible with Cena that was heavily promoted, the ratings have been lacklustre. The night after he becomes champion you'd expect something impressive after all this investment, and even his hour (let's ignore the others) didn't draw a very impressive viewership.


This. People overrate the hell out of Lesnar in this forum and he clearly isn't that big. He was a great PPV seller in 2012 (the 2 ppvs he showed up) and that's it. He has been slowly losing that effect in buyrates, and even if he still had it, it would not matter that much with the Network, where making a good weekly show and good PPVs during the year is more important IMO.


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

Ravensflock88 said:


> I don't really care about numbers but it's still sad that the main event didn't pull more because I really don't want creative using this as a excuse to not use those 2 for main event spots more often.


First thing that came to my mind. With that number decrease, I worry. But, that was one of the best RAW matches in a while. Not to mention, it was over with the crowd.


----------



## p862011

thats why they push Reigns:reigns2


----------



## #Mark

You people do realize Ambrose/Rollins most likely gained viewers and the loss came during the six man, Usos/Stardust match, and Henry/Rusev angle? It's impossible to know without breakdowns but that's how it usually is.


----------



## murder

#Mark said:


> You people do realize Ambrose/Rollins most likely gained viewers and the loss came during the six man, Usos/Stardust match, and Henry/Rusev angle? It's impossible to know without breakdowns but that's how it usually is.


Yup! Not to mention that the third hour is usually the lowest unless freaking Hulk Hogan himself shows up. Also, Lesnar, the champion, had already appeared in hour 2.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

#BadNewsSanta said:


> While the number is down from last year's show, it did open stronger than the prior year (4.281 million this >4.076 million last year), which shows fans were probably invested at the start to see Lesnar, then they promoted that he'd be receiving a new belt. So extra people probably tuned out during or after that opening segment and figured Lesnar would be back for the end of the show (I know I and those that watched with me did)... of course then he comes out in the 9PM, does his thing, and that feels like the end of the show. While I'm sure a lot of those fans that tuned out probably tuned in for that segment when they heard Lesnar was on, I also think a good number of people missed the boat and didn't realize Lesnar was on until it was too late. At that point the lot of viewers that tuned into see Lesnar tuned out, and the third hour was riding on Ambrose/Rollins. And on that, while I don't necessarily think being just under 4 million is bad for a couple of guys who's feud has been treated as a mid-card feud for months now and only just suddenly got the main event, it still shows the feud even after going on for a couple of months still wasn't a big drawing feud, and probably wouldn't ever be unless maybe they put Seth's contract on the line.
> 
> Of course all I can do is speculate and offer the opposite argument to what's already been put in this thread. Maybe Lesnar just isn't that big of a (TV) draw. He did well when he returned in 2012, but his feuds with Taker and HHH were actually disappointing in the numbers game, and those are two big draws in their own right, especially in Taker's case with it being Taker, the streak feud and all that. Lesnar's PPV numbers though have overall done well. His ER 2012 match with Cena did a great number, as did his SS and ER match with HHH, and the Taker match at Mania. Heck, you can maybe even attribute a little bit of the successful RR buyrate to him (although that was probably mostly down to Batista's return). The only one that didn't do well was his match with Punk.


I don't think I'd attribute any amount of the Royal Rumble buyrate to him this year. He was in a bigger match with CM Punk the year before and did nothing for the buyrate. Obviously I'm not going to think him being in a match with Big Show of all people had any affect. Especially when the week before the PPV, Batista returned and did over 5 million viewers for his hour which is higher than any number Lesnar return has had. The Royal Rumble PPV boost was very likely thanks to some returning fans to see what happens with Batista.

Lesnar did really well with his first matches with Cena and Triple H in 2012 but he's fallen flat right after. None of his subsequent feuds have done very well. Even Wrestlemania 30, which was mostly built around Bryan and Lesnar/Undertaker, did the worst international buyrate ever. Who knows what the domestic buyrate total would actually be without the Network obscuring traditional numbers. This is why I feel WWE messed up with him. Lesnar, the monster, should have happened in 2012. Not now when it feels like even feeding him the streak has done nothing for him. Perception is nice, but not when it isn't actually translating to anything.

I'd argue he's behind Cena, Bryan and Batista in terms of drawing ability. The problem with Cena is that he's not fresh so he's not good for TV as much (still valuable on tours and with his sponsorships), whereas Bryan and Batista pretty much are. Batista also has the Royal Rumble boost (which if you take out The Rock's return, is about 70,000 higher on average than any of the few years prior) as well as a huge TV number upon his return. The big test for Batista will be his return to see whether jobbing him out to The Shield has pretty much ruined him too but he is coming off a huge movie so maybe people will come back to see if he's treated any better. Bryan's been one of the most consistent people on the show for viewership even if he doesn't do huge ratings (this is important because Bryan isn't just TV but also touring and bringing revenue there so he's an asset long-term).


----------



## kokepepsi

Leave the analysis to the experts pls
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...k-lesnars-value-in-the-era-of-the-wwe-network

LOLatbuyrates


----------



## JY57

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_80322.shtml#.U_T3KksdsUs



> WWE Raw's TV rating on Monday was driven by Brock Lesnar's coronation segment as new WWE World Hvt. champion.
> 
> The segment outdrew the next-highest-rated segment by 17 percent, capturing Raw as a one-segment show. But, WWE put Lesnar's segment at the top of the second hour, as opposed to the third hour, the remaining portion of Raw lost a good chunk of the audience to NFL pre-season football.
> 
> Top 5 Rated Segments (key m18-49 demo)
> 
> - Q5: 2.46 rating / 1.546 million viewers: Lesnar's Coronation & Heyman Speech
> 
> - Q4: 2.10 rating / 1.319 million viewers: Paige vs. Natalya in a non-title match and the first three minutes of Lesnar's segment.
> 
> - Q9: 2.07 rating / 1.304 million viewers: Slight top-of-the-third-hour bump for the second-half of the Sheamus & RVD & Reigns vs. Orton & Axel & Ryback six-man tag match.
> 
> - Q7: 2.06 rating / 1.299 million viewers: Jack Swagger vs. Cesaro and Bo Dallas's promo toward Swagger.
> 
> - Over-Run: 2.04 rating / 1.285 million viewers: The Dean Ambrose vs. Seth Rollins main event increased 12 percent from Q12, but just did rank in the Top 5 after Raw lost a good chunk of viewers to football in the third hour.
> 
> ***
> 
> Overall Raw TV Rating Breaking Down (m18-49 demo)
> 
> - Overall Show: 1.95 rating / 1.226 million viewers.
> 
> - Q1: Raw started slow with a 1.86 rating for the immediate Summerslam fall-out segment focused on Stephanie McMahon and the Bellas.
> 
> - Q2: Raw fell to a show-low 1.69 rating for two commercial breaks and the first-half of Mark Henry & Big Show vs. The Wyatts.
> 
> - Q3: Raw jumped to a 1.93 rating for the second-half of the tag match, one commercial, and Ric Flair backstage. The segment was boosted by a big audience leap for the finish of the tag match.
> 
> - Q4: Raw increased again to a strong 2.10 rating for Paige vs. Natalya with A.J.'s interruption, one commercial, and the first portion of Lesnar's coronation.
> 
> The Divas match drew just as well as the start of Lesnar's segment.
> 
> - Q5: At the top of the second hour, Raw jumped to a 2.46 rating for Lesnar's segment and Paul Heyman's speech. There was no commercial break, which helped.
> 
> Included was Raw's peak audience of 1.643 million viewers at 9:03 p.m. Heyman held the audience starting with 1.560 million viewers at 9:04 p.m. and finishing with 1.554 million viewers at 9:13 p.m.
> 
> - Q6: Raw dropped to a 1.94 rating for two commercials and Dolph Ziggler vs. The Miz in a tough spot following Lesnar/Heyman.
> 
> - Q7: Raw rebounded to a 2.06 rating for Swagger vs. Cesaro and one commercial.
> 
> - Q8: Raw fell back to a 1.86 rating for two commercials and the first-half of a six-man tag match.
> 
> - Q9: At the top of the third hour, Raw increased to a 2.07 rating for the finish of Team RVD vs. Team Orton, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q10: Raw fell hard to a 1.73 rating for two commercials and a non-descript Usos vs. Rhdoes Bros. tag match. This 45-minute block is where Raw really lost the audience to football, dragging down the third hour.
> 
> - Q11: Raw inched up to a 1.77 rating for Mark Henry answering Rusev and one commercial.
> 
> - Q12: Raw inched up to a 1.82 rating for the first-half of Ambrose vs. Rollins, plus one mid-match commercial.
> 
> - Over-run: Raw got a boost to a 2.04 rating for the end of Ambrose vs. Rollins.


Brock/Heyman (way above anything else) and Paige/AJ Lee were top two segments of the show for 18-49 Male Demos

also final rating: 3.04 (down from 3.06 from last week)


----------



## LOL-ins

Rollins can't draw.


----------



## RatedR10

That Usos/GoldStar match really dragged things down.

dat BORK bringing in the big numbers :brock

Those thinking they'd blame Ambrose/Rollins... I wouldn't think so. WWE gets minute-by-minute breakdowns and it's obviously The Usos and GoldStar dragged that shit down.


----------



## wwe4universe

While i'm no expert analyzing the positives and negatives in ratings, i do see the lesnar segment in hour 2 drew in the most, which is a good sign. However, the overall ratings did decline slightly from last week. 

Although criticizing brock lesnar solely for the lack of ratings boost is far fetch without taking into account of other variables. Such as. the brown/redskins game, a 3hr show with a lack of depth roster (As always), brie and steph (like it opened the damn show) and, as always, the overall product is just not appealing. 

Raw has been averaging around 2.8 roughly in 2014. It is barely making the hump over 3.0 on weekly basis. Clearly the product is just stale.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

JY57 said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_80322.shtml#.U_T3KksdsUs
> 
> 
> 
> *Brock/Heyman (way above anything else) *and Paige/AJ Lee were top two segments of the show for 18-49 Male Demos
> 
> also final rating: 3.04 (down from 3.06 from last week)


He should be considering there is no competition on the show. Everyone else is effectively a mid-carder except for Orton who is doing nothing. It doesn't change that the overall number is a disappointment.


----------



## Kabraxal

As much as I love Paige/AJ I am shocked they are the second highest segment. Would not have guessed that.


----------



## Diezffects

2.4 is still not that good, and overrun really bad.




Last year's Summerslam fall-out show QH for comparison -


8/19/13

*Q1: 2.11* rating for the immediate Summerslam fall-out.

*Q5: 2.19* rating for Dolph Ziggler vs. The Shield handicap

*Q9: 2.56* rating C.M. Punk's promo on Paul Heyman

*OR: 2.75* rating for Triple H/McMahons, Bryan, Orton segment


I believe the loss of Q9 spot as a big viewership gainer in recent weeks is the real reason for low third hour viewership. This is where Seth Rollins was usually placed against Jericho, RVD, Slater etc.. and he's bombing hard in that spot. This low overrun again shows Rollins clearly isn't Punk or Bryan in terms of star value to the company, atleast not yet.


----------



## Tweener ken

FINALLY......A BREAKDOWN!
Been ages since I saw one.


----------



## A-C-P

Dat Paige/AJ love :AJ aige


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Brock did his thing in getting people into his segment, blame can't be placed on him for how the rest of the show, especially hour 3 did. 

Overrun only just made it into the top 5... yup, looks like Ambrose/Rollins just doesn't cut it... at least not yet. Of course without having other overruns to compare to recently, this might actually be the norm for overruns. 

It's interesting that the divas title feud seemed to get the second highest number of the show. 

Also interesting how this breakdown just randomly appears. What up with that?


----------



## kokepepsi

Damn you marks suck
The most interesting thing was Swagger/Cesaro gain all the rest is expected


----------



## JY57

> Raw on 8/18 did 4.18 million viewers, perhaps disappointing for the day after SummerSlam, but the ESPN preseason game with Cleveland Browns vs. Washington Redskins did a 4.5 rating and 6.90 million viewers, and that’s enough to make a difference. It was the most-watched preseason game in five years and the fifth highest rated preseason game on ESPN in the last 25 years, even though ratings were far easier to come by with less competition going back that far. The game did a 28.5 rating in Cleveland and a 13.6 in Washington.


Via WON


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

Johnny Manziel getting those ratings!


----------



## joeycalz

AJ and Paige >>>>>>>> everybody else


----------



## Lebyonics

:aj3aige


----------



## Dark_Raiden

Um....Aj and Paige wasn't the draw...it clearly said it was the beginning of Brock's stuff.....people tuned in for Brock.


----------



## RKO 4life

Orton getting those ratings!


----------



## Starbuck

A wild breakdown appears!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Brock topped the hour and that should be a surprise to absolutely no one. Not the biggest viewership numbers all things considered though. Have diminishing returns offset the super human booking of Lesnar lately? They might have decided to get their act together a little too late. I personally don't think Ambrose/Rollins did bad at all considering they are upper midcard. Nobody is expecting them to pull the same numbers as Brock Lesnar and the only way they ever will is by getting main event exposure. No harm no foul. 

:brock


----------



## Diezffects

> I personally don't think Ambrose/Rollins did bad at all considering they are upper midcard. Nobody is expecting them to pull the same numbers as Brock Lesnar and the only way they ever will is by getting main event exposure. No harm no foul.


Shield was pretty dominant though, they had some of the best consistent booking in recent years. Atleast Rollins, after the turn and break up of the Sheild, should be doing a lot better imo. He just isn't. I mean Ryback was doing incredibly well with not even half the push in 2012.


----------



## Kabraxal

Diezffects said:


> Shield was pretty dominant though, they had some of the best consistent booking in recent years. Atleast Rollins, after the turn and break up of the Sheild, should be doing a lot better imo. He just isn't. I mean Ryback was doing incredibly well with not even half the push in 2012.


A team/faction/stable can be a draw while individual members once broken off may not be. It simply takes time to build them as individual entities, especially when one man basically keeps the same gimmick he had in the shield while the other two have to show off new sides.


----------



## A-C-P

My absolute favorite part of Raw is that they put the Steph/Bellas' stuff in the opening segment so they can attribute the # generated by people tuning in to see the fallout from Lesnar to them :maury


----------



## D.M.N.

Here's the YouTube hits for last week and this week, which might be interesting to put alongside the breakdowns:

August 11th
- 889k - Brock Lesnar crashes Hulk Hogan's birthday celebration
- 435k - The New World Order and WWE Legends wish Hulk Hogan a happy birthday
- 414k - John Cena calls out Brock Lesnar
- 368k - Stephanie McMahon reveals Daniel Bryan's "secret"
- 318k - Brie Bella is arrested
- 250k - AJ Lee vs. Eva Marie
- 236k - Sheamus vs. Randy Orton
- 223k - Roman Reigns vs. RybAxel - 2-on-1 Handicap Match
- 216k - Paul Heyman vows Brock Lesnar will give John Cena a beating at SummerSlam
- 202k - "Mean" Gene Okerlund introduces Hulk Hogan
- 184k - Chris Jericho and Bray Wyatt go face-to-face
- 151k - Rob Van Dam vs. Seth Rollins
- 150k - Dolph Ziggler vs. Heath Slater
- 114k - Jack Swagger vs. Cesaro

August 18th
- 497k - Brock Lesnar receives the new WWE World Heavyweight Championship
- 353k - Nikki Bella explains why she betrayed Brie at SummerSlam
- 299k - Dean Ambrose empties an ice bucket on Seth Rollins' head
- 253k - Mark Henry confronts Rusev
- 230k - Roman Reigns, Sheamus & Rob Van Dam vs. Randy Orton & RybAxel
- 201k - Dean Ambrose vs. Seth Rollins - WWE App Vote Match
- 179k - Dolph Ziggler vs. The Miz - Intercontinental Championship
- 169k - Natalya vs. Paige
- 138k - The Usos vs. Goldust & Stardust
- 122k - Big Show & Mark Henry vs. Luke Harper & Erick Rowan
- 111k - Jack Swagger vs. Cesaro
- 96k - Ric Flair congratulates Dolph Ziggler on his Intercontinental Title win
- 69k - Jack Swagger comments on his SummerSlam defeat
- 68k - Chris Jericho reveals what Bray Wyatt will never take away from him
- 56k - Bray Wyatt comments on defeating Chris Jericho at SummerSlam


----------



## LOL-ins

BROCK IS A FUCKING MONSTER DRAW.


----------



## wjd1989

LOL-ins said:


> BROCK IS A FUCKING MONSTER DRAW.


Not really.


----------



## murder

It would be interesting to see house show numbers if Lesnar actually was on the road. Then and only then, his drawing power could be compaed to Cena's or anybody else. It's real easy to come in and co-headline Mania against Taker and against Cena at Summerslam and pop a buyrate. Same goes for his UFC stint. 

Not knocking on Lesnar here. In fact, I think he would move house show numbers as well, but it's a bit ridiculous that Lesnar gets praised for buyrates and ratings when he only shows up a few times a year. Of course he does move numbers because he is a special attraction. That's why UFC and WWE can hardly be compared to begin with.

Hopefully for them, WWE haven't killed their biggest full-time draw by sacrificing Cena for Lesnar.


----------



## validreasoning

murder said:


> Not knocking on Lesnar here. In fact, I think he would move house show numbers as well, but it's a bit ridiculous that Lesnar gets praised for buyrates and ratings when he only shows up a few times a year. Of course he does move numbers because he is a special attraction. That's why UFC and WWE can hardly be compared to begin with.


lesnar certainly wasn't a houseshow draw during his first stint as wwe champion, in fact numbers were really poor so it would be interesting to see what he could do in 2014


----------



## kokepepsi

Gonna waste my 6k post on this
ITS BUYS NOT BUYTRATES

Pls use the right word, you look like a mark who read a dirshit newz site and all of a sudden think you know what you talking about when you say buyrate


----------



## AnthonyMichaelHall

A-C-P said:


> My absolute favorite part of Raw is that they put the Steph/Bellas' stuff in the opening segment so they can attribute the # generated by people tuning in to see the fallout from Lesnar to them :maury


No one else has the courage to type it, so I will.....*I don't think that actually WAS your favorite part of Raw.*


----------



## krai999

you know as low as the summerslam buyrate was,the Post summerslam raw ratings were much higher than last years


----------



## murder

kokepepsi said:


> Gonna waste my 6k post on this
> ITS BUYS NOT BUYTRATES


That was really a waste of a post. You're right, it's not "buy*t*rates", it's "buyrates".


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

kokepepsi said:


> Damn you marks suck
> The most interesting thing was Swagger/Cesaro gain all the rest is expected


Because Cesaro and Swagger are silent draws.


----------



## brxd

D.M.N. said:


> August 18th
> - 122k - Big Show & Mark Henry vs. Luke Harper & Erick Rowan
> - 111k - Jack Swagger vs. Cesaro
> - 96k - Ric Flair congratulates Dolph Ziggler on his Intercontinental Title win
> - 69k - Jack Swagger comments on his SummerSlam defeat
> - 68k - Chris Jericho reveals what Bray Wyatt will never take away from him
> - 56k - Bray Wyatt comments on defeating Chris Jericho at SummerSlam


The Jericho vs. Wyatt feud is doing well then. :lol:


----------



## RebelArch86

krai999 said:


> you know as low as the summerslam buyrate was,the Post summerslam raw ratings were much higher than last years


Um what? This post show is down across the board and there's SS numbers already?


----------



## RebelArch86

Diezffects said:


> 2.4 is still not that good, and overrun really bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Last year's Summerslam fall-out show QH for comparison -
> 
> 
> 8/19/13
> 
> *Q1: 2.11* rating for the immediate Summerslam fall-out.
> 
> *Q5: 2.19* rating for Dolph Ziggler vs. The Shield handicap
> 
> *Q9: 2.56* rating C.M. Punk's promo on Paul Heyman
> 
> *OR: 2.75* rating for Triple H/McMahons, Bryan, Orton segment
> 
> 
> I believe the loss of Q9 spot as a big viewership gainer in recent weeks is the real reason for low third hour viewership. This is where Seth Rollins was usually placed against Jericho, RVD, Slater etc.. and he's bombing hard in that spot. This low overrun again shows Rollins clearly isn't Punk or Bryan in terms of star value to the company, atleast not yet.


Let the butt hurt commence. Daniel Bryan is a bigger draw than Brock.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Is it wrong that I've been waiting for a mark war to happen in this thread?


----------



## RebelArch86

Tardbasher12 said:


> Is it wrong that I've been waiting for a mark war to happen in this thread?


No, help me start one. There'll be pop corn.


----------



## MaybeLock

RebelArch86 said:


> Let the butt hurt commence. Daniel Bryan is a bigger draw than Brock.


:yes


----------



## validreasoning

GermanSuplex_x16 said:


> Well, this article shows that Lesnar draws approximately $1.08 million per PPV appearance


And according to same report its costing wwe $1.7 million per ppv appearance so they are losing money on the deal. I don't mind lesnar in wwe but he clearly isn't worth what they are paying.

Being a draw in UFC does not mean that will translate to pro wrestling. We saw that with rampage jackson who didn't even raise tna's rating a fraction when he was there. Jackson remains a major draw in mma having done 100k+ buys on ppv with lowly bellator recently.



> Last week's RAW went up against the most watched preseason NFL game in a long while. Lesnar's segment still drew in 17% higher than the next highest segment.


Raw will go up against much tougher competition in the months ahead. The next 3 weeks are far tougher.

Punk got shit on back in late 2012 even though his segments often added a million viewers. Punk was responsible for ALL of Raws rating as champ according to many here at the time, even when he wasn't there, so its only fair the same responsibility falls on brock


----------



## The Caped Crusader

GermanSuplex_x16 said:


> The article only considered PPV appearances. There are other factors to consider when trying to put a monetary value on someone. Merchandise sales, and ratings. He may not be breaking any ratings records, but he does increase ratings when he makes an appearance. You also have to consider that he really doesn't do much on RAW. He stands in the ring while Heyman speaks. His value is mostly derived from being a big PPV draw (as that article states.) But again, it's not the sole determinant of value.
> 
> $1.08 million per PPV appearance is significant.


That article also credits him somewhat for Wrestlemania 28 and 29 to help that average, which were mostly Rock shows. Brock was a PPV draw...in the two matches he had in 2012. He hasn't been a big draw since then. He couldn't draw against CM Punk (but then I guess Punk wasn't as much of a draw as Cena or Triple H in the first place) and he didn't draw against Undertaker this year. Basically, once the novelty wore off which took all of two matches, he's been a normal main eventer like Cena or Bryan, probably slightly worse.

Rock takes a year off and Wrestlemania has the lowest international buys in the last decade and the domestic numbers are obscured by the Network. So I think I can probably agree Bryan is a bigger deal than him right now. He was on tours too whilst he was here and whilst he may not do huge ratings, he's consistently one of the top gainers and that's to his credit.


----------



## RKO 4life

Ready for Orton/HBK/Hogan to carry the ratings tonight. I hope Cena and Bray main event loses ratings big time. Bray always does lol


----------



## The Caped Crusader

GermanSuplex_x16 said:


> Actually if you read the article, you'll notice that the multiple regression considers pay-per-view price, type of pay-per-view and trend averages with different variables for The Rock and Brock Lesnar. So no, it doesn't attribute buys to Brock that should be attributed to The Rock.
> 
> Brock is a big PPV draw. There is no denying that.


Yes, he does. He just randomly decides to attribute 25% to Brock, which is nonsense. There's no way of knowing the breakdown, but it's obvious to anyone with a brain that you could remove Lesnar/Triple H and Wrestlemania 29 would likely have the same buys. The wrtier is very generous in that article and still has a tough time making excuses in some cases for Brock.

I made a mistake with Wrestlemania 28 since Lesnar wasn't on it, but my meaning was that Rock/Cena II is basically the re-match to Wrestlemania 28, an event which had massive buys without Lesnar. In that very same article, the writer breaks down Wrestlemania 30 and essentially says that it's no different than pre-Rock Wrestlemanias. So Brock is benefitting from being given 25% of Rock's Wrestlemania, and the following year at Wrestlemania 30 where he was in a huge match against Undertaker shows he didn't do anything outside the norm.

Wrestlemania 27, 28 and 29 are all Rock shows. Lesnar benefits from 29 in that article for no reason when it's pretty clear that he really has nothing to do with it. Lesnar also didn't draw against CM Punk later that year. In that same article, the writer also points out that it's debatable attributing Royal Rumble 2014 in any meaningful way to Brock since he was in a match with Big Show. Well that would be obvious since the previous Monday, Batista returned and did a much bigger viewership number than any Brock number since his return. That was obviously thanks to fans returning to see him. Royal Rumble 2014 has nothing to do with Lesnar. He didn't draw against CM Punk or even Taker a couple months later, who the hell would be dumb enough to think he did with Big Show?

Brock drew big at Extreme Rules 2012 and Summerslam 2012. That's about it. The article you keep referring to pretty much comes to the conclusion that he's a draw, but it's nothing significant. He certainly isn't a big PPV draw and it's asinine to claim so.

He just won the championship and the next night, they had the worst viewership number in over a decade. He's highly overrated on these forums. What's worse is that it took all of two matches to show the novelty wore off.

On the other hand, Cena may not move numbers in a huge way, but he's on the road, leading tours and bringing in sponsorships. Bryan is also consistently one of the top gainers, and is a tour leader normally. They're both more notable draws than Lesnar is right now. And they don't need special booking to keep them off TV for 40 weeks of the year to be that relevant either.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

HeatEquation said:


> He's not attributing 25% of the overall number of buys to Brock. He's attributing 25% of the difference between actual buys and baseline buys (which were predicted by the regression model.) So for WM29, he attributes 43,500 buys to Brock, which is 4% of the overall number of buys. The model suggests that WM29 outperformed expectations.
> 
> Same thing with the Royal Rumble. He attributes 12,000 to Brock which is about 2% of the overall number of buys.
> 
> He isn't making excuses at all. You just didn't understand the analysis. It's pretty clear that you have no knowledge of how regression analysis works. But very few people do, so I guess I shouldn't expect too much.
> 
> Regardless, even using very conservative numbers, Brock is still a big PPV draw. I don't know why this fact bothers you so much, but it's true nevertheless. $1.08 million per PPV appearance, heck even $900K or $800K, is significant.


I understood it just fine. When I say 25%, I'm obviously referring the difference. There have been many shows without Rock that have done close to a million or just above, but the difference is all him. Try and keep up and not assume like an idiot.


----------



## Rap God

> Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with John Cena's return, drew 3.97 million viewers, down 5% from last week's 4.19 million viewers.
> For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.859 million viewers, the second hour drew 4.057 million viewers and the final hour drew 4.005 million viewers.


Not surprised. RAW was lacking VIOLENCE :ambrose


----------



## MaybeLock

Jarsy1 said:


> Not surprised. RAW was lacking VIOLENCE :ambrose


Also too much Cena in the show to draw well. :


----------



## RatedR10

That Hall of Fame panel sure did draw...

WWE's programming is terrible right now. There's going to be more sub 4 million viewers on average until the RTWM begins again.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

RAW was doing 4.3-4.5 million viewers a about a month ago. I hate to say it but one of the reasons why the ratings have dipped could be because of Brock Lesnar. Once he started the build with Cena the ratings started to drop. Go to this link and look at the numbers since the night after WM: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/tag/wwe-raw-ratings/

Also, when Daniel Bryan left the ratings started to go up for hour 2 and 3 -- a trend that wasn't happening before that.


----------



## A-C-P

Shit Show got a shit rating, makes sense


----------



## RatedR10

The ratings have dropped because of the quality of programming. When we were getting breakdowns, it showed Bryan consistently having top rated segments. Today, when we get breakdowns, like we did last week, it still shows Lesnar as the top draw and bringing in the most ratings, not including overrun.

The fact is ratings have slid because of WWE's underdeveloped roster/mid-card, lack of compelling storylines and just flat out bad programming. There's nothing that is 'must-see' anymore. Not even the top of the hour segments are all that. I mean, the Bellas on the top of an hour? No thank you.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Lesnar is a draw but it's odd that him being on the show hasn't increased the overall numbers for the entire show. This could be on WWE for not building anticipation for Lesnar. In other words they need to make fans watch for 2 hours and 50 minutes before bringing Lesnar out there.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

No one currently in WWE is a ratings draw. They have guys who can sell t-shirts and merchandise, but not even any of those guys make a casual fan sit down in front of their TV every Monday night.


----------



## MaybeLock

The Boy Wonder said:


> RAW was doing 4.3-4.5 million viewers a about a month ago. I hate to say it but one of the reasons why the ratings have dipped could be because of Brock Lesnar. Once he started the build with Cena the ratings started to drop. Go to this link and look at the numbers since the night after WM: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/tag/wwe-raw-ratings/
> 
> Also, when Daniel Bryan left the ratings started to go up for hour 2 and 3 -- a trend that wasn't happening before that.


Brock Lesnar is not conquering the ratings, it seems.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

One thing I would reiterate again is that the ratings were going up for hour 2 and 3 for RAW for a few months until recently. So WWE was doing something right in terms of keeping fan interest for the three hours. That wasn't the case during DB's push going into WM or recently either.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MaybeLock said:


> Brock Lesnar is not conquering the ratings, it seems.


Raw needs more Daniel Bryan.


----------



## MaybeLock

ShowStopper said:


> Raw needs more Daniel Bryan.


Indeed, it does. He took the ratings away with him, that motherfucker.

If he was still champion with these ratings people would be going wild on him already. But it's Cenuh and da beast, so they seem to get a pass.


----------



## Batz

> The 66th Primetime Emmy Awards were on at 8 PM on NBC, gathering 15.6 Million Viewers (second highest in 8 years)
> http://deadline.com/2014/08/emmy-ratings-nbc-824990/



That must have played a part in the viewership early on. Not to mention the show was a crap-fest overall.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I'll post the ratings in a bit. This decline in the ratings just started a few weeks ago. It actually started when they were ending RAW with Steph/Brie. That was a risky move. There could be a theory that the fans who tuned out would come back, but that hasn't been the case. That's why you don't close out shows like that.


----------



## kokepepsi

RatedR10 said:


> The ratings have dropped because of the quality of programming. When we were getting breakdowns, it showed Bryan consistently having top rated segments. Today, when we get breakdowns, like we did last week, it still shows Lesnar as the top draw and bringing in the most ratings, not including overrun.
> 
> The fact is ratings have slid because of WWE's underdeveloped roster/mid-card, lack of compelling storylines and just flat out bad programming. There's nothing that is 'must-see' anymore. Not even the top of the hour segments are all that. I mean, the Bellas on the top of an hour? No thank you.


:bow
He gets it why can't the rest of you


----------



## The Boy Wonder

You guys are making it seem like ratings have been slipping ever since Bryan left and that has clearly not been the case. RAW was doing just fine from May to July.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

The Boy Wonder said:


> You guys are making it seem like ratings have been slipping ever since Bryan left and that has clearly not been the case. RAW was doing just fine from May to July.


You're right. Raw ratings were doing better overall until about a month ago. I'm pretty sure the rating of this Raw could have been affected by the Emmys, but we'll see what happens next week.

Cena/Lesnar has been a dud though for all the promotion it has received. Things will not get better moving forward. The WWE show is lacking a lot lately. When people say 'no part-timers' and I keep saying yes we need them to come and establish some stars, this is what I mean. Last week's Raw was the lowest post-Summerslam in about 15 years or something, and this week they've been hit further.

WWE has a very poor overall roster, but they're also lacking in main event talent. Lesnar is overhyped, and isn't a huge draw so he's not going to do much for ratings alone. The bigger problem is what happens over the coming months which are usually bad anyway, when your top storyline (the title belt) has one half of the equation sitting out weeks at a time.

Cena and Orton are the only current full time main eventers. That's ridiculous when you think about it. Two people. How can you build a strong three hour show when you don't even have enough people at the top of the show?


----------



## kokepepsi

How is lesnar to blame when all he had was a video package at 9:33pm?

Cena seems to have done pretty well


----------



## The Caped Crusader

kokepepsi said:


> How is lesnar to blame when all he had was a video package at 9:33pm?
> 
> Cena seems to have done pretty well


We're talking in general over the past month where Cena/Lesnar has been the top feud but ratings have been on a steady decline. Lesnar is coming off beating the streak and winning the title after squashing Cena, and it still didn't generate enough interest with his Raw being the lowest post-Summerslam Raw in over a decade.

All it shows is the overall problem which is with the product itself. Lesnar isn't as big of a draw as people think because he really doesn't make much of a difference. He's basically another Cena or Orton, even worse since he's not there 52 weeks a year. And WWE needs main eventers who are there consistently so they can book a better overall show long-term.

WWE needs a group of top talent like they had 7-8 years ago. Right now, their mid-card looks better than it has in a long time with superstars like Reigns, Rollins, Ambrose, Wyatt, Cesaro, Sheamus, Miz so they just need to book them right. The top of the card is extremely weak though.

They have two full time main eventers right now in Cena and Orton. Orton wasn't even on the show. Bryan is the other full time main eventer and he's injured. Every other main eventer they have is part time like Lesnar or Batista, or isn't an active competitor like Triple H. The top of the card is suffering and that's screwing the product more than anything else.

This is exactly why I'm fully behind Reigns being the one to take down Lesnar at Wrestlemania instead of Bryan if Lesnar is indeed holding the title until then. WWE desperately needs to establish some top talent. If Reigns is cemented by next year, they increase the tally of full time main eventers to four with hopefully Ambrose and Rollins following sometime next year too.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Average audience of < 4 mils is awful. MNF wasnt even on last night either.


----------



## Batz

No?


----------



## almostfamous

The WWE is kinda hurting right now. The night after wrestlemania, everyone was optimistic. Bryan is the top guy, Cena is helping put over the next generation, Bray is the next monster tweener character, Punk will be back soon, Cesaro is getting over with Heyman, The Shield is super over. Now look at where we are.

And people really think Vince isn't going to bring in Kurt Angle? They need all the help they can get right now. Cena and Lesnar are their only draws right now. What happens when this feud is over?


----------



## Oakue

These ratings are terrible. And perhaps worst of all for WWE...Monday Night Football is coming.


----------



## El_Absoluto

Who are we blaming this week?


----------



## RebelArch86

El_Absoluto said:


> Who are we blaming this week?


Has to be Reigns' fault since last year it was Bryan's and the year before that it was punk' seven though the breakdowns said otherwise.


----------



## RatedR10

The Boy Wonder said:


> You guys are making it seem like ratings have been slipping ever since Bryan left and that has clearly not been the case. RAW was doing just fine from May to July.


No we're not. But you're also making it seem like Lesnar is to blame when he's getting higher ratings than any other part of the show when he's there.

He's doing his part. Just because he's there, it doesn't automatically make everyone else on the roster a draw. That's on WWE's part.


----------



## JY57

EMMYs had their 2nd highest viewership in the past 8 years with 15.6 million viewers. RAW never stood a chance tbh regardless who is on the show


----------



## CM punker

This raw lacked a lot of star power. it was missing the authority, dean ambrose, brock lesnar, and chris jericho. cena was in the opener and the main event and hes not enough to carry an entire show. cena is a draw, but hes not THAT big of a draw.


----------



## p862011

CM punker said:


> This raw lacked a lot of star power. it was missing the authority, dean ambrose, brock lesnar, and chris jericho. cena was in the opener and the main event and hes not enough to carry an entire show. cena is a draw, but hes not THAT big of a draw.


yet guys like punk and bryan were labeled not draws lol

cena doesn't draw shit


----------



## CM punker

p862011 said:


> yet guys like punk and bryan were labeled not draws lol
> 
> cena doesn't draw shit


cena hasnt been drawing shit for a long long time


----------



## ZKortes

*8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

This week’s edition of WWE Raw, which saw the return of John Cena, drew a final 2.88 cable rating, which is down from last week’s 3.04 rating. 

I guess we aren't the only ones tired of the shit product of the WWE.


----------



## gabrielcev

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

This is actually good news. The more the ratings go down the more likely they are to actually improve. They need to know that the current product is trash.


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

So Cena returns after the worst beating of his life and nobody cares... Interesting.


----------



## ZKortes

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



gabrielcev said:


> This is actually good news. The more the ratings go down the more likely they are to actually improve. They need to know that the current product is trash.


Yea, i hope they GET THE PICTURE.


----------



## Adyman

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Bad RAW, bad ratings. What's new?


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Great news
It means people bought the network and watched it on that instead


----------



## DualShock

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



MaybeLock said:


> So Cena returns after the worst beating of his life and nobody cares... Interesting.


That's because WWE fucks up with Cena again. After the destruction at the hands of Lesnar and the booked rematch at the next PPV bringing Cena back so quick was a big mistake. No wonder the return of Cena was a major ratings flop


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Cena return deserves this.


----------



## Marrakesh

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

:vince3 DAMNIT! THE FANS DON'T SEEM TO WANT TO WATCH WHEN JOHN ISN'T THE CHAMP, GET THE BELT BACK ON HIM ASAP! THE CHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMPPPPPPPPPPPPP ISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS HERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRE!


----------



## Vox Machina

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Adyman said:


> Bad RAW, bad ratings. What's new?


I thought you said it was a great Raw. You even argued vehemently that it was good spanning three pages or whatever, calling everyone out who disagreed with you.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



MaybeLock said:


> So Cena returns after the worst beating of his life and nobody cares... Interesting.


----------



## KingJohn

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

I attribute this to the lack of







on Raw this week.


----------



## Joshi Judas

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

The Emmys.


----------



## Swissblade

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*


----------



## Karma101

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Strange. I was epecting a 4.0 with a show that had a 10+ minute Bellas only segment and an embarrassingly bad squash match in the ME. Obviously the viewers have no taste.


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Bossdude said:


> Great news
> It means people bought the network and watched it on that instead


You cant watch it on the Network, as far as I'm concerned. 

https://worldwrestling.custhelp.com...sion/L3RpbWUvMTQwOTE2NjE2NC9zaWQvV0g3bUlWKmw=


----------



## Indywrestlersrule

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

That's what happens when your A+ player is out :bryan6


----------



## paqman

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

The show was trash. Unfortunately when vince panics he goes back to the status quo pretty quick. I wouldn't be too surprised to see Cena win the title back from lesnar next month. 

Now you have the problem of no WWE champ and Cena burying everyone on the mid card to prove a point of being "angry" and "ready". This should be an interesting few weeks creatively lol. This is why WWE can never dig themselves out of holes. They pile on more dirt instead of trying to crawl out. While I'm all for Lesnar being champ and not showing up all the time, WWE can't seem handle it on the booking end. I'm still holding out hope, but this is WWE lol


----------



## chargebeam

Emmys. That's what I was watching too.


----------



## Batz

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Adyman said:


> Bad RAW, bad ratings. What's new?


Heh?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



SalisburySuperkick said:


> I thought you said it was a great Raw. You even argued vehemently that it was good spanning three pages or whatever, calling everyone out who disagreed with you.


Interesting, isn't it?


----------



## WalkingInMemphis

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



RAVEN said:


> The Emmys.


Yeah, the WWE Demographic ran for the remote contols when they saw that The Emmys were on. fpalm

Wait until Monday Night Football gets into full swing...jeez.


----------



## WalkingInMemphis

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



SalisburySuperkick said:


> I thought you said it was a great Raw. You even argued vehemently that it was good spanning three pages or whatever, calling everyone out who disagreed with you.


:jordan5


----------



## Fluffyjr101

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

:yes:yes:yes


----------



## Bad Gone

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Nothing surprising, really. Not only It was 3 hours of absolute crap, the absences of Brock Lesnar (the reigning champ), Randy Orton, Dean Ambrose, Chris Jericho were deeply felt.


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



KINGPIN said:


>


Basically, shit after that Bellas segment I know I damn near turned it and left it there fpalmfpalm


----------



## Adyman

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



SalisburySuperkick said:


> I thought you said it was a great Raw. You even argued vehemently that it was good spanning three pages or whatever, calling everyone out who disagreed with you.





WalkingInMemphis said:


> :jordan5





ShowStopper said:


> Interesting, isn't it?





Batz said:


> Heh?


Never mind that gimmick.

:troll


----------



## NXT83

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Probably to do with the fact that Lesnar wasn't on it and Cena was coming back only a week or two after that beating he got at Summerslam.


----------



## Stinger Fan

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Orton wasn't on the show too, right?


----------



## Joshi Judas

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



WalkingInMemphis said:


> Yeah, the WWE Demographic ran for the remote contols when they saw that The Emmys were on. fpalm
> 
> Wait until Monday Night Football gets into full swing...jeez.



Err yes, more than 15 million people watch the Emmys, obviously it hurt WWE's ratings. Shouldn't be too hard to comprehend.

Not saying the quality of the show didn't have anything to do with it. But ratings would have been down from the previous week either way.


----------



## kurtmangled

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

No lesnar = bad ratings

Beast incarnate = Ratings incarnate


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

No one in WWE is a ratings draw. There are guys who sell merchandise really well. But there isn't anyone on the roster that makes fans (mostly the casual fans) sitdown on Monday night every week and watch Raw for three hours straight. In other words, no one in WWE makes Raw "must see."


----------



## cokecan567

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

If Cena was such a great draw they wouldn't need lesnar.

Back during Rock and Austin on top what part timers did they really need huh?

Yet Cena is this great draw huh?


Wake up Cena fanboys

people are tired of Cena


----------



## Bad Gone

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Stinger Fan said:


> Orton wasn't on the show too, right?


Yes and he & Ambrose won't be on Smakdown too. Sad news since the only things that have made Smackdown somehow watchable lately always involved either Ambrose or Orton.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



KINGPIN said:


>


Pretty much. As much as I'd love to blame Cena, he's not gonna beat the Breaking Bad awards...I mean the Emmy's.


----------



## *Eternity*

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

RAW was going up against the damn Emmys which was watched by 15 million people. Theres no way in hell that a lackluster 3 hrs episode of RAW is going to successfully compete with that. 


Also do people actually watch the entire 3hrs of RAW? Because I sure as hell don't.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

On a night with no "competition", Raw barely breaks a 3 these days. I wonder how many little kids were watching the Emmy's. Hrm.


----------



## Bad Gone

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



ShowStopper said:


> On a night with no "competition", Raw barely breaks a 3 these days. *I wonder how many little kids were watching the Emmy's.* Hrm.



I don't know about the little kids but I understand people who chose the Emmy's. Indeed, It was the last time people had a chance to witness Breaking Bad bury its opponents (deservedly so btw).


----------



## deathslayer

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Even Mark-Ratingz-Henry couldn't save this.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Let's see how well they'll do when they will have to compete with MNF every week :lol


----------



## Vox Machina

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Sith Rollins said:


> Let's see how well they'll do when they will have to compete with MNF every week :lol


Compete with what?


----------



## ★Th0t Patr0L★

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Good, it was shit.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



SalisburySuperkick said:


> Compete with what?


Monday Night Football.

To put it into perspective, Monday Night Football was watched by more people than Raw and Nitro combined, at the height of the Monday Night War. Fortunately, back then, there was still an incredibly healthy audience, which there isn't now.


----------



## squeelbitch

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

at this rate with the current state the product is in, give it a year and bruce blitz's raw reviews will be getting higher viewing figures than raw itself lol


----------



## NXT83

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



cokecan567 said:


> If Cena was such a great draw they wouldn't need lesnar.
> 
> Back during Rock and Austin on top what part timers did they really need huh?
> 
> Yet Cena is this great draw huh?
> 
> 
> Wake up Cena fanboys
> 
> people are tired of Cena


That's a fair point man.
If Cena was as big a draw as some say, then why all the part timers? Wouldn't Cena be enough if he was really up there with Austin, Rock and Hogan like some say he is??? Hmmmm.


----------



## Achilles

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*


----------



## Adyman

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



cokecan567 said:


> If Cena was such a great draw they wouldn't need lesnar.
> 
> Back during Rock and Austin on top what part timers did they really need huh?
> 
> Yet Cena is this great draw huh?
> 
> 
> Wake up Cena fanboys
> 
> people are tired of Cena


Anti-Cena post no.783 just proves you are a troll. Ratings for just one RAW don't mean the top guy is a bad draw. He's a top guy for 10 years and you're just gonna talk about one RAW? Of course WWE product is going to be shitty once in 10 years. Meltzer's list of 10 top draws by decade features Cena at no.3, while Lesnar is nowhere to be seen. I know Lesnar is a bigger draw now after UFC, but he ain't a bigger one than THE John Cena.


----------



## Lord Humongous

I think that Lesnar beatdown of their standard bearer was a watershed moment for WWE. Oh so this time Cena is serious and is going to beat Lesnar's butt? So are we to believe that Cena wasn't serious enough at Summerslam?


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## cokecan567

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Adyman said:


> Anti-Cena post no.783 just proves you are a troll. Ratings for just one RAW don't mean the top guy is a bad draw. He's a top guy for 10 years and you're just gonna talk about one RAW? Of course WWE product is going to be shitty once in 10 years. Meltzer's list of 10 top draws by decade features Cena at no.3, while Lesnar is nowhere to be seen. I know Lesnar is a bigger draw now after UFC, but he ain't a bigger one than THE John Cena.


Oh my fucking...... I didn't Just mean for THIS ONE RAW. How about all the fucking years???? No shit I know they go up against shit like award ceremnoies and they have football and basketball on here and then. There's times when there ain't jack shit on to draw people away from not watching wrestling and yet the rating is sup par and shitty and plenty of times it's involved with cena in the main event or he's the focus of the show

But my statement still stands. He ain't that great of a draw because of he was we wouldn't need the rock brock lesnar jericho etc etc to come back all the time. They need other big names like that to be able to draw more people cause cena ain't enough.

Don't respond to me no more I ain't responding to you. We won't ever see eye to eye with our opinions so it's pointless. And this goes to all the other Cena defenders on here as well if you're reading this and disagree with what I am saying.

I'm ignoring your ass ''Adyman'' ya dig sonny? hey? cya

I'll keep posting MY opinions WHICH are fact in my eyes

and you can keep posting YOURS. don't expect anymore responses from me son


----------



## WalkingInMemphis

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

What's up with the people who act like they've never heard of Monday Night Football? :side:


----------



## Flashyelbow

Adyman should just go back to school it's obvious he doesn't have the comprehension skills to understand what anybody types on here.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## CM Chump

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Ambrose=ratings. That is all.


----------



## Illumination

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Obviously because there was no BRRRRRRROCK LESNAR. Have fun with your part time champion WWE Universe. Just goes to show when you invest so much into one or two guys to be the "top guy" things like this are abound to happen.


----------



## HiddenFlaw

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



WalkingInMemphis said:


> What's up with the people who act like they've never heard of Monday Night Football? :side:


maybe they really don't know :lel


----------



## Adyman

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



cokecan567 said:


> Oh my fucking...... I didn't Just mean for THIS ONE RAW. How about all the fucking years???? No shit I know they go up against shit like award ceremnoies and they have football and basketball on here and then. There's times when there ain't jack shit on to draw people away from not watching wrestling and yet the rating is sup par and shitty and plenty of times it's involved with cena in the main event or he's the focus of the show
> 
> But my statement still stands. He ain't that great of a draw because of he was we wouldn't need the rock brock lesnar jericho etc etc to come back all the time. They need other big names like that to be able to draw more people cause cena ain't enough.
> 
> Don't respond to me no more I ain't responding to you. We won't ever see eye to eye with our opinions so it's pointless. And this goes to all the other Cena defenders on here as well if you're reading this and disagree with what I am saying.
> 
> I'm ignoring your ass ''Adyman'' ya dig sonny? hey? cya
> 
> I'll keep posting MY opinions WHICH are fact in my eyes
> 
> and you can keep posting YOURS. don't expect anymore responses from me son


I agree with Dave Meltzer, someone credible, and stand by his opinions and facts. I'm glad you're not replying anymore.



Flashyelbow said:


> Adyman should just go back to school it's obvious he doesn't have the comprehension skills to understand what anybody types on here.


I have no trouble arguing against that, but since you didn't bring up any points as to why I'm wrong.....

You mad :troll

If I like something else, I should go back to school? Well, if you think like that, "_you should go back in the womb_"!


----------



## Flashyelbow

Adyman said:


> I agree with Dave Meltzer, someone credible, and stand by his opinions and facts. I'm glad you're not replying anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> I have no trouble arguing against that, but since you didn't bring up any points as to why I'm wrong.....
> 
> You mad :troll
> 
> If I like something else, I should go back to school? Well, if you think like that, "_you should go back in the womb_"!



Bye kid, you still don't understand but whatever oh and no one likes a troll so get out.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Kabraxal

Honestly don't know how much of an effect the Emmy's would have... I don't know if the audiences cross over that much. I didn't even know they were on. But then, I haven't respected a major awards show in over a decade. But then most of the wrestling fans I know are the same way...


----------



## Adyman

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Flashyelbow said:


> Bye kid, you still don't understand but whatever oh and no one likes a troll so get out.
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Why don't you get out, kid? Because if I say that, it's obviously gonna work. You keep replying to me, even though I said all I can say so far in this thread. And you're assuming that I'm a kid and a troll because I have a different opinion than you

:maury :ti fpalm


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

fpalm at even calling it a Cena return. He missed ONE Raw.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Bossdude said:


> Great news
> It means people bought the network and watched it on that instead


You can't watch Raw on the Network. They don't put up past Raws until about a month goes by.

This is good news though. It was a terrible Raw that bet everything on a returning Cena. Then they featured a redundant, fast, and boring segment. So, they should have expected a terrible viewership. I know I tuned out before the 2 hour mark.


----------



## rakija

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

The ratings match the quality of the show


----------



## amhlilhaus

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



WalkingInMemphis said:


> What's up with the people who act like they've never heard of Monday Night Football? :side:


They're from overseas. They think football is soccer and know we hate it so they're confused


----------



## Tardbasher12

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

That Raw was absolute shit all around. I'm surprised that the ratings weren't lower.


----------



## Larry Davis

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Adyman said:


> Why don't you get out, kid? Because if I say that, it's obviously gonna work. You keep replying to me, even though I said all I can say so far in this thread. And you're assuming that I'm a kid and a troll because I have a different opinion than you
> 
> :maury :ti fpalm


You should maybe both grow up and not get into internet slapfights about pro rasslin? Just a thought.


----------



## Adyman

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Larry Davis said:


> You should maybe both grow up and not get into internet slapfights about pro rasslin? Just a thought.


I'm a grown up and I'll do what I want. It's not like I'm not having fun here.

Geez, that sounded so childlish, but whatever.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Best thing is there's no vanilla midgets to blame.


----------



## DeeGirl

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

That's what happens when there is no Punk, Bryan or Ambrose.

The legends forum was pretty poor and no HHH, Steph or Heyman made for very poor watching.

Nxt > raw.


----------



## Adyman

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Summer Rae said:


> Best thing is there's no vanilla midgets to blame.


Well, it's not like people that decided not to watch this particular episode knew that vanilla midgets wouldn't be there. Plus, Emmys or whatever.


----------



## DeeGirl

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



amhlilhaus said:


> They're from overseas. They think football is soccer and know we hate it so they're confused


"Soccer" is the real football, they kick the ball with their feet.

American football is just rugby. Don't know how it is called football.


----------



## GNR4LIFE

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



amhlilhaus said:


> They're from overseas. They think football is soccer and know we hate it so they're confused


Soccer is known as Football to the entire world. The only country that calls it Soccer is the US.


----------



## FatherTed

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

Football was invented in Britain. Americans cant tell the difference between their hands and their feet so called their knock off rugby "football".


----------



## Blackbeard

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

No wonder that Raw was horrendous.


----------



## skarvika

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

To the people attributing it to the Emmys, let's be honest...do you think a wrestling fan would watch the freakin' Emmys over Raw if Raw wasn't a steaming hunk of cow shit this week? Also, WWE's stock went up drastically the night Brock defeated Cena and continued to rise while Cena wasn't appearing. The night he appears, stock drops again.


----------



## A-C-P

Adyman said:


> Bad RAW, bad ratings. What's new?



But I thought you said it was a Great Raw, one of the best of the year? unk2

But this post is right Shit Raw gets shit rating


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## FatherTed

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*

3.0 is fairly standard these days, sadly.


----------



## autechrex

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Adyman said:


> Anti-Cena post no.783 just proves you are a troll. Ratings for just one RAW don't mean the top guy is a bad draw. He's a top guy for 10 years and you're just gonna talk about one RAW? Of course WWE product is going to be shitty once in 10 years. Meltzer's list of 10 top draws by decade features Cena at no.3, while Lesnar is nowhere to be seen. I know Lesnar is a bigger draw now after UFC, but he ain't a bigger one than THE John Cena.


That list of draws was a joke. It's all about longevity. Lesnar was around for a couple years.

Unless you actually think Konnan was a bigger draw than Austin and Rock...


----------



## Adyman

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



autechrex said:


> That list of draws was a joke. It's all about longevity. Lesnar was around for a couple years.
> 
> Unless you actually think Konnan was a bigger draw than Austin and Rock...


Meltzer is a joke? :maury


----------



## LOL-ins

The Boy Wonder said:


> You guys are making it seem like ratings have been slipping ever since Bryan left and that has clearly not been the case. *RAW was doing just fine from May to July*.


No they were not at all. 

May 5th 3.02	
May 12th	2.87	
May 19th	2.72	
May 26th 2.62	
June 2nd	2.92	
June 9th	2.93 
June 16th	2.90 
June 23rd	2.85	
June 30th	2.94 
July 7th	2.90 
July 14th	2.83 
July 21st	3.15	
July 28th	3.06

10 week run of doing 2's which is unheard of for WWE during these months. These are usually fall numbers not spring/summer numbers.


----------



## Adyman

SalisburySuperkick said:


> I thought you said it was a great Raw. You even argued vehemently that it was good spanning three pages or whatever, calling everyone out who disagreed with you.


Never mind that gimmick.

:troll


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

A-C-P said:


> But I thought you said it was a Great Raw, one of the best of the year? unk2
> 
> But this post is right Shit Raw gets shit rating
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


I think we all know why..


----------



## Adyman

ShowStopper said:


> I think we all know why..


I know that Bellas were as horrible as they can be, but nobody that didn't watch could predict that segment happening. As much as this RAW was bad, it was mostly because of the Emmys


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Adyman said:


> I know that Bellas were as horrible as they can be, but nobody that didn't watch could predict that segment happening. *As much as this RAW was bad*, it was mostly because of the Emmys


Raw was bad? The past two days you've been telling everyone that it was one of the best Raws of the year.


----------



## Adyman

ShowStopper said:


> Raw was bad? The past two days you've been telling everyone that it was one of the best Raws of the years.


Like I said....



Adyman said:


> Never mind that gimmick.
> 
> :troll


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Adyman said:


> Like I said....


'Gimmick." Or trolling. Same thing, I suppose.


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



Adyman said:


> Meltzer is a joke? :maury


Yes.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



skarvika said:


> To the people attributing it to the Emmys, let's be honest...do you think a wrestling fan would watch the freakin' Emmys over Raw if Raw wasn't a steaming hunk of cow shit this week? Also, WWE's stock went up drastically the night Brock defeated Cena and continued to rise while Cena wasn't appearing. The night he appears, stock drops again.


1. Wrestling fans most likely have more than one interest.
2. The Emmys are an annual event while RAW happens every week.


----------



## FatherTed

You had to watch Lucha in the 90s to realize what a big star Konnan was. He was huge, during a time when nobody in the States was drawing.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Raw was a 2.88 this week. Not even going against MNF.

This is actually good news. If during MNF, Raw can crater down to the 2.5 - 2.6 range, maybe just maybe Vince will end PG and bring back television people actually want to watch.

Take a clue Vince. The highest rated tv shows nowadays have plenty of violence, sex, and cursing on them. Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Breaking Bad (when it was on). If you want a bigger audience, you gotta appeal to a bigger audience. And by bigger, I mean frickin ADULTS.


----------



## ShammyWoWLoL

Randy Lahey said:


> Raw was a 2.88 this week. Not even going against MNF.
> 
> This is actually good news. If during MNF, Raw can crater down to the 2.5 - 2.6 range, maybe just maybe Vince will end PG and bring back television people actually want to watch.
> 
> Take a clue Vince. The highest rated tv shows nowadays have plenty of violence, sex, and cursing on them. Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Breaking Bad (when it was on). If you want a bigger audience, you gotta appeal to a bigger audience. And by bigger, I mean frickin ADULTS.





:genius:bow


----------



## Goldusto

ShammyWoWLoL said:


> :genius:bow


but even then, You don't need sex and violence as it has been proven, but the lack of consistent storytelling and constant burial of new talent is the ultimate problems that need adressing first and foremost.


----------



## Joshi Judas

*Re: 8/25 Raw Rating Drops Below 3.0*



KINGPIN said:


> 1. Wrestling fans most likely have more than one interest.
> 2. The Emmys are an annual event while RAW happens every week.


Don't use common sense over here, most people don't get it :lol


----------



## Insomnia

whoops, wrong thread lol.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Randy Lahey said:


> Raw was a 2.88 this week. Not even going against MNF.
> 
> This is actually good news. If during MNF, Raw can crater down to the 2.5 - 2.6 range, maybe just maybe Vince will end PG and bring back television people actually want to watch.
> 
> Take a clue Vince. The highest rated tv shows nowadays have plenty of violence, sex, and cursing on them. Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Breaking Bad (when it was on). If you want a bigger audience, you gotta appeal to a bigger audience. And by bigger, I mean frickin ADULTS.


:bryanlol


----------



## Superhippy

Randy Lahey said:


> Raw was a 2.88 this week. Not even going against MNF.
> 
> This is actually good news. If during MNF, Raw can crater down to the 2.5 - 2.6 range, maybe just maybe Vince will end PG and bring back television people actually want to watch.
> 
> Take a clue Vince. The highest rated tv shows nowadays have plenty of violence, sex, and cursing on them. Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Breaking Bad (when it was on). If you want a bigger audience, you gotta appeal to a bigger audience. And by bigger, I mean frickin ADULTS.


The WWE is going to get fucking slaughtered this fall and winter during football season. SLAUGHTERED.

- The champ will rarely be on.
- One of your top feuds is between the Bella's.
- Your top babyface is hated by no less then 40% of your audience.
- HHH still has a rambling 15 - 20 minute promo every week like always.
- The fans have cooled off on Roman Reigns alot.
- The fans were getting really into Ambrose and they took him off TV.
- Thc oonstant $9.99 stuff was funny for a week but is not just annoying.
- The mid-card other then Ziggler and Miz is nearly non-existent.

And on top of every single Monday Night football game this year has either 1 or 2 teams that made the playoffs last year, or involves teams like the Bears, Jets, Dolphins, and Steelers that only missed the playoffs by one game last year and will be in the playoff race.

Good Luck Vince, you are going to need it.


----------



## dougfisher_05

Superhippy said:


> The WWE is going to get fucking slaughtered this fall and winter during football season. SLAUGHTERED.
> 
> - The champ will rarely be on.
> - One of your top feuds is between the Bella's.
> - Your top babyface is hated by no less then 40% of your audience.
> - HHH still has a rambling 15 - 20 minute promo every week like always.
> - The fans have cooled off on Roman Reigns alot.
> - The fans were getting really into Ambrose and they took him off TV.
> - Thc oonstant $9.99 stuff was funny for a week but is not just annoying.
> - The mid-card other then Ziggler and Miz is nearly non-existent.
> 
> And on top of every single Monday Night football game this year has either 1 or 2 teams that made the playoffs last year, or involves teams like the Bears, Jets, Dolphins, and Steelers that only missed the playoffs by one game last year and will be in the playoff race.
> 
> Good Luck Vince, you are going to need it.


He needs more than luck, that's for damn sure. There was a reason they went into hard sell mode for next week's show, and I really don't think it's gonna work. 

The NFL and ESPN are going to dominate this season. Next week's rating could be really, really bad. Have they ever had less momentum going into the fall season? This is gonna be nasty.. .


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It's that time of year again, where WWE gets RAPED by the NFL:

:mark: :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark:


----------



## Mqwar

> - The fans have cooled off on Roman Reigns alot.
> - The fans were getting really into Ambrose and they took him off TV.


See, I really hate this blind markdom. fpalm Wasn't Ambrose Vs Rollins main event one of the lowest rated of the year?

What WWE really needs is to stop catering to smarks first and foremost. Most of those fanbase are cheap and won't pay for anything, ever. WWE needs to make mega stars on a much more broader level appealing to main stream fans like old times. These Indy guys coming in, while fun to watch, are never going to cut it at that level.


----------



## RatedR10

Mqwar said:


> See, I really hate this blind markdom. fpalm Wasn't Ambrose Vs Rollins main event one of the lowest rated of the year?


It constantly increased after The Usos match dragged that entire hour down. But let's blame Ambrose vs. Rollins lol.


----------



## thaimasker

Randy Lahey said:


> Raw was a 2.88 this week. Not even going against MNF.
> 
> This is actually good news. If during MNF, Raw can crater down to the 2.5 - 2.6 range, maybe just maybe Vince will end PG and bring back television people actually want to watch.
> 
> Take a clue Vince. The highest rated tv shows nowadays have plenty of violence, sex, and cursing on them. Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Breaking Bad (when it was on). If you want a bigger audience, you gotta appeal to a bigger audience. And by bigger, I mean frickin ADULTS.


I do agree with you but not gonna happen. Remember when CM Punk was champ with those abysmal ratings? RAW could be doing 2.5 weekly and they still wouldn't care about catering to adults(and people over the age of 10 in general). Even the network does below expectations and what do they do? put on horrible shows.


----------



## El_Absoluto

Mqwar said:


> See, I really hate this blind markdom. fpalm Wasn't Ambrose Vs Rollins main event one of the lowest rated of the year?
> 
> What WWE really needs is to stop catering to smarks first and foremost. Most of those fanbase are cheap and won't pay for anything, ever. WWE needs to make mega stars on a much more broader level appealing to main stream fans like old times. These Indy guys coming in, while fun to watch, are never going to cut it at that level.


See I really hate people with no brains for analysis.

They closed up decently after the cataclysmic disaster that particular 3rd hour was.


----------



## Superhippy

Mqwar said:


> See, I really hate this blind markdom. fpalm Wasn't Ambrose Vs Rollins main event one of the lowest rated of the year?
> 
> What WWE really needs is to stop catering to smarks first and foremost. Most of those fanbase are cheap and won't pay for anything, ever. WWE needs to make mega stars on a much more broader level appealing to main stream fans like old times. These Indy guys coming in, while fun to watch, are never going to cut it at that level.


I'm not being a blind smark at all. When the Shield broke up Reigns had the highest stock of the three by far and Ambrose had the lowest by far. Ever since then Reigns has begun to slowly cool off while Ambrose's popularity has consistently grown week after week. I'm not saying Reigns still isn't popular because he is, and is still their top mid-carder right now, what I am saying is that interest in him is going in the wrong direction while Ambrose's was growing. You can deny that if you want but it's pretty clear to anyone with eyes that that is what has happened.

LMFAO at thinking the WWE is going to bring in more fans with "non-indy" guys like the good ol' days. Those fans are not coming back as long as the product is garbage whether an indy Dean Ambrose or a homegrown Roman Reigns is on top. What self-respecting fan would put themselves through the trash that is put out on Raw week in and week out is beyond me. 3 out of 4 main events every month are 3 v. 3. tag matches, the show is stuffed with filler, and the cringe worthiness is at an all time high.


----------



## Cobalt

ShowStopper said:


> It's that time of year again, where WWE gets RAPED by the NFL:
> 
> :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark:


Good maybe they might wake up and start putting out a decent product.


----------



## Joshi Judas

Ratings for this week's terrible Raw out yet?


----------



## LOL-ins

Cobalt said:


> Good maybe they might wake up and start putting out a decent product.


Keep thinking that. They will stop giving a shit even more.

Proof: last year during football season.


----------



## Punkholic

> WWE Entertainment 8:00 PM 4,009,000 1.3
> WWE Entertainment 9:00 PM 3,925,000 1.3
> WWE Entertainment 10:00 PM 3,827,000 1.4
> 
> Average viewers per hour: 3,920,333


*Source:* http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...e-raw-houdini-teen-wolf-t-i-tiny-more/298979/


----------



## DoubtGin

Worse than last week's ratings.


----------



## LOL-ins

Wow. Not even a 3.0 before football season that is actually pretty worrying. WWE used to always have a string of good ratings before the Football season started.

Well Vince say goodbye to having 4 million viewers in any hour again til January.


----------



## Chrome

Cobalt said:


> Good maybe they might wake up and start putting out a decent product.


Nah. Happens every year, but MNF can never put a big enough dent in Raw's ratings to cause some legit changes to be made.


----------



## LOL-ins

Chrome said:


> Nah. Happens every year, *but MNF can never put a big enough dent* in Raw's ratings to cause some legit changes to be made.


Wanna bet? I'm sure RAW ratings could hit as low as 2.3 this year.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

RAW: 9/2/13

Hour 1: 3,690,000
Hour 2: 4,146,000
Hour 3: 3,974,000

RAW: 9/1/14

Hour 1: 4,009,000
Hour 2: 3,925,000 
Hour 3: 3,827,000 

As bad as the show was they are doing about the same rating they were doing last year at the same time.


----------



## LOL-ins

Remember when people tried to defend the low rating last week on the emmys and with no competition they got a lower rating and worse numbers. 

You can't make this shit up.


----------



## DoubtGin

The Boy Wonder said:


> RAW: 9/2/13
> 
> Hour 1: 3,690,000
> Hour 2: 4,146,000
> Hour 3: 3,974,000
> 
> RAW: 9/1/14
> 
> Hour 1: 4,009,000
> Hour 2: 3,925,000
> Hour 3: 3,827,000
> 
> As bad as the show was they are doing about the same rating they were doing last year at the same time.


That RAW from last year included:

- Orton/HHH/Bryan opening segment, Big Show (ironclad contract lol) against Bryan as the main event is announced
- Orton vs Cody Rhodes announced, if Cody loses he's fired
- Miz beats Fandango
- Booker/Bryan backstage segment 
- Ryback beats Ziggler (Ambrose beat Ziggler down before the match)
- more Big Show/Authority/Bryan backstage stuff
- Steph talks Big Show down making the latter nearly cry
- PTP beat 3MB
- Heyman/Maddox/HHH backstage segment
- Orton beats Cody, Cody is fired
- Punk inring promo
- Bryan/Show backstage segment
- Natalya vs Brie vs Naomi in a #1 contenders match ends in a NC
- RVD beats Sandow
- Steph announced AJ vs Naomi vs Brie vs Natalya at NoC
- Cody Rhodes promo
- Show vs Bryan with lots of fuckery including Shield and The Authority

Totally feels like we are missing some stars now.


----------



## validreasoning

LOL-ins said:


> Wanna bet? I'm sure RAW ratings could hit as low as 2.3 this year.


Are you the same guy who made similar predictions around this time last year? Unless raw falls on Christmas day or something major newsworthy breaks I can almost guarantee it won't go that low.

Last year raw on labor day drew 3.937 million viewers, pretty much identical to this past Monday and yet the lowest rating they got until the end of the year was a 2.65


----------



## Oakue

The WWE is going to get the shit knocked out of them worse than ever before by the NFL this forthcoming 2014 season. This season I see no bad games on the MNF schedule, and a couple of divisional games late in the season that are probably going to be meaningful and will draw huge. Games with Brady, Manning, Newton, Rodgers, Steelers a few times who always draw, Redskins vs Cowboys...

So good luck Vince.


----------



## almostfamous

Oakue said:


> The WWE is going to get the shit knocked out of them worse than ever before by the NFL this forthcoming 2014 season. This season I see no bad games on the MNF schedule, and a couple of divisional games late in the season that are probably going to be meaningful and will draw huge. Games with Brady, Manning, Newton, Rodgers, Steelers a few times who always draw, Redskins vs Cowboys...
> 
> So good luck Vince.


Tough times. The NFL is only growing in popularity and the WWE has slowly reached it's lowest possible public interest level. I'm interested to see what happens on Monday.


----------



## DoubtGin

Rating: 2.81 (last week: 2.88)


----------



## Cliffy

Vince is gonna hit the panic button and have Cena win the belt at NOC.


----------



## Redzero

LoL :reigns the draw.


----------



## Tweener ken

The trend is starting already.


----------



## Kabraxal

Cliffy Byro said:


> Vince is gonna hit the panic button and have Cena win the belt at NOC.


And sadly still not realising that is probably the biggest contributor to the downward spiral the WWE has taken... he really is completely disconnected from the audience. But then, reading and hearing about the run up to the AE, he really never was as connected to the audience as he would have you believe. He was forced by WCW stomping him into the dirt and talent just giving a finger to his "traditions" and saw the money... but more often than not, he's been completely miss with his ideas. It's usually someone else coming up with the creative bright spots the company has seen and forced his hand into doing what he does best.. promoting it. 

Seriously, if he just backed off creative and only worried about the money while at least HHH handled creative the product would be exponentially better in the matter of weeks. The problem isn't the talent or the audience or the UFC being "competition" (hint, it's not really)... the problem is Vince pure and simple. And i hope the ratings continue to dive until he finally gets the fuck out of the way of the talent and creative minds he has there right now.


----------



## JY57

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



> - E! issued the following on Monday night:
> 
> E!’S “TOTAL DIVAS” SEASON 3 PREMIERE DELIVERS OVER 1.2 MILLION TOTAL VIEWERS
> 
> “#RichKids of Beverly Hills” Draws Half a Million Among Adults 18-49 – Second Season Continues to Pace Ahead of Season 1
> 
> Los Angeles, CA – September 8, 2014 – E!’s “Total Divas” kicked off its third season premiere with a pop on Sunday, September 7 (9-10:00 pm). Delivering over 1.2 million total viewers and 821K Adults 18-49, the series was up +15% and +17% respectively versus the season 2 premiere. Back for an all-new season where sisterhood meets over-the-top drama, viewers were introduced to the brazen WWE Diva, Rosa Mendes™, and saw Nikki Bella™ pursue freezing her eggs unbeknownst to her longtime boyfriend, WWE Superstar John Cena™. The unprecedented inside look at the lives of the women of the WWE® was the most watched E! season 3 premiere in more than three years. On the digital front, "Total Divas" garnered 26,000 Tweets and ranked as the #1 ad-supported cable program of the night (excluding sports).
> 
> Viewers of Sunday night’s highly rated “Total Divas’” premiere stayed tuned for a new episode of “#RichKids of Beverly Hills” (10 – 10:30 pm), which followed EJ Johnson as a celebrity Grand Marshal of San Francisco’s Pride Parade. The episode, which also documented socialite Dorothy Wang’s return to the dating scene after recent heartbreak, retained nearly two-thirds (64%) of its lead-in and delivered over half a million among Adults 18-49 (516K). The second season continues to pace ahead of season 1 by +6%.


----------



## Starbuck

Nikki Bella dat GOAT draw

:cena7


----------



## validreasoning

Fridays final numbers

Smackdown = 2,758,000 
UFC = 911,000
Bellator = 667,000


----------



## Starbuck

validreasoning said:


> Fridays final numbers
> 
> Smackdown = 2,758,000
> UFC = 911,000
> Bellator = 667,000


Fuck, is that normal lol? I don't really follow UFC outside of the big PPV events, hell I didn't even know they had tv shows tbh. Lol smackdown. 

:vince2


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Starbuck said:


> Fuck, is that normal lol? I don't really follow UFC outside of the big PPV events, hell I didn't even know they had tv shows tbh. Lol smackdown.
> 
> :vince2


Yeah pretty normal, they don't get big number because most TV cards are watered down specially on FS1 with the highest drawing 1.7 Million. They get better ratings on Fox with around 3.2 million median and 5.7 Million was their biggest Card which was Cain vs JDs and the last two cards doing 2 million.

Bellator usually pulls 500k and this card I thought would do better.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM 4.162
WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM 3.984	
WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM 3.814


----------



## LOL-ins

The Boy Wonder said:


> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM 4.162
> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM 3.984
> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM 3.814


I think these numbers have positives and negatives. 

*The good *



They got a 4 million+ hour
The overall rating didn't drop too much
Actually got one of the higher hours of the last few weeks

*The bad *


They lost 300,000 viewers over the 3 hour period.
Non of the hours had an increase just a slow decrease which is becoming frequent.

TLDR they didn't get fucking destroyed as many thought but there are signs they will over the next few weeks.


----------



## Punkholic

The Boy Wonder said:


> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM 4.162
> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM 3.984
> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM 3.814



Which is an average of 3,986,666 viewers per hour. Better than I expected, I have to say.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## LOL-ins

It also should be noted MNF doesn't destroy RAW in September it's usually a small decrease until they hit a usual 2.6/2.7. If they can keep these numbers it should be deemed a successful fall period.

They need to not fall in to their usual DGAF mode until January by doing something stupid like putting Big Show in the main event.


----------



## Londrick

The Boy Wonder said:


> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM 4.162
> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM 3.984
> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM 3.814


That Reigns vs Orton main event

:jordan4


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Summer Rae said:


> The Boy Wonder said:
> 
> 
> 
> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM 4.162
> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM 3.984
> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM 3.814
> 
> 
> 
> That Reigns vs Orton main event
Click to expand...

Orton's main event match with Bryan and Punk didnt draw either. Yes, as an Orton fan I can admit he's not a good draw. However, his run in 2010 was drawing well. But that was prob more due to the Nexus angle.


----------



## Lordhhhx

Good rating considering how bad the bella segment was and that it was mostly filler with rose and the cosmic bros in the 3rd hour+i doubt anyone expected reigns vs orton 2 be good.


----------



## RatedR10

Seriously, stop putting the Bellas at the top of the 3rd hour.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

For all the hype Orton vs Reigns got... :lmao... Granted, the segment itself probably didn't bomb, but it's pretty sad WWE was hyping it as this "big fight/big time match" only for it to have no effect from what we can see.

We'll never know for sure how it did though unless we get the random breakdown.


----------



## Lordhhhx

I would not be shocked if the match bombed i only enjoyed the match so much because i thought that randy would beat roman but imagine almost everyone else just thinking reigns wins lol.

until roman loses a match and actually looks vulnerable he will be uninteresting .


----------



## SUPERMANPUNCH

who cares bout the rating???

all that matters if the how good the show is and i think its great right now


----------



## superuser1

Summer Rae said:


> That Reigns vs Orton main event
> 
> :jordan4


Nah the 3rd hour has had the lowest ratings for the last couple of weeks its a trend. Funny thing is when the Rollins/Ambrose main event had the lowest ratings there were no blame thrown at them lol the double standards here.


----------



## A-C-P

SUPERMANPUNCH said:


> who cares bout the rating???
> 
> all that matters if the how good the show is and i think its great right now


where you are correct, at least about why we should care about the ratings, the show is great right now is very subjective.

This thread exists for the people who do care, so if you are one that doesn't care, that's great, but then I would suggest just not reading this thread at all.

And for this weeks #, its good the #s held steady, but the continuous drop in viewers as the show goes on should make the WWE really look at what is going on in those hours (cough...Bellacrap at the top of hour 3 every week....cough)


----------



## The Boy Wonder

superuser1 said:


> Nah the 3rd hour has had the lowest ratings for the last couple of weeks its a trend. Funny thing is when the *Rollins/Ambrose main event had the lowest ratings there were no blame thrown at them lol the double standards here.*


Good point.


----------



## Choke2Death

The Boy Wonder said:


> Orton's main event match with Bryan and Punk didnt draw either. Yes, as an Orton fan I can admit he's not a good draw. However, his run in 2010 was drawing well. But that was prob more due to the Nexus angle.


Orton vs Bryan the night after TLC did pretty good numbers actually. They also had another match from March this year that I recall doing pretty good numbers and it was put in a random spot.


----------



## Shenroe

The Boy Wonder said:


> Good point.


Well Rollins-Ambrose did slightly better. But yeah all in all it's not good at all for both, WWE needs to adress the problem. Is it the slot, the wrestlers, competition on that hour? They need to fix it.


----------



## Londrick

superuser1 said:


> Nah the 3rd hour has had the lowest ratings for the last couple of weeks its a trend. Funny thing is when the Rollins/Ambrose main event had the lowest ratings there were no blame thrown at them lol the double standards here.


Why would midcarders get blamed for not doing well in the main even spot? Orton's a main eventer and Reigns is being pushed to the moon as the future so they shouldn't be bombing in the main event.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

> Orton vs Bryan the night after TLC did pretty good numbers actually. They also had another match from March this year that I recall doing pretty good numbers and it was put in a random spot.


I'm sure he was referring to the first match they had in June, which I think lost viewers (or got an small bump/poor overall number). In fact, this is it:



> The Orton vs. Bryan street fight gained 104,000 viewers - one of the lowest main event gains of the whole year, finishing at a 2.92 overrun.


Can't recall what that December match or any of their matches this year did, or even if they got a breakdown.



Shenroe said:


> Well Rollins-Ambrose did slightly better. But yeah all in all it's not good at all for both, WWE needs to adress the problem. Is it the slot, the wrestlers, competition on that hour? They need to fix it.


Thing is, we don't how how Reigns/Orton actually did, where Ambrose/Rollins we did get a breakdown. We can't really compare the two unless this week's Raw has a breakdown.



> Why would midcarders get blamed for not doing well in the main even spot? Orton's a main eventer and Reigns is being pushed to the moon as the future so they shouldn't be bombing in the main event.


This isn't what concerns me personally as much the fact that they advertised Orton/Reigns like a huge Raw main event that was must-see, advertising it several times each hour and even advertising it the week prior. They put a lot of stock in the match and from the looks of it, it failed to deliver big time. However, to once again state what should be the obvious, we don't know for certain if it failed or not unless we see an actual breakdown.

Bottomline is though, Ambrose/Rollins didn't do well, and Orton/Reigns we don't really know (and most likely won't as a breakdown is rare these days). Whether that's because Ambrose/Rollins are just a couple of mid-carders or not doesn't matter, WWE gave it a chance in that spot and it didn't necessarily deliver... not that it was some god awful number (though I don't remember what exactly it was), but it wasn't anything good.


----------



## Shenroe

#BadNewsSanta said:


> I'm sure he was referring to the first match they had in June, which I think lost viewers (or got an small bump/poor overall number). In fact, this is it:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't recall what that December match or any of their matches this year did, or even if they got a breakdown.
> 
> 
> 
> Thing is, we don't how how Reigns/Orton actually did, where Ambrose/Rollins we did get a breakdown. We can't really compare the two unless this week's Raw has a breakdown.
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't what concerns me personally as much the fact that they advertised Orton/Reigns like a huge Raw main event that was must-see, advertising it several times each hour and even advertising it the week prior. They put a lot of stock in the match and from the looks of it, it failed to deliver big time. However, to once again state what should be the obvious, we don't know for certain if it failed or not unless we see an actual breakdown.
> 
> Bottomline is though, Ambrose/Rollins didn't do well, and Orton/Reigns we don't really know (and most likely won't as a breakdown is rare these days). Whether that's because Ambrose/Rollins are just a couple of mid-carders or not doesn't matter, WWE gave it a chance in that spot and it didn't necessarily deliver... not that it was some god awful number (though I don't remember what exactly it was), but it wasn't anything good.


Can you show me that breakdown. I wasn't aware they had one for Ambrose Rollins.


----------



## Choke2Death

#BadNewsSanta said:


> I'm sure he was referring to the first match they had in June, which I think lost viewers (or got an small bump/poor overall number). In fact, this is it:


I know, but I pointed out that they were doing well in the main event spot a few months later when they were reestablished as main eventers. Orton in first half of 2013 was a glorified midcard booking wise and Bryan was still coming up.



> Can't recall what that December match or any of their matches this year did, or even if they got a breakdown.


They did, but I don't recall a breakdown for their February match. I don't have the exact number but I do remember myself and some others singing Orton's (and Bryan's) praises in here.

Might find it after searching through this thread or the previous incarnations of it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Shenroe said:


> Can you show me that breakdown. I wasn't aware they had one for Ambrose Rollins.


http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_80322.shtml#.VBCLkWPdo2t



> WWE Raw's TV rating on Monday was driven by Brock Lesnar's coronation segment as new WWE World Hvt. champion.
> 
> The segment outdrew the next-highest-rated segment by 17 percent, capturing Raw as a one-segment show. But, WWE put Lesnar's segment at the top of the second hour, as opposed to the third hour, the remaining portion of Raw lost a good chunk of the audience to NFL pre-season football.
> 
> Top 5 Rated Segments (key m18-49 demo)
> 
> - Q5: 2.46 rating / 1.546 million viewers: Lesnar's Coronation & Heyman Speech
> 
> - Q4: 2.10 rating / 1.319 million viewers: Paige vs. Natalya in a non-title match and the first three minutes of Lesnar's segment.
> 
> - Q9: 2.07 rating / 1.304 million viewers: Slight top-of-the-third-hour bump for the second-half of the Sheamus & RVD & Reigns vs. Orton & Axel & Ryback six-man tag match.
> 
> - Q7: 2.06 rating / 1.299 million viewers: Jack Swagger vs. Cesaro and Bo Dallas's promo toward Swagger.
> 
> - Over-Run: 2.04 rating / 1.285 million viewers: The Dean Ambrose vs. Seth Rollins main event increased 12 percent from Q12, but just did rank in the Top 5 after Raw lost a good chunk of viewers to football in the third hour.
> 
> ***
> 
> Overall Raw TV Rating Breaking Down (m18-49 demo)
> 
> - Overall Show: 1.95 rating / 1.226 million viewers.
> 
> - Q1: Raw started slow with a 1.86 rating for the immediate Summerslam fall-out segment focused on Stephanie McMahon and the Bellas.
> 
> - Q2: Raw fell to a show-low 1.69 rating for two commercial breaks and the first-half of Mark Henry & Big Show vs. The Wyatts.
> 
> - Q3: Raw jumped to a 1.93 rating for the second-half of the tag match, one commercial, and Ric Flair backstage. The segment was boosted by a big audience leap for the finish of the tag match.
> 
> - Q4: Raw increased again to a strong 2.10 rating for Paige vs. Natalya with A.J.'s interruption, one commercial, and the first portion of Lesnar's coronation.
> 
> The Divas match drew just as well as the start of Lesnar's segment.
> 
> - Q5: At the top of the second hour, Raw jumped to a 2.46 rating for Lesnar's segment and Paul Heyman's speech. There was no commercial break, which helped.
> 
> Included was Raw's peak audience of 1.643 million viewers at 9:03 p.m. Heyman held the audience starting with 1.560 million viewers at 9:04 p.m. and finishing with 1.554 million viewers at 9:13 p.m.
> 
> - Q6: Raw dropped to a 1.94 rating for two commercials and Dolph Ziggler vs. The Miz in a tough spot following Lesnar/Heyman.
> 
> - Q7: Raw rebounded to a 2.06 rating for Swagger vs. Cesaro and one commercial.
> 
> - Q8: Raw fell back to a 1.86 rating for two commercials and the first-half of a six-man tag match.
> 
> - Q9: At the top of the third hour, Raw increased to a 2.07 rating for the finish of Team RVD vs. Team Orton, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q10: Raw fell hard to a 1.73 rating for two commercials and a non-descript Usos vs. Rhdoes Bros. tag match. This 45-minute block is where Raw really lost the audience to football, dragging down the third hour.
> 
> - Q11: Raw inched up to a 1.77 rating for Mark Henry answering Rusev and one commercial.
> 
> - Q12: Raw inched up to a 1.82 rating for the first-half of Ambrose vs. Rollins, plus one mid-match commercial.
> 
> - Over-run: Raw got a boost to a 2.04 rating for the end of Ambrose vs. Rollins.


EDIT-



> They did, but I don't recall a breakdown for their February match. I don't have the exact number but I do remember myself and some others singing Orton's (and Bryan's) praises in here.
> 
> Might find it after searching through this thread or the previous incarnations of it.


Do you have the exact dates the matches happened? (Not that I'm doubting you, I remember at least one of those matches doing very very well and it wouldn't surprise me if more than just that did well)


----------



## xdoomsayerx

Reigns is gonna be pushed no matter what, so people don't get all excited when he's not drawing as of now.


----------



## Shenroe

#BadNewsSanta said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_80322.shtml#.VBCLkWPdo2t
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT-
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have the exact dates the matches happened?


Yep i googled it afterwards.. not good. Oh well they'll do better next time.


----------



## Wynter

I don't think anyone should have expected Roman vs Randy to draw anything great. Both of them aren't draws at the moment :lol If Ambrose vs Rollins couldn't draw well despite having the hottest feud , I have no hope for Randy/Roman .

I'm still interested to see the breakdown though.


----------



## Choke2Death

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Do you have the exact dates the matches happened? (Not that I'm doubting you, I remember at least one of those matches doing very very well and it wouldn't surprise me if more than just that did well)


Here I found the numbers for their December match. The opening segment with Orton's championship celebration also did strong numbers, with 2.41. That night was simply Orton's night. Everything he did was perfect from his promos to the Bryan match and how well he drew.



> Q11: Raw bottomed out with a 1.74 rating for various video and interview segments leading to the main event, plus one commercial.
> 
> Q12: Raw rebounded to a 1.99 rating for the first-half of the Orton vs. Bryan main event, plus one mid-match commercial.
> 
> Over-run: Raw finished with a 2.32 rating for the conclusion of Orton vs. Bryan and post-match activity involving Cena.


http://www.wrestlingforum.com/27756129-post3101.html

I cba looking up the other one but it was from March 17.


----------



## CM punker

Choke2Death said:


> Here I found the numbers for their December match. The opening segment with Orton's championship celebration also did strong numbers, with 2.41. That night was simply Orton's night. Everything he did was perfect from his promos to the Bryan match and how well he drew.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/27756129-post3101.html
> 
> I cba looking up the other one but it was from March 17.


Everyone knew there was going to be a lot of star power in Ortons' celebration. Triple H and stephanie mcmahon follow orton everywhere he goes. Every time orton is mentioned, the casuals immediately know that the authority will be involved. the authority was also a hot angle when it started out. people were tuning in and hoping that daniel bryan would make the save


----------



## Choke2Death

CM punker said:


> Everyone knew there was going to be a lot of star power in Ortons' celebration. Triple H and stephanie mcmahon follow orton everywhere he goes. Every time orton is mentioned, the casuals immediately know that the authority will be involved. the authority was also a hot angle when it started out. people were tuning in and hoping that daniel bryan would make the save


I'm so glad that you took the time to ask every single person who tuned in the reason why they did so and came back with the answer. Really means a lot to me.

Since you know everything Randy Orton related, may I ask you what did he have for breakfast?


----------



## bmtrocks

Nothing draws in the third hour. i wish WWE would just get rid of the third hour all together, terrible decision on their part.

Three hours is too much wrestling for the normal viewer of the product.


----------



## A-C-P

bmtrocks said:


> Nothing draws in the third hour. i wish WWE would just get rid of the third hour all together, terrible decision on their part.
> 
> Three hours is too much wrestling for the normal viewer of the product.


Wasn't WWE's decision really, USA wanted the 3 hours of RAW every week :draper2


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 2 - 4.162 million viewers - http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-9-9-2014.html
P18-34 - 1.42 rating / 965,000 viewers
P18-49 - 1.52 rating / 1.93 million viewers
P25-54 - 1.63 rating / 1.95 million viewers

Compare that to.

Love and Hip Hop Atlanta - 3.722 million viewers
P18-34 - 2.23 rating / 1.52 million viewers
P18-49 - 1.87 rating / 2.37 million viewers
P25-54 - 1.66 rating / 1.98 million viewers

Which show is more profitable? Definitely not Raw.


----------



## RatedR10

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 2 - 4.162 million viewers - http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-9-9-2014.html
> P18-34 - 1.42 rating / 965,000 viewers
> P18-49 - 1.52 rating / 1.93 million viewers
> P25-54 - 1.63 rating / 1.95 million viewers
> 
> Compare that to.
> 
> Love and Hip Hop Atlanta - 3.722 million viewers
> P18-34 - 2.23 rating / 1.52 million viewers
> P18-49 - 1.87 rating / 2.37 million viewers
> P25-54 - 1.66 rating / 1.98 million viewers
> 
> Which show is more profitable? Definitely not Raw.


WWE should really start focusing on the key demos. The thing is, I think Triple H realizes this based on his interview on Jericho's podcast, but Vince is so insistent on not changing anything for years.


----------



## DoubtGin

> Sunday's episode of WWE Total Divas drew 974,000 viewers. This is down 19% from the season premiere, which drew 1.2 million viewers. Next Sunday's episode will go head-to-head with WWE Night of Champions.


.


----------



## RatedR10

With WWE pretty much inviting viewers to leave the show last night to watch football until half time, I'm so intrigued to see the numbers for the show.


----------



## Darkness is here

The numbers should be good for lesnar/cena and opening segment.


----------



## D.M.N.

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-9-15-2014.html

Hour 1 - 3.900 million
Hour 2 - 3.949 million
Hour 3 - 3.629 million


----------



## Batz

D.M.N. said:


> http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-9-15-2014.html
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.900 million
> Hour 2 - 3.949 million
> Hour 3 - 3.629 million












'Murica's man.


----------



## DoubtGin

Wow that's pretty low.


----------



## A-C-P

D.M.N. said:


> http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-9-15-2014.html
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.900 million
> Hour 2 - 3.949 million
> Hour 3 - 3.629 million


:lmao it looks like the WWE didn't do a good job really explaining what "halftime" was (of course w/o breakdowns we don't know) but it looks like the viewership spiked during the 2nd hour, when the "halftime" of Raw happens, and people stuck around to actually see Cena/Heyman/Lesnar at the top of the 3rd hour, BIG tune out afterwards.


----------



## DoubtGin

Batz said:


> 'Murica's man.


Wasn't Henry's segment in the overrun only?


----------



## RatedR10

Wow at those numbers. :lmao

I hope they continue to dip.


----------



## Batz

DoubtGin said:


> Wasn't Henry's segment in the overrun only?


It began right before it went into the overrun IIRC.


----------



## Darkness is here

When was the last time they went above 4million?


----------



## JY57

thats the fall season for ya. ratings are lost cause in September - December (regardless who is there). so not sure what people are expecting.


----------



## LOL-ins

JY57 said:


> thats the fall season for ya. ratings are lost cause in September - December (regardless who is there). so not sure what people are expecting.


Nope, nope, nope not accepting this excuse at all. I give you exhibit A just 3 years ago.

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

September-December they had RAW's that got as high as 3.3. It's the lack of interest in the product because people have caught on with what WWE do around that time and come back in January.


----------



## RatedR10

Can we stop saying it's the time of year? If the product is good, people will watch.


----------



## Waffelz

Not really.


----------



## Born of Osiris

They need to be lower.


----------



## LOL-ins

RatedR10 said:


> Can we stop saying it's the time of year? If the product is good, people will watch.


This. Above your post I posted a link with RAW's 2011 ratings. The same "time of the year ratings" got as high as 3.3. WWE has had a show higher than a 3.0 since 2011 in that period which is really bad.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

RatedR10 said:


> Can we stop saying it's the time of year? If the product is good, people will watch.


Monday Night Football has a big affect on Raw's ratings. We can't just ignore that.


----------



## Punkholic

A-C-P said:


> :lmao it looks like the WWE didn't do a good job really explaining what "halftime" was (of course w/o breakdowns we don't know) but it looks like the viewership spiked during the 2nd hour, when the "halftime" of Raw happens, and people stuck around to actually see Cena/Heyman/Lesnar at the top of the 3rd hour, BIG tune out afterwards.



The football game started getting interesting at about 10:15-10:30, so that may have caused the decline as well.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## JY57

LOL-ins said:


> Nope, nope, nope not accepting this excuse at all. I give you exhibit A just 3 years ago.
> 
> http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2011-ratings/
> 
> September-December they had RAW's that got as high as 3.3. It's the lack of interest in the product because people have caught on with what WWE do around that time and come back in January.


rating system was different and that was when it was 2 hours.

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2012-tv-ratings/

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2013-ratings/

last two years it didn't see any 3.0 and above. And 2012 had like 5 of the lowest RAW Ratings in history (2 of them being Christmas Eve and New Years Eve probably shouldn't count). 

Okay I was wrong about every September-December time period. The better wording is the 3 hour era in September-December, 2 years and no 3.0 yet (although last year had slight improvements over 2012). We'll see how it goes this year


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Lack of The Authority in major storylines isn't helping either. They were involved so much in storylines last year. Interestingly I thought the show was over after Reigns/Rollins. When I saw the Henry/Rusev segment I turned away. I'm assuming many others did as well.


----------



## Lordhhhx

They deserve to get that and more hopefully when raw gets smackdown numbers vince will finally wake up in 2014.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Something else doesn't seem right. If you recall RAW was doing low 4s and some mid 4s just a few weeks ago in the lead up to Summerslam. Here is the average rating since:

8/18 (Night after SSlam): 4.194 viewers
8/25: 3.973 viewers
9/2: 3.920
9/8: 3.986
9/15: 3.826

The amazing thing is that Brock was advertised to be at this week's RAW yet he wasn't there last week. So with Brock the overall rating didn't improve. I'm not putting it all on him in any way. A lot of the blame can be put on creative for not putting together interesting storylines. Another thing to consider is the lack of involvement from Triple H in the major storylines. When Triple H is NOT there the show isn't as interesting. That's natural when you condition the audience to accept an authority figure to be there all the time — they've been doing this since 2002. Even when Triple H has been there in recent weeks he's not being utilized like he was last year.


----------



## kokepepsi

They had a divas match at the 9pm segment
:ti

This ain't 1998 where sable would draw 800k viewers


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The Boy Wonder said:


> Something else doesn't seem right. If you recall RAW was doing low 4s and some mid 4s just a few weeks ago in the lead up to Summerslam. Here is the average rating since:
> 
> 8/18 (Night after SSlam): 4.194 viewers
> 8/25: 3.973 viewers
> 9/2: 3.920
> 9/8: 3.986
> 9/15: 3.826
> 
> The amazing thing is that Brock was advertised to be at this week's RAW yet he wasn't there last week. So with Brock the overall rating didn't improve. I'm not putting it all on him in any way. A lot of the blame can be put on creative for not putting together interesting storylines. Another thing to consider is the lack of involvement from Triple H in the major storylines. When Triple H is NOT there the show isn't as interesting. That's natural when you condition the audience to accept an authority figure to be there all the time — they've been doing this since 2002. Even when Triple H has been there in recent weeks he's not being utilized like he was last year.


HHH alone wouldn't help at this point either (he didn't really last year). The whole thing is a combination of Football, and WWE as a whole lacking in story development. Viewership in 2012 was roughly the same as 2013 for these shows, and it looks like 2014 is just heading downhill. Even Brock's not helping... he can only help what he's directly involved in but people aren't going to sit through the show to get through that.

Numbers will continue sinking until January and nothing short of Rock returning could potentially change that... and I don't even think he would help anymore.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

#BadNewsSanta said:


> HHH alone wouldn't help at this point either (he didn't really last year). The whole thing is a combination of Football, and WWE as a whole lacking in story development. Viewership in 2012 was roughly the same as 2013 for these shows, and it looks like 2014 is just heading downhill. Even Brock's not helping... he can only help what he's directly involved in but people aren't going to sit through the show to get through that.
> 
> Numbers will continue sinking until January and nothing short of Rock returning could potentially change that... and I don't even think he would help anymore.


Good point.

But considering WWE just paid Brock $5 Million for 24 more dates they need to get more out of him each time he appears. I wasn't impressed at all with his usage last night. That was a weak looking brawl that didn't do much for their upcoming match.


----------



## Choke2Death

The Boy Wonder said:


> Good point.
> 
> But considering WWE just paid Brock $5 Million for 24 more dates they need to get more out of him each time he appears. I wasn't impressed at all with his usage last night. That was a weak looking brawl that didn't do much for their upcoming match.


What exactly is he supposed to do?

They even advertised his return for "halftime" which was basically them telling their audiences that they know most of them will be watching MNF and to return at halftime for the big segment of the night.

They deserve what they are getting.


----------



## RKO 4life

Orton vs reigns drew way higher last week then this week watching that Rollins kill ratings at the 10:45 slot. 

Waiting for the people to say Reigns and Rollins drawing power suck. (Rollins)

Orton gets cred here because I stand by what I say. He's the biggest draw they have, if booked right and if he's doing a great feud. He doesn't sell the t shirts but he does sell tickets and people watch him at home!

We don't need a break down to even see that peeps.


----------



## Darkness is here

The hour with lesnar in it did it the same as the 1st hour.

Lesnar doesn't seems to attract much viewers this year.


----------



## RKO 4life

Lasnar never does...


----------



## sesshomaru

RKO 4life said:


> Orton vs reigns drew way higher last week then this week watching that Rollins kill ratings at the 10:45 slot.
> 
> Waiting for the people to say Reigns and Rollins drawing power suck. (Rollins)
> 
> Orton gets cred here because I stand by what I say. He's the biggest draw they have, if booked right and if he's doing a great feud. He doesn't sell the t shirts but he does sell tickets and people watch him at home!
> 
> We don't need a break down to even see that peeps.


Orton's a ~10 year Main Eventing veteran. He'd better draw more then a midcarder who's had 0 title runs so far.


----------



## RKO 4life

sesshomaru said:


> Orton's a ~10 year Main Eventing veteran. He'd better draw more then a midcarder who's had 0 title runs so far.


Oh bull shit. They gave him the MITB, they turned him to close Raw 3 months ago. He took out Ambrose, he was in the Main Event on Raw and Smack Down ever since he came on board jumping Ryback in late 2012.

Nice try

Waiting for the heat for Rollins.


----------



## LOL-ins

When will people learn Rollins isn't a credible heel draw. If he was a high flying face he'd be a fucking ultra draw. Reigns should of been the one to make the turn but they were so focused on having Reigns/HHH at Summerslam (That didn't even happen in the end) that everyone has become lost in the shuffle.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RKO 4life said:


> Oh bull shit. They gave him the MITB, they turned him to close Raw 3 months ago. He took out Ambrose, he was in the Main Event on Raw and Smack Down ever since he came on board jumping Ryback in late 2012.
> 
> Nice try
> 
> Waiting for the heat for Rollins.


Given that Reigns is the common denominator in both poorly drawing third hours the last two weeks, the heat needs to be placed firmly where it belongs, Samoa Joe Anoai.


----------



## almostfamous

This is getting ugly.


----------



## CJohn3:16

I would really like to know what was the highest point of the show and how many people changed the channel when they realized Henry and Rusev were going to close the show.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

Why does Cena never get the blame? Why's it always a mid-card guy who gets the shit? He's the face of the company, he's the one who was featured prominently last night with his fucking unfunny shenanigans and yet, oddly enough, he doesn't seem to be setting the world on fire either...

I'm not even blaming Cena myself because that would be retarded, one guy cannot be responsible for WWE's current failures, it's a team effort. _The whole fucking brand_ is stale, out of date and boring.


----------



## RatedR10

RKO 4life said:


> Orton vs reigns drew way higher last week then this week watching that Rollins kill ratings at the 10:45 slot.
> 
> Waiting for the people to say Reigns and Rollins drawing power suck. (Rollins)
> 
> Orton gets cred here because I stand by what I say. He's the biggest draw they have, if booked right and if he's doing a great feud. He doesn't sell the t shirts but he does sell tickets and people watch him at home!
> 
> We don't need a break down to even see that peeps.


If we don't have a breakdown, why would you say Reigns and Orton popped a big number last week? You have no idea if that's the case.

As an appreciation for Orton as a worker, he's not a great draw. The guy, as World champ, brought in 1.7 ratings to Smackdown in 2011 and when Henry won the title, the ratings were consistently in the 2.0 - 2.3 range. 

Randy Orton, as WWE champ in 2013, lost WWE's trust (it would seem) to be in the top of the hour segment and was in 9:30 and 10:30 slots.


----------



## Quietus

Last year Authority angle held up well against MNF when all characters involved were fresh, hot and had momentum. Ofcourse this year they are phasing out the angle and characters, it's been diluted to a bunch of cheap diva segments, even Stephanie is more or less gone. Bryan's obviously injured. Combine that with lack of starpower and RAW is getting killed. Cena/Brock while its being built up well, is not that hot. It's only going to get worse for WWE.

I guess WWE was probably banking on all 3 Shield members to provide that lacking starpower this year but that hasn't really worked out it seems, especially Rollins who has been a ratings bust so far.


----------



## DenGal

What do the highest rated shows in tv have in common? They have great writing and good cliff hangers. Closing each RAW with a good cliff hanger would attract more viewers. Does ending RAW with Mark Henry and Rusev get people excited like they cant wait for next weeks RAW? No. They need to start having actual stories and creative material. Its basically just a bunch of matches that nobody cares about thats why nobody watches.


----------



## joeycalz

Didn't watch RAW last night, and my Monday night was infinitely better. You should all seriously boycott until they change this crap.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

DenGal said:


> What do the highest rated shows in tv have in common? They have great writing and good cliff hangers. Closing each RAW with a good cliff hanger would attract more viewers. Does ending RAW with Mark Henry and Rusev get people excited like they cant wait for next weeks RAW? No. They need to start having actual stories and creative material. Its basically just a bunch of matches that nobody cares about thats why nobody watches.


Its hard to do that when most of what takes place is in a wrestling ring...the same setting each week.

Maybe wrestling needs to evolve? I think total divas is on to something even tho most hate. Maybe WWE should do more segments and stories outside of the ring.

When was the last cool thing that happened outside of the arena...HHH attacking Orton in his home?


----------



## Chrome

joeycalz said:


> Didn't watch RAW last night, and my Monday night was infinitely better. You should all seriously boycott until they change this crap.


Didn't watch either, and I agree. And yeah, I'm thinking of taking a break too, got back into WWE 3 years ago and this is the most disinterested I've been in the product. If we get Show/Lesnar and Cena/Rusev feuds after NOC, then bye bye...


----------



## validreasoning

DenGal said:


> What do the highest rated shows in tv have in common? They have great writing and good cliff hangers. Closing each RAW with a good cliff hanger would attract more viewers.


doesn't work anymore. when lesnar returned at the end of raw 2012 a full 20% of viewers didn't bother tuning in the next week



joeycalz said:


> Didn't watch RAW last night, and my Monday night was infinitely better. You should all seriously boycott until they change this crap.


we need to get a petition to have more people to boycott like this one from 2003 http://www.petitiononline.com/rawwwe/petition.html


----------



## The Boy Wonder

The show is actually better quality than it was at this time last year. Night of Champions from last year was one of the worst PPVs of the year and the RAW's that followed were somewhat boring. I actually find the current product/storylines better right now.


----------



## validreasoning

safe to say lesnar as champion isn't exactly drawing any new viewers and next week there will be about 50 million watching dancing with the stars/mnf and the season opener of big bang theory alone head to head with raw so they need to do something at the ppv.


----------



## A-C-P

validreasoning said:


> safe to say lesnar as champion isn't exactly drawing any new viewers and next week there will be about 50 million watching dancing with the stars/mnf and the season opener of big bang theory alone head to head with raw *so they need to do something at the ppv*.


The problem here is whenever the WWE feels "they need to do something" that "something" is usually putting the title back on "Good Guy" :cena3


----------



## Fissiks

The Boy Wonder said:


> The show is actually better quality than it was at this time last year. Night of Champions from last year was one of the worst PPVs of the year and the RAW's that followed were somewhat boring. I actually find the current product/storylines better right now.


damn you hate Bryan so much that you are willing to throw your boy Orton under the bus lol


----------



## DenGal

validreasoning said:


> safe to say lesnar as champion isn't exactly drawing any new viewers and next week there will be about 50 million watching dancing with the stars/mnf and the season opener of big bang theory alone head to head with raw so they need to do something at the ppv.


With all that you just said that will be going head to head with RAW, expect another guest host or celebrity that wrestling fans dont care about. That is what we can expect in upcoming weeks.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It's too bad WWE has to go up against the NFL. If they went up against some garbage like the NBA, they'd be alot better off.


----------



## Markus123

4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> Why does Cena never get the blame? Why's it always a mid-card guy who gets the shit? He's the face of the company, he's the one who was featured prominently last night with his fucking unfunny shenanigans and yet, oddly enough, he doesn't seem to be setting the world on fire either...
> 
> I'm not even blaming Cena myself because that would be retarded, one guy cannot be responsible for WWE's current failures, it's a team effort. _The whole fucking brand_ is stale, out of date and boring.


This, people blaming Rollins is incredibly harsh, if anyone out of the shield to blame it's Reigns since he's the one getting the superman push yet is seemingly not getting many interested in watching but obviously it's not Reigns fault either.

When things go wrong at a football club (or soccer club for you Americans) the manager gets the blame for not getting the most of what he's got, it should be the same for the WWE Vince isn't getting the most out of what he's got, i think there's alot of talent but the way they're booked just kills them. Bray Wyatts is a good example, he was different and you'd look forward to see where it's going and what do they do? Feed him to Cena and don't show any creativity with him at all and now barely anyone cares anymore, he couldn't even have Wyatt go over Big Show, does anyone care about Big Show? Vince is killing potential in favour of wrestlers who don't have any real benefit, certainly not long term.


----------



## Bushmaster

Fissiks said:


> damn you hate Bryan so much that you are willing to throw your boy Orton under the bus lol


:lmao


----------



## Tweener ken

validreasoning said:


> safe to say lesnar as champion isn't exactly drawing any new viewers and next week there will be about 50 million watching dancing with the stars/mnf and the season opener of big bang theory alone head to head with raw so they need to do something at the ppv.


lesnar isn't a draw anymore......atleast no way near like in 2012, the last ppv which did great buys with him was SS12.


----------



## thaimasker

validreasoning said:


> safe to say lesnar as champion isn't exactly drawing any new viewers and next week there will be about 50 million watching dancing with the stars/mnf and the season opener of big bang theory alone head to head with raw so they need to do something at the ppv.


God damn thats alot of competition..Do BBT And DWTS usually come on this time of year competing with raw too? or is this the first time. They might get CM Punk #'s this season lol.


----------



## FITZ

At this point WWE just needs to hope for big blow outs on Monday Night Football.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

thaimasker said:


> God damn thats alot of competition..Do BBT And DWTS usually come on this time of year competing with raw too? or is this the first time. They might get CM Punk #'s this season lol.


No, BBT was on Thursdays and DWTS I think was always on Monday. Big Bang will be back to Thursdays in October 30th though. 

TOP 10 BY TOTAL VIEWERS
1. NBC Sunday Night Football, NBC (21.5 million)
2. The Big Bang Theory, CBS (20 million)
5. Dancing With the Stars, ABC (15.2 million)


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

Tweener ken said:


> lesnar isn't a draw anymore......atleast no way near like in 2012, the last ppv which did great buys with him was SS12.


This. Lesnar is not a draw at all. He was for his first two return PPV matches and that's it.

Cena, Punk, and Bryan are way bigger draws than Lesnar.


----------



## RatedR10

Lesnar still is a draw. Is he as big of a draw as he was when he made his return? No. You can thank the booking for that. His entire run since coming back should have had him winning every single match he was in, including the streak match, ending the big angle winning the WWE World Title when he did, while still undefeated. Then, he runs through challengers until the next guy is ready to take over and get a huge rub.

Instead, he lost 2 of his first 3 matches coming back to the WWE.

To say Lesnar isn't a draw is nuts. And even as a Punk fan, I wouldn't consider him a huge draw when it comes to TV or PPV numbers. Lesnar bumped the buys on shows he was headlining pre-Network era.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

A red hot punk and bryan were also on those shows. Lesnar is not a draw. FACT.


----------



## kokepepsi

So many segments that lose viewers
So in order for Brock to affect the ratings his segment would need to gain 1.5 million viewers on avg
:ti
yeah good luck with that

Fix the midcard and they fix the ratings


----------



## JY57

CenaBoy4Life said:


> This. Lesnar is not a draw at all. He was for his first two return PPV matches and that's it.
> 
> Cena, Punk, and Bryan are way bigger draws than Lesnar.












http://lastwordonsports.com/2014/02/02/dissecting-wwe-raw-ratings-2011-2013-by-superstar/

and this for 2012 (obviously wasn't there in 2011 )

I doubt u get anything for this year since the breakdowns are non existent.


----------



## Japanese Puroresu

*WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

http://www.inquisitr.com/1480745/ww...ould-be-in-trouble-as-wwe-struggles-continue/

It hit a low point in May, and went below last Wednesday......... Ever since Punk left... Coincidence?



> The WWE and Vince McMahon could be headed for trouble as sinking viewership has reportedly brought about some desperate measures.
> 
> Pressure has been growing on McMahon since early this year, when a failed launch of the WWE Network, along with a sinking stock price, hit the company hard. At the time, it was reported that shareholders were planning to oust McMahon, but the rumors have since died down, and McMahon appears to be keeping his job — at least for the moment.
> 
> For the WWE, the uncertainty has continued on through the summer. This week’s episode of WWE Raw saw a slip in viewers, falling 4 percent from the previous week to 3.826 million. That was due in part to the return of the NFL, as the Monday Night Football game between the Eagles and Colts drew away 14.891 million viewers, but it comes at a time the WWE needs to be growing its viewership rather than shrinking.
> 
> Many wrestling insiders sensed a bit of desperation from Vince McMahon in the latest RAW episode, which featured Roman Reigns vs. Seth Rollins — a match that is already scheduled to play out on pay-per-view.
> 
> Joe Marsalis of Rappler noted the following.
> 
> “I also don’t understand why Roman Reigns vs. Seth Rollins, a match already scheduled for this Sunday’s Night of Champions event, was given away in full and for free on TV. If you think this is a joke with an impending punchline, unfortunately, you’re wrong—they’re already billing the PPV match as a rematch. Is the WWE truly so desperate for ratings that they’d throw away what they told us was gonna be a special match? Never mind if shenanigans are going down in that same slot on Sunday — why would people tune in now?”
> 
> Rumors indicate that Vince McMahon could already be scrapping the idea behind the WWE Network, which was supposed to bring a major online presence to the company with streaming video of events. McMahon is reportedly considering putting the network on cable television, abandoning the premise behind the online hub in the hopes of raising television numbers.
> 
> There had been rumors in May that WWE advisers were telling Vince McMahon to pull the plug on the WWE Network in light of its disastrous debut.
> 
> “The mood is so bad… that some people within WWE were even openly speculating that Vince McMahon may have to pull the whole plug on the WWE Network soon, to stop the bleeding before it gets out of control,” noted Mike Johnson of PWInsider.
> 
> For now, Vince McMahon and the WWE appear to be staying the course, but insiders believe big changes could be on the way if ratings continue to slide.
> 
> Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1480745/ww...s-wwe-struggles-continue/#XWDxpH5l0Kk1odlO.99


----------



## BREEaments03

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Japanese Puroresu said:


> It hit a low point in May, and went below last Wednesday......... Ever since Punk left... Coincidence?


ummmm....yes.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Not Punk alone.

Punk - Out

Bryan - Out

Wyatt - Jobbing (he's drawn numbers before when he was put on spotlight so he IS a factor who could bring in money if Cena wasn't a jealous bitch)

Two of WWEs biggest stars are not around and their biggest rising star got buried so yeah. Oh and also American Sports and what not but they've always been around.


----------



## bmtrocks

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Interesting read. I don't think WWE will be going out of business by any means but the WWE Network is definitely a bust on their part

The WWE Network is a good idea, but the problem with it is that it doesn't really resonate with the casual fans.

Most people who watch WWE watch the product on a casual basis. They have no interest in pay-per-views and mainly watching RAW every Monday when they're flipping through the channels. This is the core audience that gets gains from WWE and this audience has been lead to believe that the only legitimate star in the company is Cena. And Bryan more recently, but he's out on an injury.

So for the WWE Network really only appeals to the hardcore fan, but even in that it does a lot of blunders.

For one the WWE Network was promised to include all the episodes of RAW, Smackdown, Nitro, you name it. It didn't have these on launch. A lot of people got the impression they could get the WWE Network and watch RAW live, and this wasn't the case. Instead RAW had, what? A week delay release every week on the Network? THat isn't very good.

And then you have the original programming, which again only the most hardcore fan is interested in those products.


----------



## CALΔMITY

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Punk leaving actually forced the WWE to actually TRY to make things better. It didn't get much better, but for a little while things seemed to have been looking slightly more up than usual. However...things just went back down. I'm just glad I never subscribed to the network because I was afraid of something like this happening.


----------



## Queendom9617

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

It's a sad day when WWE struggles to even get above a 3.0 rating, but I think it's what they need. Maybe this is a wake-up call. 

This is the New Generation all over again.


----------



## Captain IWC

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Of course the ratings are plummeting they are producing shit. The ratings and the Network are connected. If Vince makes WWE Raw *must see tv* and *build every PPV like it's WM* the fans will want to want watch the ppvs, thus ordering the network *IT'S THAT FUCKING SIMPLE*.


----------



## #Mark

The show is just dreadful.. Honestly, you know it's bad when people are leaving the show before the final segment. This is the worst the product has been in years.


----------



## I Ship Sixon

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Queendom9617 said:


> It's a sad day when WWE struggles to even get above a 3.0 rating, but I think it's what they need. Maybe this is a wake-up call.
> 
> This is the New Generation all over again.


:cena4 Bret Cena :vince$


----------



## Allur

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

That's what they get for treating Damien like shit. The audience is smart.


----------



## Down_Under_Thunder

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Maybe start with putting wrestlers on the TV that people want to watch. You can't tell me that more people wouldn't tune in if you build Zach Ryder back up and have him on TV instead of Sheamus. What do you think would happen Vince, someone gets over huge and than you squash them, put on a wrestler that someone doesn't like instead, and expect to have ratings?

Obviously there's many more and probably better examples, just as a newish fan to WWE, that's the first example that comes to mind. Try not making wrestlers unstoppable and have more top tier wrestlers losing matches, you have Roman Reigns going into matches that you know he's not going to lose and will end up doing the same combo of moves that he does every match, why would someone tune into watch when they already know the result?

I know that wrestling is currently based on feuds, but seriously I get over watching the same two people wrestler over and over for a couple of months, it gets boring quickly. Reigns vs Orton....Stale, Miz vs Ziggler....Stale.


----------



## WrayBryatt

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Every interesting character they had, they fucked up.

Bray And Wyatt family - fucked up
Bo dallas - fucked up
reigns - Fucked up ( I would go against the grain and say that RR is booked poorly, mainly in areas that exploit his weakness, being mic skills and type of matches he have and working with people that can't hide his weakness, IE fucking kane
leo Kruger - adam rose. that's all I can say there.
Cesaro - MAJOR fuck up on wwe's end. fuck I wanted to see this guy succeed really really bad.

they fucked up so bad with talent, HHH is like fuck being promoted to raw, I want to make NXT as big as wcw. rightly so, the main roster just doesn't know how to manage talent.

Night of champion only has one fucking match on the card, maybe two if ambrose does a surprise return. Why the hell would I want to renew then? lol. Fuck after this month, I'm gone until maybe wrestlemania season.


----------



## Queendom9617

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



theBeastlyBest said:


> :cena4 Bret Cena :vince$


Oh god... 

How long until "Cena screwed Cena. I have no sympathy, whatsoever for John Cena." 

Because he refuses to give up his spot and put Roman Reigns over.


----------



## ShammyWoWLoL

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

They deserve this, they're treating their product like they were when WCW was handing their asses to them for over a year. Crappy content insulting the viewers intellect with garbage feuds/buries and just overall bad writing. 

I hope NXT or some other Pro Wrestling company strong enough (Sorry not TNA isn't going to happen) starts to compete and really start another Monday Night War. WWE was childish/cartoons and WCW was cool/real/edgy, once WWE get into the real/edgy stuff they started to grow.

WWE defeats WCW and they resume back to their shitty "Family cartoon" show and now we have Bunny's attacking Heath Slater. It's as if they did a 180 from what they did to win the Monday Night Wars, and decided once WCW was dead they can go back to shoving this child content down our throats. I really hope the Network flops/ratings tank and then they get the same realization they did in the 90s and step up their game.


----------



## Rex Rasslin

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

And they really wonder? :lol Man they are so bad lately, seriously they would have to pay me to enjoy that 3 hour bullshit called RAW. It's a disgrace!


----------



## LordKain

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

The only thing that could possibly force the WWE to better themselves agin would be for Cena to finally grow a pair balls and walk out on the WWE once he jobs to Lenar again at NOC because in my eyes that's it for Cena after that where can he go from there?

Sometimes it's not a bad thing to hit rock bottom hell people do it all the time and I feel that's what the WWE needs to do at this point in order to get better because there gotten far too arrogant and lazy to keep costing by anymore.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



LordKain said:


> The only thing that could possibly force the WWE to better themselves agin would be for Cena to finally grow a pair balls and walk out on the WWE once he jobs to Lenar again at NOC because in my eyes that's it for Cena after that where can he go from there?


He can go hang out with some kids while he is gone for 2-3 months after Lesnar fucks him up...in a perfect world.


----------



## Damage Case

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Why don't they just turn the Network into a WWE YouTube and make money from advertisers? Have full length PPV and shows available for free and just make money off the advertising?


----------



## Xyll

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Classic short-term vision syndrome. Put all your eggs on Cena's basket for years because he sells shirts, neglect the rest of the roster to amplify him. While bringing back old stars to reignite some interest in your product, and fail to capitalise on it.
Some bad luck with CM Punk/DBry but still, no doubt this will fall on the current roster's "lack of desire" bullshit they pull when shit goes bad.


----------



## SaltyKernels

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Vince McMahon seems to be a stubborn man. Don't get me wrong, I give him credit for what he's done with WWE. He's a millionaire for a reason. However, the WWE is a bit out of touch and it seems to be McMahon's stubbornness that is part of the problem. It amazes me how WWE can be so with the times in aspects like social media, the look of their production and the WWE Network, yet when it comes to the actual product that goes on screen, WWE seems to be behind the times. I'm not blaming the PG rating, but I am blaming the tired and nonsensical booking that has been plaguing WWE for a long time. There just doesn't seem to be anything there to make people want to watch. This past episode of RAW was terrible because it didn't do anything to make anybody want to watch Night of Champions. The direction is tired. The storylines are tired. The main event scene is tired. The characters are stale.

I hope the best for WWE and especially the Network, but I would be curious to see what happens if Vince McMahon finds himself getting really desperate to turn things around. He can't turn to edgier programming now because they've backed themselves into a corner. I don't know what the future of WWE holds, but they better right the ship quick.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Damage Case said:


> Why don't they just turn the Network into a WWE YouTube and make money from advertisers? Have full length PPV and shows available for free and just make money off the advertising?


They are just going to add advertisers anyway to the paying customers. Why eat your eggs when you can also milk them?


----------



## sesshomaru

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

This report seems a bit more doom-and-gloom then we've heard in the past. However it would be very interesting if Vince had to step down due to investor pressure.


----------



## Hulkamaniac Rules

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

WWE invested a ton in Brock by giving him the streak and squashing Cena. But still, him being champ till WrestleMania, uninterrupted, sounds boring.


----------



## Darkness is here

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Allur said:


> That's what they get for treating Damien like shit. The audience is smart.


:vince2


----------



## Afterlife

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

More Cena on the Network will fix things.


----------



## JamesK

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Hulkamaniac Rules said:


> WWE invested a ton in Brock by giving him the streak and squashing Cena. But still, him being champ till WrestleMania, uninterrupted, sounds boring.


So the only thing that they done right is boring? :ti

Dem current and future faces of the company can't pull the numbers :lmao


----------



## Hulkamaniac Rules

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



JamesK said:


> So the only thing that they done right is boring? :ti
> 
> Dem current and future faces of the company can't pull the numbers :lmao


I apologize for having a different opinion than you.


----------



## Rhilgus

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

That's what happens when you lose your balls. Vince didn't even TRIED to go against the NFL, he just gave up. How the hell can it be great when you react like this ? 

And lol at the Punk comment, I'm happy is gone, anyone who watched the WWE knows that he sucked on the ring, he couldn't even have a good match with Seth Rollins


----------



## JamesK

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Hulkamaniac Rules said:


> I apologize for having a different opinion than you.


Apology accepted man..


----------



## 260825

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

*It doesn't matter D'bry, Ambrose or CM Phil aren't there;

They're great wrestlers in a shit environment;

It's like Having De Niro in a Princess Diaries movie. *


----------



## Argothar

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



JamesK said:


> So the only thing that they done right is boring? :ti
> 
> Dem current and future faces of the company can't pull the numbers :lmao



They can't pull numbers because WWE has refused to build any of them as major stars. As soon as anyone starts to get over they get buried, downright removed from the card, or fed to Cena.


----------



## bagodking

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

i like how everyone chooses to believe cena buries everyone
its more so trips and vince's doing
and even more so that racoon buck toothed bastid


----------



## silverspirit2001

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

The fact is, WWE programming is catered to kiddies who pester parents for Cena Merch. Parents remember the edgier Attitude era, and will not buy network subscriptions for Kiddies, because of swearing. So the Kiddies wont see PPV, and lose interest in the product.

The truth is, Vince needs to choose a market to focus on - the Network or merchandise. Adults or Kiddies. Mature content vs Cartoon content. He cannot straddle both demographics in one TV show. Especially since most children will not be interested in PPV's from 20 years ago. You think an 8 year old knows who Ric Flair is? Hulk Hogan? Steven Austin?


----------



## validreasoning

RatedR10 said:


> Lesnar still is a draw. Is he as big of a draw as he was when he made his return? No. You can thank the booking for that.


lesnar has never been a big tv draw. his segments might gain but nobody is watching a full show for lesnar.

case in point the night after mania 28 raw drew over 5 million viewers in the 2 hour http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...fe-of-the-american-teenagerpawn-stars/127242/ 

you would expect most of those 5 million to tune into raw the next week but only 4.2 million watched the first hour of raw a week later. a full 20% of viewers logged out after lesnar came back, that in itself should have been a warning sign for wwe right off the bat http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ican-teen-la-las-full-court-life-more/128247/


----------



## amhlilhaus

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

as long as mcmahon is enamored of john cena merchandise revenue, things won't change. yeah cena moves product and sells tickets, but he's cancer for ratings and if ratings are that important then they have a choice: make money now and fail later, or take a hit and get some people over. 

they won't do it. they want another cena which they think will keep the audience happy, not caring that it's not cena the character but how he's presented that piss people off. this is modern pro wrestling, no guy, not my favorites like bryan, wyatt, ambrose or rollins should be invincible and win every fucking big match. 

cena may have 'lost' to orton, wyatt lol, and lesnar but he's still unstoppable. the lesnar situation is interesting because he seems vulnerable but fans realize that if he 'overcomes' the odds again, we're stuck in the twilight zone of cena as champ with everyone else several notches below him.


----------



## The Sharpshooter

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

It's pretty standard for this time of the year - especially with it being NFL season. I don't think Vince is too concerned about this. The WWE ratings have actually been very stable in the last few years if you look at them seasonally.


----------



## dan the marino

Lesnar was never a huge draw and I'm not sure where that came from. Sure there was some interest when he first came back from UFC but they snuffed that light out quick.

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## ThirtyYearFan

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Rhilgus said:


> That's what happens when you lose your balls. Vince didn't even TRIED to go against the NFL, he just gave up. How the hell can it be great when you react like this ?
> 
> And lol at the Punk comment, I'm happy is gone, anyone who watched the WWE knows that he sucked on the ring, he couldn't even have a good match with Seth Rollins


I have said it a million times and will say it again that the WWE is insignificant to and not competition to the NFL. Wrestling could be having its biggest boom period ever and will still not be competition or even come close to NFL ratings. Wrestling will never garner the interest people have in the NFL. IMHO, the WWE should just not worry about the NFL but just try to make the product better for their core constituent audience that they do have. They should make the product better and then come the end of the NFL season they can attract more viewers due to a better product.


----------



## Miss Sally

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

But Cena = ratings right? Cena becomes champ, ratings drop, Cena main events.. ratings drop..


----------



## s.kong

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



silverspirit2001 said:


> The fact is, WWE programming is catered to kiddies who pester parents for Cena Merch. Parents remember the edgier Attitude era, and will not buy network subscriptions for Kiddies, because of swearing. So the Kiddies wont see PPV, and lose interest in the product.
> 
> The truth is, Vince needs to choose a market to focus on - the Network or merchandise. Adults or Kiddies. Mature content vs Cartoon content. He cannot straddle both demographics in one TV show. Especially since most children will not be interested in PPV's from 20 years ago. You think an 8 year old knows who Ric Flair is? Hulk Hogan? Steven Austin?


Maybe they should have a brand split again and make Smackdown the PG show. It's not like they're advancing any storylines or doing anything relevant on that show anymore anyway. There is more than enough talent available to do that again, if they take time and effort to rebuild certain wrestlers.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Miss Sally said:


> But Cena = ratings right? Cena becomes champ, ratings drop, Cena main events.. ratings drop..


numbers rose when cena got the belt at mitb and have fallen since he dropped it at summerslam

cena as champ, notice every week was higher than raw prior to putting the belt on cena

6/23/14 = 4,031,000
6/30/14 = 4,332,000 (night after mitb)
7/7/14	= 4,381,000
7/14/14 = 4,153,000
7/21/14 = 4,433,000
7/28/14	= 4,318,000
8/4/14	= 4,048,000
8/11/14	= 4,300,000

lesnar as champ, numbers fell the night after summerslam which to my knowledge is unheard of
8/18/14 = 4,194,000
8/25/14	= 3,974,000
9/1/14 = 3,920,000
9/8/14 = 3,987,000
9/15/14	= 3,826,000


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

The "fuck any long-term potential" for short term gain (mostly with "Good Guy" :cena3) was eventually going to catch up to them.



validreasoning said:


> numbers rose when cena got the belt at mitb and have fallen since he dropped it at summerslam
> 
> cena as champ, notice every week was higher than raw prior to putting the belt on cena
> 
> 6/23/14 = 4,031,000
> 6/30/14 = 4,332,000 (night after mitb)
> 7/7/14	= 4,381,000
> 7/14/14 = 4,153,000
> 7/21/14 = 4,433,000
> 7/28/14	= 4,318,000
> 8/4/14	= 4,048,000
> 8/11/14	= 4,300,000
> 
> lesnar as champ, numbers fell the night after summerslam which to my knowledge is unheard of
> 8/18/14 = 4,194,000
> 8/25/14	= 3,974,000
> 9/1/14 = 3,920,000
> 9/8/14 = 3,987,000
> 9/15/14	= 3,826,000


Where as you can't argue with these #s I think there is ALOT more that goes into them then just who was the champion.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Miss Sally said:


> But Cena = ratings right? Cena becomes champ, ratings drop, Cena main events.. ratings drop..


This. No one in WWE is a ratings draw. No one.


----------



## Brandough

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



validreasoning said:


> Lesnar as champ, numbers fell the night after summerslam which to my knowledge is unheard of
> 8/18/14 = 4,194,000
> 8/25/14	= 3,974,000
> 9/1/14 = 3,920,000
> 9/8/14 = 3,987,000
> 9/15/14	= 3,826,000


B b but Lesnar Draws right?


----------



## RCSheppy

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

I wouldn't just blame Lesnar, that's fucking stupid.


----------



## Wiserone

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

LOL you guys have so many "good ideas" you should start your own company instead of worrying so much about vinces company. How on earth do you guys sleep at night knowing you have the abilities to change vince Mc fortunes ROLF.


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Part-time champion deal hasn't really done much for ratings


----------



## Redzero

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

:reigns the draw.


----------



## ADRfan

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

The champion is on Raw once a month. Also no Bryan, Del Rio or Punk.


----------



## Miss Sally

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Wiserone said:


> LOL you guys have so many "good ideas" you should start your own company instead of worrying so much about vinces company. How on earth do you guys sleep at night knowing you have the abilities to change vince Mc fortunes ROLF.


We're fans, we know what we like. we don't nutride Vince unlike people like you. We don't live vicariously through vince and successful people like you do. The IWC is a window into all things good about wrestling and all things bad. We want to see everyone successful, even Cena. We just want there to be balance and some semblance of story and good matches. We know this can be done which is why many of us are critical of Vince when we know he can do better. You cannot make a show for just one demographic or yourself and hope to retain viewers. 

As for vince he was always rich, was richer before the network debacle, yet he cut his own fortune in half with it.  Real question is how does he sleep losing 60% of his money, knowing ratings are dropping and realizing he is out of touch? Maybe you can call him and cheer him up. Meanwhile we'll be discussing wrestling. :


----------



## NotAllThere

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

The product is not evolving right now. Commentary sucks, new talent is not being developed, storylines are being aborted or having no payoff (Ambrose, Wyatt, Woods coalition). It looks like WCW in 1999 where storylines last all of a week right now and the same old same old keeps being broadcast.


----------



## WWEUniverse

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

the lower the ratings go, the lower vince mcmahon must dig his hand to find more ideas from his personal barrel behind his carage, he must find ways to get the network working and rocket the ratings up towards the sky, this will not do with absent champion, john cena, romanian reigns, and all the others, not without the spark of fresh smell all over the product, triple h must looking down at the barrel as we speak and he only sees darkness, there must be a way for the wwe to get out of this helpless situation or else all of sports entertainment will be doomed


----------



## rakija

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

This is what happens when you refuse to grow with the times. It's karma for all of Vince's backstage BS


----------



## kronos96

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

After Alberto left, 50% of the reason i watch the show was gone. The other one is Reigns, if they screw it up, the WWE can go to hell as far as i'm concerned.

If we are talking about part timers. They need Rock and Batista back, the only last real superstars the have. But we all know how the moronic short-sighted smarks reacted to that. 

So basically it's only Rock again. Pay him more, bring him back an build a feud with Lesnar. Batista would be amazing if he was added somehow. After that, they have nothing left. All those indy NXT guys won't cut it.


----------



## Therapy

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Nice to see this addressed beyond a wrestling forum and to major news sites now. The product is boring. The talent isn't being advanced beyond enhancement talent for eventual Cena burials. It's completely insulting to the intelligence. Completely redundant and predictable with heavy doses of pandering to spend money on WWE Network and watching Total Divas


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Japanese Puroresu said:


> It hit a low point in May, and went below last Wednesday......... Ever since Punk left... Coincidence?


But Punk left right before February. :draper2

Ratings are down because the product is pure shit and there's nothing interesting going on. The only part of the card they usually put any effort into (the main event) is also empty because Brock only appears once a month.


----------



## HiddenFlaw

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

bring back tv-14 

you know what fuck that make it ma


----------



## Miss Sally

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Choke2Death said:


> But Punk left right before February. :draper2
> 
> Ratings are down because the product is pure shit and there's nothing interesting going on. The only part of the card they usually put any effort into (the main event) is also empty because Brock only appears once a month.


Love or hate punk he still brought viewers. Same with Bryan, a lot of people are fed up the crap angles, so much focus on Bellas with no meaningful outcome and watching stars who get cheers get buried.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

WWE is in big trouble with their horrible ratings, at least according to some fans: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/general-wwe/1410217-wwe-ratings-continue-plummet.html

Here's a look at some ratings from the past few years:

*RAW 2012 Ratings (May 2012 to December 2012)*

*May 7-11	3.01
May 14-18	2.95	
May 21-25	3.03
May 28-6/1	2.7
June 4-8	2.92
June 11-15	3.23
June 18-22	3.4
June 25-29	3.29
July 2-6	3.18 
July 9-13	3.17 
July 16-20	3.44 
July 23-27	3.86 
7/30 – 8/3	3.09 (Raw begins going three hours every week) 
August 6-10	3.09 
August 13-17	2.85 
August 20-24	3.14 
August 27-31	3.13 
September 3-7	2.83 
September 10- 2.89
September 17- 2.86*
September 24- 2.72 
October 1-5	2.54 
October 8-12	2.8	
October 15-19	2.81
10/22 – 10/26	2.48
10/29 – 11/2	2.95
November 5-9	2.78
November 12- 2.86 
November 19- 2.73	
11/26 – 11/30	2.7	
December 3-7	2.55
December 10- 2.67
December 17- 2.87	
December 24- 2.2
December 31	2.32

*Average rating from May to Mid-September 2012: 3.10*
*Average rating with 3-hour format from 7/30/12 to 9/17/12: 2.98*

*RAW 2013 Ratings (May 2013 to December 2013)*

*5/13 – 2.91
5/20 – 2.97
5/27 – 2.80
6/3 – 2.65
6/10 – 3.05
6/17 – 3.05
6/24 – 2.89
7/1 – 2.89
7/8 – 3.09
7/15 – 3.05
7/22 – 2.95
7/29 – 2.86
8/5 – 2.96
8/12 – 2.95
8/19 – 3.24
8/26 – 3.07
9/2 – 2.85
9/9 – 2.91
9/16 – 2.96*
9/23 – 2.81
9/30 – 2.68
10/7 – 2.65
10/14 – 2.88
10/21 – 2.71
10/28 – 2.98
11/4 – 2.75
11/18 – 2.73
11/25 – 2.93
12/2 – 2.64
12/9 – 2.84
12/16 – 2.93
12/23 – 2.66
12/30-2.96

*Average rating from May to Mid-September 2013: 2.95*

*RAW 2014 Ratings (To present)*

1/6 – 3.23
1/13 – 3.11
1/20 – 3.46
1/27 – 3.23
2/3 – 3.14
2/10 – 3.14
2/17 – 3.08
2/24 – 3.31
3/3 – 3.25
3/10 – 3.09
3/17 – 2.97
3/24 – 3.07
3/31 – 3.13
4/7 – 3.69
4/14 – 3.26
4/21 – 2.96
*4/28 – 3.26
5/5 – 3.02
5/12 – 2.87
5/19 – 2.72
5/26 – 2.62
6/2 – 2.92
6/9 – 2.93 (Daniel Bryan vacates WWE Championship)
6/16 – 2.90
6/23 – 2.85
6/30 – 2.94
7/7 – N/A
7/14 – 2.83
7/21 – 3.15
7/28 – 3.06
8/4 – 2.85
8/11 – 3.07
8/18 – 3.04
8/25 – 2.88
9/1 – 2.81
9/8 – 2.87
9/15 – N/A Yet; reports said lowest rating since May (Educated Guess: 2.70?)*

*Average rating from May to Mid-September 2014: 2.91*

The ratings have remained the same for the time periods I've discussed. The ratings are in the high 2s.

Discuss at this thread: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/general-wwe/1410450-wwe-raw-ratings-reality-fans.html


----------



## Londrick

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Article is BS. WWE are pushing muscle guys over vanilla midgets right now, top feud is Brock vs Cena and Rusev and Reigns are getting pushed so business should be doing good now right?


----------



## WilfyDee

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

The Network is still the future and TV in general is dying, the world has had on demand and starting to question the ridiculousness of having to sit down at a specific time to watch something (live sports being the exception). If the pull the plug on the Network to try aid tv ratings they'll be shooting themselves in the foot as they will only have to release something similar a few years down the line. Marketing of the Network is the issue, the only place I've seen it mentioned is on WWE programming and most watching that are aware of the Network already.


----------



## Therapy

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



HiddenFlaw said:


> bring back tv-14
> 
> you know what fuck that make it ma


PG-13 isn't going to fix shitty writing and shitty booking.

It will still be the same old shit show with some random curse words and dick jokes.


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



JamesK said:


> So the only thing that they done right is boring? :ti
> 
> Dem current and future faces of the company can't pull the numbers :lmao


With Lesnar as champion and not being on TV the ratings are tanking.

How is that doing something right?

The WWE champion needs to be on TV and he needs to be wrestling on RAW.


----------



## PepeSilvia

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

same ____ different year. when was the last time wwe had rave reviews during the post summerslam- royal rumble perido


----------



## Dark_Raiden

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Rusev shouldn't main event clearly. Also need more star power. Only true main eventers are Cena and Lesnar, with Orton fluctuating.


----------



## FITZ

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



bmtrocks said:


> Interesting read. I don't think WWE will be going out of business by any means but the WWE Network is definitely a bust on their part
> 
> The WWE Network is a good idea, but the problem with it is that it doesn't really resonate with the casual fans.
> 
> Most people who watch WWE watch the product on a casual basis. They have no interest in pay-per-views and mainly watching RAW every Monday when they're flipping through the channels. This is the core audience that gets gains from WWE and this audience has been lead to believe that the only legitimate star in the company is Cena. And Bryan more recently, but he's out on an injury.
> 
> So for the WWE Network really only appeals to the hardcore fan, but even in that it does a lot of blunders.
> 
> For one the WWE Network was promised to include all the episodes of RAW, Smackdown, Nitro, you name it. It didn't have these on launch. A lot of people got the impression they could get the WWE Network and watch RAW live, and this wasn't the case. Instead RAW had, what? A week delay release every week on the Network? THat isn't very good.
> 
> And then you have the original programming, which again only the most hardcore fan is interested in those products.


I was never under the impression that Network was going to come with every Raw, Smackown, and Nitro when it launched. All I remember was hearing how every PPV would be on the Netowrk live and every previous PPV would also be there. They delivered on that promise and I got exactly what I expected to get. 





Captain IWC said:


> Of course the ratings are plummeting they are producing shit. The ratings and the Network are connected. If Vince makes WWE Raw *must see tv* and *build every PPV like it's WM* the fans will want to want watch the ppvs, thus ordering the network *IT'S THAT FUCKING SIMPLE*.


Do you realize how absurd this post is? You seem to think that these 2 sentences that you wrote are the solution to all of WWE's problems. But all you really said is that, "They suck and if they stop sucking they won't suck." That's very insightful man.


----------



## xDD

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

but but but Lesnar = ratings? He's huge draw? Right?

http://www.pwinsider.com/article/88...may-hour-three-drops-especially-hard.html?p=1


----------



## HarHar

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



kronos96 said:


> After Alberto left, 50% of the reason i watch the show was gone. The other one is Reigns, if they screw it up, the WWE can go to hell as far as i'm concerned.
> 
> If we are talking about part timers. They need Rock and Batista back, the only last real superstars the have. But we all know how the moronic short-sighted smarks reacted to that.
> 
> So basically it's only Rock again. Pay him more, bring him back an build a feud with Lesnar. Batista would be amazing if he was added somehow. After that, they have nothing left. All those indy NXT guys won't cut it.


give me a fucking break lol. The rock is old news - he's finished. His "captain catchphrase" bullshit doesn't fly in 2014. He's also a lot older than most guys on that roster, by as much as 10 years. You gotta get over your hardon for rocky, he's somewhere else, doing something else. Wrestling isn't shit to him anymore, and quite frankly, he couldn't do a thing for the business anymore - half the crowd is kids, and half of them won't even know who the fuck the rock is if he showed up. One thing is for sure and it's that he will not draw the numbers he used to - simply because time is moving forward, not backward. He doesn't fit into the current wwe system - not at all.


Sorry brother. You'll just have to go backwards in time and watch wrestling from 15 years ago if you want to keep jerking to mr. maivia


----------



## Oakue

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

I can believe the reports on either changing or scrapping the network. It just doesn't seem like it's going to happen in it's current model. It will be interesting to see though if Vince has to move back to traditional PPV standards at some point, how he is treated. The cable and satellite companies who dumped him, will now have all the advantages and leverage in negotiations. You'd have to think in that scenario the cable/satellite companies will be able to take a higher % of PPV revenue than they did before, which of course means less profit for WWE.


----------



## dan the marino

I've been saying it but the WWE Network flopping is a product of their "try and appeal to kids then everyone" strategy biting them in the ass. You promote directly to kids for years and years and alienate a large portion of your older fanbase, then release something like this? Kids can't pay for the Network. Their parents may spend $20 on a Cena shirt for them but they're not going to spend a monthly fee on something they have no interest in like wrestling.

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Bernas24

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Allur said:


> That's what they get for treating Damien like shit. The audience is smart.
























not


----------



## hbgoo1975

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

The WWE has gone stale. My WCW wrestling promotion with my CAWS are a lot better than this crap!


----------



## Achilles

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

The WWE needs to right the ship before it becomes like the last days of WCW. :favre


----------



## WilfyDee

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



xDD said:


> but but but Lesnar = ratings? He's huge draw? Right?
> 
> http://www.pwinsider.com/article/88...may-hour-three-drops-especially-hard.html?p=1


When Brock was on TV was when most the people were watching, it's not down to Brock that everyone else isn't carrying their weight. If WWE was smart they would start catering more to their hardcore fanbase and get them locked down on the network because kids aren't subscribing.


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

this is so good,i love it, ,maybe now guys like bryan and punk can get some respect they deserve from ignorant fans, lets see this overpaid performer who's the wwe champion try and make things better lol


----------



## Hawkke

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Japanese Puroresu said:


> http://www.inquisitr.com/1480745/ww...ould-be-in-trouble-as-wwe-struggles-continue/
> 
> It hit a low point in May, and went below last Wednesday......... Ever since Punk left... Coincidence?


No it's not, he has nothing to do with it like a great many other things.. the writing and booking has hit record bad since this time last year.. Overall lack of quality of a show causes trends. Besides I think what you meant is..


*John Cena and the Bellas have been front and center the last 6 weeks... Coincidence?*


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



WilfyDee said:


> When Brock was on TV was when most the people were watching, it's not down to Brock that everyone else isn't carrying their weight. If WWE was smart they would start catering more to their hardcore fanbase and get them locked down on the network because kids aren't subscribing.


Brock said it best in his interview with Cole this week on WWE.com I mean I know the interview was kayfabe, but Brock was spot on when he said he is a "prize fighter" He is not there to raise the TV ratings for the weekly shows, he is there to increase interest in the PPVs, PPV buys, and Network subs.


----------



## DudeLove669

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

They're booking is atrocious and RAW is constant filler. No shit people stop watching. But of course they'll blame it on the new blood instead of realizing they are fucking idiots.


----------



## TheeJayBee

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

I love the WWE and pro wrestling, but seriously, fuck them. They've brought all this on themselves by not listening to the fans who are the most in-touch with what pro wrestling fans want to see.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Lesnar is still the biggest draw WWE has today, bigger than anyone on the show currently. Bryan's injured, Rock, Taker, and even Batista aren't around. It's might not be saying much but Lesnar is the best they have, and everyone named above outside Rock, Lesnar is arguably a bigger draw than. And with three hours of TV, he's simply not big enough to impact the whole show. With or without him, Raw will continue heading downward until January, hit it's peak of the year January-April (specifically late January), and then go up and down leading to Summerslam, and then go down from there for the rest of the year.


----------



## TrainRekt

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

I hope Raw ratings continue to drop. It is the only way Vince will ever considering pulling his head out of his ass and start listening to what the audience wants. Sometimes I think maybe Vince doesn't care his ship is sinking. Vince knows he doesn't have a lot of time left in this world, maybe he wants his ship to sink along with himself. He's the kind of bastard that would do that. Fuck everyone else. He only cares about himself.


----------



## Casual Fan #52

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

It would make more sense to me if WWE was floundering and failing, but it really doesn't look like they are even trying. They don't look like they are putting in any effort at all to use the talent they have, which is substantial and could be material for a boom period.

You really do get the impression that WWE just doesn't care to be good and is content to coast along on whatever ratings and money they are pulling in.


----------



## Rap God

Lesnar is a draw. Blame WWE for ruining everything.Every storyline sucks right now so you can't expect Brock to carry a 3 hour show


----------



## DenGal

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

They just dont care anymore, no build up. Look at the PPV set ups its exactly like RAW. Back in the day it was different every PPV because they gave effort. Its sad that they just half ass it now.


----------



## kokepepsi

JY57 said:


> http://lastwordonsports.com/2014/02/02/dissecting-wwe-raw-ratings-2011-2013-by-superstar/
> 
> and this for 2012 (obviously wasn't there in 2011 )
> 
> I doubt u get anything for this year since the breakdowns are non existent.


LOL JY posts numbers and everyone no sells them like they Cena
:ti

See Brock is a draw 
But you people think he should be gaining more than he can OR ANYONE ELSE CAN
fpalm


----------



## Lordhhhx

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

they have no one to blame but themselves they tought that they would make millions of fans Blidly subscribe with the shitty produt and bad handling of future main event potential stars that the *Fans *want like Rollins,Anbrose,wyatts,Bryan,Cesaro,,Ryback..for their chosen ones reigns and cena and its incredible just how far they go to make all of them look bad in comparasion to them or Give Batista the rumble win a week after his return while bryan was the one that the fans had chosen.



also losing Barret,Punk,Bryan,Christian and to a minor degree del rio has also Hurt them since it decreases they already thin star power something they could slightly avoided had they not fucked up cesaro and bray who on their way to the main event post and pre mania respectively.


----------



## volunteer75

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Argothar said:


> They can't pull numbers because WWE has refused to build any of them as major stars. As soon as anyone starts to get over they get buried, downright removed from the card, or fed to Cena.


I agree with you 100%. The main guy could have been Wyatt, but ever since he lost his feud to Cena he does not seem the same. Creative has screwed the most refreshing character in a long while.


----------



## Bandwagon_derailed

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

No fox no ratings.

:kermit


----------



## TJQ

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Wiserone said:


> LOL you guys have so many "good ideas" you should start your own company instead of worrying so much about vinces company. How on earth do you guys sleep at night knowing you have the abilities to change vince Mc fortunes ROLF.


I forgot as a WWE fan I'm not allowed to have an opinion, I should just eat the shit that Vince shovels into my mouth because he knows what entertains me. Thanks for clearing this up for me, Wiserone, you're living up to your name.

No surprise the ratings are dropping, the product has been a steamy shit patty for a while. No doubt it'll only get shittier as Vince piggy backs Reigns to the top.


----------



## jcmmnx

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

All that Money they're giving Brock, and really he doesn't matter much to ratings or buy rates(which don't matter much due to the Network. The bottom line is Vince needs to go, and the product needs a fresh coat of paint. Raw has been the same format for 10+ years.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Ratings always fall in this time period from SummerSlam to Royal Rumble, especially with the NFL now here. But the thing that's alittle different this year is the product seems to be a tad worse than usual creatively speaking. That's making it even worse. Going to be a tough time for WWE until Royal Rumble. Tough time for the fans too in terms of sitting through it.


----------



## jayrwi23

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

I love it. its happening vince is so overnhis head. wwe fans thinks vince is the king if bishoff dint push vince to the limt vince wont be doing a network


----------



## Laser Rey

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

The people who did get WWE Network are the people most likely to buy PPVs. Sorry, those people aren't going to go back to paying $50 a month after they've had a taste of $10 a month. They have to stick with the Network. Abandoning it will put a crater in the PPV business that will make today's struggles look marginal.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

CM Punk left in February not May and no he could not draw against Monday Night Football either. WWE could only hit 4.0 on a good week last year too and they drawing a sh** load of 3.5's as well with Daniel Bryan and CM Punk running the show. 

This is nothing more than bull sh** the sky is falling, the sky is falling reporting. The Network may be flopping but that has nothing to do with the product. The 6-700k number they have right now is pretty much what Forbes told them they were going to get and that's why everyone bolted and their stock went in the gutters. The Network being a horrendous idea is not saying the product is any worse than the year before. On it's best day WWE struggles to find a million people willing to pay for the product to assume you get that monthly with the Network even if it's only 9.99 has proven to be a terrible idea so far.


----------



## jayrwi23

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

im going to cancle mine. when its ends its up after night and champions. if they want me to renew they better get there sit together


----------



## Laser Rey

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

At what point do you make the switch on these guys?
:lawler:cole:jbl


----------



## TJQ

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Laser Rey said:


> At what point do you make the switch on these guys?
> :lawler:cole:jbl


Preferably as soon as possible. #ExcaliburForRAWCommentary


----------



## DenGal

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

I was watching Survior Series 03 and every match had great build up and you actually cared about the fued. Now its lazy build up and nothing to get excited about. They actually had a story from the start of the show to the end of the show to make fans want to watch. Now you can miss weeks and its like you missed nothing.


----------



## doinktheclowns

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

No Bryan and Punk is a disaster for WWE especially when they are both in their prime.

I am not comparing them to these star but its like WWE losing there B and C guy back in the early 90s and Attitude era.

It's like losing Bret and Randy Savage. (Or Ultimate Warrior)

How can the product really prosper when two of its major stars and draws aren't there.


----------



## squeelbitch

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

as a wrestling fan i want wwe to succeed but not with it's current crappy product, it's amazing how they fucked about bray wyatt, he was red hot after coming off his feud with bryan and then dickhead cena came along


----------



## OddSquad

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Simply put, shit product = shit ratings. Very little star power on the roster, Punk's gone and Bryan's injured.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

its what happens when you build really one star in the past 10 years.


----------



## Dirtnose

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Are we actually surprised? The product has been so awful recently it's kind of expected. Injuries haven't helped either, Cena is the only true star there atm.


----------



## Big Wiggle

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

This is hardly a surprise. The product has been conservative, simple, rushed and bland for years. Just have Cena bury more people...that should fix things.

:eyeroll


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

I know there were some who didn't like the Bryan/Authority storyline. But at least they had some type of defined storyline at that point time. I'm struggling to think what WWE is even going for right now.


----------



## Honey Bucket

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

I knew for certain that they would be taking a nose dive in effort because they always do at this time. In fact I think 80% of people knew. 

What surprises me is how _spectacularly_ little they care or how little common sense they're using this time. 

In the real world (that's a world with logic, ladies and gentlemen), people learn from their mistakes and try not to repeat them ever again. However - in their own cuckoo world - WWE go that extra mile just to make things worse. They see their past mistakes and they go 'I wonder how low we can really make this go?'. I swear Old Man McMahon is doing this on purpose. 

It'll undoubtedly improve around RTWM (_maybe_) but the negligence is astounding.


----------



## Goldusto

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



ShowStopper said:


> Ratings always fall in this time period from SummerSlam to Royal Rumble, especially with the NFL now here. But the thing that's alittle different this year is the product seems to be a tad worse than usual creatively speaking. That's making it even worse. Going to be a tough time for WWE until Royal Rumble. Tough time for the fans too in terms of sitting through it.


IT is not an excuse anymore, Vince should not be throwing in the towel he should be making football fans question : Hang on a sec there I heard an interesting buzz the other day about this wrestling malarkey and that the story has gotten interesting may be it iw worth a look at ! "

All statements like ' its fall, its nfl' makes out that no one gives a shit so why bother watching? Why bother wrestling in the ring at all if everyone is watching NFL ? Just don't even turn up for work until rumble.

How is any of that acceptable? *WHY SHOULD IT BE ACCEPTABLE ???*

Vince Practically gave up on monday, He may as well pack it in if he is going to be like that. Yea we shit on Vince and say make the show good but if everyone acts like they do not care then we basically do not care about wrestling anymore.

We should be fighting like rabid dogs to keep this company and this show afloat, as fans we should not want our team to just flounder and accept things as they are, full in the knowledge that everything has the potential to be completely awesome and relevant still.

As soon as everyone stops caring, including vince, then the show is dead.

Wrestling is Dead.


----------



## xDD

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



WilfyDee said:


> When Brock was on TV was when most the people were watching, it's not down to Brock that everyone else isn't carrying their weight. If WWE was smart they would start catering more to their hardcore fanbase and get them locked down on the network because kids aren't subscribing.


RAW without Brock: Average Audience 3,987,000
RAW with Brock: Average Audience 3,826,000


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Goldusto said:


> IT is not an excuse anymore, Vince should not be throwing in the towel he should be making football fans question : Hang on a sec there I heard an interesting buzz the other day about this wrestling malarkey and that the story has gotten interesting may be it iw worth a look at ! "
> 
> All statements like ' its fall, its nfl' makes out that no one gives a shit so why bother watching? Why bother wrestling in the ring at all if everyone is watching NFL ? Just don't even turn up for work until rumble.
> 
> How is any of that acceptable? *WHY SHOULD IT BE ACCEPTABLE ???*
> 
> Vince Practically gave up on monday, He may as well pack it in if he is going to be like that. Yea we shit on Vince and say make the show good but if everyone acts like they do not care then we basically do not care about wrestling anymore.
> 
> We should be fighting like rabid dogs to keep this company and this show afloat, as fans we should not want our team to just flounder and accept things as they are, full in the knowledge that everything has the potential to be completely awesome and relevant still.
> 
> As soon as everyone stops caring, including vince, then the show is dead.
> 
> Wrestling is Dead.



I never said it was acceptable, nor do I like it.

But this is the same company that barely tries at all ever since having no legit head to head competition. So, the fact that they "relax" in the non-Road to WrestleMania season is not something that surprises me or makes me raise my eyebrows. I've been a wrestling fan for years, so I've simply gotten used to it. It is what it is, and it will never change until WWE has some legit competition again.


----------



## Honey Bucket

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Not to worry guys...we've still got the Slammy Awards episode to come in a couple of months. Brace yourselves.


----------



## Rasslor

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

We need a kickstarter to raise money to buy out the WWE.


----------



## RadGuyMcCool

xDD said:


> RAW without Brock: Average Audience 3,987,000
> RAW with Brock: Average Audience 3,826,000


Lesnar confirmed for lowest drawing champion since Diesel.


----------



## nkjimipink

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Yes things are this way because of punk,lmao so sad sometimes reading these posts


----------



## DanielBlitzkrieg

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

The main story is a rematch between a part-time champion and John Cena. If John Cena's involvement didn't already make it the Same Old Shit, the other two facts ensure that there's nothing to see on RAW. Any sense of danger from Seth Rollins is non-existent since he's looked weak since he won the MITB.

The best single angle to bring viewers would be for Daniel Bryan to return, Seth Rollins to turn face and give him the briefcase, and he "cashes it in" against Brock Lesnar, all on one RAW. Not that that would really be a good idea.


----------



## PoissonProcess

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



> Rumors indicate that Vince McMahon could already be scrapping the idea behind the WWE Network, which was supposed to bring a major online presence to the company with streaming video of events. McMahon is reportedly considering putting the network on cable television, abandoning the premise behind the online hub in the hopes of raising television numbers.
> 
> There had been rumors in May that WWE advisers were telling Vince McMahon to pull the plug on the WWE Network in light of its disastrous debut.


Or ... and this is a radical idea so hear me out ... they could actually, you know ... push interesting characters that the fans have gotten behind, as opposed to forcing the same type of trash down our throats year after year.


----------



## onlytoview

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Will they change? No. Will they start pushing new wrestlers? No. Will they have storylines? No. Will the continue to neglect anyone who isn't Vince's own project? No. Will they stop filling RAW with filler? No. 

They deserve the rating, sadly Vince won't wake up. The product is in the toilet right now, and Vince is the reason why.


----------



## BRRROCK-LESNAR

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Pull the plug on the network? 
What an embarassement. Vince needs to step down, he's insane. 
Its time for a new era.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

There's always a drop in the fall. I think that's natural since it's happened so many years in a row. The issue is more that WWE isn't getting any of those viewers back.

Without knowing the SummerSlam 2014 buyrate/subscrption-rate, I think Brock is still a draw, but not a draw to the extent that he can save the ratings. However, it's especially worse if Brock is holding the WWE World Heavyweight Title, which is the A Story, and he's rarely ever on the show. It doesn't help anything.

This week is a great example of that. Brock comes out for his one (heavily hyped) segment. He comes out, does his thing, and the ratings sound like they did peak here. Then he's gone. What good does that do anyone? And we're supposed to endure 6 more months of this when he's not even going to be on the shows?

I like Brock, but I don't think that's a good idea.


----------



## Spagett

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

They should make the US title a TV title


----------



## Comp85t

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

They should have never booked Bray the way he did. I think they should have him feud with Cena again to get that payback, especially with Cena hopefully losing to Brock, Bray can be the bridge to that Heel Cena.

Please don't let Rusev lose to Cena. Cena is ALREADY the guy, BUILD RUSEV UP MORE and let his streak live longer. He and Lana are pretty over.

Stephanie and Triple H should be on every Raw, they are very over. They tease a little of Stephanie vs AJ, they should do that match, maybe a slow build to Wrestlemania. Stephanie is over, AJ is over and the CM Punk chants/heat towards Stephanie make for an amaZing possibility.

Dean Ambrose is also gone which hurts momentum a bit...

Try and use Dolph Ziggler a little more


----------



## heyman deciple

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Vince needs to overhaul creative.

They need to simplify the process.

Shit can 90 percent of those "Hollywood" writers, just put Hunter and Vince in a room let them book the nuts and bolts of the show, then handover the outline to a writer they trust let him fill in and format the show. Then Hunter and Vince go over the script fine tune it and your off and running.


----------



## *Eternity*

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



xDD said:


> RAW without Brock: Average Audience 3,987,000
> *RAW with Brock: Average Audience 3,826,000*





RadGuyMcCool said:


> *Lesnar confirmed for lowest drawing champion since Diesel*.


Yep, that's usually how it works. unk2


----------



## paqman

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

..........

First of all, The WWE Network is a stand alone service. It's like Netflix (huh, what's that Vince? Oh... *but better*). While a bang up live product helps, it's WWE monetizing their back catalog the best way possible in 2014. I never bought those anthology sets of WM or Summerslam, even though I was close to doing so, so I will say for that alone (old PPVs), if that's all the service offered I'd be on board any way. 

Blaming the product for Network subs has some merit, but it's not the entire picture. This is like blaming a tumble in Netflix subs on a box office bomb. "Well, if they had better movies out in theaters, more people would join Netflix!". Granted, Netflix is vomiting money at the moment, but that's the same principle. People join Netflix for on demand content that's simple to get to on any device. What's on it and your personal mileage in the value beyond that is up to taste. If you want WWE on the go without busting your ass searching YouTube, then The Network is your deal. I've been stuck in airports for hours this year and I can't tell you how much of a relief it was to pass the damn time on the airports wifi watching WCW shit I've never seen in my life. That is the service, folks.

WWE Network pours some sugar in the Kool-Aid by adding live content. Now, this is where people split in opinion. To me, the PPVs and live shows are free and I'm just paying for the on demand shit, which I would have gone out of pocket for anyway. Most of you think the entire concept is paying $10 for the PPVs ALONE every month and it not being worth the money. PPVs are pushed so heavy because it's a no-brainer deal... Supposedly. 

I don't know if you guys were born yesterday, but even before The Network, WWE was putting on some shit events and some shit RAWs. I'm not gonna defend them here, last Monday's RAW was ass. Basically every show has been without a major direction since Summerslam. No denying this. However, people would not be subscribing to the Network for various reasons even if the product was good. Just go dig up any random Network thread. The list of personal reasons are all over the place. Ranging from being angry a certain year of RAW isn't available, the video player needing some slight tweaks, not having a device suitable for viewing it, or them just simply being cheap and sticking to torrents. No matter the reason, the Monday night product is the least of their problems. 

All they need to do is focus on delivering a quality Network product. The PPVs need to be perfect. More perfect than RAW. I can assure you, people will be watching the events. Check Twitter when NOC is on and I'm certain it will be a top trend all night. If it's memorable, angles progress, and we get some good match ups, the word of mouth with spread. It might take some time, but it will happen. Because at the end of the day, you need to satisfy the folks that are paying you already. Some of you will just never subscribe and you are the same folks just watching RAW for free. Does the show need to sell the PPV? Yes, I agree, but even with a shit build WWE can still deliver something. 

WWE's going to get slaughtered in the ratings against football. They do all the time, what's new? Just get a string of hot PPVs going and work out the rest later. Will NOC stink? On paper it does, but Lesnar/Cena is worth it so I'm going to come away happy either way -- BUT I do hope the rest of the show is quality. 

As far as pulling the plug on the whole project... That's fucking dumb. Yes they're getting raped but this is a gigantic undertaking. I hope Vince sees the long term potential in this and isn't just forced to end it by investors mad they can't buy their wives (plural) new ass implants due to the low sub numbers. 

Just my 2 cents. *shrug*


----------



## Ecoces

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Vince will probably blame it on anyone BUT Cena and start shoving Cena down our throats even more than he does now ... if that is even possible.


----------



## La Parka

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

raw has been shit, they deserve poor ratings.


----------



## 260825

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

*I'm dumbfounded.

$9.99 is good value because of the catlogue, the PPVs are pretty worthless (Most of the times), because it's just wrestling .. but we already get the matches free on RAW, and what we don't get on RAW is any fulfilling story building; maybe 20 minutes worth TOTAL in 3 hours .. just filler & exhibition matches until the '3' Major PPVs cause we know they made the 4th one worthless. 

How anyone could pay $60 - $75 to watch a PPV is absurd & I can't imagine how they sold it in the hundreds of thousands, you could give me one of WWE's PPVs free in HD & i'd probably decline (Unless it's must-see LIVE), no way could I stomach so much 'void'; it would be like watching Epic Movie, no one wants to waste their time let alone money.*


----------



## cmpunkisgod.

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Moving the network away from the internet would be the death of WWE. Period.

There's no future in cable television..Sounds to me like Vince McMahon is simply not with the times anymore.


----------



## GothicBohemian

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

As someone who has stopped watching WWE – NXT aside – I have my own reason for turning away and it has nothing to do with quality or who happens to be main eventing. WWE lost me because of constant overexposure. There’s too damn much product. 

RAW
Smackdown
NXT
PPVs
All the extras they’ve created for internet and the network

I don’t have time for all that. I like wrestling enough that I have multiple promotions that I at least try to keep up on. I even watch the odd show from small, regional indy companies. WWE wants to suck up all my available wrestling watching time. When RAW went to 3 hours, that’s when it really started becoming overkill for me – I just couldn’t last that long trying to watch live and once I switched to watching later I found the whole thing beginning to feel like a chore, like I HAD to plow through all of it because…because…I’m a wrestling fan, so I’m supposed to, right? Don't I kinda have to?

No, I don’t have to. And it seems like there’s many others out there who feel the same. I’m not saying I never watch anything WWE, just a whole lot less of it.


----------



## cminc

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

I quit watching a month ago and also cancelled my network subscription. The product is just unbearable to watch. Cena hasnt been interesting in years and no one's allowed to stand next to him as an equal for fear of tshirt sales. 

It's ridiculous. Creative isnt allowed to be creative, there are too many members for it to function coherently from week to week anyway, triple h and vince have no odea how to write compelling tv and the only way anyone is ever allowed to get over is if theyre unbeatable for a string of matches until everyones tired of getting them, and only them, shoved down their throats. 

Sheamus' gimmick is that he's a pale wrestler who likes to wrestle ans hes probably te most developed character on the roster that doesnt have tits.

How retarded is that? 

The 18-49 demo is the most lucrative demo there is. It's the demo that wwe makes the most of their tv money on and what do they do?

Make tv that's too childish for 12 year olds.


----------



## Ratedr4life

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

No on here can deny they put themselves in this situation.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Vince has lost his fucking mind and just needs to go away now, it's embarrassing. The next time he appears on a show and the crowd starts bowing to him like fucking mindless sheep, I hope they remember he's the reason why the entire fucking product revolves around Cena, he's the reason why everything is watered down, he's the reason we're seeing shit that makes 1995 WWF look like Breaking Bad, The Wire and The Sopranos all rolled into one.


----------



## squeelbitch

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



RadGuyMcCool said:


> Lesnar confirmed for lowest drawing champion since Diesel.


it's no coincidence that both champions drew poorly during a period where the product was really shitty, it was only a few months later when nash moved to wcw and they started to pull in great numbers and nash was partly responsible for that


----------



## Queendom9617

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Goldusto said:


> IT is not an excuse anymore, Vince should not be throwing in the towel he should be making football fans question : Hang on a sec there I heard an interesting buzz the other day about this wrestling malarkey and that the story has gotten interesting may be it iw worth a look at ! "
> 
> All statements like ' its fall, its nfl' makes out that no one gives a shit so why bother watching? Why bother wrestling in the ring at all if everyone is watching NFL ? Just don't even turn up for work until rumble.
> 
> How is any of that acceptable? *WHY SHOULD IT BE ACCEPTABLE ???*
> 
> Vince Practically gave up on monday, He may as well pack it in if he is going to be like that. Yea we shit on Vince and say make the show good but if everyone acts like they do not care then we basically do not care about wrestling anymore.
> 
> We should be fighting like rabid dogs to keep this company and this show afloat, as fans we should not want our team to just flounder and accept things as they are, full in the knowledge that everything has the potential to be completely awesome and relevant still.
> 
> As soon as everyone stops caring, including vince, then the show is dead.
> 
> Wrestling is Dead.


No NFL fan is going to be like "Oh, I heard this fake fighting show was good, lemme check it out instead of watching the game." That'll never happen no matter if WWE is at Attitude Era level of good.


----------



## RebelArch86

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Please for the love of god just watch TNA. I promise it's better. It just feels weird bc it's not on Monday. Wrestling fans have trained for 25 years that Monday is wrestling night. You know pavlovs dog and behavioral conditioning right? Any hang up you have over TNA is just your subconscious rejecting something different from your conditioning.

Here's the solution, DVR Impact and watch it on Mondays. It takes one month to form a habit. Do this for 1 month and you'll notice it's better.

The best thing for WWE is to pop TNAs rating.


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Lol did they really think having Roman Reigns Vs Seth Rollins would make people watch raw? :maury

They would.....In like 4-5 years. Not now :lol

They've just completely ruined a PPV match :maury


----------



## @MrDrewFoley

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Wrestling isn't as popular anymore. That's about it.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Loudness said:


> Not Punk alone.
> 
> Punk - Out
> 
> Bryan - Out
> 
> *Wyatt - Jobbing (he's drawn numbers before when he was put on spotlight so he IS a factor who could bring in money if Cena wasn't a jealous bitch)*
> 
> Two of WWEs biggest stars are not around and their biggest rising star got buried so yeah. Oh and also American Sports and what not but they've always been around.


Idiotic posts like these need to stop being posted already.

WWE's in a rough spot, and I'm shocked that they didn't expect this. I wasn't expecting the Network to be a success given the big flaws that were involved in it, but I was under the assumption that WWE had a huge back up plan to solve this. I'm shocked beyond belief that they haven't planned that far ahead yet.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

I remember some were saying last year that this era would overtake the Attitude Era in terms of quality.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Oliver-94 said:


> I remember some were saying last year that this era would overtake the Attitude Era in terms of quality.


Literally no one said that (I have no problem admitting defeat if you prove that wrong).

They need to have Brock Lesnar wrestle at some point on Raw. He IS a draw. Having him wrestle in a big match that is promoted heavily will bring in ratings. You'd have to pick his opponent wisely, but in this situation, you need to get yourselves a ratings spike.

I would have his opponent be Randy Orton to be honest. You can't have these two feud because they're both heels and it makes no sense to change either one of them any time soon, so have them have some kind of disagreement and have them dish it out on an episode of Raw. The interest level in this would be huge.


----------



## KingLobos

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

But this year has the best wrestlers and best wrestling matches of all time!!!!!!

:maury


----------



## Marv95

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Queendom9617 said:


> No NFL fan is going to be like "Oh, I heard this fake fighting show was good, lemme check it out instead of watching the game." That'll never happen no matter if WWE is at Attitude Era level of good.


Nitro and Raw combined were getting as many viewers as the NFL in the late 90s, if not moreso. The highest rated Raws had almost the same rating as the NFL which was on network tv and available to more homes than USA was on cable. Both were just about equal in terms of popularity at one point. There are NFL/sports fans out there who are former wrestling fans.


----------



## Oliver-94

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



TheGMofGods said:


> Literally no one said that (I have no problem admitting defeat if you prove that wrong).
> 
> They need to have Brock Lesnar wrestle at some point on Raw. He IS a draw. Having him wrestle in a big match that is promoted heavily will bring in ratings. You'd have to pick his opponent wisely, but in this situation, you need to get yourselves a ratings spike.
> 
> I would have his opponent be Randy Orton to be honest. You can't have these two feud because they're both heels and it makes no sense to change either one of them any time soon, so have them have some kind of disagreement and have them dish it out on an episode of Raw. The interest level in this would be huge.


 http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/916177-2013-shaping-up-all-time-great-year-wwe-history.html 

I know it says 2013 but there are posts in that thread which hype the 2013-present era to be one of the greatest of all time (surpassing the Attitude Era).


----------



## Frozager

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Honestly? Those ratings are too high for the absolute ass the last RAW was. The last 3 RAWs for that matter.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Oliver-94 said:


> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/916177-2013-shaping-up-all-time-great-year-wwe-history.html
> 
> I know it says 2013 but there are posts in that thread which hype the 2013-present era to be one of the greatest of all time (surpassing the Attitude Era).


Attitude Era is not the best Wrestling Era. Maybe in terms of ratings, and it had the peak of the Monday Night Wars, so, you know, that shit was pretty fun. But in terms of show quality, in my opinion, no.

But this does prove me wrong, so I'll give you that.


----------



## I Came To Play

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Japanese Puroresu said:


> http://www.inquisitr.com/1480745/ww...ould-be-in-trouble-as-wwe-struggles-continue/
> 
> It hit a low point in May, and went below last Wednesday......... *Ever since Punk left... Coincidence*?


:haha


----------



## DenGal

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

This is the worst its ever been in terms of vets established stars facing young unestablished stars. Because of the fact barely any stars were made last 6 years that are still here. Most are either with another company or retired.


----------



## Wiserone

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Miss Sally said:


> Real question is how does he sleep losing 60% of his money, knowing ratings are dropping and realizing he is out of touch? Maybe you can call him and cheer him up. Meanwhile we'll be discussing wrestling. :


There a simple answer to that.

He sleeps well knowing he made something out of his life and never wasted a day. He fought and fought and became a winner in life, unlike most people here who are too busy with outside crap that doesnt concern them.


----------



## Laser Rey

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



xDD said:


> RAW without Brock: Average Audience 3,987,000
> RAW with Brock: Average Audience 3,826,000


So what? Why would Brock be a draw on RAW? He doesn't cut promos and doesn't work in the ring.

People want to see Brock kick ass in high profile matches on PPV.



Wiserone said:


> There a simple answer to that.
> 
> He sleeps well knowing he made something out of his life and never wasted a day. He fought and fought and became a winner in life, unlike most people here who are too busy with outside crap that doesnt concern them.


Wow. What a pandering pile of crap. Vince is still supposed to be a creative force in the company. Creative is in a bad place and reaks of poor effort. He may have been a hard worker at one time but if you think Vince doesn't waste plenty of days now, I don't know what to tell you. Just look at state of the shows he runs.


----------



## CM punker

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



TheGMofGods said:


> Literally no one said that (I have no problem admitting defeat if you prove that wrong).
> 
> They need to have Brock Lesnar wrestle at some point on Raw. He IS a draw. Having him wrestle in a big match that is promoted heavily will bring in ratings. You'd have to pick his opponent wisely, but in this situation, you need to get yourselves a ratings spike.
> 
> I would have his opponent be Randy Orton to be honest. You can't have these two feud because they're both heels and it makes no sense to change either one of them any time soon, so have them have some kind of disagreement and have them dish it out on an episode of Raw. The interest level in this would be huge.


Implying that Orton is a massive draw :lol:lol


----------



## DenGal

Maybe the writers just dont think they're doing a bad job and are being told they are doing a good job. Thus why the TV sucks.


----------



## CM punker

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



doinktheclowns said:


> No Bryan and Punk is a disaster for WWE especially when they are both in their prime.
> 
> I am not comparing them to these star but its like WWE losing there B and C guy back in the early 90s and Attitude era.
> 
> It's like losing Bret and Randy Savage. (Or Ultimate Warrior)
> 
> How can the product really prosper when two of its major stars and draws aren't there.


Ratings will continue to plummet without the 2nd biggest star of the PG era CM Punk and 3rd biggest star Daniel Bryan.


----------



## Wiserone

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

1. My original comment had nothing to do with vince or how good or bad the WWE is. It was about losers here who know every little thing about the company and think they have the answer to fix the WWE yet dont know the inner workings of the industry. These people should spend the same energy on more productive things..maybe like becoming rich themselves and chasing their own dreams and goals.

2. If vince does have days off now, well he deserved it.





Laser Rey said:


> So what? Why would Brock be a draw on RAW? He doesn't cut promos and doesn't work in the ring.
> 
> People want to see Brock kick ass in high profile matches on PPV.
> 
> 
> Wow. What a pandering pile of crap. Vince is still supposed to be a creative force in the company. Creative is in a bad place and reaks of poor effort. He may have been a hard worker at one time but if you think Vince doesn't waste plenty of days now, I don't know what to tell you. Just look at state of the shows he runs.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



CM punker said:


> Implying that Orton is a massive draw :lol:lol


I'm not implying that at all. I'm implying that Brock Lesnar matched up against a heel like Randy Orton for a one night only type of match on Raw would draw in viewers given what they have done with Orton for the past year and a half. It would be one of the most intriguing match-ups WWE has had in a long time.


----------



## RatedR10

Oh god, people are actually blaming Lesnar. Do you not realize that Lesnar can't be on every segment of every show? Because that's the only way the show would get a good rating. Lesnar doesn't automatically add to the drawing power of The Usos, or Stardust, or Goldust, or Ziggler, Miz, Sandow, etc., anyone else in the mid-card.

Lesnar's one segment would have to bring in 2 million+ viewers for a single segment to hold up the rating because the rest of the roster is shit when it comes to drawing power. And it's not on the talent, it's WWE not giving fans a reason to care about the midcard guys. 

Blaming Lesnar is just fucking stupid.


----------



## LKRocks

Ok, first off: Lesnar is not a gigantic mega draw. He's a big star, like Cena, but he alone can't save an entire show.

The roster had three full-time stars last year: Bryan during his rise, Punk and Cena. One quit, one is recovering from a surgery, and one is definitely past his peak.

Without Bryan and Punk, there's not enough star power to sustain 3 hours of Raw.


----------



## El_Absoluto

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*



Wiserone said:


> 1. My original comment had nothing to do with vince or how good or bad the WWE is.* It was about losers here who know every little thing about the company and think they have the answer to fix the WWE yet dont know the inner workings of the industry. These people should spend the same energy on more productive things..maybe like becoming rich themselves and chasing their own dreams and goals.*
> 
> 2. If vince does have days off now, well he deserved it.



You have read too many Chicken soup for the soul books bro....

This a discussion forum where people discuss the WWE, including subjects we might not have a Ph D on.

Its the whole purposse of the website.

You are the one who should GTFO and study the business deeply with other erudites.


----------



## #Mark

Fissiks said:


> damn you hate Bryan so much that you are willing to throw your boy Orton under the bus lol


:lmao

His creepy obsession with Bryan is pathetic. How on earth can you invest so much hatred into a character on a television show?


----------



## Wiserone

*Re: WWE ratings continue to plummet.*

Regardless smarks are pathetic and wasting their time on here.There opinions dont mean anything and they spend too much time, and energy trying to better someone elses business.

In reality, its just a place for men to feel all logical and smart when they are too blind to see their own stupidity.



El_Absoluto said:


> You have read too many Chicken soup for the soul books bro....
> 
> This a discussion forum where people discuss the WWE, including subjects we might not have a Ph D on.
> 
> Its the whole purposse of the website.
> 
> You are the one who should GTFO and study the business deeply with other erudites.


----------



## kokepepsi

RatedR10 said:


> Oh god, people are actually blaming Lesnar. Do you not realize that Lesnar can't be on every segment of every show? Because that's the only way the show would get a good rating. Lesnar doesn't automatically add to the drawing power of The Usos, or Stardust, or Goldust, or Ziggler, Miz, Sandow, etc., anyone else in the mid-card.
> 
> Lesnar's one segment would have to bring in 2 million+ viewers for a single segment to hold up the rating because the rest of the roster is shit when it comes to drawing power. And it's not on the talent, it's WWE not giving fans a reason to care about the midcard guys.
> 
> Blaming Lesnar is just fucking stupid.


:bow:bow:bow
:clap:clap:clap
And everyone is gonna nosell this post because they are marks
:leo


----------



## A-C-P

RatedR10 said:


> Oh god, people are actually blaming Lesnar. Do you not realize that Lesnar can't be on every segment of every show? Because that's the only way the show would get a good rating. Lesnar doesn't automatically add to the drawing power of The Usos, or Stardust, or Goldust, or Ziggler, Miz, Sandow, etc., anyone else in the mid-card.
> 
> Lesnar's one segment would have to bring in 2 million+ viewers for a single segment to hold up the rating because the rest of the roster is shit when it comes to drawing power. And it's not on the talent, it's WWE not giving fans a reason to care about the midcard guys.
> 
> Blaming Lesnar is just fucking stupid.



Blaming any ONE person for the rating of a 3 hr show is fucking stupid, and blaming Lesnar is extra fucking stupid.


----------



## JY57

> - The September 21st episode of WWE Total Divas drew 1,188,000 viewers on E!. The show went head-to-head with WWE Night of Champions. This is up from the previous Sunday's 974,000 viewers.


Read more at http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._Brock_Lesnar_Bayley.html#lzyogvepjiQmR8ej.99


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 4.000m
Hour 2 - 3.790m
Hour 3 - 3.847m

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-9-22-2014.html


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

Hours 1 and 3 increased from last week. Ambrose is a draw.

No Reigns? No problem.


----------



## A-C-P

Math_Stats_Guru said:


> Hours 1 and 3 increased from last week. Ambrose is a draw.


:ambrose "The Ratings Master"


----------



## rakija

:ambrose3

That Ambrimpact


----------



## The Boy Wonder

So Ambrose vs Brock at WM 31? Or do you guys still think Ambrose needs to take a back seat to Daniel Bryan? It should be The Lunatic vs The Beast.


----------



## Shenroe




----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

The Boy Wonder said:


> So Ambrose vs Brock at WM 31? Or do you guys still think Ambrose needs to take a back seat to Daniel Bryan? It should be The Lunatic vs The Beast.


They won't stop pushing Reigns. Anyone with a brain and knowledge of pro wrestling history could have told you that Ambrose would have more drawing power than Reigns. I am certain WWE knew that, yet they still chose Reigns as their golden boy. They have no competition right now so they can easily push whoever they want.

It will still be Brock/Reigns, unfortunately. Unless Reigns can't go due to his injury.

As awesome as Ambrose/Brock would be, we likely won't see it.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Math_Stats_Guru said:


> The Boy Wonder said:
> 
> 
> 
> So Ambrose vs Brock at WM 31? Or do you guys still think Ambrose needs to take a back seat to Daniel Bryan? It should be The Lunatic vs The Beast.
> 
> 
> 
> They won't stop pushing Reigns. Anyone with a brain and knowledge of pro wrestling history could have told you that Ambrose would have more drawing power than Reigns. I am certain WWE knew that, yet they still chose Reigns as their golden boy. They have no competition right now so they can easily push whoever they want.
> 
> It will still be Brock/Reigns, unfortunately. Unless Reigns can't go due to his injury.
Click to expand...

Ambrose can also be a bigger draw than Bryan. He plays the rebel face so much better than the guy who spray paints YES on a SUV and occupies RAW.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 4.000m
> Hour 2 - 3.790m
> Hour 3 - 3.847m
> 
> http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-9-22-2014.html


The 2nd hour was the worst result. 
How long has this not happened?

I may be wrong but in recent times the 2nd hour have had good results


----------



## Lordhhhx

The rating is better than the last 2 years during the same time and up 140,000 compared to last year.

3,879,000 2014

3,787,000 in 2012

3,739,000 in 2013

i say its an improvement and scarily consistent


----------



## Batz

Dean f*cking Ambrose. :bow


----------



## Mr. Yes

Up 50,000 last week, which was the lowest viewership since May, and that's with it being the day after a PPV. Hardly much to get excited about.


----------



## DoubtGin

There was football, the new Big Bang Theory season and Dancing With the Stars, afaik

not too shabby, to be honest


----------



## superuser1

Dean Ambrose returning and Cena/Orton in the main event sure helped as well. Yeah the iwc is tired of them facing off but I think the casuals still view it as somewhat of a big deal.


----------



## thaimasker

The Boy Wonder said:


> So Ambrose vs Brock at WM 31? Or do you guys still think Ambrose needs to take a back seat to Daniel Bryan? It should be The Lunatic vs The Beast.


I dbout they are gonna have ambrose vs brock instead of reigns vs brock but to me Bryan vs Brock is the more appealing match out of them all so I would want to see that.


----------



## RatedR10

Ambrose da draw :ambrose


----------



## validreasoning

Mr. Yes said:


> Up 50,000 last week, which was the lowest viewership since May, and that's with it being the day after a PPV. Hardly much to get excited about.


Football game between WWEs two largest markets. Big bang premiere, voice premiere, Gotham premiere and dwts drawing huge I think WWE will take this.

Coming the night after a ppv doesn't guarantee numbers will be up either, viewership fell by 150,000 the night after Summerslam and also fell the night after rumble.


----------



## Marv95

Final: 2.69(year low rating)


----------



## Cliffy

Ouch


----------



## roadkill_

C'mon 1.9!!


----------



## murder

roadkill_ said:


> C'mon 1.9!!


Once they reach that number, ..... will get an e-mail from McMahon with a link to .....'s homepage and write: "This is what Raw needs to be".

In some weird way, I kind of hope that Raw will fall below the 2's again one day. Because that's probably the only way they would get their heas out of their asses.


----------



## thaimasker

So does the ratings mean more than viewership for WWE?


----------



## El_Absoluto

I fear for ma boy :ambrose

But seriously isn't viewership much more important than ratings in this era?


----------



## wwe4universe

Lol 2.69 just as I predicted it to be Below 2.8 EASILY. Monday was literally night of rematches. No Brock. No progression in storyline besides Ambrose and rollins. No cliche excuses like football, season premiere shows, or other craps. Show is on a decline, then again it has always been on a decline for a long time


----------



## funnyfaces1

DEAN NUMBROSE :ambrose


----------



## DenGal

WWE is in such denial and refusing to admit they are putting out a fail of a product. Its pathetic.


----------



## RKO 4life

Orton/Rollins/Cena/Ambrose pulling in the late night hour numbers baby!!!!!!!!!

great main event IMO then Rollins Kane at ring side with Ambrose closing us out.


----------



## The Buryer

How does a 2.6 rating make Dean Ambrose a draw? Its a year low FFS! Think this is the second time Ambrose has closed the show with Rollins only to draw one of the lowest rating and overrun viewership. If these guys are the future, then its not looking any good for WWE.


----------



## #Mark

Cena vs. Orton closed out the show. Ambrose didn't appear until the overrun.


----------



## KJX

Ambrose pulling in the viewers


----------



## The Buryer

Makes no difference, Overrun probably drew just as bad. Cena/Orton is stale as fuck and overdone multiple times, atleast they have an excuse. Ambrose and Rollins are suppose to be new young talents meant to carry the product.


----------



## #Mark

I'm still not sure where the Ambrose blame is coming from. The advertised match was Cena vs. Orton with the Authority at ringside, if that failed to draw it's on them. This whole argument is moot though because one program or wrestler doesn't change the rating of the entire three hour show. Even Lesnar isn't impacting the ratings.


----------



## The Buryer

Entire RAW was built around Ambrose vs Authority, I'm sure everyone knew he was coming out in the end to beat up Rollins.


----------



## fulcizombie

LOL 2.69 . Well done wwe !!! Also: at people blaming Ambrose and not the "face of the company " .


----------



## youmakemeleery

You know, this same shit happens this time every freaking year in late september/early october. Every damn year.

NO ONE draws for WWE at this time. It always tanks. 

Besides, even if Dean Ambrose didn't spike viewership, that would be hard to blame him. The guy hasn't main evented a single ppv solo. He has never held the title.

You have to TAKE TIME to build someone new.


----------



## Londrick

2.69 :jordan4

How much lower do the ratings need to go until Brock replaces that skinny fat ass Phil as the lowest drawing champ of all time or at least since Diesel?


----------



## Vårmakos




----------



## Chris22

Summer Rae said:


> 2.69 :jordan4
> 
> How much lower do the ratings need to go until Brock replaces that skinny fat ass Phil as the lowest drawing champ of all time or at least since Diesel?


How can Brock be blamed for the ratings of episodes that he's not even apart of? lol


----------



## Chrome

2.69? :lol

This company is more like WCW than they would ever care to admit. Even Ambrose can't save them.


----------



## Terminator GR

Same old boring main events, bunnies, midgets, raw being written literally at the last second, terrible booking etc. Things are worse than ever before, it feels like the mid 90s all over again, only this time there is no wcw to revolutionise the business 

Vince needs to sit down and watch again and again the famous video where he introduces the attitude era.

"We, in the WWF, think that you, the audience, are quite frankly, tired of having your intelligence insulted. We also think that you're tired of the same old simplistic theory of good guys vs bad guys. Surely the era of the super-hero urge you to say your prayers and take your vitamins is definitely, passe."


----------



## Lordhhhx

What is all the fuss about? The ratings are practically the same during this time of the year.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

This episode had more viewers but less ratings

This was expected taking into account the Premieres


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw needs more flippy guys and fewer bunnies.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

The Boy Wonder said:


> Ambrose can also be a bigger draw than Bryan. He plays the rebel face so much better than the guy who spray paints YES on a SUV and occupies RAW.


NO Bryan is so good people bring him up in a random conversation that doesn't really pertain to him. I thought it was just his marks who did it on TV. You proved that it's a lot more people who just have Bryan in their minds. :|


----------



## DenGal

Once Cena's contract is up WWE is going to pay him some amount of money ill tell you. There are basically no real stars after Cena and WWE cant afford to lose him or they might be out of business.


----------



## Joshi Judas

I'm a complete noob in this, how are ratings calculated? More viewership than last week but less ratings?


----------



## Lordhhhx

RAVEN said:


> I'm a complete noob in this, how are ratings calculated? More viewership than last week but less ratings?


This has me confused has well anybody care to explain please?


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Lordhhhx said:


> This has me confused has well anybody care to explain please?


I could be wrong 

But that can happen because there were more people watching TV that day (season premiere make up the number of viewers)


----------



## Armani

Summer Rae said:


> 2.69 :jordan4
> 
> How much lower do the ratings need to go until Brock replaces that skinny fat ass Phil as the lowest drawing champ of all time or at least since Diesel?


I'm sure ratings is the least thing to measure a draw, you can't really have a show just advertising one guy for 3 hours and expect viewers to watch all the shit they put. So many clueless marks over here talking shit out of their asses. Brock and Punk are one of the biggest draws of this generation easily.


----------



## Bfo4jd

Actually overall viewership of the show does reflect on the Champion/Top star. You could look at the big increase in late 1997 and 1998 ratings when Austin was extremely hot, it lead to big overall increase of the entire show every week. In 2005 and '06 when Batista and Cena were fresh in the main events and had the ball, they did well. Punk more or less failed and ended up as one of the lowest drawing champions. Brock atleast is a big time PPV draw, the fact that WWE built their entire summerslam and Network subscriptions renewals around Brock shows he has value as star/champion in different ways. 

As for Rollins and Ambrose, we can't judge yet. They need more time to prove themselves.


----------



## JustJoel

RAVEN said:


> I'm a complete noob in this, how are ratings calculated? More viewership than last week but less ratings?





Lordhhhx said:


> This has me confused has well anybody care to explain please?


Ratings deal with what proportion of people watching TV were watching a specific show. Hence, you can have more viewership and lower ratings if more people generally are watching TV that night. Further reading:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nielsen_ratings#Measuring_ratings

Hope that helps


----------



## Shenroe

Basically it means more people watched tv that night( nfl, fans of BBT who usually watch the show on another day, season premieres etc..), instead of turning the tv off to read a book/going out/dvr stuff or whatever. 

RAW had still his viewership intact though.


----------



## youmakemeleery

DenGal said:


> Once Cena's contract is up WWE is going to pay him some amount of money ill tell you. There are basically no real stars after Cena and WWE cant afford to lose him or they might be out of business.


False. WWE would be fine.


----------



## bmtrocks

youmakemeleery said:


> False. WWE would be fine.


Yep WWE would be fine for the most part. Matter of fact they got rid of Bret Hart and they became an even bigger company than ever before. I think if they did this with Cena they'd get a similar result tbh.


----------



## fulcizombie

DenGal said:


> Once Cena's contract is up WWE is going to pay him some amount of money ill tell you. There are basically no real stars after Cena and WWE cant afford to lose him or they might be out of business.


It's more possible that cena finds a job in his local gym ,if he doesn't stay in the wwe ,than wwe going out of business because of a hypothetical departure of cena . Hell it's the cena period , as face of the company, that has led the wwe to these and the networks pathetic numbers .
Cena leaving and a change of direction would be a blessing for the wwe .


----------



## Bfo4jd

bmtrocks said:


> Yep WWE would be fine for the most part. *Matter of fact they got rid of Bret Hart and they became an even bigger company than ever before. * I think if they did this with Cena they'd get a similar result tbh.


:Jordan 

Cena is much much bigger globlal star than Bret was though. Bret wasn't over outside of Canada.


----------



## validreasoning

seeing as some are completely ignoring stuff 

june 23 = 4.03 million 
*june 30 = 4.33 million (cena becomes champion previous night at mitb)*
july 7 = 4.38 million
july 14 = 4.15 million
july 21 = 4.43 million
july 28 = 4.32 million
august 4 = 4.05 million
august 11 = 4.3 million
*august 18 = 4.19 million (lesnar becomes champion at summerslam previous night)*
august 25 = 3.97 million
september 1 = 3.92 million
september 8 = 3.99 million
september 15 = 3.83 million
september 22 = 3.88 million


----------



## Lordhhhx

So it really seems that if the champion is absent then there is less interest in the show.

Maybe once cena wins it again the numbers will go up.


----------



## Kabraxal

Bfo4jd said:


> :Jordan
> 
> Cena is much much bigger globlal star than Bret was though. Bret wasn't over outside of Canada.


You really don't know how huge Hart was do you? In fact, the US was probably the least supportive in comparison to everywhere else.


----------



## uknoww

when you think about that wwe were getting 6.0-7.0 ratings in 2000


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

Ratings will take a huge hit tomorrow given the New England vs Kansas City Chiefs game. Tom Brady is a mega draw.

I know I'm definitely watching the New England game over RAW.


----------



## RatedR10

Lordhhhx said:


> So it really seems that if the champion is absent then there is less interest in the show.
> 
> Maybe once cena wins it again the numbers will go up.


Yeah, it has nothing to do with the show itself being absolute shit. Nothing at all.


----------



## amhlilhaus

crowd is loving Hogan.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-9-29-2014.html

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ood-chrisley-knows-best-t-i-tiny-more/308889/


----------



## SóniaPortugal

> Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with John Cena and Dean Ambrose vs. Kane and Randy Orton in the main event, drew 4.040 million viewers, up from last week's 3.879 million viewers.
> For this week's show, the first hour drew 4.015 million viewers, the second hour drew 4.222 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.882 million viewers.
> 
> RAW was #2 for the night on cable behind the NFL's Monday Night Football.




The ratings may go down, but the number of viewers increased


----------



## CJohn3:16

The first hour was actually quite high.


----------



## A-C-P

:ambrose The Ratings Master


----------



## Lordhhhx

Hopefully this teaches wwe to allways give a good show cause this week was awesome and the rating shows it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Well, that was a nice increase in viewership. Actually, it's up considerably from the same week last year:

Hour 1- 3,605,000
Hour 2- 3,530,000
Hour 3- 3,616,000

So it actually looks like a great number, all things considered. Not sure if it's Ambrose catching on or what, but the numbers are really good for this time of year.


----------



## TN Punk

Bfo4jd said:


> :Jordan
> 
> Cena is much much bigger globlal star than Bret was though. Bret wasn't over outside of Canada.


What a dumb ass comment.



Kabraxal said:


> You really don't know how huge Hart was do you? In fact, the US was probably the least supportive in comparison to everywhere else.


:bow


----------



## Starbuck

Hour 3 was shit Cena & Ambrose can't draw. Fact.

unk


----------



## Rap God

Titty Master draws :ambrose


----------



## Darkness is here

Pretty good numbers.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Starbuck said:


> Hour 3 was shit Cena & Ambrose can't draw. Fact.
> 
> unk



What?

"John Cena and Dean Ambrose vs. Kane and Randy Orton in the main event, drew 4.040 million viewers, up 4% from last week's 3.879 million viewers."


----------



## Vyer

SóniaPortugal said:


> What?
> 
> "John Cena and Dean Ambrose vs. Kane and Randy Orton in the main event, drew 4.040 million viewers, up 4% from last week's 3.879 million viewers."


Starbuck is just joking, Sonia.

Anyway, pretty good numbers.


----------



## KJX

AMBROSE = RATINGS


----------



## RatedR10

Considering the numbers this time last year, this has to be Ambrose catching on.


----------



## TJC93

Hogan made 400,000 people tune out :troll


----------



## Batz

Jarsy1 said:


> Titty Master draws :ambrose


Loving it! :dance


----------



## Bfo4jd

Hogan.


----------



## Shenroe

Bfo4jd said:


> Hogan.


Hour 3


----------



## Rap God

Bfo4jd said:


> Hogan.


Noone wanted to see Hogan :vince7


----------



## JY57

> Monday's WWE Raw scored a 2.83 rating, up from the 2.69 rating the show drew the previous week. As previously noted, Raw averaged 4.039 million viewers, up from the 3.879 million average from last week.
> 
> WWE appears to have benefitted from the lopsided football game that aired on ESPN, yet they actually lost 340,000 viewers from the second to third hour. The September 30, 2013 Raw delivered a 2.68 rating with 3.583 million viewers


via Prowrestling.net


----------



## Joshi Judas

Well yeah hour 3 had one bad segment after another and a main event tag match not many would be interested in.

First hour was pretty good, second hour was decent too.


----------



## LOL-ins

2.8 is a draw? Okay I like Ambrose too but please shut up. 

If he can pull RAW up to a 3.0 during the fall then I will be impressed as WWE hasn't had a 3.0 rating in the fall months since 2011.


----------



## Londrick

Breast cancer = :vince$


----------



## D.M.N.

September numbers since 2010

- 2010 = 4.08 million (4 x 2 hours)
- 2011 = 4.13 million (4 x 2 hours)
- 2012 = 4.04 million (4 x 3 hours)
- 2013 = 3.83 million (5 x 3 hours)
- 2014 = 3.93 million (5 x 3 hours)


----------



## Shenroe

LOL-ins said:


> 2.8 is a draw? Okay I like Ambrose too but please shut up.
> 
> If he can pull RAW up to a 3.0 during the fall then I will be impressed as WWE hasn't had a 3.0 rating in the fall months since 2011.


Well it was a 2 hour show man.Gotta factor that in.


----------



## Darkness is here

TJC93 said:


> Hogan made 400,000 people tune out :troll


:vince2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

D.M.N. said:


> September numbers since 2010
> 
> - 2010 = 4.08 million (4 x 2 hours)
> - 2011 = 4.13 million (4 x 2 hours)
> - 2012 = 4.04 million (4 x 3 hours)
> - 2013 = 3.83 million (5 x 3 hours)
> - 2014 = 3.93 million (5 x 3 hours)


Punk's GOAT Heel Title Run>>>>> Bryan/Authority Shit - FACT unk

*Ducks for cover*


----------



## Chrome

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Punk's GOAT Heel Title Run>>>>> Bryan/Authority Shit - FACT unk
> 
> *Ducks for cover*


LOL

Interesting thing about that is how the 2 years that had a 2-hour Raw had a higher average than the 3 years that have had 3-hour Raws. Granted, not a HUGE difference, but a difference nonetheless.


----------



## Wynter

That would be pretty awesome if Dean is starting to draw. But you do gotta factor in MNF having a one sided as fuck game and this Raw being in Chicago. We know the reputation Chicago has :lol

Shame the main event dipped a bit. But that's not surprising. Middle of the show kind of dragged and I'm sure many are tired of seeing guys like Orton and Kane main eventing Raw.


----------



## Shenroe

WynterWarm12 said:


> That would be pretty awesome if Dean is starting to draw. But you do gotta factor in MNF having a one sided as fuck game and this Raw being in Chicago. We know the reputation Chicago has :lol
> 
> Shame the main event dipped a bit. But that's not surprising. Middle of the show kind of dragged and I'm sure many are tired of seeing guys like Orton and Kane main eventing Raw.


Fact is ever since he came back numbers went up though.

_#fact_


----------



## Wynter

Shenroe said:


> Fact is ever since he came back numbers went up though.
> 
> _#fact_


Trying to figure out the point of this post :lol

Selective reading I see. Because somehow you missed me saying if Dean is starting to draw, that's awesome. That's awesome for the product as a whole. 

Some of you ride way too hard for your favorites


----------



## Shenroe

WynterWarm12 said:


> Trying to figure out the point of this post :lol
> 
> Selective reading I see. Because somehow you missed me saying if Dean is starting to draw, that's awesome. That's awesome for the product as a whole.
> 
> Some of you ride way too hard for your favorites


Look up your rep Wynter, i was jk :lol


----------



## Darkness is here

So we now have to act like ambrose is suddenly a big draw...right?


----------



## Wynter

Shenroe said:


> Look up your rep Wynter, i was jk :lol


Oh, Shenroe. I should have paid attention to your damn signature :lmao No one else has that. Apologies


----------



## Shenroe

WynterWarm12 said:


> Oh, Shenroe. I should have paid attention to your damn signature :lmao No one else has that. Apologies










:lol


----------



## Chrome

WynterWarm12 said:


> Shame the main event dipped a bit. But that's not surprising. Middle of the show kind of dragged and I'm sure many are tired of seeing guys like Orton and Kane main eventing Raw.


Especially Kane. I figured when he went back to Corporate Kane, we'd see less of him in the ring but he continues to get main-event matches on Raw and Smackdown? :drake1


----------



## Diezffects

LOL-ins said:


> 2.8 is a draw? Okay I like Ambrose too but please shut up.
> 
> If he can pull RAW up to a 3.0 during the fall then I will be impressed as WWE hasn't had a 3.0 rating in the fall months since 2011.


Its not even 2.8, a fucking 2.6, two weeks in a row. Lolambrose dat draw! Truth be told, this is a perfect rating for this smarks-ridden shit era. 2014 been hitting some of the lowest ratings since 1996, the average of this year is gonna be laughable when its all said and done. 

Whatever though...I'm way past giving a shit, pro-wrestling as a whole right now is so lame, uninteresting and embarrassing. The best thing about WWE as a global wrestling franchise used to be the fact they had charismatic top tier larger than life Mega-stars and badass characters relatable and fun to watch. Now its all about being the underdog and whining about being held back by the system, so redundant and lame. To mainstream audience, wrestling is just dead, only smarks and hardcores are delusional enough to still think it matters because their favourites are current headliners of this ongoing shitty smark heavy era of WWE. 

I guess its safe to say, as long as WWE builds their promotion around all these Indy names with no mainstream cross-over appeal and caters to glorified Indy audience, pro-wrestling will remain dead and lacking. Funny to think people still wonder why WWE keeps running back to names from the past like Hogan, The Rock or Brock Lesnar to make themselves relevant again for one single night a year, Wrestlemania. 


And I'm just going to leave this wonderful quote here...



Terminator GR said:


> This company that gave us the attitude era and one time defined pop culture has been reduced to an irrelevant "me too" entity, adjusting its own programming and biggest storylines to a fucking nfl break. Even vince himself doesnt believe in his own product. Absolutely pathetic.


Tell me if this isn't the truth?


----------



## Shenroe

Diezffects said:


> Its not even 2.8, a fucking 2.6, two weeks in a row. Lolambrose dat draw! Truth be told, this is a perfect rating for this smarks-ridden shit era. 2014 been hitting some of the lowest ratings since 1996, the average of this year is gonna be laughable when its all said and done.
> 
> Whatever though...I'm way past giving a shit, pro-wrestling as a whole right now is so lame, uninteresting and embarrassing. The best thing about WWE as a global wrestling franchise used to be the fact they had charismatic top tier larger than life Mega-stars and badass characters relatable and fun to watch. Now its all about being the underdog and whining about being held back by the system, so redundant and lame. To mainstream audience, wrestling is just dead, only smarks and hardcores are delusional enough to still think it matters because their favourites are current headliners of this ongoing shitty smark heavy era of WWE.
> 
> I guess its safe to say, as long as WWE builds their promotion around all these Indy names with no mainstream cross-over appeal and caters to glorified Indy audience, pro-wrestling will remain dead and lacking. Funny to think people still wonder why WWE keeps running back to names from the past like Hogan, The Rock or Brock Lesnar to make themselves relevant again for one single night a year, Wrestlemania.
> 
> 
> And I'm just going to leave this wonderful quote here...
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me if this isn't the truth?


No wonder WWE doesn't cater to smarks anymore..You sound really angry dude :brady2


----------



## Chismo

Diezffects said:


> pro-wrestling as a whole right now is so lame, uninteresting and embarrassing


Sure, if you only watch WWE 10 hours every week.


----------



## Diezffects

If it aint WWE, its not relevant. Simple. Who the fuck even watches TNA?


----------



## Shenroe

Well then


----------



## thaimasker

Diezffects said:


> If it aint WWE, its not relevant. Simple. Who the fuck even watches TNA?


Do you only listen to popular music too? I'm glad that I'm not someone that only follows whats "relevant" So I can actually enjoy watching new wrestling instead of just watching a product I dislike because its "relevant"...and Lol we all know how "relevant" WWE is nowadays...sure in the wrestling world but still...not like that even means much of anything.


----------



## Diezffects

> Do you only listen to popular music too? I'm glad that I'm not someone that only follows whats "relevant"


I'm not saying you only have to listen to mainstream music, yes you can enjoy underground rap or metal but the fact remains, its not relevant in terms of representing the industry as a whole. But then, Music as a broader term is not the same as pro-wrestling, this comparison is fundamentally flawed. 




> So I can actually enjoy watching new wrestling instead of just watching a product I dislike because its "relevant


Again, yes you can enjoy whatever you like but that doesn't make it relevant. When I say pro-wrestling, 80% of the time WWE is the only brand people are going to associate that with. WWE defines how wrestling as a whole is perceived by the masses. WWE is the face of the industry, hell WWE is the industry. 




> Lol we all know how "relevant" WWE is nowadays...sure in the wrestling world but still...not like that even means much of anything.



Which is exactly my point, if you haven't read my original post. It used to mean something. WWE needs to stop catering to smarks and these glorified, non-paying, poverty ridden indy audience and actually build some mainstream relevant money drawing mega stars.


----------



## thaimasker

They clearly cater to kids and their casual base more than anyone, not indie fans. I shouldn't even have to explain why. Just look at the show and tell me that they cater more to a guy that likes to watch a show filled with only great wrestling, instead of kids that like what the WWE is putting on. The bella segemnts, bunnies,most raws have very little on screen wrestling out of the 3 hours hell raw has alot of matches that don't even go over 3 min..John cena devaluing indie favorites...I shouldn't even have to explain.


----------



## El_Absoluto

A TNA mark. How cute.


----------



## MaybeLock

Diezffects said:


> Its not even 2.8, a fucking 2.6, two weeks in a row. Lolambrose dat draw! Truth be told, this is a perfect rating for this smarks-ridden shit era. 2014 been hitting some of the lowest ratings since 1996, the average of this year is gonna be laughable when its all said and done.
> 
> Whatever though...I'm way past giving a shit, pro-wrestling as a whole right now is so lame, uninteresting and embarrassing. The best thing about WWE as a global wrestling franchise used to be the fact they had charismatic top tier larger than life Mega-stars and badass characters relatable and fun to watch. Now its all about being the underdog and whining about being held back by the system, so redundant and lame. To mainstream audience, wrestling is just dead, only smarks and hardcores are delusional enough to still think it matters because their favourites are current headliners of this ongoing shitty smark heavy era of WWE.
> 
> I guess its safe to say, as long as WWE builds their promotion around all these Indy names with no mainstream cross-over appeal and caters to glorified Indy audience, pro-wrestling will remain dead and lacking. Funny to think people still wonder why WWE keeps running back to names from the past like Hogan, The Rock or Brock Lesnar to make themselves relevant again for one single night a year, Wrestlemania.


You have no idea what you're saying. Are you actually implying that bringing people from the Indies to the roster is the problem with nowadays product? Are you actually saying, they are the reason why Wrestling is not as popular as it was in the 80s and in the Monday Night Wars? Well, you need to explain to me how they affected WWE ratings in 2002, since their biggest drop was back then. You also need to explain to me, how it is Punk or Bryan's fault these last weeks ratings being awful. And you also need to explain how you can blame Ambrose or Rollins for the ratings when the mega draws Brock Lesnar and Cena are the main feud and the main event.

Also, I dont see how you could name this era, the smarks Era. The Era where most insults are censored, the Era of Hornswaggle, El Torito, Adam Rose, Los Matadores, Tons of funk, Sandow and all others awful comedy gimmicks. The Era where Cena still wins, and the Era where apparently the Wyatts were a concept too complicated to succeed.

You're talking like finding a new Rock or a new Hogan was easy. Good luck with that mate. If they had someone like them they would be getting a push. And you know what? They would be getting nowhere because WWE doesnt have a problem of talent. WWE has a problem of creativity.


----------



## Shenroe

But the ratings this week was higher than last month and the same period last year :shrug. I don't get the issue.


----------



## THANOS

MaybeLock said:


> You have no idea what you're saying. Are you actually implying that bringing people from the Indies to the roster is the problem with nowadays product? Are you actually saying, they are the reason why Wrestling is not as popular as it was in the 80s and in the Monday Night Wars? Well, you need to explain to me how they affected WWE ratings in 2002, since their biggest drop was back then. You also need to explain to me, how it is Punk or Bryan's fault these last weeks ratings being awful. And you also need to explain how you can blame Ambrose or Rollins for the ratings when the mega draws Brock Lesnar and Cena are the main feud and the main event.
> 
> Also, I dont see how you could name this era, the smarks Era. The Era where most insults are censored, the Era of Hornswaggle, El Torito, Adam Rose, Los Matadores, Tons of funk, Sandow and all others awful comedy gimmicks. The Era where Cena still wins, and the Era where apparently the Wyatts were a concept too complicated to succeed.
> 
> You're talking like finding a new Rock or a new Hogan was easy. Good luck with that mate. If they had someone like them they would be getting a push. And you know what? They would be getting nowhere because WWE doesnt have a problem of talent. WWE has a problem of creativity.


Great post :clap! And the biggest problem with creativity lies with the out of touch majority owner. Hell I made a post about Bryan that proved that he is a monster draw, yet people still claim horseshit like, "Bryan and other vanilla midgets make the casuals tune out". It's like they actively avoid the truth even when there are many metrics put in front of them that disprove their claims.

Hell just for kicks, here's the the thread I made after 1 month of Bryan's title reign, to respond to people saying he's an afterthought champion.



> Before I begin, let me iterate that the point of making this a thread is to bring awareness to a few points that refute a lot of popular misconceptions about Daniel Bryan's reign on this site, and making a post that gets buried in an eventual 10 page + thread quite frankly doesn't achieve that result.
> 
> So..
> 
> After reading through the opposing thread of this nature, I decided I would make this thread to show people how much Daniel Bryan certainly IS working, and that momentum is still rolling despite what people on here are saying.
> 
> *1) Merchandise sales mean very little to WWE's overall success. It's literally the smallest revenue stream to WWE by a large margin.* Bryan being second to Cena also means he's still selling more than everyone else bar Cena. Cena himself is a walking billboard wearing no less than 4 pieces of merchandise at all times, and all outside events. He also has his own line of clothes at K-Mart, Wallmart, etc. Increased awareness and promotion + a high in demand product = higher sales. It's pretty simple.
> 
> *2) Bryan is STILL more over than everyone else on the show so you can't say he's losing momentum really.* If other people were overtaking him than that's one thing, but Cena isn't getting anywhere near the reaction Bryan gets, and I'm adding the decibels of his boos and cheers together in that analysis.
> 
> *3) He's still the #1 ratings draw in the company*, and has been since the beginning of 2014, and this is indisputable because of our access to the breakdowns.
> 
> *4) His ridiculous feud with Kane is generating a better reaction than Evolution/Shield by the crowd, and better ratings in all non-overrun spots* (since overruns gain huge on average). WWE's even recognizing it by booking his matches to main event the payperviews, when they had no problem letting HHH/Lesnar or Cena main event over the title in past years. What's especially interesting is that the peak viewership in Bryan's cheesy segment with Kane and his match with Del Rio was beaten by only 20,000 viewers in the overrun by Shield/Wyatts/Evolution. That says everything right there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sources:
> *1) WWE's Annual Financial Report*
> Link = http://ir.corporate.wwe.com/Cache/1001184723.PDF?Y=&O=PDF&D=&FID=1001184723&T=&IID=4121687 (It's in the Executive Summary - Business section on page 3 down, I believe)
> 
> *2) the ratings thread*, and
> 
> *3) your eyes and ears.*
Click to expand...


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

Ratings should be massive for this episode.

The Rock. Enough said.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Math_Stats_Guru said:


> Ratings should be massive for this episode.
> 
> The Rock. Enough said.


Keep in mind he wasn't advertised. However there is a chance the third hour saw a big jump because of him. I'm sure his segment jumped up through the roof, but it's just a matter of how many of those people that tuned in for him, stayed through at least most of the hour, if not to the end of the show. 

Hopefully one of those random breakdowns appears. Would be interesting to see how much he boosted that quarter.


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

Would be surprised if it didn't do well over 3.0.


----------



## Cobalt

Not a known return with The Rock will interested to see how it effects the ratings.


----------



## Arcturus

How many people actually took a crap break when Rusev/Lana were cutting the promo on Big Show?


----------



## LOL-ins

Hour 1: 3.87 million
Hour 2: 3.75 million
*Hour 3: 4.4 million *

Holy shit dat :rock :rock4 :rock6 

and dat :ambrose


----------



## Darkness is here

Math_Stats_Guru said:


> Ratings should be massive for this episode.
> 
> The Rock. Enough said.


Your are kidding...right?
Hardly anybody knew he was gonna show up.


----------



## A-C-P

Arcturus said:


> How many people actually took a crap break when Rusev/Lana were cutting the promo on Big Show?


Not to mention how many people turned it off during the first 2 hours of garbage, outside of Ambrose


----------



## Bfo4jd

LOL-ins said:


> Holy shit dat :rock :rock4 :rock6


True.



> and dat :ambrose


lol no. The past three weeks of Ambrose closing the show has gotten lowest numbers of the entire year. This hack isn't drawing all of a sudden.


----------



## LOL-ins

Darkness is here said:


> Your are kidding...right?
> Hardly anybody knew he was gonna show up.


4.4 million without notice.

Rock wins lol

:rock4


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

LOL-ins is a troll


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

.


----------



## Londrick

Damn at hour 3. Raw is Ambrose = :vince$


----------



## D.M.N.

Well, actually Math_Stat_Guru, posted a prediction... sadly, he was half a million out: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-10-6-2014.html

Hour 1 - 3.577 million
Hour 2 - 3.891 million
Hour 3 - 3.924 million

Poor, poor number.

*EDIT - LOL-ins numbers on the previous page are inaccurate, obviously.*


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

D.M.N. said:


> Well, actually Math_Stat_Guru, posted a prediction... sadly, he was half a million out: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-10-6-2014.html
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.577 million
> Hour 2 - 3.891 million
> Hour 3 - 3.924 million
> 
> Poor, poor number.


That wasn't a prediction, someone posted different numbers.

3.924 for hour 3 is shocking. You're right, that's very poor.


----------



## MaybeLock

D.M.N. said:


> Well, actually Math_Stat_Guru, posted a prediction... sadly, he was half a million out: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-10-6-2014.html
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.577 million
> Hour 2 - 3.891 million
> Hour 3 - 3.924 million
> 
> Poor, poor number.


:jordan4


----------



## D.M.N.

Only consolidation is that hour three was the highest since the end of August. On the other hand, hour one was the lowest since the end of May, so a real mixed bag.


----------



## The True Believer

Less than 4 million viewers at the start of the show?

Damn.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Well, a surprise Rock return didn't pull a miracle, but hour 3 being the highest of the night shows there had to be some weight to Rock's appearance. Based off previous numbers, I'd guess hour 3 would've been closer to hour 1's number if not for Rock. Of course without a breakdown, it doesn't mean much.

But as a whole, that's terrible. That hour 1 number is especially terrible. Last year's numbers of the same week were:

Hour 1 - 3.694 million
Hour 2 - 3.739 million
Hour 3 - 3.685 million

And 2012's (This was the night of Punk vs. Vince):

Hour 1 - 4.191 million
Hour 2 - 4.067 million
Hour 3 - 4.065 million

I was about to say numbers just keep going down and down and down, but actually I think 2014's average is a little bit higher than 2013's... though without The Rock's help in the third hour, I doubt that would've been the case.


----------



## LOL-ins

My bad but holy shit 3.5 million is fucking terrible. 

If it wasn't for Rock then this show would of been a ratings disaster. Hour 3 would of been around 3.7 million. So overall rating for RAW might be a 2.6. :lol


----------



## #Mark

You people do realize that the numbers are going to decrease every fall as long as RAW is three hours? These numbers are essentially pointless to discuss.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

The numbers of viewers will not change much

Although last week was better

And Ambrose is at the beginning of his career, perfectly natural that is not a draw

If he is in segments with the best numbers, then he is doing a excellent job, however he is not the whole show

The only one with the power to change something will be Bryan


----------



## RatedR10

I wish we got a breakdown but I fully expect there was a mass tune-in for The Rock (obviously), considering: A) it's The Rock and B) it was at the top of the hour and at the halftime of the football game, and then a mass tune-out afterwards.


----------



## p862011

this is why wwe advertised returns so ratings would go up yet fans bitch when they do that


----------



## Goldusto

Rock saved this weeks raw. simple as. If he didn't show up for half time Raw would have free falled after Gator torito, That and the AWESOME crowd too. I swear the Crowd was easily one of the reasons hours 2-3 went up.

10/6/14	3,797,000

Hour 1 : 3,577,000 - *down 440,000 from last week* 
Hour 2 : 3,891,000	*down 330,000*
Hour 3 : 3,924,000 - *up 40,000*


----------



## MaybeLock

p862011 said:


> this is why wwe advertised returns so ratings would go up yet fans bitch when they do that


...Because fans don't give a damn about ratings and they rather have a surprise return? 

Also, a surprise return in the main event of Raw, can extremely bump next Raw's rating. Just look at Brock Lesnar's return. The surprise made it a bigger impact. You also need to make people believe you're going to surprise them from time to time so they keep watching in spite of a crappy show expecting for a return or something.


----------



## Bushmaster

p862011 said:


> this is why wwe advertised returns so ratings would go up yet fans bitch when they do that


:duck I doubt most fans bitch, just a small amount on here who seem to care about ratings more than anything. The same fans would probably bitch if we got Brock vs Rock on Raw next week. Whining about how it's on free TV.


----------



## KingLobos

The Rock's return will help next weeks show much more than this weeks I would imagine. People who missed it will be hoping something happens next week (It won't). So a boost to the overall product will take effect in that respect.


----------



## Redzero

Ambrose the draw.


----------



## njcam

*RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Monday's WWE Raw TV rating dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012... What a disgrace!!!


----------



## BRRROCK-LESNAR

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Hopefully they keep bringing in celebrity guest hosts and have midgets in costumes fighting. That will surely help the ratings.


----------



## Mobster

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

This is CM Punk's fault. Damn, he quit.

Umm, it's Daniel Bryan's fault. Damn, he's injured.

I got it, it's Dean Ambrose's fault...


----------



## Dub J

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Dean Ambrose is pretty much all they have going for them right now. The booking is so horrible it defies logic. They should just go ahead and tape Usos vs. Rhodes brothers and just play it twice a week. At least that way they don't risk any injury.


----------



## bADaSSaTTiTuDE

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Good fuck the WWE, I hope they keep experiencing failure since they give us crap every week.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Can't even blame Punk for this. unk


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Good. I hope they get lower and lower until shit gets waaaaaaaaay better.


----------



## Panzer

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

When Brooklyn RAW gets a rating like this, you know it's got to send a "maybe it's just the product that sucks" message. If anyone gets it that is.


----------



## Dub J

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



Panzer said:


> When Brooklyn RAW gets a rating like this, you know it's got to send a "maybe it's just the product that sucks" message. If anyone gets it that is.


They've known for a long time and have gone out of their way to let us know they don't care.


----------



## fulcizombie

Wwe network failing, ratings dropping to the toilet, ppv buyrates almost non existent (except for mania) ......great news , IMO . Finally Vince will get what he deserves for what we have through during the cena era .


----------



## njcam

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

What do you all think of bringing Daniel Bryan back in a 'non in-ring' role?


----------



## TKOW

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Can't say I'm surprised with the garbage they keep presenting on a weekly basis.


----------



## Rex Rasslin

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

I guess were officially done with surprise returns now..


----------



## njcam

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

For people in this thread that say the product is garbage (and I am not disagreeing) how would you have produced/booked this past RAW show (using the talent that were present on the night)?

Listing matches/segments as they air.


----------



## Damage Case

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



Chrome said:


> Can't even blame Punk for this. unk


You could blame him in 2012. He was in a main event programme with Ryback. unk2


----------



## Marv95

Final rating: year low 2.63(2.6), lowest since December 2012. It'll more likely go up next week as some people are expecting the Rock to show up after Monday. Oh and guest hosts(ha).


----------



## Emperor Palpatine

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

The Rock can't draw 8*D.






















































(yes I'm joking I know he was a surprise )


----------



## Synax

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



njcam said:


> For people in this thread that say the product is garbage (and I am not disagreeing) how would you have produced/booked this past RAW show (using the talent that were present on the night)?
> 
> Listing matches/segments as they air.


I don't have a lot of problems with the product right now, but I wouldn't mind Rocky cutting a 2 hour promo :rock Followed by Ambrose craziness. :ambrose


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

source?


----------



## NewJack's Shank

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

The product is god awful, and at the beginning of the year I was really enjoying it


----------



## superuser1

I hope this doesn't cause Vince to tone down on Ambrose. He has been getting the most camera time lately.


----------



## cmpunkisgod.

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



njcam said:


> For people in this thread that say the product is garbage (and I am not disagreeing) how would you have produced/booked this past RAW show (using the talent that were present on the night)?
> 
> Listing matches/segments as they air.


The main problem is not the individual RAW's sucking bear balls, it's the fact that they have no real theme or story to tell at the moment (which results in every single RAW sucking bear balls).

It's been The Authority vs. 'Others' for over a year now and still this angle hasn't moved forward at all. At. All. (Not even touching on the fact that this is a main-event only storyline and the midcard/lowcard are just there to fill time and space)

It's the blatant time-wasting and non-commitment that gets my panties in a bunch.


----------



## Robbyfude

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

"WE NEED MORE CENA":vince$


----------



## squeelbitch

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



Damage Case said:


> You could blame him in 2012. He was in *a main event programme with Ryback*. unk2


maybe this was the bigger problem, a guy that was squashing jobbers thrown into the main event scene with no build up at all, to think this was the best wwe could offer at that time and even worse was that cm punk was injured for like a month in december


----------



## VRsick

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Well I'm sure that was the last big surprise return then. If they announced the rock would be there, ratings would have been a lot better.


----------



## Bfo4jd

superuser1 said:


> I hope this doesn't cause Vince to tone down on Ambrose. He has been getting the most camera time lately.


 :westbrook3 Your post is like sarcastically hoping Vince would do exactly that.

Ambrose main event will only last as long as Reings is out anyway, once he returns this dude is an afterthought.


----------



## njcam

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



cesaro_ROCKS said:


> source?


I'm glad you asked.....

Source: PWTorch

Not even a surprise appearance by The Rock could save Monday's Raw, as the TV rating fell to the lowest point since the end of 2012.

Raw scored a 2.63 rating, down from a 2.83 rating last week. This followed a previous year-low 2.69 rating two weeks ago.

Raw was hit across the board, reaching historical lows in males 18-49 & 18-34. Raw also took a hit among all adults (male & female 18-34 & 18-49). The only demographic not to nosedive was the unpredictable teen male 12-17 demo, which was actually up three-tenths from last week.

- Raw averaged 3.797 million viewers, down six percent from last week. It was the second-fewest viewers of the year behind the dreaded May 19 episode that was previously the low-point of Raw's 2014 campaign.

Hourly Break Down: 3.577 million first hour viewers, 3.891 million second hour viewers, and 3.924 million third hour viewers (which included Rock's segment).

It was the fewest first hour viewers since that dreaded end-of-May stretch during the post-WrestleMania lull period.

- On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #2 behind Monday Night Football, which drew a pedestrian 13.2 million viewers.

*Caldwell's Analysis:* The product has been dreadful for weeks, yet WWE has done nothing about it, choosing to ignore what led to the bottom falling out. It's a general lack of accountability and this should be a wake-up call. The Rock was merely a one-week Halftime show placeholder before WWE got back to the filler, so if they want the audience back, they have to re-build the middle of the show and create better stories than repeating the same tired situations involving The Authority's henchmen and John Cena and Dean Ambrose on top.


----------



## Tavernicus

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Maybe they'll take the hint.


----------



## Onyx

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Thing is, why should WWE care what the rating is? There's no competition. TNA is nowhere near a 2.0.


----------



## Darkness is here

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

It's cena's fault ofcourse :side:


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



Darkness is here said:


> It's cena's fault ofcourse :side:


I dont like to blame individual wrestlers for the ratings of a whole show if we can't see how their segments actually did (breakdowns), BUT he's the top guy of a show who is doing awful as far as ratings go, so IF we are to blame individuals, he should take the biggest part of the blame. No doubt about that.

Anyway, I believe it is simply the concept of dumbed down wrestling slowly failing, it's beyond the wrestlers in the roster. Give them something better to work with and ratings will improve. Hell, not even Rock could save this fuckery


----------



## njcam

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

For people in this thread that say the product is garbage (and I am not disagreeing) how would you have produced/booked this past RAW show (using the talent that were present on the night)?

Listing matches/segments as they air.


----------



## NastyYaffa

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

And now they can't even blame Punk or Bryan for this.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



skyman101 said:


> Thing is, why should WWE care what the rating is? There's no competition. TNA is nowhere near a 2.0.


honestly they shouldn't. they just started their new multi year deal with usa this past monday and are locked in so they will get paid the same if they draw a 2 or a 5.

also tv networks basically told them their numbers mean jack squat during the last round of negotiations. nba actually averaged lower ratings than wwe in 2013 and signed a $24 billion tv deal this week, about 20 times what wwe will get from their us partners over the next decade. even on monday raw easily beat the baseball playoff game head to head but when mlb tv deal comes up then will get 20 times the tv money wwe gets too. tv networks valued raw and sd the same and wwe only get paid for the extra hour of raw.

when they resigned with usa in 2005 they lost all their advertising monies as well


----------



## Miss Sally

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



Mobster said:


> This is CM Punk's fault. Damn, he quit.
> 
> Umm, it's Daniel Bryan's fault. Damn, he's injured.
> 
> I got it, it's Dean Ambrose's fault...


Oh yea, forgot about the blaming CM Punk guys here.


----------



## NastyYaffa

Marv95 said:


> Final rating: year low 2.63(2.6), lowest since December 2012. It'll more likely go up next week as some people are expecting the Rock to show up after Monday. Oh and guest hosts(ha).


And now they can't even blame Punk or Bryan for it :lmao


----------



## ErickRowan_Fan

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

They should've advertised The Rock. How dumb.


----------



## 260825

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

**During RAW*

:vince4 "Look at these ratings!, this is what I get for pushing Danielson!!"

:cena7 "And he's out injured as well, I told you he was too unreliable to hold the titles boss"*


----------



## Snake Plissken

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

those awful comedy segments combined with these celebs who no one cares to see on a Wrestling show. It doesn't surprise me.


----------



## Mindy_Macready

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



njcam said:


> For people in this thread that say the product is garbage (and I am not disagreeing) how would you have produced/booked this past RAW show (using the talent that were present on the night)?
> 
> Listing matches/segments as they air.


Maybe because they're not booking stars they have right at all, Seems like WWE is reusing same 10 wrestlers for both Raw & Smackdown.... Didn't WWE learned from WCW mistakes?


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



ErickRowan_Fan said:


> They should've advertised The Rock. How dumb.


They were right not to. It made his surprise appearance all the better. It may have hurt their ratings a bit, but I have no reason to care about that and ratings being down one week isn't gonna cause some huge ripple effect. By next week it won't even be an issue.


----------



## KingLobos

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Seth Rollins is gonna main event a PPV and he just isn't ready yet. I'd argue Ambrose isn't ready to MAKE money either from a business standpoint. He's popular but he isn't a known draw yet. Without Cena this company would be in shambles. Bryan needs to come back and step it up as well as Reigns.


----------



## own1997

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



njcam said:


> For people in this thread that say the product is garbage (and I am not disagreeing) how would you have produced/booked this past RAW show (using the talent that were present on the night)?
> 
> Listing matches/segments as they air.


It's the fact that they've booked guys terribly. Guys like Bray, Cesaro etc have been booked like chumps when they could've been top stars by now. Stop over saturated Cena and create some cool, believeable alternatives and write some better storylines. Put more of a focus on the undercard instead of treating it as filler.


----------



## own1997

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



KingLobos said:


> Seth Rollins is gonna main event a PPV and he just isn't ready yet. I'd argue Ambrose isn't ready to MAKE money either from a business standpoint. He's popular but he isn't a known draw yet. Without Cena this company would be in shambles. Bryan needs to come back and step it up as well as Reigns.


I agree for the most part but the only reason it would be shambles without Cena is because they've failed to create new stars. Cena is treated as WWE's only star. The time he retires may finally bring about new stars being built up and hopefully a better product in general.


----------



## ErickRowan_Fan

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



Kevin Lockard said:


> They were right not to. It made his surprise appearance all the better. It may have hurt their ratings a bit, but I have no reason to care about that and ratings being down one week isn't gonna cause some huge ripple effect. By next week it won't even be an issue.


It might cause the effect of Vince losing his patience, pushing the Big Show and forcing Dean Ambrose to job against everybody. He has always been a nutjob about ratings, and always goes back to the status quo whenever there's a dip in ratings.


----------



## Yes Era

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Deserved. Stop sandbagging the show..torito vs hornswoggle? Holy shit.


----------



## DanielBlitzkrieg

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

It's because the fans have learned not to expect a Champion on RAW. Even if in the past it was Cena vs. Orton for years, at least the main eventers were always there. Now Cena is feuding with Seth Rollins and Dean Ambrose, two 'midcarders'.

In my opinion, they should take advantage of the Rock's surprise return. Last week showed the astronomical difference between the big stars and the filler acts - Rocky followed Hornswoggle. They should keep letting fans know that they might see something very special. For instance, I would rather see a Brock 'n' Rock tag team than a match between them, showing up once a month and running wild. They could be a great faction.


----------



## eskymi

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

My biggest gripe is HHH and Steph every week. To me they can come out and do stuff once in a while but every week coming out on top. Tired o Kane and Orton bitching about fighting for Rollins and then doing it. Stand up to the boss, it would be like that in a real work place. Have K and O say, "No we aren't doing it..." Then HHH gets pissed and is made at everyone. But it wouldn't work that way, HHH would just make a smart ass comment and sarcastically smile and let everyone know he is the best.


----------



## Miss Sally

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



KingLobos said:


> Seth Rollins is gonna main event a PPV and he just isn't ready yet. I'd argue Ambrose isn't ready to MAKE money either from a business standpoint. He's popular but he isn't a known draw yet. Without Cena this company would be in shambles. Bryan needs to come back and step it up as well as Reigns.


And Cena is? He's been the main event and highlight for years and still ratings drop so what's your suggestion? Also Reigns? since when has he established himself as a merch seller or draw?


----------



## Interceptor88

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



njcam said:


> For people in this thread that say the product is garbage (and I am not disagreeing) how would you have produced/booked this past RAW show (using the talent that were present on the night)?
> 
> Listing matches/segments as they air.


 A lot of work, but in general:

They should give a lot more importance to the midcard. Guys like Justin Gabriel, Sin Cara, Heath Slater, Cesaro, CHRISTIAN, etc are underutilized. They fired talented guys like McIntyre, Percy Watson or Curt Hawkins that, with proper characters, could've been very good midcarders. 

Sheamus should get a character overhaul. Stop being just a Irish guy who is nicknamed the Celtic Warrior, and start being the Celtic Warrior just as he was in FCW and the indies but even more badass and over the top. 

Where is Bray Wyatt?? Why is Randy Orton, a main eventer, being used as a henchman in a stale storyline? Why is Kane still corporate and jobbing when he could be an uppercarder monster face? 

Less 6 vs 6 matches and more actual storylines. Goldust is great doing creeping out people: Why aren't he and Stardust in some program involving creepy stuff instead of talking about cosmic keys? 

Also, what's going to happen with the WWE World Heavyweight Championship?


----------



## KingLobos

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



Miss Sally said:


> And Cena is? He's been the main event and highlight for years and still ratings drop so what's your suggestion?


Yes he is, and I don't even like him. I didn't say he was doing good or as good as he use to. I said without him it was be astronomically worse.


----------



## RedScrumper

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Reasons why ratings are tanking:

-Cena vs Kane/Orton in some tag match main event each week
- 30 minutes of the Authority in the beginning of every RAW
- Adam Rose / Bunny / Gator / Torito. Nobody pops for these lame comedy acts, even the kids in the crowd.
- Hot potato IC title
- Horrible product placement sketches (Adam Rose and the Occulus Mirror, Usos and Sonic fast food)
- RECAP RECAP RECAP
- Undercooked AJ / Paige feud
- Pushing nonstarters like Big Show and Kane into main event spots
- Weak commentary team. Lawler checked out years ago and Michael Cole is dead inside


----------



## TrainRekt

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Good. This is really good. I hope the ratings keep tanking. They deserve to fall to the 1's with the shit product Vince has been putting out. WWE PG/CENA will never reach the beloved Attitude Era's weekly 6's, 7's, and 8's. Never.


----------



## The Bloodline

superuser1 said:


> I hope this doesn't cause Vince to tone down on Ambrose. He has been getting the most camera time lately.


I actually am worried about that, especially when I believe they'll use any excuse to stop using certain people.

Fall isn't working out for WWE right now, that's for sure fpalm


----------



## Joe88

And they still have two more d list reality stars to come in the next two weeks. Hopefully ratings continue to tank.


----------



## CarolinaCoog

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



RedScrumper said:


> Reasons why ratings are tanking:
> 
> -Cena vs Kane/Orton in some tag match main event each week
> - 30 minutes of the Authority in the beginning of every RAW
> - Adam Rose / Bunny / Gator / Torito. Nobody pops for these lame comedy acts, even the kids in the crowd.
> - Hot potato IC title
> - Horrible product placement sketches (Adam Rose and the Occulus Mirror, Usos and Sonic fast food)
> - RECAP RECAP RECAP
> - Undercooked AJ / Paige feud
> - Pushing nonstarters like Big Show and Kane into main event spots
> - Weak commentary team. Lawler checked out years ago and Michael Cole is dead inside


I agree with most of these. A big problem I also have is the way #1 contenders for titles are determined now. It's not challengers fighting challengers and working their way up the ladder. It's almost always...

Night after PPV: Champion vs. challenger in a non-title match, challenger wins.
Every Raw until the next PPV: Champion and challenger on opposite sides of a tag team or 6-man match
PPV: Champion vs. challenger in a title match
Repeat

It's boring and lazy. There are no stakes to any of those Raw matches. If you had challengers facing each other at every Raw, with the #1 contender for the IC/US/Tag Team title being decided on the Raw before the PPV, it would do three things. It would make the buildup more impressive. It would keep matches fresh and meaningful. It would get more talent onto the shows because you're not just running the same 2 guys over and over in different ways. It's okay to have a 1-month (or multi-month) story arc for a title if the story itself warrants it. But there's no story to most of these.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Shit Show, outside of Rock and Ambrose, so shit rating fits.


----------



## Lesnar Turtle

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



njcam said:


> For people in this thread that say the product is garbage (and I am not disagreeing) how would you have produced/booked this past RAW show (using the talent that were present on the night)?
> 
> Listing matches/segments as they air.



All the divas taking it in turns to strip, interspersed with Dean Ambrose promos.


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

LOL some of the suggestions! Orton and Sheamus should of get more pushed? you people would kill WWE.


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

Reigns was getting terrible ratings even when there was no MNF to compete with, yet Vince still wants to continue his push to the top. Ratings aren't the priority for him. When Reigns comes back, he's going to send Ambrose to the midcard regardless, just because he doesn't like his look.


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

For the most part everyone does the same thing every week. It amazes me that the ratings are as high as they are, regardless of nielsen having such a small sample size.


----------



## onlytoview

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Good. I hope it keeps plummeting as well, it's the only way Vince will wake up and change the product.


----------



## Tangerine

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

No it's still too high. Anything over 3.0 is too much. Vince will blame it on the NFL.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

I can honestly say that this shit comparable to mid-90's WWF, with the only difference being that it's actually still reasonably popular. They were nearly dead prior to the Attitude Era and they fucking deserve to be in that position again.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

:cena4


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

*It's a shame they wasted The Rock on such an awful show, but at the same time, he was desperately needed. Fuck those old hags.*


----------



## TromaDogg

Wow, just wow. fpalm

I can remember a time not so long back on this forum (and I've only been a member since 2011) when a 2.63 rating wouldn't only be considered low or bad, it'd be considered absolutely shameful.

How much more crap like a guy in a bunny suit (I don't give a fuck who it is in there, the whole gimmick just screams 'Gobbeldy Gooker' to me fpalm ), embarrassingly shit guest 'celebrities', midget wrestlers dressed up as a crocodile and a bull, Cena having to be involved anytime a younger talent gets a decent storyline or feud to work with, an IC belt that keeps changing hands between the same 2 guys and makes their title reigns worthless and a World Champion who's barely on the show anymore (and probably won't be until 2015 by the looks of it) is it going to take before ratings sink even lower towards 2.0 and maybe into the 1s?

I mean, damn...if things carry on tanking the way they are (both the quality of the show and it's ratings), then we're going to have lower ratings than 1995 soon and then you would think people will realise how seriously bad this shit has gotten.


----------



## The One Man Gang

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

"more Bunnies and Gators dammit!" :vince$


----------



## JJForReal

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Just so I'm clear, ratings are out of 5, right?
Also, no idea why Punks title reign got such low ratings, I was hella entertained.
Google "Punks heel reign promos"
It's a 4 part vid and I found it great to watch.


----------



## philsphan26

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

There's no identity with the characters. They're all stale. 

The storylines/matches are the same weekly. You have to change things up. 

Give wrestlers identities, create storylines. They're trying with Ambrose, Golddust/Stardust, Wyatts, etc. But they don't push them. People are tired of HHH, Cena, Kane, Orton, etc. Their acts are old. Change Orton's persona, Give Kane a new storyline, Turn Cena heel, Tell HHH to go home to his kids or work behind the scenes, etc. Everytime Cena is in the ring he's boo'd. Do they not see this?

They need creativity. If this isn't working, fire your team and find people that have the right vision.


----------



## njcam

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Being from Australia, I'm not exactly fluent in when NFL games are played, but I'm guessing RAW goes up against NFL Monday Night Football.

Is the answer to change RAW to Tuesday nights? ..... and Smackdown on Thursday nights (just started)?


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

Cut off the midgets in costumes and terrible diva story lines


----------



## thaimasker

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



JJForReal said:


> Just so I'm clear, ratings are out of 5, right?
> Also, no idea why Punks title reign got such low ratings, I was hella entertained.
> Google "Punks heel reign promos"
> It's a 4 part vid and I found it great to watch.


 I think its more like out of 100%...its % based off of how many people are watching it compared to all the other shows on TV on at the same time...If you got a rating of 19.2 then 19.2 percent of people watched it.....in reality only like 20k people are counted in this but its all that cable networkss have of determining who watches their shows so its treated as fact. In reality according to neilson only 1 mil people could be watching a show but for all we know 5 mil people could be watching it and vice versa.


----------



## DeeGirl

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

No surprise really. 

No Bryan, No Punk. No champion appearing either.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*

They had the same amount of viewers as least year at this time. The sky is not falling. These threads pop up every single year at this time and it's ridiculous each time. They're competing against Monday Night Football, MLB playoffs and to top it off an increasingly shrinking cable viewing audience.


----------



## Joe88

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



GillbergReturns said:


> They had the same amount of viewers as least year at this time. The sky is not falling. These threads pop up every single year at this time and it's ridiculous each time. They're competing against Monday Night Football, MLB playoffs and to top it off an increasingly shrinking cable viewing audience.


 They competed against the same things in the late 90s and early 2000s and things weren't dismal then. Ratings are just a small picture of a really shitty inconsistent product.


----------



## KingLobos

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



GillbergReturns said:


> They had the same amount of viewers as least year at this time. The sky is not falling. These threads pop up every single year at this time and it's ridiculous each time. They're competing against Monday Night Football, MLB playoffs and to top it off an increasingly shrinking cable viewing audience.


Its different. WWE has injuries to key players on an already thin roster.


----------



## Wynter

Ok, I'm very ignorant to this type of thing so I'm kind of lost. What's more important, viewership or ratings?? Because if viewership rises but the ratings is low, how does that work?


----------



## birthday_massacre

Lowest rating since dec 2012 yeah Brock as champion is really boosting the ratings eh LOL
stupid WWE


----------



## DanielBlitzkrieg

birthday_massacre said:


> Lowest rating since dec 2012 yeah Brock as champion is really boosting the ratings eh LOL
> stupid WWE


It isn't Brock, it's Brock's distance from a WWE jet and proximity to his remote home-base.

And you say that with that Championship reign in your avatar... :Jordan


----------



## birthday_massacre

DanielBlitzkrieg said:


> It isn't Brock, it's Brock's distance from a WWE jet and proximity to his remote home-base.
> 
> And you say that with that Championship reign in your avatar... :Jordan



The fact that the WWE champion is not on TV every week, is easily a cause for low ratings.

What is the point of watching of the WWE champion is not on TV, also its even more funny the WWE champion won't even be having a match at the next PPV.

The WWE deserves everything its getting right now. And I love the double standards when DB and Punk are champion and the ratings are not high they get all the blame but now that Lesnar is champion and the ratings are even lower, its not Brocks fault LOL

Gotta love that logic.


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



JJForReal said:


> Just so I'm clear, ratings are out of 5, right?
> Also, no idea why Punks title reign got such low ratings, I was hella entertained.
> Google "Punks heel reign promos"
> It's a 4 part vid and I found it great to watch.


No, ratings can get up into the 10-13 range depending on demographics.

Sunday football gets like 12 and 13 ratings while NCIS is always around a 10 or 11.

Ratings are based on the estimated number of people watching the show .


----------



## DanielBlitzkrieg

birthday_massacre said:


> The fact that the WWE champion is not on TV every week, is easily a cause for low ratings.
> 
> What is the point of watching of the WWE champion is not on TV, also its even more funny the WWE champion won't even be having a match at the next PPV.
> 
> The WWE deserves everything its getting right now. And I love the double standards when DB and Punk are champion and the ratings are not high they get all the blame but now that Lesnar is champion and the ratings are even lower, its not Brocks fault LOL
> 
> Gotta love that logic.


I agree with you. That's what I was trying to say, it's the fact that the Champion isn't there that's kept people from watching. I was trying to say the problem isn't Brock himself, it's the fact that he's not there. Or Brock's desire to not be there. But I think the main reason this week lost viewers is because fans learned not to expect Brock to show up.


----------



## birthday_massacre

DanielBlitzkrieg said:


> I agree with you. That's what I was trying to say, it's the fact that the Champion isn't there that's kept people from watching. I was trying to say the problem isn't Brock himself, it's the fact that he's not there. Or Brock's desire to not be there. But I think the main reason this week lost viewers is because fans learned not to expect Brock to show up.


Thats what I meant. Brock was supposed to boost ratings as him being champion but he doenst show up to TV, so since the WWE champion is not on TV you have to blame Brock for the ratings falling. 

I meant it was stupid for the WWE to put the title on someone that is not going to be on TV wrestling every week.


----------



## Batz

birthday_massacre said:


> Thats what I meant. Brock was supposed to boost ratings as him being champion but he doenst show up to TV, so since the WWE champion is not on TV you have to blame Brock for the ratings falling.
> 
> I meant it was stupid for the WWE to put the title on someone that is not going to be on TV wrestling every week.


This logic is stupid. Brock was not made champion to boost television ratings. He was made champion to sell the WWE Network, as he got the belt around the same time over 600+ thousand subscriptions were set to renew after their 6 month commitment. Putting Brock only on PPV shows does sell the Network. $10 to see Brock Lesnar fight? That will always sell.


WWE's focus is not entirely on television ratings, it's on selling the network. The product they have made over $50 million dollars in cuts trying to earn a steady profit from. Brock is set to lose his title at Wrestlemania, another time where many people's subscription will be up again (and many starting).


Yes, not having Brock around is hurting the product. There's no denying that at all. Viewers are popping in not knowing who holds the big strap? It's an issue. However, that's not his fault. It's the people who are writing the 8 hours of content each week who are to blame. They are not fitting in the title in anywhere. When's the last time you heard a direct mention as to someone facing Lesnar for the title? Not since before NOC. There were reports of Heyman being taken out of the show last second over the past few RAWs after NOC, Brock has barely even been mentioned, he's free to do vignettes and taped promos, and would appear for some extra cash (which may sound absurd to you, but tell me would you rather have a new celebrity guest host each week or Lesnar? WWE seems to be choosing the former). 

WWE as far I am concerned has not taken any steps to do any of that, instead they are entirely shifting focus to Cena/Ambrose getting their hands on Rollins, and are leaving the title out of it entirely. Brock does need to be in the picture, but it's on WWE to the take the step to fit him in it.


----------



## xDD

DanielBlitzkrieg said:


> It isn't Brock, it's Brock's distance from a WWE jet and proximity to his remote home-base.


It doesn't matter if Brock is on RAW or not. 

RAW without Brock: 3,987,000 average viewers.
Next week with Brock: 3,826,000 average viewers.


----------



## kokepepsi

One segment
Brock would be in ONE segment
How is it his fault when he would be in ONE segment
His segment would be at the start,9pm,10pm,overrun
So his ONE segment would gain due to the time placement no matter what
Given that its Brock, maybe at best he gains 300k extra more viewers?

You are bitching about 300k viewers which would barely boost the rating
OH yeah and then his ONE segment would be followed by 4 shit ones that lose millions of viewers

:ti

Fix the midcard
Fix the midcard
Gangrel would gain 200k viewers
Al snow would gain 100k viewers
Sable would gain 300kviewers
This is how the AE got them 8.0 ratings
Not cuz of one guy you fucking marks


----------



## birthday_massacre

Batz said:


> This logic is stupid. Brock was not made champion to boost television ratings. He was made champion to sell the WWE Network, as he got the belt around the same time over 600+ thousand subscriptions were set to renew after their 6 month commitment. Putting Brock only on PPV shows does sell the Network. $10 to see Brock Lesnar fight? That will always sell.
> 
> 
> WWE's focus is not entirely on television ratings, it's on selling the network. The product they have made over $50 million dollars in cuts trying to earn a steady profit from. Brock is set to lose his title at Wrestlemania, another time where many people's subscription will be up again (and many starting).
> 
> 
> Yes, not having Brock around is hurting the product. There's no denying that at all. Viewers are popping in not knowing who holds the big strap? It's an issue. However, that's not his fault. It's the people who are writing the 8 hours of content each week who are to blame. They are not fitting in the title in anywhere. When's the last time you heard a direct mention as to someone facing Lesnar for the title? Not since before NOC. There were reports of Heyman being taken out of the show last second over the past few RAWs after NOC, Brock has barely even been mentioned, he's free to do vignettes and taped promos, and would appear for some extra cash (which may sound absurd to you, but tell me would you rather have a new celebrity guest host each week or Lesnar? WWE seems to be choosing the former).
> 
> WWE as far I am concerned has not taken any steps to do any of that, instead they are entirely shifting focus to Cena/Ambrose getting their hands on Rollins, and are leaving the title out of it entirely. Brock does need to be in the picture, but it's on WWE to the take the step to fit him in it.


Yeah he was made champion to sell network subs and he is not on the next PPV on that very network LOL
FAIL


----------



## birthday_massacre

kokepepsi said:


> One segment
> Brock would be in ONE segment
> How is it his fault when he would be in ONE segment
> His segment would be at the start,9pm,10pm,overrun
> So his ONE segment would gain due to the time placement no matter what
> Given that its Brock, maybe at best he gains 300k extra more viewers?
> 
> You are bitching about 300k viewers which would barely boost the rating
> OH yeah and then his ONE segment would be followed by 4 shit ones that lose millions of viewers
> 
> :ti
> 
> Fix the midcard
> Fix the midcard
> Gangrel would gain 200k viewers
> Al snow would gain 100k viewers
> Sable would gain 300kviewers
> This is how the AE got them 8.0 ratings
> Not cuz of one guy you fucking marks



Then how is it Punk or Bryans fault when they were champion and ratings were not that great yet people would blame them for the low ratings.
of course its not Brocks fault. I was being sarcastic and pointing out the flaw since people use the same argument when someone like DB or Punk were champion. 

I am just pointing out the double standard and it worked to perfection.

Ratings never have to do with just one guy it has to do with the product overall. and again ratings are all BS anyways since like I always have said, unless you have a Neilson rating box your viewership doesn't even count.


----------



## Batz

birthday_massacre said:


> Yeah he was made champion to sell network subs and he is not on the next PPV on that very network LOL
> FAIL


Why does he need to be there for HiAC? They can sell that PPV alone with the current main event scene, and they are locked with over 700,000 subscriptions till Royal Rumble. He doesn't even need to be there for Survivor Series, and they might even keep him out of that at this point, although I hope they don't.


----------



## Darkness is here

^ I thought lesnar was given the title because of reigns.


----------



## Starbuck

The Authority vs. Cena/Ambrose has been done to death the past month. It's ticking over but isn't anything particularly exciting. No Brock. No Bryan. No Reigns. Midcard shot to hell. THE SKY IS FALLING THE SKY IS FALLING. 

:vince2


----------



## Batz

Darkness is here said:


> ^ I thought lesnar was given the title because of reigns.


Maybe (I'd say that is one of the reasons personally). But Lesnar winning the title at Summerslam was set from the moment they decided to end Taker's streak. Whether he had beaten Bryan or Cena or anyone, he was set to win the title at SS months in advance.



Starbuck said:


> The Authority vs. Cena/Ambrose has been done to death the past month. It's ticking over but isn't anything particularly exciting. No Brock. No Bryan. No Reigns. Midcard shot to hell. THE SKY IS FALLING THE SKY IS FALLING.
> 
> :vince2


What was even advertised for RAW in the US market? The only hyped segment I could think of was Rusev/Big Show incident and Reigns' "return". Not exactly a "must-see" show for the casual audience who make up the majority of the weekly viewership .


----------



## Batz

Double post. Sorry.


----------



## birthday_massacre

Batz said:


> Why does he need to be there for HiAC? They can sell that PPV alone with the current main event scene, and they are locked with over 700,000 subscriptions till Royal Rumble. He doesn't even need to be there for Survivor Series, and they might even keep him out of that at this point, although I hope they don't.


Because the WWE champion should be at every PPV defending the title. And if they are trying to get new subs or even renewals for the network Lesnar should be at every PPV while he is champion.

Plus they still have to sell the cable and sattilte PPVs that are $60 and if Lesnar is not going to be there you can expect a huge drop off on those.

If you think its ok the WWE title is not defended at every PPV then you have no clue about business.


----------



## Batz

birthday_massacre said:


> Because the WWE champion should be at every PPV defending the title. And if they are trying to get new subs or even renewals for the network Lesnar should be at every PPV while he is champion.
> 
> Plus they still have to sell the cable and sattilte PPVs that are $60 and if Lesnar is not going to be there you can expect a huge drop off on those.
> 
> If you think its ok the WWE title is not defended at every PPV then you have no clue about business.


No you seem to be missing many variables. WWE made it clear that they are moving away from the second-hand $59.95 PPV buys. You must have watched NOC, and you must've seen and heard the commentating group on the PPV and on the pre-show poking fun at viewers who purchased the $60 PPV instead of the $10 Network. It is evident that the Network is the sell now, it is the top priority.

Yes I agree WWE champion should be defended at every PPV. I'd love for Lesnar to be around as often as the champions before him, but this is not about PPV anymore. It's the WWE Network. Times are changing, and so is the WWE business philosophy. They are trying to sell the Network at $9.99 with a 6-month commitment. The 700,000+ they currently have are locked in till Rumble, they do not _need_ to cast Lesnar into any show until those same 700,000+ subscribers are nearly up on their 6-months (which happens to be around Royal Rumble 2015 for the majority of their subscriber base).

The mindset is different, this is not 2013, 2008, 2001, 1995, 1980. This is 2014, the era of the WWE Network. PPV buyrates are on there way to being useless to the WWE, and they themselves have made that statement to us. They are only concerned with getting as many subscribers as possible on a 6-month cycle. The sooner you comprehend that philosophy, the better you will understand the fuckery that is going on with the current product.


----------



## Cnunez

kokepepsi said:


> One segment
> Brock would be in ONE segment
> How is it his fault when he would be in ONE segment
> His segment would be at the start,9pm,10pm,overrun
> So his ONE segment would gain due to the time placement no matter what
> Given that its Brock, maybe at best he gains 300k extra more viewers?
> 
> You are bitching about 300k viewers which would barely boost the rating
> OH yeah and then his ONE segment would be followed by 4 shit ones that lose millions of viewers
> 
> :ti
> 
> Fix the midcard
> Fix the midcard
> Gangrel would gain 200k viewers
> Al snow would gain 100k viewers
> Sable would gain 300kviewers
> This is how the AE got them 8.0 ratings
> Not cuz of one guy you fucking marks


AGREED!!!!!!!


----------



## birthday_massacre

Batz said:


> No you seem to be missing many variables. WWE made it clear that they are moving away from the second-hand $59.95 PPV buys. You must have watched NOC, and you must've seen and heard the commentating group on the PPV and on the pre-show poking fun at viewers who purchased the $60 PPV instead of the $10 Network. It is evident that the Network is the sell now, it is the top priority.
> 
> Yes I agree WWE champion should be defended at every PPV. I'd love for Lesnar to be around as often as the champions before him, but this is not about PPV anymore. It's the WWE Network. Times are changing, and so is the WWE business philosophy. They are trying to sell the Network at $9.99 with a 6-month commitment. The 700,000+ they currently have are locked in till Rumble, they do not _need_ to cast Lesnar into any show until those same 700,000+ subscribers are nearly up on their 6-months (which happens to be around Royal Rumble 2015 for the majority of their subscriber base).
> 
> The mindset is different, this is not 2013, 2008, 2001, 1995, 1980. This is 2014, the era of the WWE Network. PPV buyrates are on there way to being useless to the WWE, and they themselves have made that statement to us. They are only concerned with getting as many subscribers as possible on a 6-month cycle. The sooner you comprehend that philosophy, the better you will understand the fuckery that is going on with the current product.



No you like the WWE is missing some variables. The WWE is stupid to not give a crap about the $60 PPVs while they still have them. That is a ton of lost revenue, and Vince wonders why some investors are suing him because of all that loss of revenue and the stock tanking. Even if the network is the top sell, the WWE still should be trying to also sell the $60 PPVs instead of making the PPVs just a glorified RAW which is exactly what they are doing now and its not working now is it? 

And you need to keep those fans that have the network now that are locked in because if the WWE champion is only on lets say 3 of the 6 PPVs then they have no reason to renew it, and no one that does not have it doenst have a reason to buy it since the PPVs are crap and don't have the title defenses on it, its basically just a sunday night raw.

And that 700,000 was supposed to be way over 1 million but its not. What they are doing is not working and its flopping big time. And they are making it worse by not having the WWE champion on every PPV and trying to make every PPV a huge deal. The wWE doesn't even try to build the PPVs anymore they just half ass it all the time. That is a terrible business model.


I understand exactly what the company is dolng and I can clearly see how wrong and broken it is its just funny that Vince can't see it.

Vince is giving no one a reason to buy the network.


----------



## Batz

birthday_massacre said:


> No you like the WWE is missing some variables. The WWE is stupid to not give a crap about the $60 PPVs while they still have them. That is a ton of lost revenue, and Vince wonders why some investors are suing him because of all that loss of revenue and the stock tanking. Even if the network is the top sell, the WWE still should be trying to also sell the $60 PPVs instead of making the PPVs just a glorified RAW which is exactly what they are doing now and its not working now is it?
> 
> And you need to keep those fans that have the network now that are locked in because if the WWE champion is only on lets say 3 of the 6 PPVs then they have no reason to renew it, and no one that does not have it doenst have a reason to buy it since the PPVs are crap and don't have the title defenses on it, its basically just a sunday night raw.
> 
> And that 700,000 was supposed to be way over 1 million but its not. What they are doing is not working and its flopping big time. And they are making it worse by not having the WWE champion on every PPV and trying to make every PPV a huge deal. The wWE doesn't even try to build the PPVs anymore they just half ass it all the time. That is a terrible business model.
> 
> 
> I understand exactly what the company is dolng and I can clearly see how wrong and broken it is its just funny that Vince can't see it.
> 
> Vince is giving no one a reason to buy the network.


I agree with many points here. WWE should not be dropping the second-hand PPV buys. It's really stupid, because if the Network fails they have burned bridges with top TV networks for nothing.

And yes I agree the way they are selling the Network is also stupid. They seem to not care about the B and C ppvs and only put effort into the big four (atleast thus far). It does not attract subscribers.

The 1 million subscriber within the US market was a ridiculous projection to begin with. There are multiple articles on it, but simply put that projection alone was the reason for nearly $50 million in cost-cutting. 700,000 is definitely a disappointment, but it wouldn't have been if their head of finances and marketing weren't suck tools (forgot their names, to lazy to google them). Not to mention how they went global very late, and dropped the ball in Canada and the UK *of all places*.

I'm glad you see the company's direction. and I agree they are messing up on so many areas it's hard to understand.

Which is what I am trying to get at. Brock Lesnar is not at fault, it is the WWE. He is without a doubt a sell, if WWE wishes to sell him. But they aren't doing that. They can make him appear for a match at HiAC for what? $250k + bonuses (maybe less maybe more)? Can easily set him up and make him appear on a few RAWs, and they should. But they aren't going to, as they have made it clear that they only wish to sell the $10 Network at a 6-month commitment. It's the wrong way to go for sure, but as CM Punk put it best "Vince is a millionaire that should be a billionaire".


----------



## tailhook

*Re: RAW 10/6 Rating - 'Dropped to the lowest rating since December 2012'*



njcam said:


> Being from Australia, I'm not exactly fluent in when NFL games are played, but I'm guessing RAW goes up against NFL Monday Night Football.
> 
> Is the answer to change RAW to Tuesday nights? ..... and Smackdown on Thursday nights (just started)?


Monday Night Football was cancelled in 2005 and an ESPN production that took on the generic term sprang up in its place. Either way... MNF has been an institution since 1970 and RAW has always gone head-to-head with it in the Fall.

If there were to be a hiatus in wrestling.. the ideal time is Sept -> Dec as its always traditionally been the downseason for wrestling given the new fall tv season, football, baseball ending, back to school, etc. Too much stuff going on.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Rock was on the show and it got a 2.63?

LOL...

Wrestling is DEAD.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Math_Stats_Guru said:


> Would be surprised if it didn't do well over 3.0.


:lmao


----------



## Batz

Randy Lahey said:


> Rock was on the show and it got a 2.63?
> 
> LOL...
> 
> Wrestling is DEAD.


He wasn't advertised. It's a three hour show now and RAW in general was awful out side of him and Dean Ambrose.


----------



## Peerless

In the hours Ambrose is involved in is there a raise in viewership?

Does he draw?


----------



## The Caped Crusader

WWE fucked up. When they stripped Bryan, they should have handed the title to Batista. He could have done a part-time schedule until Summerslam, then went full-time again. Give him a long reign and either set up a Batista/Bryan or Batista/Reigns match for Wrestlemania 31. The fans hate him enough that you'd create a star, or have a big match with built in history in Bryan. Instead, Lesnar is basically gone for several months, and he hardly generates much of a reaction as it is. Cena has basically saved those matches because fans always react to him. With the absence of so many other stars, the show is becoming even more unbearable.


----------



## birthday_massacre

Batz said:


> I agree with many points here. WWE should not be dropping the second-hand PPV buys. It's really stupid, because if the Network fails they have burned bridges with top TV networks for nothing.
> 
> And yes I agree the way they are selling the Network is also stupid. They seem to not care about the B and C ppvs and only put effort into the big four (atleast thus far). It does not attract subscribers.
> 
> The 1 million subscriber within the US market was a ridiculous projection to begin with. There are multiple articles on it, but simply put that projection alone was the reason for nearly $50 million in cost-cutting. 700,000 is definitely a disappointment, but it wouldn't have been if their head of finances and marketing weren't suck tools (forgot their names, to lazy to google them). Not to mention how they went global very late, and dropped the ball in Canada and the UK *of all places*.
> 
> I'm glad you see the company's direction. and I agree they are messing up on so many areas it's hard to understand.
> 
> Which is what I am trying to get at. Brock Lesnar is not at fault, it is the WWE. He is without a doubt a sell, if WWE wishes to sell him. But they aren't doing that. They can make him appear for a match at HiAC for what? $250k + bonuses (maybe less maybe more)? Can easily set him up and make him appear on a few RAWs, and they should. But they aren't going to, as they have made it clear that they only wish to sell the $10 Network at a 6-month commitment. It's the wrong way to go for sure, but as CM Punk put it best "Vince is a millionaire that should be a billionaire".


When I say Brock is to blame, I don't mean Brock the person. I mean the WWE are to blame for putting the title on someone that won't be at every Raw or every PPV and that happens to be Lesnar.
It has nothing to do with him, he has to be with the WWE champion and title not being on RAW every week and defended at a every PPV.


Brock is a special attraction since he isn't at every PPV or Raw, and that is exactly why he shouldn't be WWE champion.
He is bigger than the title anyways and doesn't even need it.

He should have lost the title at the last PPV by Cena getting pinned by Rollins thus Lesnar was not really pinned. Then let him come back at survivor series and wi the title back, and then defend it and drop it at the RR in Jan.

The WWE is doing this all wrong and its blowing up in their faces.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

I guess when the WWE Network subscriptions drop, and people realise that Lesnar did nothing for renewals, people can stop arguing about him being such a big "sell". He's going to do very little for subscriptions, and WWE are basically using him to elevate Reigns. They're thinking long-term, and they likely don't want to sacrifice someone like Cena to do that.


----------



## birthday_massacre

The Caped Crusader said:


> I guess when the WWE Network subscriptions drop, and people realise that Lesnar did nothing for renewals, people can stop arguing about him being such a big "sell". He's going to do very little for subscriptions, and WWE are basically using him to elevate Reigns. They're thinking long-term, and they likely don't want to sacrifice someone like Cena to do that.


And the sad thing is Reigns is the wrong guy to elevate, he is so generic and will be a huge flop. Ambrose and Rollins are way more over than him and better talents.


----------



## #Mark

Brock can wrestle an advertised match on RAW and it won't make a difference.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

Are they really only at 700k subs in Oct? That's very, very sad.


----------



## dan the marino

Did they post quarter breakdowns yet? I want to see how many people went on exodus following the Today Show shit.


----------



## Frico

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_81171.shtml#.VDbrvektDmI


> Monday's WWE Raw fell to the lowest TV rating since the end of 2012. If not for The Rock's surprise appearance at the top of the third hour, Monday's show might have dropped even further to an historical low point.
> 
> Quarter-hour TV ratings indicate that Raw was on a flat line with no growth leading into Q9 at the top of the third hour. Rock's segment with Rusev and Lana easily delivered the high point of the show, then Raw immediately returned to the same flat level the remainder of the third hour.
> 
> The over-run - featuring John Cena in a handicap match against The Authority's henchmen - delivered a slight bump, but it was still down about 200,000 m18-49 viewers from Rock's segment.
> 
> Numerically in the males 18-49 demo, Rock's segment drew 1.387 million viewers and scored a 2.20 rating. The over-run drew 1.195 million viewers and scored a 1.90 rating.
> 
> The next-closest segment was Q8, which contained the first few minutes of Rock's surprise appearance, drawing 1.041 million viewers and scoring a 1.65 rating.
> 
> Also notable is two promoted segments did not fare well. The "Today Show" segment bombed in Q3 with a near-show-low 1.43 rating and 899,000 viewers. Also, Roman Reigns's on-camera interview bombed in Q6 with a 1.45 rating and 918,500 viewers.
> 
> Raw Break Down - m18-49 demographic
> 
> - Overall Show: 1.61 rating and 1.012 million viewers.
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened right at the average with a 1.63 rating and 1.029 million viewers for The Authority, John Cena, and Dean Ambrose, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q2: Raw dropped to a 1.42 rating and 897,000 viewers for a thrown-together six-man tag of Dolph Ziggler & the Usos vs. Cesaro & WWE tag champs Rhodes Bros, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q3: Raw stayed flat at a 1.43 rating and 899,000 viewers for Adam Rose's segment with "Today Show" hosts Kathie Lee Gifford and Hoda Kotb. There was also one commercial.
> 
> - Q4: Raw stayed flat at a 1.47 rating and 925,000 viewers for Mark Henry vs. Bo Dallas and one commercial.
> 
> - Q5: Raw got a slight top-of-the-hour bump to the show average. The segment scored a 1.61 rating and drew 1.013 million viewers for Dean Ambrose and John Cena hashing out their issues before Ambrose checked out of Raw. This was followed by a commercial and Cena & Triple H backstage.
> 
> - Q6: Raw decreased to a 1.59 rating and 1.003 million viewers for Brie Bella vs. Summer Rae, one commercial, and Jack Swagger vs. Tyson Kidd. The Divas match outdrew Swagger-Kidd.
> 
> - Q7: Raw fell to a 1.49 rating and 941,000 viewers for Roman Reigns's "interview" with Michael Cole, one commercial, and El Torito vs. Hornswoggle in the "This is Stupid" match.
> 
> Most alarming is Reigns's on-camera was outdrawn by the Torito-Swoggle mascot battle. Reigns's segment peaked at a measly 997,000 viewers when Raw cut to break, while the mascot match peaked at 1.146 million viewers.
> 
> - Q8: Raw increased to a 1.65 rating and 1.041 million viewers for one commercial leading to a long Rusev & Lana talking segment before Rock made a surprise appearance just before the top of the hour.
> 
> The peak audience was 1.276 million viewers at 9:59 p.m. EST leading to Rock's dialogue with Rusev & Lana.
> 
> - Q9: Raw hit a show-high 2.20 rating and 1.387 million viewers. The peak was 1.535 million viewers at 10:07 p.m. in the middle of the dialogue. The segment then wrapped up with 1.531 million viewers at 10:09 p.m. before Raw cut to break at 10:13 p.m.
> 
> - Q10: Raw immediately fell back to the same level as before the "Halftime Show" with Rock & Rusev & Lana. This segment drew a 1.58 rating and 997,000 viewers for a Divas tag match, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q11: Raw declined again to a 1.53 rating and 961,000 viewers for U.S. champion Sheamus vs. The Miz, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q12: Raw declined again to a show-low 1.40 rating and 880,000 viewers for two commercials, Joan Lunden's on-stage speech, and the first few minutes of the Cena vs. Authority handicap match.
> 
> - Over-Run: Raw increased to a 1.90 rating and 1.195 million viewers for the latest non-finish main event, post-match return by Dean Ambrose, and chaotic brawl to wrap Raw.
> 
> Caldwell's Analysis: The exchange between Rock and Rusev & Lana really was like a Halftime Show providing a break from the filler and gunk before and after the segment. If not for Rock's return, this week's Raw performance could have been much worse. Also, it's no surprise the audience rejected the "Today Show" segment, but the reception to Reigns's on-camera interview should be a wake-up call. WWE needs to take him off the air for several weeks and let the audience anticipate his return from injury. The character is being force-fed right now, and the presentation of his "interview" on Raw only made matters worse.


----------



## Rap God

Frico said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_81171.shtml#.VDbrvektDmI


Adam Rose's segment drew more than the 6 man tag match :maury


----------



## D.M.N.

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_81171.shtml

In the Male 18-49 demographic, apart from Rock and the overrun, the show bombed.


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

All of Ambrose's segments gained viewers. The Reigns interview lost viewers.

Obviously The Rock was the biggest gainer.

Best part:



> Most alarming is Reigns's on-camera was outdrawn by the Torito-Swoggle mascot battle. Reigns's segment peaked at a measly 997,000 viewers when Raw cut to break, while the mascot match peaked at 1.146 million viewers.


----------



## Starbuck

Dat breakdown!

So the show opened on the average, bombed, bombed some more, bumped back up for 9pm, bombed, BOMBED HARD FOR THE TODAY SHOW, bumped back up for 10pm, skyROCKeted for...The Rock side, bombed, bombed some more, bumped back up for the overrun? You don't say. 

:rock4 once again saving this shit even with an unannounced appearance. 

:ti at Reigns. Even though it was a short segment it's funny to see that nobody gives a fuck. His Rumble win is going to be even worse than Batista's this year if they keep going with him the way they have and not because of the boos but because of the deafening silence of nobody giving a damn.


----------



## The True Believer

A bull and a gator outdrew the next WWEWHC Champion?


----------



## A-C-P

KINGPIN said:


> A bull and a gator outdrew the next WWEWHC Champion?


So Slater/Gator are the next new faces of the WWE?


----------



## Wynter

I did't even watch his Roman's interview and I'm one of his biggest marks :lol It wreaked of a useless filler segment and I was right.


----------



## joeycalz

Good. I hope it bombs again next week because I'm not going to be watching again.


----------



## Wynter

Seriously though. WWE needs to get their shit together. Cena/Ambrose/Authority can only do so much. It takes a collective effort to carry a show unless there's a talent on there who is hugely over and their segments really up the viewership/ratings. Its's a shame out of a 3 hour show, only a couple segments and maybe a match is the only things worth talking about :no:


----------



## LOL-ins

Wouldn't be surprised if it dropped to a final 2.5 rating next week. This show would of been destroyed had it not been for :rock4 rescuing the show from being a total fail.


----------



## MaybeLock

> Most alarming is Reigns's on-camera was outdrawn by the Torito-Swoggle mascot battle. Reigns's segment peaked at a measly 997,000 viewers when Raw cut to break, while the mascot match peaked at 1.146 million viewers.


:haha

DAT DRAW.


----------



## LKRocks

No way in hell Reings goes on to win the rumble and defeat Lesnar at Mania. He's being overshadowed by both of his former Shield allies. 

I'd bet on Ambrose or Bryan to be the one facing Lesnar at Mania


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

LKRocks said:


> No way in hell Reings goes on to win the rumble and defeat Lesnar at Mania. He's being overshadowed by both of his former Shield allies.
> 
> I'd bet on Ambrose or Bryan to be the one facing Lesnar at Mania


What you said is 100% true. Problem is Vince has shown that he cares more about how a guy looks than talent or even drawing power. He has no competition so he can do pretty much what he wants.

I assure you Reigns will still be the one to beat Lesnar.


----------



## RatedR10

Holy crap, Roman Reigns :lmao

The midgets out-drew him.


----------



## THANOS

MaybeLock said:


> :haha
> 
> DAT DRAW.


:lmao :ti

That's just :lol :lol. Good to see!



LKRocks said:


> No way in hell Reings goes on to win the rumble and defeat Lesnar at Mania. He's being overshadowed by both of his former Shield allies.
> 
> I'd bet on Ambrose or Bryan to be the one facing Lesnar at Mania


We can only hope. If the metrics show he's not growing as a draw, then Vince will go with someone else. If there's one thing we know with Vince, is money always talks in the end. Bryan didn't main event WM30 based solely on crowd reaction, he main evented it because he proved he was a massive draw that people wanted to see in ratings and merchandise sales, and that the Summerslam buys were a minor setback and not the norm.



Math_Stats_Guru said:


> What you said is 100% true. Problem is Vince has shown that he cares more about how a guy looks than talent or even drawing power. He has no competition so he can do pretty much what he wants.
> 
> I assure you Reigns will still be the one to beat Lesnar.


Maybe, but only to a point. Ryback and Mason Ryan aren't former world champions, and likely never will be, with one fired and the other forever in the midcard. Reigns' ceiling is Orton imo. He'll never be fully accepted as the top guy the way Cena is because he doesn't have the charisma, mic skills, or ring work of Cena. He'll certainly never be universally loved the way Bryan is. Is best hope is to get to Orton's level as an overpushed top guy, that was meant to be the face of the company, but never quite got there. It's still a great position to be in imo.



RatedR10 said:


> Holy crap, Roman Reigns :lmao
> 
> The midgets out-drew him.


Yeah, pretty funny lol. There's a joke in there somewhere. Imagine what will happen when the "vanilla midgets" return/debut as competition (Bryan, Zayn, Steen, Itami, Balor, Neville), Reigns will fade into diva level territory in the ratings.


----------



## Murph

MaybeLock said:


> :haha
> 
> DAT DRAW.


Is this in male viewers 18-35?


----------



## Londrick

Not only are vanilla midgets outdrawing Reigns but actual midgets as well.


----------



## THANOS

Summer Rae said:


> Not only are vanilla midgets outdrawing Reigns but actual midgets as well.


There we go :clap. Beautiful :.


----------



## Choke2Death

Midgets outdrawing the next face of the company. :ti

Nothing unusual with The Great One making the save. :rock


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

So many sad Reigns haters bashing him for a pre-taped segment LOL. If it was Ambrose or rollins the ratings would been the same or lower.


----------



## birthday_massacre

CenaBoy4Life said:


> So many sad Reigns haters bashing him for a pre-taped segment LOL. If it was Ambrose or rollins the ratings would been the same or lower.


That is why the ratings for the rollins and ambrose segment got an increase right


----------



## Londrick

CenaBoy4Life said:


> So many sad Reigns haters bashing him for a pre-taped segment LOL. If it was Ambrose or rollins the ratings would been the same or lower.


Pre taped or not is irrelevant. They hyped the segment multiple times leading up to it and it bombed.

Hopefully this leads to El Torito vs Swoggle vs Brock for the WWE title @ WM 31.


----------



## THANOS

CenaBoy4Life said:


> So many sad Reigns haters bashing him for a pre-taped segment LOL. If it was Ambrose or rollins the ratings would been the same or lower.


:ti



birthday_massacre said:


> That is why the ratings for the rollins and ambrose segment got an increase right


This.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:lmao at Reigns' segment bombing, although to be fair, it wasn't a top of the hour segment.

DA RAWK does it again, and showing that even a surprise return, as long as it goes on for more than a minute or two, can lead to a massive bump. Rock's segment left everything else in the dust, although the overrun did respectable in comparison to the show average. 

Wish we'd get some consistent breakdowns. No doubt Rock's segment helped pull the viewership up a lot, it makes you wonder if/how much some of Brock's segments helped their respective shows (even in cases where the overall viewership dropped from the previous week when he wasn't there).


----------



## Wynter

Ok, you all are being dramatic :lol One low rating won't kill him. Remember when Seth vs Dean main evented Raw and it drew low ratings?? And that's when the feud was getting hot. The Shield aren't draws yet. I don't know why ya'll acting like Dean and Seth are drawing huge numbers that are saving the product or something :lol 

Now, if Roman were drawing abysmal numbers every time he went on, then I'd worry. You really expect Reigns to be this huge draw already? Dude isn't even over enough for all that :lol Raw as a whole still bombed and drew the lowest rating in almost two years.

Roman's interview at least drew more than the main event match. I'll take it :lmao :lmao


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

Doesn't matter if they hype it! People know its pre-taped and nothing important will happen or be said. It's a bathroom break segment and it doesn't matter who is in it.

Stop being BLIND HATERS.


----------



## THANOS

WynterWarm12 said:


> Ok, you all are being dramatic :lol One low rating won't kill him. Remember when Seth vs Dean main evented Raw and it drew low ratings?? And that's when the feud was getting hot. The Shield aren't draws yet. I don't know why ya'll acting like Dean and Seth are drawing huge numbers that are saving the product or something :lol


Just curious, did we ever get a full breakdown that week, or was it just an hourly breakdown with the third hour being the lowest? 



WynterWarm12 said:


> Now, if Roman were drawing abysmal numbers every time he went on, then I'd worry. You really expect Reigns to be this huge draw already? Dude isn't even over enough for all that :lol Raw as a whole still bombed and drew the lowest rating in almost two years.
> 
> Roman's interview at least drew more than the main event match. I'll take it :lmao :lmao


That's fair. However, Bryan was drawing show highs in odd quarters wrestling Randy Orton for the 20th time, so an overly hyped Reigns interview segment after the guy has been on the shelf for weeks should do decent at least. It sure as hell shouldn't be the weak spot in a quarter shared with a midget match :|.


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

WynterWarm12 said:


> Ok, you all are being dramatic :lol One low rating won't kill him. Remember when Seth vs Dean main evented Raw and it drew low ratings?? And that's when the feud was getting hot. The Shield aren't draws yet. I don't know why ya'll acting like Dean and Seth are drawing huge numbers that are saving the product or something :lol
> 
> Now, if Roman were drawing abysmal numbers every time he went on, then I'd worry. You really expect Reigns to be this huge draw already? Dude isn't even over enough for all that :lol Raw as a whole still bombed and drew the lowest rating in almost two years.
> 
> Roman's interview at least drew more than the main event match. I'll take it :lmao :lmao


But it drew less than all of Ambrose's segments.

Also, not sure we got breakdowns for the RAWs main evented by Reigns but they had horrible viewership and ratings considering they weren't going up against MNF at the time.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

The Rock proves once again why he is the single biggest draw of all time. The GOAT :rock4


And even though Reigns got low ratings this week, yet he is the second largest merchandise seller behind John Cena. Reigns is still the man even when draw power is concerned. Haters better believe that :reigns


----------



## Rap God

Reigns the draw :maury. There's something that Vince likes more than body builders and thats money AND WHO WILL BRING YOU THE MOST MONEY?

:ambrose DIS GUY


----------



## Math_Stats_Guru

Boots2Asses said:


> The Rock proves once again why he is the single biggest draw of all time. The GOAT :rock4
> 
> 
> And even though Reigns got low ratings this week, yet he is the second largest merchandise seller behind John Cena. Reigns is still the man even when draw power is concerned. Haters better believe that :reigns


No, he isn't. There is nothing to suggest he is any kind of a draw. The data that was posted a couple of days ago was for September only. Who was he competing with? Cena sold significantly more than him, Ambrose was absent for the majority of the month, Bryan has been out for several months. He out sold the Usos, Sheamus, etc. Wow! Good for him. So did CM Punk and he wasn't a draw. Except CM Punk did it for more than a month and he even out sold Cena.

His segment fucking bombed and the RAWs he main evented had poor numbers even in the absence of competition from MNF.


----------



## D.M.N.

Year-on-year M18-49 comparison is horrific - this is for the October 7th, 2013 episode: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/973441-all-tv-ratings-talk-here-32.html#post24932817


----------



## Bfo4jd

Frico said:


> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_81171.shtml#.VDbrvektDmI
> 
> Monday's WWE Raw fell to the lowest TV rating since the end of 2012. If not for The Rock's surprise appearance at the top of the third hour, Monday's show might have dropped even further to an historical low point.
> 
> Quarter-hour TV ratings indicate that Raw was on a flat line with no growth leading into Q9 at the top of the third hour. Rock's segment with Rusev and Lana easily delivered the high point of the show, then Raw immediately returned to the same flat level the remainder of the third hour.
> 
> The over-run - featuring John Cena in a handicap match against The Authority's henchmen - delivered a slight bump, but it was still down about 200,000 m18-49 viewers from Rock's segment.
> 
> Numerically in the males 18-49 demo, Rock's segment drew 1.387 million viewers and scored a 2.20 rating. The over-run drew 1.195 million viewers and scored a 1.90 rating.
> 
> The next-closest segment was Q8, which contained the first few minutes of Rock's surprise appearance, drawing 1.041 million viewers and scoring a 1.65 rating.
> 
> Also notable is two promoted segments did not fare well. The "Today Show" segment bombed in Q3 with a near-show-low 1.43 rating and 899,000 viewers. Also, Roman Reigns's on-camera interview bombed in Q6 with a 1.45 rating and 918,500 viewers.
> 
> Raw Break Down - m18-49 demographic
> 
> - Overall Show: 1.61 rating and 1.012 million viewers.
> 
> - Q1: Raw opened right at the average with a 1.63 rating and 1.029 million viewers for The Authority, John Cena, and Dean Ambrose, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q2: Raw dropped to a 1.42 rating and 897,000 viewers for a thrown-together six-man tag of Dolph Ziggler & the Usos vs. Cesaro & WWE tag champs Rhodes Bros, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q3: Raw stayed flat at a 1.43 rating and 899,000 viewers for Adam Rose's segment with "Today Show" hosts Kathie Lee Gifford and Hoda Kotb. There was also one commercial.
> 
> - Q4: Raw stayed flat at a 1.47 rating and 925,000 viewers for Mark Henry vs. Bo Dallas and one commercial.
> 
> - Q5: Raw got a slight top-of-the-hour bump to the show average. The segment scored a 1.61 rating and drew 1.013 million viewers for Dean Ambrose and John Cena hashing out their issues before Ambrose checked out of Raw. This was followed by a commercial and Cena & Triple H backstage.
> 
> - Q6: Raw decreased to a 1.59 rating and 1.003 million viewers for Brie Bella vs. Summer Rae, one commercial, and Jack Swagger vs. Tyson Kidd. The Divas match outdrew Swagger-Kidd.
> 
> - Q7: Raw fell to a 1.49 rating and 941,000 viewers for Roman Reigns's "interview" with Michael Cole, one commercial, and El Torito vs. Hornswoggle in the "This is Stupid" match.
> 
> Most alarming is Reigns's on-camera was outdrawn by the Torito-Swoggle mascot battle. Reigns's segment peaked at a measly 997,000 viewers when Raw cut to break, while the mascot match peaked at 1.146 million viewers.
> 
> - Q8: Raw increased to a 1.65 rating and 1.041 million viewers for one commercial leading to a long Rusev & Lana talking segment before Rock made a surprise appearance just before the top of the hour.
> 
> The peak audience was 1.276 million viewers at 9:59 p.m. EST leading to Rock's dialogue with Rusev & Lana.
> 
> - Q9: Raw hit a show-high 2.20 rating and 1.387 million viewers. The peak was 1.535 million viewers at 10:07 p.m. in the middle of the dialogue. The segment then wrapped up with 1.531 million viewers at 10:09 p.m. before Raw cut to break at 10:13 p.m.
> 
> - Q10: Raw immediately fell back to the same level as before the "Halftime Show" with Rock & Rusev & Lana. This segment drew a 1.58 rating and 997,000 viewers for a Divas tag match, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q11: Raw declined again to a 1.53 rating and 961,000 viewers for U.S. champion Sheamus vs. The Miz, plus one commercial.
> 
> - Q12: Raw declined again to a show-low 1.40 rating and 880,000 viewers for two commercials, Joan Lunden's on-stage speech, and the first few minutes of the Cena vs. Authority handicap match.
> 
> - Over-Run: Raw increased to a 1.90 rating and 1.195 million viewers for the latest non-finish main event, post-match return by Dean Ambrose, and chaotic brawl to wrap Raw.




Last year for comparison...

Q1: 1.77 Stephanie slapping around Big show and firing him
Q2: 1.67 Dolph Ziggler vs. Damien Sandow
Q3: 1.95 Brad Maddox's WWE Title announcement, six-Divas tag match
Q4: 1.74 Los Matadores tag match 

Q5: 1.95 top of the hour Punk/Heyman segment, and first-half of Punk/Truth vs. Ryback/Axel. 
Q6: 1.87 end of the tag match, Bob Backlund promo
Q7: 1.80 Randy Orton vs. Kofi Kingston 
Q8: 1.86 Shawn Michaels' return + promo

Q9: 1.95 top of the hour Del Rio vs. Ricardo, announcement of Cena return
Q10: 1.72 Fandango vs. Zack Ryder,
Q11: 1.66 Miz TV segment + backstage promos + commercials
Q12: 1.87 Bryan & Rhodes vs. Shield main event

OR: 2.30 Big Show returns to knockout Triple H for the first time.


----------



## D.M.N.

So year-on-year in the Males 18-49 demographic - 7th October 2013 vs 6th October 2014

Q1 - 1.77 rating vs 1.63 rating
Q2 - 1.67 rating vs 1.42 rating
Q3 - 1.95 rating vs 1.43 rating
Q4 - 1.74 rating vs 1.47 rating
....
Q5 - 1.95 rating vs 1.61 rating
Q6 - 1.87 rating vs 1.59 rating
Q7 - 1.80 rating vs 1.49 rating
Q8 - 1.86 rating vs 1.65 rating
....
Q9 - 1.95 rating vs 2.20 rating
Q10 - 1.72 rating vs 1.58 rating
Q11 - 1.66 rating vs 1.53 rating
Q12 - 1.87 rating vs 1.40 rating
....
OR - 2.30 rating vs 1.90 rating


----------



## MaybeLock

CenaBoy4Life said:


> So many sad Reigns haters bashing him for a pre-taped segment LOL. If it was Ambrose or rollins the ratings would been the same or lower.


Outdrawn by Torito-Swoggle

Outdrawn by Torito-Swoggle

Outdrawn by Torito-Swoggle

*Outdrawn by Torito-Swoggle*

:ti


----------



## Starbuck

Had a quick glance over a few pages from the link DMN posted. :lmao Ah, the glory days on this thread lol.


----------



## Kabraxal

D.M.N. said:


> So year-on-year in the Males 18-49 demographic - 7th October 2013 vs 6th October 2014
> 
> Q1 - 1.77 rating vs 1.63 rating
> Q2 - 1.67 rating vs 1.42 rating
> Q3 - 1.95 rating vs 1.43 rating
> Q4 - 1.74 rating vs 1.47 rating
> ....
> Q5 - 1.95 rating vs 1.61 rating
> Q6 - 1.87 rating vs 1.59 rating
> Q7 - 1.80 rating vs 1.49 rating
> Q8 - 1.86 rating vs 1.65 rating
> ....
> Q9 - 1.95 rating vs 2.20 rating
> Q10 - 1.72 rating vs 1.58 rating
> Q11 - 1.66 rating vs 1.53 rating
> Q12 - 1.87 rating vs 1.40 rating
> ....
> OR - 2.30 rating vs 1.90 rating


Think the base is finally giving up on the WWE... those numbers should show them that how they've been doing it the past few years isn't working. Add that in with other issues and this is clearly a company that is about to fail and fail hard. Wake up Vince...


----------



## A-C-P

D.M.N. said:


> Year-on-year M18-49 comparison is horrific - this is for the October 7th, 2013 episode: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/973441-all-tv-ratings-talk-here-32.html#post24932817


To me it seems Vince and Co have operated under the assumption that the "hardcore fans" will always be there no matter what, so we will cater as much as we can to every other demo to gain viewers.

I have always countered with there will eventually be a tipping point for the "hardcore fans"

It seems we may be getting to that tipping point.


----------



## Londrick

Boots2Asses said:


> The Rock proves once again why he is the single biggest draw of all time. The GOAT :rock4
> 
> 
> And even though Reigns got low ratings this week, yet he is the second largest merchandise seller behind John Cena. Reigns is still the man even when draw power is concerned. Haters better believe that :reigns


Low ratings, yet sells lots of merch? Remind anyone of another guy that isn't considered a draw? unk3


----------



## The XL

This and breakdowns like this should kill Reigns as the next face of the company dead in the water.

He was well protected while in the Shield, but solo he's being exposed for what he truly is: a medium sized wrestler playing a bigger man gimmick with no discernible charisma and limited mic skills. He's also not the greatest worker in the world. He's got a solid look and isn't a bad athlete, but that should not warrant a face of the company push.


----------



## THANOS

The XL said:


> This and breakdowns like this should kill Reigns as the next face of the company dead in the water.
> 
> He was well protected while in the Shield, but solo he's being exposed for what he truly is: a medium sized wrestler playing a bigger man gimmick with no discernible charisma and limited mic skills. He's also not the greatest worker in the world. He's got a solid look and isn't a bad athlete, but that should not warrant a face of the company push.


Definitely, and portraying him as a damn powerhouse every week is dumb when the guy uses no power moves whatsoever. Rollins and Ambrose do more moves requiring strength than him for gosh sakes :lol.


----------



## RebelArch86

RatedR10 said:


> Holy crap, Roman Reigns :lmao
> 
> The midgets out-drew him.


But but h is so marketable. Size = draw damn it!


----------



## RatedR10

CenaBoy4Life said:


> Doesn't matter if they hype it! People know its pre-taped and nothing important will happen or be said. It's a bathroom break segment and it doesn't matter who is in it.
> 
> Stop being BLIND HATERS.


Of course it matters if it's hyped. It wouldn't be a bathroom segment if it was someone people actually cared about.



THANOS said:


> Just curious, did we ever get a full breakdown that week, or was it just an hourly breakdown with the third hour being the lowest?
> 
> 
> 
> That's fair. However, Bryan was drawing show highs in odd quarters wrestling Randy Orton for the 20th time, so an overly hyped Reigns interview segment after the guy has been on the shelf for weeks should do decent at least. It sure as hell shouldn't be the weak spot in a quarter shared with a midget match :|.


We never got a breakdown that week, IIRC. Saying Ambrose/Rollins drew low viewers is just clumping it in with the last hour numbers with no proof that they drew a low number.


----------



## birthday_massacre

CenaBoy4Life said:


> Doesn't matter if they hype it! People know its pre-taped and nothing important will happen or be said. It's a bathroom break segment and it doesn't matter who is in it.
> 
> Stop being BLIND HATERS.


When the rock was back weren't his pre taped raw interviews gains and not losses in the ratings?


----------



## Wynter

You can't compare Roman to Bryan. One is a draw and one is not :lol Romans momentum has been declining so it's not all that shocking.


----------



## RebelArch86

WynterWarm12 said:


> You can't compare Roman to Bryan. One is a draw and one is not :lol Romans momentum has been declining so it's not all that shocking.


I would like to agree with you, but WWE is forcing the comparison. One is clearly their top guy and should have the spot they are preparing to jam Reigns into.


----------



## CookiePuss

:lel

It's so funny to see people point out how bad Reigns "drew" - in a 30 second pointless segment at that - but back when Rollins/Ambrose main evented RAW and did that shitty number, none of the posters you see trashing Reigns fail to acknowledge this. I'll wait for the excuses, or not.

Keep on hating.

:reigns2


----------



## JamesK

Boots2Asses said:


> The Rock proves once again why he is the single biggest draw of all time. The GOAT :rock4
> 
> 
> And even though Reigns got low ratings this week, yet he is the second largest merchandise seller behind John Cena. Reigns is still the man even when draw power is concerned. Haters better believe that :reigns


That's true!

He is the second merch seller. For the month of Semptember only. In the merch sold at the arenas because on the WWEShop Dean solds more..

But yeah second merch seller believe dat and staff


----------



## MaybeLock

cookiepuss said:


> :lel
> 
> It's so funny to see people point out how bad Reigns "drew" - in a 30 second pointless segment at that - but back when Rollins/Ambrose main evented RAW and did that shitty number, none of the posters you see trashing Reigns fail to acknowledge this. I'll wait for the excuses, or not.
> 
> Keep on hating.
> 
> :reigns2


Yep. I'm still wating for people in here to acknowledge that time when they were outdrawn by El Torito vs Hornswoggle. Oh wait...

:reigns2


----------



## Wynter

How many minutes is a quarter by the way? Like 10-15 minutes??


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

RatedR10 said:


> We never got a breakdown that week, IIRC. Saying Ambrose/Rollins drew low viewers is just clumping it in with the last hour numbers with no proof that they drew a low number.


Actually we did, and the overrun number wasn't very good. It's in this thread somewhere, can't be arsed to find it since I'm on my phone right now.


----------



## DoubtGin

WynterWarm12 said:


> How many minutes is a quarter by the way? Like 10-15 minutes??


15 min.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Boots2Asses said:


> The Rock proves once again why he is the single biggest draw of all time. The GOAT :rock4
> 
> 
> And even though Reigns got low ratings this week, yet he is the second largest merchandise seller behind John Cena. Reigns is still the man even when draw power is concerned. Haters better believe that :reigns


I'm not doubting you or attacking you but everyone always says X is the second biggest merchandise seller behind Cena. Where is that sourced from?


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 3.833 million
Hour 2 - 3.756 million
Hour 3 - 3.664 million

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-10-13-2014.html


----------



## The True Believer

Yikes. Only a little better than last week, I think.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 3.833 million
> Hour 2 - 3.756 million
> Hour 3 - 3.664 million
> 
> http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-10-13-2014.html


Cena vs. Ambrose is in the 3rd hour?
Is that the match was so late


----------



## LOL-ins

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 3.833 million
> Hour 2 - 3.756 million
> *Hour 3 - 3.664 million
> *
> http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-10-13-2014.html


:ambrose 

lets hear all the same users hating on :reigns for a 30 second interview last week twist this one.


----------



## Darkness is here

LOL-ins said:


> :ambrose
> 
> lets hear all the same users hating on :reigns for a 30 second interview last week twist this one.


won't happen because it's ambrose, cena will be blamed for everything.


----------



## THANOS

LOL-ins said:


> :ambrose
> 
> lets hear all the same users hating on :reigns for a 30 second interview last week twist this one.





Darkness is here said:


> won't happen because it's ambrose, cena will be blamed for everything.


The breakdown last week showed Reigns dragging down his quarter to the point where a midget match actually drew better and raised the overall quarter.

If a breakdown comes out showing the Ambrose portion of the opening promo drawing less than when Cena came out, or Ambrose/Cena drawing bad, a portion of the blame should rightfully be spread to Ambrose, but until then no one knows anything.


----------



## Jurisprudence

LOL-ins said:


> :ambrose
> 
> lets hear all the same users hating on :reigns for a 30 second interview last week twist this one.


Are you that unintelligent or what?

Last week Reigns' segment bombed and lost viewers. No one was blaming him for the average viewership of the entire show or the entire hour. Just for his segment.

Ambrose's segments last week all gained viewers. Even the main event had terrible numbers before Ambrose showed up and the viewership increased. There's no reason to believe that that same isn't true this week as well.


----------



## xDD

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 3.833 million
> Hour 2 - 3.756 million
> Hour 3 - 3.664 million
> 
> http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-10-13-2014.html


And now just watch TWD ratings



> That's a reference to the season five premiere of "The Walking Dead," which attracted a monstrous 17.3 million viewers to AMC, the show's best performance to date. 11 million of the viewers were in the key 18- to 49-year-old demographic.
> The ratings record was all the more notable because the episode was up against NBC's "Sunday Night Football."


WWE needs go back to TV 14...


----------



## D.M.N.

Worth noting that last night's show was wrestling heavy... like it or not, the more casual fans prefer the segments and not the wrestling.


----------



## Tweener ken

Poor numbers.
So....who are we blaming this week?


----------



## Kabraxal

D.M.N. said:


> Worth noting that last night's show was wrestling heavy... like it or not, the more casual fans prefer the segments and not the wrestling.


Considering we've seen segment heavy shows with low ratings, I don't think the balance can be blamed right now. The WWE simply tarnished their image and they aren't trusted to put out a consistently good product. It will take months of solid shows with a good balance between segments and wrestling before they will really affect the ratings. Happened in 97 when the WWF was one fire creatively, but the fans were still wary from the years of mediocrity.


----------



## The True Believer

Tweener ken said:


> Poor numbers.
> So....who are we blaming this week?


It all depends on the breakdown, in all honesty.


----------



## Jurisprudence

Tweener ken said:


> Poor numbers.
> So....who are we blaming this week?


The same people who should be blamed every week: Vince McMahon and Kevin Dunn.


----------



## Kabraxal

Jurisprudence said:


> The same people who should be blamed every week: Vince McMahon and Kevin Dunn.


Ding ding ding... we have a winner.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Did we have the breakdown of the week that there was Ambrose Clearance?
I was always curious as this segment behaved


----------



## Jurisprudence

SóniaPortugal said:


> Did we have the breakdown of the week that there was Ambrose Clearance?
> I was always curious as this segment behaved


No breakdown for that week.


----------



## LOL-ins

Walking Dead the TV-MA show got 17 million viewers with advertisers begging to be apart of the ad blocks. Still WWE can't push their limits. 

TV-PG SHOWS DON'T FUCKING DRAW IN 2014!


----------



## Londrick

And people said Brock as champ would be best for business. :ti


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Jurisprudence said:


> No breakdown for that week.



I wanted to know


----------



## MaybeLock

Summer Rae said:


> And people said Brock as champ would be best for business. :ti


Well, he is at home watching Raw. That's one more viewer. :


----------



## validreasoning

since raw moved to 3 hours.. will try to keep this updated in the coming weeks 

*2012*
sep 3 = 4.2 million
sep 10 = 4.14 million
sep 17 = 4.05 million
sep 24 = 3.79 million
oct 1 = 3.5 million
oct 8 = 4.11 million
oct 15 = 3.99 million
*average = 3.97 million*

*2013*
sep 2 = 3.94 million
sep 9 = 3.87 million
sep 16 = 4.01 million
sep 23 = 3.74 million
sep 30 = 3.59 million
oct 7 = 3.71 million
oct 14 = 3.99 million
*average = 3.84 million*

*2014*
sep 1 = 3.92 million
sep 8 = 3.99 million
sep 15 = 3.83 million
sep 22 = 3.88 million
sep 29 = 4.04 million
oct 6 = 3.8 million
oct 13 = 3.75 million
*average = 3.89 million *



xDD said:


> And now just watch TWD ratings
> 
> WWE needs go back to TV 14...


seeing as tna are struggling to get 1 million viewers despite being tv 14 its pretty obvious to me what wwe needs to do

bring back this guy and make him wwe champion


----------



## Darkness is here

The numbers look really bad.
I wonder what will happen in dec.


----------



## MaybeLock

validreasoning said:


> since raw moved to 3 hours.. will try to keep this updated in the coming weeks
> 
> *2012*
> sep 3 = 4.2 million
> sep 10 = 4.14 million
> sep 17 = 4.05 million
> sep 24 = 3.79 million
> oct 1 = 3.5 million
> oct 8 = 4.11 million
> oct 15 = 3.99 million
> *average = 3.97 million*
> 
> *2013*
> sep 2 = 3.94 million
> sep 9 = 3.87 million
> sep 16 = 4.01 million
> sep 23 = 3.74 million
> sep 30 = 3.59 million
> oct 7 = 3.71 million
> oct 14 = 3.99 million
> *average = 3.84 million*
> 
> *2014*
> sep 1 = 3.92 million
> sep 8 = 3.99 million
> sep 15 = 3.83 million
> sep 22 = 3.88 million
> sep 29 = 4.04 million
> oct 6 = 3.8 million
> oct 13 = 3.75 million
> *average = 3.89 million *


unk2


----------



## Armani

validreasoning said:


> since raw moved to 3 hours.. will try to keep this updated in the coming weeks
> 
> *2012*
> sep 3 = 4.2 million
> sep 10 = 4.14 million
> sep 17 = 4.05 million
> sep 24 = 3.79 million
> oct 1 = 3.5 million
> oct 8 = 4.11 million
> oct 15 = 3.99 million
> *average = 3.97 million*
> 
> *2013*
> sep 2 = 3.94 million
> sep 9 = 3.87 million
> sep 16 = 4.01 million
> sep 23 = 3.74 million
> sep 30 = 3.59 million
> oct 7 = 3.71 million
> oct 14 = 3.99 million
> *average = 3.84 million*
> 
> *2014*
> sep 1 = 3.92 million
> sep 8 = 3.99 million
> sep 15 = 3.83 million
> sep 22 = 3.88 million
> sep 29 = 4.04 million
> oct 6 = 3.8 million
> oct 13 = 3.75 million
> *average = 3.89 million *
> 
> 
> 
> *seeing as tna are struggling to get 1 million viewers despite being tv 14* its pretty obvious to me what wwe needs to do
> 
> bring back this guy and make him wwe champion


Tbf when TNA were doing 1 million views it was the highest rated show for Spike lol, so there was no room for TNA to grow with them. 

Anyway it's kinda strange how viewership in 2012 were higher than the post two years yet it got lower ratings! why is that?


----------



## LOL-ins

So this is going to be a 2.6 right? If so.

Get the real draws back on TV 

:brock
:rock4
unk (saved 2012 from failure) 
:reigns (proven draw, last week people used information wrong) 
:vince3
:maddox (one of the 2012/2013 highest gainers)
:austin
:bryan


----------



## Cliffy

I give it till survivor series before Vince cracks, brings back lesnar and has cena beat him for the belt.


----------



## Jurisprudence

LOL-ins said:


> So this is going to be a 2.6 right? If so.
> 
> Get the real draws back on TV
> 
> :brock
> :rock4
> unk (saved 2012 from failure)
> :reigns (proven draw, last week people used information wrong)
> :vince3
> :maddox (one of the 2012/2013 highest gainers)
> :austin
> :bryan


Reigns isn't a draw you unintelligent buffoon. There is no proof to back that claim up. In fact, he is a ratings killer.

What has been proven though is that you are an unintelligent troll.


----------



## LOL-ins

Jurisprudence said:


> Reigns isn't a draw you unintelligent buffoon. There is no proof to back that claim up. In fact, he is a ratings killer.
> 
> What has been proven though is that you are an unintelligent troll.





Jurisprudence said:


> *Last week Reigns' segment bombed and lost viewers. No one was blaming him for the average viewership of the entire show or the entire hour. Just for his segment.*


You've just made an account and you know about last weeks discussions? 

So you are already arguing with users and are a possible duplicate account. You are not going to last here long.


----------



## Jurisprudence

LOL-ins said:


> You've just made an account and you know about last weeks discussions?
> 
> So you are already arguing with users and are a possible duplicate account. You are not going to last here long.


Don't worry about how long I will last.

Your lies (i.e. Reigns being a draw) will continue to get called out.


----------



## THANOS

Jurisprudence said:


> Reigns isn't a draw you unintelligent buffoon. There is no proof to back that claim up. In fact, he is a ratings killer.
> 
> What has been proven though is that you are an unintelligent troll.


Be respectful. From what we've seen thus far Reigns is certainly very inconsistent like Punk was on his rise, but I'm not sure I would call him a ratings killer yet, at least until we see how his return and subsequent segments do. 

Last week was bad though, no way around it. You're given a hyped segment, revolving completely around a 'popular' pushed face that has been shelved for a month, that is all over wwe.com and has been hyped for over a week on their shows, and Reigns weighs down his quarter substantially to the point where the midget match has to hold up the quarter to even get the pathetic number it received. Any way you look at it, that's considered a huge red flag to the interest in Reigns. However, it could be an anomaly and he may pop a big number in his return segment, so let's wait and see what happens there.


----------



## kokepepsi

Blaming Reigns is really dumb

Every segment loses viewers except the top ones (opener/9pm/10pm/overrun) ....hype or no hype
Sometimes the one off quarter gains but that is rare and yet no one pays attention when it happens
(happened with Cesaro a while a go and everyone no sold it)

A ton of segments have lost viewers despite hype just because of the bad timing spot...segments with
HHH/Jericho/Orton/Cena/Vince/Batista/Punk/Bryan and the list goes on

If Reigns segment was at 10pm and he had lost viewers then everyone should be shitting on him
unk


----------



## Jurisprudence

kokepepsi said:


> Blaming Reigns is really dumb
> 
> Every segment loses viewers except the top ones (opener/9pm/10pm/overrun) ....hype or no hype
> Sometimes the one off quarter gains but that is rare and yet no one pays attention when it happens
> (happened with Cesaro a while a go and everyone no sold it)
> 
> A ton of segments have lost viewers despite hype just because of the bad timing spot...segments with
> HHH/Jericho/Orton/Cena/Vince/Batista/Punk/Bryan and the list goes on
> 
> If Reigns segment was at 10pm and he had lost viewers then everyone should be shitting on him
> unk


The two midgets drew higher viewership than him in the exact same quarter hour.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Vince's decision to trot out the WWE Network when ratings and interest for wresting are at all time lows is one of the strangest decisions I have ever seen. The WWE Network is basically an "add on" item. And if the item itself (WWE) is tanking, why try to sell add-ons? 

Vince should have focused on Raw, getting that show back to good ratings by going back to the formula that works - adult programming. When Raw gets hot again, then you trot out the Network. 

But right now, it would not surprise me if Vince sells his company within the next 3 years. Wrestling is dead as we know it. There's no interest in it, the people making the product dont know the base, and um yeah. Its going to be a slow agonizing death. 2.6's to 2.5, and lower. 

Vince literally killed the golden goose when he went to PG or really its G rated now.


----------



## Lebyonics

validreasoning said:


> since raw moved to 3 hours.. will try to keep this updated in the coming weeks
> 
> *2012*
> sep 3 = 4.2 million
> sep 10 = 4.14 million
> sep 17 = 4.05 million
> sep 24 = 3.79 million
> oct 1 = 3.5 million
> oct 8 = 4.11 million
> oct 15 = 3.99 million
> *average = 3.97 million*
> 
> *2013*
> sep 2 = 3.94 million
> sep 9 = 3.87 million
> sep 16 = 4.01 million
> sep 23 = 3.74 million
> sep 30 = 3.59 million
> oct 7 = 3.71 million
> oct 14 = 3.99 million
> *average = 3.84 million*
> 
> *2014*
> sep 1 = 3.92 million
> sep 8 = 3.99 million
> sep 15 = 3.83 million
> sep 22 = 3.88 million
> sep 29 = 4.04 million
> oct 6 = 3.8 million
> oct 13 = 3.75 million
> *average = 3.89 million *


unk2unk5unk8unk6


----------



## RabidCrow

validreasoning said:


> since raw moved to 3 hours.. will try to keep this updated in the coming weeks
> 
> *2012*
> sep 3 = 4.2 million
> sep 10 = 4.14 million
> sep 17 = 4.05 million
> sep 24 = 3.79 million
> oct 1 = 3.5 million
> oct 8 = 4.11 million
> oct 15 = 3.99 million
> *average = 3.97 million*
> 
> *2013*
> sep 2 = 3.94 million
> sep 9 = 3.87 million
> sep 16 = 4.01 million
> sep 23 = 3.74 million
> sep 30 = 3.59 million
> oct 7 = 3.71 million
> oct 14 = 3.99 million
> *average = 3.84 million*
> 
> *2014*
> sep 1 = 3.92 million
> sep 8 = 3.99 million
> sep 15 = 3.83 million
> sep 22 = 3.88 million
> sep 29 = 4.04 million
> oct 6 = 3.8 million
> oct 13 = 3.75 million
> *average = 3.89 million *



*Da GOAT.*
unk5 unk6

Hey. i miss this thread. :lol


----------



## validreasoning

Randy Lahey said:


> Vince should have focused on Raw, getting that show back to good ratings by going back to the formula that works - *adult programming.* When Raw gets hot again, then you trot out the Network.


making sure to not the repeat the formula that saw raw lose 38% of its ratings between 2000 and 2004 then?


----------



## Jof

October in 2012 had the rise of Ryback, let's not forget that. Ryback was super hot.




validreasoning said:


> making sure to not the repeat the formula that saw raw lose 38% of its ratings between 2000 and 2004 then?


Because of Spike.

All these adult/PG talk is bull anyway, what WWE really needs is a true mega star. Adult oriented product just presents a better opportunity of creating one much faster, but that doesn't mean they can't achieve that in PG. I truly thought they had something special going with Roman Reigns until he got hurt.


----------



## funnyfaces1

The Ryback/Punk on a segment by segment basis was very hot, but everything else on the show would regularly lose viewers. I wouldn't exactly call 2012 very impressive. This all just shows how far things have fallen. I'm kinda ashamed at 2013 though. September and October were actually pretty good months. It was November where things went sour in show quality.


----------



## Chrome

Jof said:


> Because of Spike.


Also because of Rock and Austin leaving, and no more competition. I doubt the TV-14 rating was what contributed to the decrease in those years.


----------



## Jof

Chrome said:


> Also because of Rock and Austin leaving, and no more competition. I doubt the TV-14 rating was what contributed to the decrease in those years.


Rock/Austin didn't matter any after 2001, Ratings/PPV buys were on a free fall even with them on the show. But you're right death of WCW ended the boom period, and had a big impact in pro-wrestling in general, not just the US scene. 

Also, Spike network despite the availability is just not a popular one like USA. Their highest rated prime time show is probably TNA and they draw like just over a million viewers average. Its pretty pathetic, one of the reasons UFC quickly left the network once they became an established brand. I honestly don't think Cena would've become the star that he is today, if WWE had stayed with Spike past 05.


----------



## Wynter

Raw drew a 2.73. While it's not a good rating, it still increased by 4 percent 

Seriously, WWE needs to step it up :lol


----------



## validreasoning

Jof said:


> Also, Spike network despite the availability is just not a popular one like USA. Their highest rated prime time show is probably TNA and they draw like just over a million viewers average. Its pretty pathetic, one of the reasons UFC quickly left the network once they became an established brand. I honestly don't think Cena would've become the star that he is today, if WWE had stayed with Spike past 05.


re-runs of cops draw more viewers than tna. 

the reason ufc left spike was because fox offered to pay them three times what spike were despite the fact ufc peaked in 2009 and had fallen in the 2 years after that when fox came in with their offer, ufc numbers on fox have been well below what they used to draw on spike. ultimate fighter used to draw 5 million on spike and struggles to do 1/10th of that on fs1

speaking of ufc imagine this place if raw had lost 90% of its viewership in 5 years lol


----------



## Jof

validreasoning said:


> re-runs of cops draw more viewers than tna.
> 
> the reason ufc left spike was because fox offered to pay them three times what spike were despite the fact ufc peaked in 2009 and had fallen in the 2 years after that when fox came in with their offer, ufc numbers on fox have been well below what they used to draw on spike. ultimate fighter used to draw 5 million on spike and struggles to do 1/10th of that on fs1


Ofcourse money is the biggest reason but Spike having limited potential to help expand the brand compared to other major networks was also a key reason. Look at TNA, for close to a decade exact same 1.2 ~ 1.5 rating average on spike. Its just not popular. UFC drew those figures following RAW, mostly wrestling audience.


----------



## validreasoning

Jof said:


> Ofcourse money is the biggest reason but Spike having limited potential to help expand the brand compared to other major networks was also a key reason. Look at TNA, for close to a decade exact same 1.2 ~ 1.5 rating average on spike. Its just not popular. UFC drew those figures following RAW, mostly wrestling audience.


tna have only themselves to blame. in 2010 and 2011 they topped 2 million viewers a number of times, today they are struggling to do 50% of that, not spikes fault, clearly tnas. ufcs popularity in america has nosedived since leaving spike.

the channel or size of it shouldn't be an issue. amc averages around the same as spike in prime time without walking dead http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ership-for-week-ending-october-5-2014/311866/


----------



## SóniaPortugal

So much crap and this week RAW had higher ratings that last week :lol



> The final rating for Monday's WWE RAW from Atlanta was a 2.73, up from last week's 2.63 rating.


----------



## Armani

validreasoning said:


> tna have only themselves to blame. in 2010 and 2011 they topped 2 million viewers a number of times, today they are struggling to do 50% of that, not spikes fault, clearly tnas. ufcs popularity in america has nosedived since leaving spike.
> 
> the channel or size of it shouldn't be an issue. amc averages around the same as spike in prime time without walking dead http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ership-for-week-ending-october-5-2014/311866/


Dude Spike can't even get anywhere near 1.5 million views nowadays and nor did they get anything higher than TNA most of the time in past 10 years or so (not including UFC 09 or WWE). It's not a network to build on a company, they can only do good if they signed a major company like UFC or WWE because they are already established. I think TNA will grow if they signed with AMC but that's highly unlikely.


----------



## JY57

http://lastwordonsports.com/2014/02/02/dissecting-wwe-raw-ratings-2011-2013-by-superstar/

just for fun. top biggest gainers and losers in viewership from 2011-2013

(can't believe Randy is that low is viewership gains)


----------



## CM punker

Lol @ randy orton's viewership gains.


----------



## Shenroe

Lel Orton


----------



## THANOS

I wish we could get a range from August 2013 to April 2014. That would be fun to see.


----------



## FITZ

Before winning MITB I feel like Orton spent a year and a half wrestling 20 minute matches on the second and/or third segment of every single show (which often loses viewers).


----------



## Choke2Death

*Biggest Viewership Gainers 2011*

1 Jim Ross 344,893

2 John Cena 331,171

3 HHH 246,231

*4 The Miz 241,065

5 CM Punk  165,536*


So much for The Miz being "irrelevant and not over" and Punk should've had his WM main event spot. :ti


----------



## Bushmaster

:lmao at where Orton is at. You'd think getting pushed for a decade bring better results. Amazed they have pushed him this long and given him so much without getting even half of what Cena gives them.


----------



## JY57

Big Show during his September - November 2013 Main Event Run

+647,167 average viewership gain

And a chart of Daniel Bryan from Jan 13 - Oct 13


----------



## kokepepsi

Watch everyone no sell the big show number because they don't know how the ratings work



THANOS said:


> I wish we could get a range from August 2013 to April 2014. That would be fun to see.


No it wouldn't you know who would be number 1 
:HHH2
but if you still want go look at all the ratings for that time period
Count each time someone was in the opener/9pm/10pm/Overrun
The one with the most will be 1st place and etc


----------



## Jof

Sith Rollins said:


> :lmao at where Orton is at. You'd think getting pushed for a decade bring better results. Amazed they have pushed him this long and given him so much without getting even half of what Cena gives them.


Orton was technically being buried for much of 2012 and 2013 due to his wellness violation despite being very over as face. His recent main event "push" if you will, really only began the same time as Bryan, Summerslam 2013 but Bryan had tonnes of main event/overrun segments.



> Watch everyone no sell the big show number because they don't know how the ratings work


Meh... these numbers don't mean anything really, at the end it comes down to a crediting game of who's being credited for gains and who's taking the blame for losses etc..by the author who put this together. In 2012, Taker is no.1 which means he's credited for them first over Triple H and Shawn. Similarly, Heyman ranks high in 2013, but we all know he was mostly featured with big names.

And Jim Ross is no.1 in 2011, go figure.


----------



## Joshi Judas

Randy Orton :jordan


----------



## FITZ

Choke2Death said:


> *Biggest Viewership Gainers 2011*
> 
> 1 Jim Ross 344,893
> 
> 2 John Cena 331,171
> 
> 3 HHH 246,231
> 
> *4 The Miz 241,065
> 
> 5 CM Punk 165,536*
> 
> 
> So much for The Miz being "irrelevant and not over" and Punk should've had his WM main event spot. :ti


I think Miz and Punk are that high because they were champions for the time period and did a lot of main event segments. The last segment of the show pretty much always has a big increase.


----------



## Joshi Judas

Tbf Miz was involved with Cena and Rock during the build to Mania 27. If you look at 2012, he's on the list of viewership losers. Pretty big drop in one year.


----------



## Choke2Death

TaylorFitz said:


> I think Miz and Punk are that high because they were champions for the time period and did a lot of main event segments. The last segment of the show pretty much always has a big increase.


Point is, Punk marks swear up and down that Miz didn't deserve his spot and was a complete failure as champion with Punk being the one who should've been there instead, yet they were on top for an equal amount of time during the year and Miz is ahead of Punk in the gains. Not by some fluke 5,000 but by nearly 80,000.


----------



## dmccourt95

What is the criteria for these figures seen as JR is number 1 and he isnt an in ring talent


----------



## Starbuck

Triple H and John Cena clearly the most consistent TV draws of the last 3 years. 

:hunter :cena2

I think he should have upped the special appearance count to account for low appearances though. I mean JR in 2011 couldn't have appeared in more than 10 segments but he still topped the list. Same for Taker and HBK in 2012 although he did appear during the RTWM and Summerslam build too so maybe he had more than 10. Not that it really matters since the latter 2 likely would have been up there regardless. 

Anyway, you can all bow before the ratings Kings now. 

:trips2 :cena7


----------



## skolpo

Choke2Death said:


> Point is, Punk marks swear up and down that Miz didn't deserve his spot and was a complete failure as champion with Punk being the one who should've been there instead, yet they were on top for an equal amount of time during the year and Miz is ahead of Punk in the gains. Not by some fluke 5,000 but by nearly 80,000.


Miz was part of the WM storyline that involved the first feud between Cena and Rock. His success hinged solely on the fact that he was tailing along with The Rock and Cena even though he was the champion. If you take Cena and Rock out of the equation and threw someone else in to be feuding with him for the title, the numbers would tell a different story. I like Miz, but it's very clear that the gains seen from his segments during 2011 was due to bigger names being involved.


----------



## CM punker

Choke2Death said:


> Point is, Punk marks swear up and down that Miz didn't deserve his spot and was a complete failure as champion with Punk being the one who should've been there instead, yet they were on top for an equal amount of time during the year and Miz is ahead of Punk in the gains. Not by some fluke 5,000 but by nearly 80,000.


Miz was champion for a short amount of time and most of his segments included The Rock and/or John Cena.. of course he had high fucking ratings. Meanwhile Punk was stuck with mid card losers like Mark Henry, Del rio, Jericho, Daniel Bryan at the time, Kane, etc. and obviously for half of his title run he wasnt in the overrun, which usually has the most viewers. while miz was always in the overrun and he was the main focus during the road to wrestlemania


----------



## Londrick

Sith Rollins said:


> :lmao at where Orton is at. You'd think getting pushed for a decade bring better results. Amazed they have pushed him this long and given him so much without getting even half of what Cena gives them.


Orton is Linda's Senate run in human form.


----------



## mwk360

Summer Rae said:


> Orton is Linda's Senate run in human form.


Lmao! You win


----------



## Armani

:lol at Orton. Hell even Khali got higher gains than him. The crazy thing is, they are still pushing him into the ME, whereas other guys get depushed for that reason even tho they didn't even get a proper push. Conspiracy :trips4


----------



## Choke2Death

CM punker said:


> Miz was champion for a short amount of time and most of his segments included The Rock and/or John Cena.. of course he had high fucking ratings. Meanwhile Punk was stuck with mid card losers like Mark Henry, Del rio, Jericho, Daniel Bryan at the time, Kane, etc. and obviously for half of his title run he wasnt in the overrun, which usually has the most viewers. while miz was always in the overrun and he was the main focus during the road to wrestlemania


Can you read? I was talking about 2011. Punk marks are always babbling on about how he was getting mainstream attention after his shoot promo and that he deserved Miz's spot for WM27 because Miz got no heat or ratings yet it's proven false here.

And saying Miz was champion for a short time is only owning yourself more than you already have every time you post. Less time as champion = more time of the year spent as a midcarder/irrelevant which could put him at a disadvantage. :lol


----------



## kokepepsi

Need I remind you marks I did that count loses/gains way before
(Bryan marks don't click you will get butthurt...... I AM WARNING YOU)
http://www.wrestlingforum.com/11461666-post3209.html
(my method was better :ti)

Again you guys DON'T know why the numbers end up the way they do so stop using them to prove dumbass arguments


----------



## Starbuck

kokepepsi said:


> Need I remind you marks I did that count loses/gains way before
> (Bryan marks don't click you will get butthurt...... I AM WARNING YOU)
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/11461666-post3209.html
> (my method was better :ti)
> 
> Again you guys DON'T know why the numbers end up the way they do so stop using them to prove dumbass arguments


BUYRATES BUYRATES BUYRATES BUYRATES BUYRATES

:vince5


----------



## mwk360

Defenders gonna defend


----------



## kokepepsi

Starbuck said:


> BUYRATES BUYRATES BUYRATES BUYRATES BUYRATES
> 
> :vince5


don't know what those are
:booklel


----------



## RabidCrow

Choke2Death said:


> Can you read? I was talking about 2011. Punk marks are always babbling on about how he was getting mainstream attention after his shoot promo and that he deserved Miz's spot for WM27 because Miz got no heat or ratings yet it's proven false here.
> 
> And saying Miz was champion for a short time is only owning yourself more than you already have every time you post. Less time as champion = more time of the year spent as a midcarder/irrelevant which could put him at a disadvantage. :lol


Looking back to the 2011 breakdowns, besides the segments involving John Cena and The Rock, The Miz was a disaster, he was a machine of losing viewers.


----------



## Starbuck

kokepepsi said:


> don't know what those are
> :booklel


Sure you do. People talk about them in here all the time. Summerslam buyRATEs, Payback buyRATEs. You know, PPV BUYRATES.......

:trips7


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Sith Rollins said:


> :lmao at where Orton is at. You'd think getting pushed for a decade bring better results. Amazed they have pushed him this long and given him so much without getting even half of what Cena gives them.


I love Orton but he can only blame to himself for this situation
He just did shit for a while and Cena has clean record


----------



## kokepepsi

Starbuck said:


> Sure you do. People talk about them in here all the time. Summerslam buyRATEs, Payback buyRATEs. You know, PPV BUYRATES.......
> 
> :trips7


Had to google what they were to make sure and found this
http://www.twnpnews.com/information/wwfppv.html

Click on the wrestlemania ones
WM 16 had a bigger buyRATE than WM17

:HHH2 >:austin3

:ti


----------



## D.M.N.

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-10-20-2014.html

Hour 1 - 3.589 million
Hour 2 - 3.864 million
Hour 3 - 3.631 million


----------



## A-C-P

Lowest viewership in hour #1, What was missing from hour #1? :hmm:

Oh yeh, :ambrose was not in hour #1 at all


----------



## mwk360

Would like to see the breakdown, The maineventers are really sucking


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

When was the last time they actually got anything above 4 million? Holy shit.


----------



## The True Believer

4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> When was the last time they actually got anything above 4 million? Holy shit.


When :reigns was a part of the show, I think.


----------



## A-C-P

mwk360 said:


> Would like to see the breakdown, The maineventers are really sucking


Well seeing as the Main Event is the exact same match everyweek, why would people need to stay tuned for it? :draper2


----------



## The True Believer

D.M.N. said:


> http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-10-20-2014.html
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.589 million
> Hour 2 - 3.864 million
> Hour 3 - 3.631 million


Lowest viewership was in Hour 1? You mean the same hour that has the opening match a 6 man tag team match featuring The Usos?


----------



## Shenroe

Holy shit :lol Hour 2 must be credited a bit to Foley IMO, but hour 3?! What was on it before the mainevent?


----------



## own1997

KINGPIN said:


> Lowest viewership was in Hour 1? You mean the same hour that has the opening match a 6 man tag team match featuring The Usos?



It's the damn format. It's so repetitive. Promo from someone in the Authority or opposing them and then a 6 man tag involving the Uso's and Gold and Star Dust.


----------



## Shenroe

KINGPIN said:


> When :reigns was a part of the show, I think.


Nope the first 2 weeks he was out, RAW began to dip 2 weeks ago.


----------



## Frico

Shenroe said:


> Holy shit :lol Hour 2 must be credited a bit to Foley IMO, but hour 3?! What was on it before the mainevent?


Cesaro vs Dolph.


----------



## LOL-ins

That could be a 2.5 overall rating but will be at least 2.6 for sure.


----------



## Shenroe

Frico said:


> Cesaro vs Dolph.


They had to be something else, the ME didn't last more than 20 min everything included.


----------



## RichDV

Shenroe said:


> Holy shit :lol Hour 2 must be credited a bit to Foley IMO, but hour 3?! What was on it before the mainevent?


Foley was in hour 3.

Hour 2 was Orton/Cena/Heyman.


----------



## Shenroe

RichDV said:


> Foley was in hour 3.
> 
> Hour 2 was Orton/Cena/Heyman.


Well damn lol


----------



## LordKain

What do they expect huh? The main title's gone and the current product as a whole is just unwatchable. If they keep this shit up by the time WM season starts I could very easily see a lot of people who are going to the event demanding refunds at this point.


----------



## Garty

I'm surprised it's that high. I swear the same matches have been re-done in one way or another for the past 4-5 weeks, not just on Raw, but SmackDown as well.

3 on 2, vs. etc. matches with Cena, Ambrose, Kane, Orton, Rollins

Uso's and ? vs. Gold/Stardust and ?

AJ and Paige or Fox

It's just been awful this month.


----------



## Choke2Death

Last night was a pleasing surprise for me with them actually attempting to advance something involving The Authority and Orton, but most of the show was the same shit as usual. Sheamus and Usos tagging against the heels they feud with again, some irrelevant divas match, Ziggler facing whoever he "feuds" with and other filler that did nothing.

No surprise the best segment was in the hour that got the highest number. 



RabidCrow said:


> Looking back to the 2011 breakdowns, besides the segments involving John Cena and The Rock, The Miz was a disaster, he was a machine of losing viewers.


Explains why his overall for that year was at a whooping +241,000. Do you even try? :lol I'm not even a Miz fan, I just don't like revisionist history.


----------



## Joshi Judas

It's still par for the course during this time of the year I think. Don't see the ratings really picking up until the Rumble.


How were the ratings during this period last year?


----------



## Empress

The show deserves its crap ratings. It's a repetitive mess, but I have a weird form of Stockholm watching RAW. 

For me, the MVP of Raw was Randy Orton and judging by the ratings for the second hour, he did his part.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

RAVEN said:


> It's still par for the course during this time of the year I think. Don't see the ratings really picking up until the Rumble.
> 
> 
> How were the ratings during this period last year?


Last year's:

8:00 PM- 3.914 
9:00 PM- 3.802 
10:00 PM- 3.759


----------



## RatedR10

Is anyone surprised? The layout of the ENTIRE show has not changed for a good 6-8 weeks. Same main event, same middle, same everything. As well as the overexposure of any of the stars they have. It's too much.


----------



## Cliffy

They're going to get massacred next week by Cowboys-Redskins :romo


----------



## JY57

final rating - 2.75 (last week was 2.74)


----------



## LOL-ins

JY57 said:


> final rating - 2.75 (last week was 2.74)



Don't even understand the ratings system anymore. They lost viewers but got a higher rating.


----------



## mwk360

LOL-ins said:


> Don't even understand the ratings system anymore. They lost viewers but got a higher rating.



Less views is always worse in my opinion


----------



## Shenroe

mwk360 said:


> Less views is always worse in my opinion


Always.


----------



## Chrome

Cliffy said:


> They're going to get massacred next week by Cowboys-Redskins :romo


Yeah, it's going to be even worse for them because the Cowboys are good this year. :lol


----------



## validreasoning

mwk360 said:


> Less views is always worse in my opinion





Shenroe said:


> Always.


well wwe, the networks and advertisers disagree with you, they focus on household ratings not viewership.



RAVEN said:


> It's still par for the course during this time of the year I think. Don't see the ratings really picking up until the Rumble.


january 5th like clockwork



> How were the ratings during this period last year?


october 20 2014 = 3.7 million average (2.75 rating)
october 21 2013 = 3.83 million average (2.71 rating)
october 22 2012 = 3.44 million average (2.55 rating)


----------



## Jof

2.7 is not bad at all these days, albeit disappointing considering this week RAW was actually good.


----------



## Armani

WWE should blame no one but themselves. Giving the title to Brock for this long is a horrible idea, he should have lost it against Seth via cash in. Now it's worse, we will still have another Brock/Cena match, wish it was sooner than later so we can move on to another feud for Lesnar, but it's not any time soon.


----------



## Jof

Brock ends the streak, squashes Cena and....loses to Seth? Fuck that shit. He should take it all the way to wrestlemania. Anything else is unacceptable.


----------



## RabidCrow

Choke2Death said:


> Last night was a pleasing surprise for me with them actually attempting to advance something involving The Authority and Orton, but most of the show was the same shit as usual. Sheamus and Usos tagging against the heels they feud with again, some irrelevant divas match, Ziggler facing whoever he "feuds" with and other filler that did nothing.
> 
> No surprise the best segment was in the hour that got the highest number.
> 
> 
> 
> Explains why his overall for that year was at a whooping +241,000. Do you even try? :lol I'm not even a Miz fan, I just don't like revisionist history.


He had overall a good percentage because he was in segments that boost dramatically because Rock vs Cena. I think you missed your math classes, no?


----------



## wb1899

validreasoning said:


> well wwe, the networks and advertisers disagree with you, they focus on household ratings not viewership.


They focus on C3(7) ratings (A18-49, A25-54 or A18-34, depends on target demo for each cable network). HH ratings are like P2+ numbers just for PR.


----------



## DoneDirtCheap

LOL-ins said:


> Don't even understand the ratings system anymore. They lost viewers but got a higher rating.


The quoted rating is the percent of all TV equipped households watching TV that were tuned in to that program at any given moment. So if the number of people watching TV (any show) on Monday decreased at a faster rate from the previous week than the number of people who tuned into RAW, then that would result in lower viewership but higher ratings. It basically means that fewer people in general were watching TV this past Monday.

This is exactly why a single person has negligible effect on ratings. It depends on way too many variables.


----------



## Jof

Where are these C3/C7 commercial time ratings even reported? WWE has what...35 overall mins of Commercial every week in a three hour show?





> This is exactly why a single person has negligible effect on ratings. It depends on way too many variables.


This is very true for most TV shows, but WWE is NOT most shows. They have conditioned their viewers for years and years into certain specific viewing patterns. The entire WWE fanbase knows main event players are the only ones that really matter, and that mid-card division typically doesn't. WWE has been building their product around main eventers for decades, so yes the No.1 guy, the top star, the champion absolutely matters when it comes to a live weekly scripted show like WWE. 

This is the reason we have different "eras" in wrestling, something that you wouldn't find in other long running TV shows.


----------



## Demandred

Armani said:


> WWE should blame no one but themselves. Giving the title to Brock for this long is a horrible idea, he should have lost it against Seth via cash in. Now it's worse, we will still have another Brock/Cena match, wish it was sooner than later so we can move on to another feud for Lesnar, but it's not any time soon.




Brock Lesnar having the title isn't the problem. Brock Lesnar having the title but not appearing while the focus remains on John Cena is a huge problem. WWE will never ever learn though so its no surprise. Lesnar will almost certainly hold the title until Mania because there is no real legitimate way to have him drop it.


----------



## Sam Fisher 2014

Many sites used to provide ratings breakdown couple of months back which seemed to have dried up now.From where do they get the ratings breakdown?What/who is their source?If I started a dirtsheet website 2mro whom do I have to contact to get details of ratings breakdown?How come none of the sites provide ratings breakdown these daus?


----------



## Goldusto

Brock LEsnar is the Champion

Ambrose V Rollins is the hottest Fued

and yet despite this Cena is still the focus of the entire show.

You wonder why ratings are in the toilet.


----------



## luckyfri

wwe is in a ditch. rushing into summer 2014 wwe look full with potential.
some injuries maybe crushed their plans. however they killed/held back most of talent this summer by booking them wrong. at the finish wwe added lesnar and nearly made show senseless.
i hoped that rising talent would fight out who will kick cena throm his everlasting throne.
now they can't do-because noone could fight lesnar.
this summer a fell in love with wwe again. however now its getting boring.


----------



## mwk360

> By Marc Middleton | October 28, 2014 |
> 
> - The final rating for Friday's WWE SmackDown was a 1.67 rating. This is down from last week's 1.96 rating. As noted, the show drew 2.279 million viewers, down from last week's 2.694 million viewers.


Wow, This was The Ambrose, IC match show.

Can anyone tell me what the lowest non holiday rating of Smackdown was?


----------



## SóniaPortugal

mwk360 said:


> Wow, This was The Ambrose, IC match show.
> 
> Can anyone tell me what the lowest non holiday rating of Smackdown was?


And Seth Rollins


----------



## Punkholic

8pm: 3,868,000
9pm: 3,839,000
10pm: 3,529,000

Average viewership: 3,745,333 viewers

*Source:* http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...merican-dad-mike-tyson-mysteries-more/320234/


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## A-C-P

DAT "Good Guy" :cena3 Main Event


----------



## The True Believer

Wasn't the Ambrose/Wyatt segment at the top of the 3rd hour?


----------



## Joshi Judas

Is that up or down from last week?


----------



## A-C-P

KINGPIN said:


> Wasn't the Ambrose/Wyatt segment at the top of the 3rd hour?


Yep the Ambrose/Cesaro, then Wyatt stuff started at like (i'll use EDT) right before the top of the hour and ended right after the top of the hour. Ambrose/Wyatt got like a total of 5-6 minutes on TV.


----------



## Punkholic

RAVEN said:


> Is that up or down from last week?



Barely up. Last week drew 3,690,000. The week before that averaged 3,750,000 viewers.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## LOL-ins

I think RAW is the only TV-PG show that airs at 10pm. It's so fucking stupid. 

They lose in the 3rd for two reasons.

1. People can't handle 3 hours of RAW
2. Kids need to go to sleep

Either go back to 2 hours 8-10, 3 hours 7-10, or fucking change the 10pm-11pm hour to TV-14 content because no sane parent will let a aged 5-10 child stay up that late.


----------



## JY57

http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/522977-wwe-raw-viewership-2013-vs-2014-analysis



> As we reported earlier today, Hell in a Cell fallout brought the RAW viewership up from last week, but the overall numbers for October are still some of the lowest of the year.
> 
> October 2014 averaged 3.75 million viewers. That’s not just the lowest draw of the year, but of the last two years. The second lowest month this year was May, which averaged only 3.91 million, even after a tremendous WrestleMania XXX PPV and the successful RAW ratings that followed it. To put that in perspective, the lowest score of 2013 came during the start of NFL season, and still managed 3.83 million people.
> 
> What’s interesting is that RAW actually started in about the same place both years, and is likely heading towards a similar conclusion. The numbers for January are near identical (4.63 vs. 4.58), but there are a few major differences in how the year played out.
> 
> The biggest one, as you can see by the huge, plummeting red line segment, came after WrestleMania XXX. Even though the April event took RAW to the best scores its seen the past two years (and possibly beyond), there was a massive drop-off heading into the next month’s PPV.
> 
> In 2013, WWE had a much more successful first quarter overall, with the Road to WrestleMania boosting the scores a lot more than Mania itself. The drop-off was much less severe, despite landing around the same place two months later.
> 
> What that means is last year there was a gradual loss in interest in the product. It perked back up for SummerSlam, as expected, but then struggled when the NFL season got underway. The graph doesn’t show November or December 2013, but what you’d see is similar to September and October. Those early months where they saw the biggest turnout had The Rock as WWE Champion, and the impending rematch with John Cena at WrestleMania 29. Once that program ended, people slowly tuned out.
> 
> This year, the actual ROAD to ‘Mania had a surprisingly low turnout. The major stories were Daniel Bryan being “screwed over” several times by the Authority, Batista’s return, and John Cena working a mid-card program with the Wyatt Family.
> 
> This all begs the question: was Daniel Bryan a factor in the RAW ratings?
> 
> The months he was champion, or fighting for the title, were the lowest of 2013. That said, they were also expected to be low because of NFL and TV season kicking off. But because January to March 2014 – the time Bryan was fighting his way back to the title – also didn’t seem to generate interest on RAW, it makes you wonder.
> 
> On the flip side, WrestleMania month was up almost 8% over March this year. Those numbers held steady until the week Bryan announced that he was injured, and was forced to vacate the title. The important thing is to try and understand why the numbers dropped 16% (that’s SIXTEEN PERCENT) between April and May. Even with a Kane match at Extreme Rules, which you would think wouldn’t bring in a ton of eyes to the show, the numbers stayed firm until the title was taken from Daniel Bryan.
> 
> My theory is that WrestleMania just did incredibly well, and it being the 30th anniversary plus the launch of the WWE Network, there were a lot of eyes on the product. They had The Rock, Steve Austin, Hulk Hogan and The Undertaker’s streak ending on one show, and the product was highlighted in a lot of major media publications. Once people realized it was just “business as usual”, the numbers went back down to just the weekly faithful. That 16% drop looks nasty, but you also have to factor in that RAW was doing way better than it probably should have been in April, and that fall was just the viewing market regulating itself.
> 
> Don’t get me wrong – that’s still a problem, and WWE needs to figure out why they can’t retain the fans that show up for WrestleMania season. If they could have curbed that drop to 10%, or even 5% (which is around the average monthly fluctuation), RAW would have blown last year’s numbers out of the water.
> 
> The good news is that after the crash, summer 2014 actually did quite well, out-performing 2013 for three out of five months, from May to September.
> 
> It’s pretty easy to look at numbers for the month of October and say that RAW is a “sinking ship” and that the numbers are the worst they’ve ever been. And technically yes, October was the worst period of the last two years for RAW viewership. But when you actually add up every month, and look at how many fans watched the show all year long, they’re almost exactly the same. Shockingly close, actually.
> 
> In 2013, 42.16 million people watched WWE RAW on average.
> 
> In 2014, 42.22 million people watched WWE RAW on average.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

How is that 3rd hour has the worst ratings?
How much mainevent should have done?


----------



## Joe88

LOL-ins said:


> I think RAW is the only TV-PG show that airs at 10pm. It's so fucking stupid.
> 
> They lose in the 3rd for two reasons.
> 
> 1. People can't handle 3 hours of RAW
> 2. Kids need to go to sleep
> 
> Either go back to 2 hours 8-10, 3 hours 7-10, or fucking change the 10pm-11pm hour to TV-14 content because no sane parent will let a aged 5-10 child stay up that late.



This is something I do not understand. They aim their flagship program at an audience who really is not watching the entire show. What child from 5 to 9 years old is up past 9 or 9:30?


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

The whole show fucking focused on Cena and the hour in which he actually wrestled was the lowest rated of the whole show. 

Look at how amazing Cena is. He puts the likes of Hogan, Austin and Rocky to fucking shame. 

He truly is the greatest to ever step foot into a wrestling ring. The appeal this man has knows no bounds, I bet the other "greats" wish they could draw from a built-in fanbase the way he does without bringing in any new eyes to the product.


----------



## CM punker

I'm going to stop watching WWE until the road to wrestlemania. havent even watched hell in a cell or this monday night raw's episode. the reason i quit is for one reasno and one reason ONLY, its John Cena and Randy orton hogging the spotlight. im so done with this company. thats why the ratings are so low. when reigns and daniel bryan were on top the ratings were NOT at an all time low like they are right now


----------



## RKO 4life

I can't wait until Orton gets his rematch goin up against Brok for the title at WM. After talking to a few 49ers fans who are fans of WWE and live around Levi stadium are saying Orton NOT reigns will be booked in that match at WM. 

They look to be going all in on Orton at around Jan.


----------



## mwk360

> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_81615.shtml#.VFgYbfmUeLk
> 
> By James Caldwell, PWTorch assistant editor
> 
> WWE Smackdown on Friday, October 31 scored a 1.64 rating, continuing a two-week slide from a 1.67 rating last week.
> 
> The Halloween episode drew 2.213 million viewers, down three percent from last week's show. It was the
> 
> 
> fewest viewers since the Fourth of July, which drew 1.881 million viewers.
> 
> On cable TV Friday night, Smackdown fell to #4 in overall viewers, #7 in males 18-34, and #4 in m18-49.
> 
> As expected, Smackdown's biggest drop-off was among younger viewers on Halloween. Both the m12-34 & m12-17 demos fell one-tenth of a rating from last week to season lows.


As expected


----------



## Punkholic

SmackDown will be competing with TNA soon. :ti


----------



## vanboxmeer

They really need to bring back The Look as fast as they can, no matter how much HGH they need to pump into his veins. Only he can believe dat the ratings to heights it's never seen before. Once he gets over his fear of being seen in public showing his stomach region, there's no telling how high he can get.


----------



## Sam Fisher 2014

JY57 said:


> wrestlezone[dot]com/news/522977-wwe-raw-viewership-2013-vs-2014-analysis[/url]


Why ZERO response for this article.Would Daniel Bryan Fans maintain the same level of silence and show disinterest if it was Roman Reigns instead of Bryan in this article?

Hypocrisy much?


----------



## Goldusto

kane

orton

hhh

cena

still hovering around main event like flies on shit.

in 2014.

why bother.


----------



## validreasoning

viewership up nearly 8% from last week

8pm = 4.043
9pm = 4.203
10pm = 3.875


----------



## FeedMeWhores

Vince McMahon is a draw.


----------



## dxbender

No Cena and numbers went up.....


----------



## The True Believer

What happened during the second hour?


----------



## Empress

dxbender said:


> No Cena and numbers went up.....


:lol

It was a solid show last night. I'm glad the numbers went up.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

Seth 'Ratings' Rollins


----------



## The True Believer

If the viewership was up during the third hour, I'd blame it on Kane tripping.


----------



## validreasoning

KINGPIN said:


> What happened during the second hour?


authority/ziggler in-ring talking segment
ziggler vs rollins 
hhh/orton backstage talk
ryback vs titus
big show interview back stage
first few minutes of big show vs henry


----------



## The True Believer

Big Show bringing in dem big ratings.


----------



## TromaDogg




----------



## Wynter

Vince McMahon and the Authority/Randy/Seth storyline did their jobs.


----------



## Choke2Death

Orton vs Rollins >>> Cena vs Rollins in viewership numbers. :mark:

Show was way better than last week, so numbers going up was deserved.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

:cena4


----------



## Wynter

Seriously, WWE. Great job at sending Randy away for some straight to DVD bullshit for the new few weeks :lol


----------



## Marv95

There was a theme running throughout the night that helped them retain viewers.


----------



## Batz

dxbender said:


> No Cena and numbers went up.....


:cheer


----------



## joeycalz

RAW opened with Da Authoritay followed by Ambrose/Cesaro. Top of the third hour with shnoz, Ziggles then Rollins. Henry feuding with Show. Coked up Orton. No Cena

Did anybody expect something different? Sounds like a recipe for success to me.


----------



## Frico

Well deserved. All I gotta say.


----------



## Krispenwah

Anybody can outdraw Cena, this motherfucker rating power is really overrated.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

Krispenwah said:


> Anybody can outdraw Cena, this motherfucker rating power is really overrated.


This. When a new act comes around and they start showing signs of a push, the ratings stay in decline, people blame that new act (happened with Punk, Bryan, etc). When in reality, WWE has lost millions of viewers since Cena became the guy, also the change in format (PG rating, banned the word wrestling, 3 hours, etc) didn't help. This crap doesn't draw. Everyone knows Cena is still the guy when Punk gets the belt or Bryan gets a push. Of course the ratings don't increase. Change your stupid product.

The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones draw ratings. PG shows that end at 11 PM ET doesn't. Also the fact that you seem to bash your own product (wrestling) by not acknowledging that your a wrestling company so you can 'try' to gain new viewers (by trying to delete your history from the public's minds), loses your established fans by alienating them.


----------



## LPPrince

Really? Thats awesome. WWE probably will attribute the ratings increase to something else other than Cena hogging the spotlight though.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

My fav Raw of 2014. Everything was great but the story between HHH, Orton and Rollins was amazing. They played it so well HHH the mob boss that doesn't want to take out rabid Orton who can't follow orders. Seth the cocky young guy that Orton once was and HHH took him down a notch. Orton wants to do the same to Seth. but nope.

Love steph playing the devil whispering in HHH's ear role. Finish it! And HHH barks out the orders and walks away to sad to watch it go down.


----------



## JTB33b

Krispenwah said:


> Anybody can outdraw Cena, this motherfucker rating power is really overrated.


Yeah just because he is a merch draw doesn't mean he is a ratings draw. Most of his fanbase are getting ready for bed the time raw airs. He has killed the ratings. The ratings have been at an all-time low with Cena as the face of the company. Atleast with Shawn Michaels he had the excuse that WWE had to compete with WCW and the NWO.


----------



## validreasoning

should point out that last week was the most watched mnf game in years while this week was the least watched of the year...



TheLooseCanon said:


> WWE has lost *millions of viewers since Cena became the guy,* also the change in format (PG rating, banned the word wrestling, 3 hours, etc) didn't help. This crap doesn't draw.


they actually lost millions of viewers (as well as millions in revenue and thousands of paying fans) just prior to cena becoming the guy between 2000 and 2004. cena has kept the ship steady, without him in 2005-09 it would have been very nasty for wwe given ufc started targetting wwe fans directly and the great recession would have seen their live attendance dwindle even further had nobody stepped up. on a whole more people watched raw in 2009 than any year since 2001 e.g. thats more viewership not bigger ratings btw

there was no cena on top, pg, 3 hours during this period http://411mania.com/wrestling/wwe-cancels-house-shows-due-to-attendance-woes/

cena despite being on tv every week is still the most consistent ratings draw on the full time roster http://lastwordonsports.com/2014/02/02/dissecting-wwe-raw-ratings-2011-2013-by-superstar/


----------



## A-C-P

"Coked Up" :rko2 = Ratings :draper2


----------



## brxd

Good ratings is down to Team Cena vs. Team Authority. It's been a very strong storyline so far.


----------



## Alo0oy

validreasoning said:


> should point out that last week was the most watched mnf game in years while this week was the least watched of the year...
> 
> 
> 
> they actually lost millions of viewers (as well as millions in revenue and thousands of paying fans) just prior to cena becoming the guy between 2000 and 2004. cena has kept the ship steady, without him in 2005-09 it would have been very nasty for wwe given ufc started targetting wwe fans directly and the great recession would have seen their live attendance dwindle even further had nobody stepped up. *on a whole more people watched raw in 2009 than any year since 2001* e.g. thats more viewership not bigger ratings btw
> 
> there was no cena on top, pg, 3 hours during this period http://411mania.com/wrestling/wwe-cancels-house-shows-due-to-attendance-woes/
> 
> cena despite being on tv every week is still the most consistent ratings draw on the full time roster http://lastwordonsports.com/2014/02/02/dissecting-wwe-raw-ratings-2011-2013-by-superstar/


I'm pretty sure that was because Orton was feuding with the McMahons & he was pretty much running Raw.


----------



## D.M.N.

October numbers since 2010

- 2010 = 4.54 million (4 x 2 hours)
- 2011 = 4.59 million (5 x 2 hours)
- 2012 = 3.85 million (5 x 3 hours)
- 2013 = 3.92 million (4 x 3 hours)
- 2014 = 3.75 million (4 x 3 hours)

An interesting statistic is that not one 'hour' in October 2014 broke four million viewers. Pretty bad numbers.


----------



## Chrome

D.M.N. said:


> An interesting statistic is that not one 'hour' in October 2014 broke four million viewers. Pretty bad numbers.


They earned it though, October was a dreadful month.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Cena hasn't been a draw on TV in awhile. No one really has. It's great that people are starting to realize this, finally.


----------



## RKO 4life

But when Orton is booked right and to the top Raw always gets higher ratings.

While Cena only moves kids gear. Cena isn't a draw I been sayin it and now people are seeing it.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

validreasoning said:


> should point out that last week was the most watched mnf game in years while this week was the least watched of the year...
> 
> 
> 
> they actually lost millions of viewers (as well as millions in revenue and thousands of paying fans) just prior to cena becoming the guy between 2000 and 2004. cena has kept the ship steady, without him in 2005-09 it would have been very nasty for wwe given ufc started targetting wwe fans directly and the great recession would have seen their live attendance dwindle even further had nobody stepped up. on a whole more people watched raw in 2009 than any year since 2001 e.g. thats more viewership not bigger ratings btw
> 
> there was no cena on top, pg, 3 hours during this period http://411mania.com/wrestling/wwe-cancels-house-shows-due-to-attendance-woes/
> 
> cena despite being on tv every week is still the most consistent ratings draw on the full time roster http://lastwordonsports.com/2014/02/02/dissecting-wwe-raw-ratings-2011-2013-by-superstar/


Do not try
They do not want to see the reality
Let them live in a fantasy world where "Cena is not a draw"


----------



## Loader230

CenaBoy4Life said:


> My fav Raw of 2014. Everything was great but the story between HHH, Orton and Rollins was amazing. They played it so well HHH the mob boss that doesn't want to take out rabid Orton who can't follow orders. Seth the cocky young guy that Orton once was and HHH took him down a notch. Orton wants to do the same to Seth. but nope.
> 
> Love steph playing the devil whispering in HHH's ear role. Finish it! And HHH barks out the orders and walks away to sad to watch it go down.


Indeed it was great. I really loved the dynamic where Orton just can't RKO Triple H or that Triple H just couldn't lay hands on Orton himself. Because if either of those things happened, it would've been officially over. Orton can kill Seth, beat up Kane and the stooges however many times he wants, even RKO Stephanie herself and he would still be part of the Authority, but if he lays out hunter its over, similarly Hunter just couldn't take Orton out by himself. I mean that's why the crowd was going nuts, when Orton was standing there in the middle of the ring with Triple H trying to control him. They wanted it to happen.

It was like both of them knew things have gotten far out of control and the alliance was over, but even then they wanted it to somehow still exist because of their mentor-protege' relationship. Triple H could've pedigreed and stopped him, and Randy could've RKO'd and walked out a hero to the crowds cheering, but neither wanted to. Excellent psychology and amazing, strong storytelling at the end. It was thoroughly refreshing to see something different from your typical "I attacked the heel, therefore I'm the babyface blah" face turn angles we've seen for decades in wrestling.




RAVEN said:


> It was awesome.
> 
> 1st backstage segment: You can see Steph doesn't want Orton in the team, since he doesn't get on with Rollins. Steph points out that Rollins is the captain of Team Authority, but HHH manages to convince her somehow and calls Orton to join his team anyway.
> 
> After that, you have The Authority in the ring confronting Ziggler and Steph names only Rollins and Kane for Team Authority but HHH has to whisper in her ear to include Orton too.
> 
> Then, after Randy costs Seth the chance to become IC champion, backstage we see Steph not wanting to give Orton a 1 on 1 match against Seth but Triple H still believes in Orton, so he grants his wish but says after that, they need to get on the same side and go to war together at Survivor Series.
> 
> Finally, after Rollins/Orton, the moment Seth gets the pin, you see Triple H holding his head and upset, clearly wishing Orton would have won and knowing that the situation can't be controlled any longer.
> 
> And then Rollins gets condescending with his apology and says "Let me be the bigger man" :lmao Orton snaps and attacks Seth, Noble, Mercury and Kane. Goes to punt Seth but HHH interrupts and STILL doesn't attack Orton. Tries to calm him down but Orton knocks him to the mat and then you can see Stephanie snaps on the outside and sends the goons in for the kill.
> 
> And in the end, when Orton is bleeding from the curbstomp on the table and crawling towards Trips, he still doesn't want to attack his protege'. But it's Steph who gives the final order to finish him and Hunter says "Dammit" and reluctantly goes along with it, walking away without pedigreeing him. And Rollins finishes the job.
> 
> Great stuff throughout the show :clap


...


----------



## CM punker

RKO 4life said:


> But when Orton is booked right and to the top Raw always gets higher ratings.
> 
> While Cena only moves kids gear. Cena isn't a draw I been sayin it and now people are seeing it.


Orton is a bigger draw than Cena? :lol:lol:lol I'm not even a fan of Cena and this is just laughable. Cena is light years ahead of orton in drawing power


----------



## Punkholic

SmackDown averaged 2,425,000 viewers last week.

*Source:* http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ball-sportscenter-edge-of-alaska-more/325432/


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Vyer

8:00 PM= 4.018	
9:00 PM= 3.943	
10:00 PM= 3.831


----------



## dxbender

Vyer said:


> 8:00 PM= 4.018
> 9:00 PM= 3.943
> 10:00 PM= 3.831


And #1 show on Cable TV for Monday night(of all non sporting events), and people will still complain.....


----------



## Goldusto

dxbender said:


> And #1 show on Cable TV for Monday night(of all non sporting events), and people will still complain.....


well like 7 8 million less people watched the football, 7.8 around 11million,NFL hits a tie for season low, and WWE still couldn't keep above 4 million viewers.


----------



## mwk360

Vyer said:


> 8:00 PM= 4.018
> 9:00 PM= 3.943
> 10:00 PM= 3.831


The BIG GUY! :yes


----------



## BetterThanPerfect

Smackdown still gets decent ratings is surprising.


----------



## dxbender

Goldusto said:


> well like 7 8 million less people watched the football, 7.8 around 11million,NFL hits a tie for season low, and WWE still couldn't keep above 4 million viewers.


So WWE should be able to compete ratings wise with the biggest sport in USA? That's like saying WWE should beat hockey in Canada, or football in England.......Comparing WWE ratings to the biggest sport in a specific country doesn't make sense.


----------



## Fabregas

Not even the ratings thread is a draw anymore.


----------



## Goldusto

dxbender said:


> So WWE should be able to compete ratings wise with the biggest sport in USA? That's like saying WWE should beat hockey in Canada, or football in England.......Comparing WWE ratings to the biggest sport in a specific country doesn't make sense.


point was there was 7 8 million less people that could have been drawn to raw if it was a compelling program.


----------



## murder

Much like they were able to "steal" about 2 million viewers when Nitro was pre-empted back then.


----------



## JY57

> - Friday's episode of WWE SmackDown, taped from Liverpool, drew 2.715 million viewers. This is up from last week's 2.425 million viewers. SmackDown was #2 on cable for the night, behind Gold Rush.


-


----------



## Reaper

Fabregas said:


> Not even the ratings thread is a draw anymore.


What's the point of having a discussion when no one moves ratings _significantly_? 

To me it just seems like the WWE has a relatively fixed viewership regardless of product and there's nothing to discuss.


----------



## Darkness is here

This thread is dead without the breakdowns.


----------



## Bfo4jd

8:00 PM 3.894 1.2
9:00 PM 3.780 1.2
10:00 PM 3.641	1.3


----------



## LOL-ins

I still don't understand why WWE doesn't do a TV-14 10pm-11pm hour looking at the ratings. RAW lost 200,000 viewers but their 18-49 rating went up.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

Yeah the kids are usually in bed 9-10 pm in school seasons. 

After 10 should be programmed to appeal for adults. keep the guest host and comedy crap out.


----------



## DanielBlitzkrieg

Making it 'adult' after a certain hour is ridiculous. There isn't a magical force that makes wrestlers bleed after 9 or 10 PM.

It's different from things like Cartoon Network/Adult Swim because those are different shows doing different things at different times. WWE's roster is there to do the same thing, wrestle. If there's a different rating or extreme rules it should be based on which show it is, not which hour.


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32

Okay. So the rating gets bumped to a more mature one. Does that automatically mean things get better?


----------



## joeycalz

The go-home show centered around the Cena/Authority main event for SS had less total viewership than a RAW WITHOUT Cena two (?) weeks ago, which actually broke the 4 million mark -- 400k more than the lowest rated hour tonight, which was the 10 p.m. - 11 p.m. hour that featured segments with: Big Show, Sheamus, the Bellas, the tag teams and the contract signing. 

So, yeah, in what galaxy is that supposed to make any sense? Not in this one.


----------



## Shenroe

So who is to blame this week?


----------



## LOL-ins

DanielBlitzkrieg said:


> Making it 'adult' after a certain hour is ridiculous. There isn't a magical force that makes wrestlers bleed after 9 or 10 PM.
> 
> It's different from things like Cartoon Network/Adult Swim because those are different shows doing different things at different times. WWE's roster is there to do the same thing, wrestle. If there's a different rating or extreme rules it should be based on which show it is, not which hour.


RAW IS WAR 9-10

WAR ZONE 10-11

That is all that needs to be said.


----------



## Rap God

Believe it or not , WWE being PG is the reason why they will never ever get good ratings.

Adults > Kids

#dealwithit


----------



## validreasoning

arguing over pg and kids when in fact the issue is with wwes largest demo ie men over 50

the males 50+ went from 2.17 rating at 8pm all the way down to a 1.83 by 10pm..btw nearly twice as many men aged over 50 watching raw at 8pm than men/women 18-49

the 18-49 demo grew throughout the night despite a close football game that came down to the last few minutes


----------



## DanielBlitzkrieg

LOL-ins said:


> RAW IS WAR 9-10
> 
> WAR ZONE 10-11
> 
> That is all that needs to be said.


I don't recall the first part being anything like "PG Era". The more adult parts have usually happened later, but I was imagining a scenario where the first part resembles PG Era content with no blood, swearing, etc. at all, and the second half featuring a lot of it. It would be like two different shows. And how would it work in the crowd? Tickets give a seat for one or two hours and children leave after that? RAW IS WAR and the WAR ZONE didn't work like that, as far as I remember.


----------



## Randy Lahey

If you want 4.0 + ratings:

Have the divas act like sluts and use them that way.
Bring back hard core matches. High spots, tables and chairs, blood, etc.
Shorten the show to 2 hrs, and shorten the matches. 
Get rid of all of the kiddie garbage
Gives guys that can work the Mic the bulk of the TV time 
Blur the line between WWE and Reality. Create a feud where the audiences believes both guys really hate each other and might actually try to hurt each other in the ring. Use legit personal matters to push feuds.

If SCSA and The Rock had to limit themselves in the same way during the Attitude Era as the guys are doing today, they'd have never been as big of stars as they were. We dont know if the next huge star is on the roster because the PG limits prevents anyone from getting legit over. What PG stars have gotten over? Daniel Bryan - that is only because of one chant. CM Punk - yeah he delivered a pipebomb. That made for great TV. WWE quit using that technique almost immediately.


----------



## LOL-ins

DanielBlitzkrieg said:


> I don't recall the first part being anything like "PG Era". The more adult parts have usually happened later, but I was imagining a scenario where the first part resembles PG Era content with no blood, swearing, etc. at all, and the second half featuring a lot of it. It would be like two different shows. And how would it work in the crowd? *Tickets give a seat for one or two hours and children leave after that? *RAW IS WAR and the WAR ZONE didn't work like that, as far as I remember.


You'll be surprised how many kids don't make it til 10pm at live shows. Seen parents taking them home at 10pm frequently.


----------



## Randy Lahey

If you think about how backward thinking the WWE is - consider AJ. I havent watched WWE in awhile but I'm pretty sure the crowd chants (or used to chant) "CM PUNK" at her. Now, if this were the attitude era - she would talk right back to the crowd with some bitchy catty comment and draw the crowd into even more of a frenzy. But instead, the WWE has her either ignore it, or maybe roll her eyes. Its ridiculous. There are so many real life things that could be incorporated into these storylines to give them more juice/legitmacy/heat that everyone knows about - so why pretend that they dont exist. Everyone knows CM Punk is married to AJ. We know CM Punk and the WWE had a very messy parting of ways. Why not let AJ play on that to get over? Can you imagine the heat that AJ would get if, when feuding with Stephanie - said something like "Your husband NEEDS my husband, or we are all out of a job soon"..or something along those lines. 

Sometimes I think Vince believes that by acknowledging talent that leaves the WWE, you are making the WWE look bad. But i disagree. Its the opposite. Vince can still make money off CM Punk even if Punk isnt there by having his wife basically use their real life relationship to get over. 

to try to go back to this kayfabe cartoon era in the era of dirt sheets, twitter, everyone knows all the inside information is just really backwards thinking.


----------



## xDD

Shenroe said:


> So who is to blame this week?


Ryback I guess.


----------



## validreasoning

live + dvr viewership raw ratings last decade or so (dvr playback +2 is running about 12.5% extra on top of live). btw wwes files to the sec provide this info.

2002-03 = 3.7
2003-04 = 3.8
2004-05 = 3.7
2005-06 = 3.9
2007 = 3.7
2008 = 3.4
2009 = 3.7	
2010 = 3.5
2011 = 3.6
2012 = 3.3
2013 = 3.4
2014 = 3.5 (first 9 months)

as far as live viewership goes, since raw moved to 3 hours (during football season including labor day)

2012
sep 3 = 4.2 million (2.83 rating)
sep 10 = 4.14 million (2.89 rating)
sep 17 = 4.05 million (2.86 rating)
sep 24 = 3.79 million (2.72 rating)
oct 1 = 3.5 million (2.54 rating)
oct 8 = 4.11 million (2.8 rating)
oct 15 = 3.99 million (2.81 rating)
oct 22 = 3.55 million (2.48 rating)
oct 29 = 4.1 million (2.95 rating)
nov 5 = 4.08 million (2.78 rating)
nov 12 = 4.19 million (2.86 rating)
nov 19 = 3.83 million (2.73 rating)
*average = 3.96 million viewers (2.77 rating)*

2013
sep 2 = 3.94 million (2.85 rating)
sep 9 = 3.87 million (2.9 rating)
sep 16 = 4.01 million (2.96 rating)
sep 23 = 3.74 million (2.81 rating)
sep 30 = 3.59 million (2.68 rating)
oct 7 = 3.71 million (2.65 rating)
oct 14 = 3.99 million (2.88 rating)
oct 21 = 3.83 million (2.71 rating)
oct 29 = 4.16 million (2.98 rating)
nov 4 = 3.89 million (2.75 rating)
nov 11 = 3.77 million (2.73 rating)
nov 18 = 3.80 million (2.73 rating)
*average = 3.86 million (2.8 rating)*

2014
sep 1 = 3.92 million (2.81 rating)
sep 8 = 3.99 million (2.88 rating)
sep 15 = 3.83 million (2.79 rating)
sep 22 = 3.88 million (2.69 rating)
sep 29 = 4.04 million (2.83 rating)
oct 6 = 3.80 million (2.63 rating)
oct 13 = 3.75 million (2.74 rating)
oct 20 = 3.7 million (2.75 rating)
oct 27 = 3.75 million (2.71 rating)
nov 3 = 4.04 million (2.84 rating)
nov 10 = 3.93 million (2.75 rating)
nov 17 = 3.77 million (2.75 rating)
*average = 3.87 million (2.76 rating)*


----------



## Shenroe

xDD said:


> Ryback I guess.


:kermit


----------



## Bfo4jd

Damn, it finally happened. WWE is so stale that not even smarks give a damn about ratings anymore. This thread is dead.


----------



## validreasoning

Bfo4jd said:


> Damn, it finally happened. WWE is so stale that not even smarks give a damn about ratings anymore. This thread is dead.


when you break it down ratings and attendance have been so consistent in wwe these past 12 years its really a rather boring subject to talk about. gone are the day when wwe or wcw would lose 80% of their paying fans in 2 years, nearly 40% of their watching audience or have huge difference between one hour or raw and the other. nobody makes much of a difference anymore...the lowest rated show of the year this year was the one rock appeared!!

you can set your watch to this e.g
between january and april raw live will average between 4.2 and 5 million viewers
between may and august raw will average between 3.8 and 4.5 million viewers
between september and december raw will average between 3.5 and 4.1 million viewers


----------



## NastyYaffa

Shenroe said:


> So who is to blame this week?


CM Punk & Daniel Bryan.


----------



## Shenroe

NastyYaffa said:


> CM Punk & Daniel Bryan.


:lol


----------



## Bubba T

Serious question here. We have this huge thread for TV ratings, but nothing for financials? Dafaq?


----------



## JY57

> The 11/21 Survivor Series go-home edition of Smackdown did 2,878,000 viewers, up from last week’s 2,715,000 viewers. It was the fourth week in a row the audience has risen for the series.


-


----------



## validreasoning

sting and bryan got people tuning in at 8 it seems but news coverage at 9 and 10 dominated after that..foxnews drew over 7 million viewers at 9 and 10 

8pm = 4.734
9pm = 3.992
10pm = 4.012
*average = 4.246*


----------



## A-C-P

Wow, that YES! chant is sure over, not Bryan unk2

And the Sting fallout I am sure helped. But the News event from last night I am sure cost the WWE some viewers in the last 2 hours.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I saw some scoffed at Thanos for having the temerity to suggest that the Bryan segment would do well. Who's scoffing now? Bryan has been a top tv draw this year and this does nothing to change that fact.


----------



## The Buryer

*Sting return FAILS to draw!*

Viewership is in...*Not even 5 million viewers for the first hour*, even Batista's return drew 5.3 m for the first hour

Hour one: 4.73 million
Hour two: 3.99 million
Hour three: 4.01 million

Average: *4.24 million*



Last year, Nov 25 2013 post SVS Raw...

Hour one: 4.31 million
Hour two: 4.29 million
Hour three: 3.79 million

Average: *4.14 million* 

Average is barely up. Rating not out yet, but likely a 2.93.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Sting (with help from Bryan I'm sure) brought in a shit ton of viewers it seems. Even the second and third hours weren't that bad.


----------



## wkdsoul

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

So he didnt improve ratings for a show he wasnt on?


----------



## The5star_Kid

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



wkdsoul said:


> So he didnt improve ratings for a show he wasnt on?


the point is the first hour mark, where most people would have tuned in to see if sting was gonna come on. that was the whole point of his debut the night before, to get people watching the next day.


----------



## SeaM333

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

No big deal.


----------



## TheManof1000post

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

How does somebody return without actually showing up?

He wasnt there. He wasn't advertised for raw.


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

FAIL thread. Sting was not even advertised for RAW.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



wkdsoul said:


> So he didnt improve ratings for a show he wasnt on?


seems so. 

post show was all over the place tbf


----------



## TheManof1000post

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



The5star_Kid said:


> the point is the first hour mark, where most people would have tuned in to see if sting was gonna come on. that was the whole point of his debut the night before, to get people watching the next day.



Except he wasnt advertised for raw...


----------



## TripleG

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

Monday Night Football...kind of a thing...wasn't a factor when Batista returned.


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

Viewership does not count unless you have a ratings box.

These stats prove nothing.


----------



## Shenroe

It's more like The Authority wasn't there to drive viewers away anymore. RAW was a lot more fun and dare I say, unpredictable this time.


----------



## I Ship Sixon

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

Another failed investment
:vince$
Wait until I come back Vince Im going to Make it Reign in Dat Bitch
:reigns
Believe Dat


----------



## The Buryer

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



wkdsoul said:


> So he didnt improve ratings for a show he wasnt on?


Its about the hype and interest. Taker wasn't on for post WM show but the streak ending bumped the ratings up big time. That's why I particularly mentioned first hour.


----------



## Chrome

A-C-P said:


> Wow, that YES! chant is sure over, not Bryan unk2


Yeah, LOL at people that still say that. Do they miss the Daniel Bryan chants, or are they gonna argue that Daniel Bryan is only over because of Daniel Bryan chants? :lel


----------



## RJM

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

1) MNF wasn't around when Batista returned, that would obviously affect viewers.
2) Sting WASN'T actually advertised for RAW, so how can he impact ratings for a show he wasn't on?


----------



## Laser Rey

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



birthday_massacre said:


> Viewership does not count unless you have a ratings box.
> 
> These stats prove nothing.


So the advertising industry all over the world has been doing it wrong since the advent of television.

Learn something new every day.


----------



## Batz

validreasoning said:


> sting and bryan got people tuning in at 8 it seems but news coverage at 9 and 10 dominated after that..foxnews drew over 7 million viewers at 9 and 10
> 
> 8pm = 4.734
> 9pm = 3.992
> 10pm = 4.012
> *average = 4.246*


Impressive.


----------



## Roxinius

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

Op posts fails at logic


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

The Buryer with another legendary thread for the record books. It's silly to blame someone for failing to draw when they're not even on the show or advertised to be there. Come on.


----------



## HankHill_85

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

Yeah, nice try OP but your post is a fail. Not only is that rating an improvement from recent trends, but how the hell do you "blame" someone on a TV rating who wasn't there and not advertised in the slightest?

That, and congrats on making sure your ratings thread got singled out and commented on apart from THE OFFICIAL ONE. *insert sarcastic Internet clapping GIF here*


----------



## The Buryer

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



SVETV988_fan said:


> FAIL thread. Sting was not even advertised for RAW.


Viewers were not told that, they were expecting him. Thats why the first hr alone is counted. Hell they even started Raw with Sting video package, still didn't do well, relatively looking at it.


----------



## The5star_Kid

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



TheManof1000post said:


> Except he wasnt advertised for raw...


the whole point was the surprise factor, he wasnt advertised for SS either.


----------



## El_Absoluto

Next week we will see the biggest drop of the year.

So... whats the point?


----------



## The Buryer

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

ITT: people who have no clue how viewers interest work. The Rock's return in 2011 bumped Raw ratings a whole point even though he never appeared in any following his return, until go home show.


----------



## K4L318

validreasoning said:


> sting and bryan got people tuning in at 8 it seems but news coverage at 9 and 10 dominated after that..foxnews drew over 7 million viewers at 9 and 10
> 
> 8pm = 4.734
> 9pm = 3.992
> 10pm = 4.012
> *average = 4.246*


holy shit! 

that's fucking awesome. Too bad the full show isn't. 

The 3rd hour drew a 4.0? Ziggler or Rollins?


----------



## Black Widow

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

:HA


----------



## Griselda

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

Who the hell actually expected Sting to show up on Raw?


----------



## Howmuchdoesheweigh

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



TripleG said:


> Monday Night Football...kind of a thing...wasn't a factor when Batista returned.


As well as that little thing going on in Missouri


----------



## The Buryer

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

Ironic when you think about, Batista ultimately proved to be the bigger draw and he'll probably be when he returns in a few months.


----------



## El_Absoluto

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



The Buryer said:


> Ironic when you think about, Batista ultimately proved to be the bigger draw and he'll probably be when he returns in a few months.


He is not coming back.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



Chrome said:


> The Buryer with another legendary thread for the record books. It's silly to blame someone for failing to draw when they're not even on the show or advertised to be there. Come on.


:cole "VINTAGE The Buryer!"


----------



## 'Road Dogg' Jesse James

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



The5star_Kid said:


> the point is the first hour mark, where most people would have tuned in to see if sting was gonna come on. that was the whole point of his debut the night before, to get people watching the next day.


Not Sting's fault. WWE shouldn't be using cheap stunts to try to get ratings, they should be putting out a better product.


----------



## shutupchico

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

why would it? this is 2014, not 2007. sting's never worked for wwe, and hasn't been really relevent since, when, 99? they're way too late on this for it to make a huge impact.


----------



## NakedCall

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



The Buryer said:


> Viewership is in...*Not even 5 million viewers for the first hour*, even Batista's return drew 5.3 m for the first hour
> 
> Hour one: 4.73 million
> Hour two: 3.99 million
> Hour three: 4.01 million
> 
> Average: *4.24 million*
> 
> 
> 
> Last year, Nov 25 2013 post SVS Raw...
> 
> Hour one: 4.31 million
> Hour two: 4.29 million
> Hour three: 3.79 million
> 
> Average: *4.14 million*
> 
> Average is barely up. Rating not out yet, but likely a 2.93.


The fuck are you talking about? That's a huge improvement relative to recent viewership.


----------



## CM Punk Is A God

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*



The Buryer said:


> Viewers were not told that, they were expecting him. Thats why the first hr alone is counted. Hell they even started Raw with Sting video package, still didn't do well, relatively looking at it.


If they were expecting Sting that's their own fault. He made a special appearance at Survivor Series, any logical person would not expect him the following night.


----------



## Mr. Yes

Of course the ratings were up. Sting was exciting, and Bryan was a very consistent ratings draw earlier this year.


----------



## Brock

Anyone still take this guys' threads seriously anymore.


----------



## NakedCall

Bryan is the biggest star after Cena and the biggest ratings draw currently. I'm sure some of it was due to people expecting Sting, but most of it was Bryan. I'm not his biggest fan, but you can't deny that people are into him.


----------



## BadTouch

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

I think it is now safe to say Sting has flopped :troll


----------



## yeahright2

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

..How can it be a RETURN when he have never worked for WWE?
And improve ratings on a show he was never supposed to be on anyway?
Thread fail.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

Holy shit, that hour 1 number was huge, DB THE RATINGS MAGNET.


----------



## Starbuck

4.7 million viewers for 1 hour at this time of year is mighty impressive imo. Had this happened in January it probably would have hit 5 million but this time of year those extra viewers just aren't there. It's all down to Sting hype and the Survivor Series fallout. If we ever manage to get a breakdown for this show I wouldn't be surprised if the first half hour actually did top 5 million as people tuned in to see what would happen. Then when Authority/Bryan left and it was clear Sting wasn't showing up, people tuned it but it didn't drop way down to the previous weeks levels of viewership which is better. Next week should be fun. They either completely killed any and all interest coming out of Survivor Series or the Anonymous Raw GM is the GOAT draw. 

:vince2


----------



## Kowalski's Killer

*Re: Sting return FAILS to draw!*

Strangely enough, CM Punk and Goldberg didn't increase last night's ratings either. Nor did Cena finally turning full blown heel.


----------



## NakedCall

What's more amazing about the 4.7 million in the first hour is that there were TWO NFL games last night. Though granted, one of them was only shown locally.

WWE better hope Bryan returns soon. He's really the only one who can save them at this point.


----------



## Not Lying

LOL some people here I really stupid.. I watched the first hour to see the fall-out of SS ( You KNow..Sting's debut)..It was obvious that Sting wasn't showing up again, so I went to sleep. Lol at people saying a man that didn't show up failed to draw.


----------



## Punkholic

The Buryer said:


> Viewership is in...*Not even 5 million viewers for the first hour*, even Batista's return drew 5.3 m for the first hour
> 
> Hour one: 4.73 million
> Hour two: 3.99 million
> Hour three: 4.01 million
> 
> Average: *4.24 million*
> 
> 
> 
> Last year, Nov 25 2013 post SVS Raw...
> 
> Hour one: 4.31 million
> Hour two: 4.29 million
> Hour three: 3.79 million
> 
> Average: *4.14 million*
> 
> Average is barely up. Rating not out yet, but likely a 2.93.



Oh, come on, the first hour was WAY up in comparison to what they have been recently doing, so Sting (and I'm sure Bryan as well) did help a lot.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## NakedCall

etrbaby said:


> LOL some people here I really stupid.. I watched the first hour to see the fall-out of SS ( You KNow..Sting's debut)..It was obvious that Sting wasn't showing up again, so I went to sleep. Lol at people saying a man that didn't show up failed to draw.


There's only 1 person saying that and they're a confirmed troll.


----------



## LOL-ins

lol they got an extra 700,000 viewers and lost them all when they knew Sting wasn't coming. lol at the little Bryan marks thinking it was his "drawing power"


----------



## NakedCall

LOL-ins said:


> lol they got an extra 700,000 viewers and lost them all when they knew Sting wasn't coming. lol at the little Bryan marks thinking it was his "drawing power"


Bryan's segments were shown to pull in big numbers when we still had quarter hour breakdowns. I'm not a fan of his at all but you don't have to be in order to realize that he is a draw. You just have to have more than a couple of functioning braincells.


----------



## CookiePuss

More people tuned in expecting Sting to show up after Survivor Series. Plain and simple.


----------



## validreasoning

its the most viewers for an episode of raw during football season since raw moved to 3 hours in 2012. with 4.25 million viewers average it beat out the previous record of 4.23 million average on december 17 2012 (2012 slammys with ric flairs return)

more impressive considering there was 2 mnf games on last night in some markets (including wwes strongest market new york) and the news coverage of ferguson


most watched single hour of raw since back on april 14th when first 2 hours of that show drew over 4.8 million (warrior tribute). the previous most watched hour during football season (since raw went to 3 hours) was the post tlc 2013 raw on december 16..first hour of that show drew 4.417 million viewers


----------



## Sam Fisher 2014

LOL-ins said:


> lol they got an extra 700,000 viewers and lost them all when they knew Sting wasn't coming. lol at the little Bryan marks thinking it was his "drawing power"


You know Pwtorch's James Caldwell will not post quarter-hour breakdown if that's the case. 101% true.

Lets wait and watch.


----------



## RatedR10

Does PWTorch get breakdowns every week?

Anyways, the number pop is simply because people expected Sting. Those final two hours are about in line with what they'd be if he didn't appear at SS, probably less.


----------



## The Bloodline

People were pumped for this raw. even people who dont usually watch. Even if you didnt expect sting, there was the possibility and the curiousity of the follow up. if the first hour didnt receive a huge bump after the buzz of s.s i would have been shocked


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Wait. These ratings are GREAT. At least, for hour #1.

I'd say this bodes well for both Bryan and Sting, and hopefully is a sign that the demise of the Authority should stick (at least for a significant amount of time) because people also like real plot development to happen.

"Not even 5 million" is pretty damn good for this past Monday, and better than they've been doing recently.


----------



## LOL-ins

These Bryan marks are so dumb. IT WAS BECAUSE OF STING MORONS! Not Bryan, not Bryan + Sting. Stop sucking that Bryan dick and use your brain. If there was no Sting the ratings would have been the usual. Bryan didn't magically disappear in hour 2 so why did it lose 700,000 viewers? Answer that one you Bryan fanboy dumbasses.


----------



## NakedCall

LOL-ins said:


> These Bryan marks are so dumb. IT WAS BECAUSE OF STING MORONS! Not Bryan, not Bryan + Sting. Stop sucking that Bryan dick and use your brain. If there was no Sting the ratings would have been the usual. Bryan didn't magically disappear in hour 2 so why did it lose 700,000 viewers? Answer that one you Bryan fanboy dumbasses.


You're unintelligent. That much has already been established.

Sting wasn't there. It would be pretty stupid to attribute all of that to Sting. The Rock's appearance on RAW not too long ago didn't even boost ratings much. Granted, it was unannounced, but even the following week didn't see a huge increase and casual fans could very well have expected him to be there. The Rock is also a much bigger draw than Sting.

We also know, from previous quarter hour breakdowns, that Bryan segments draw pretty well.

Use your brain. I know there's not much for you to use, but try to use whatever you've got, kiddo. I know you can do it!


----------



## murder

And what did they give those 4.25 million viewers? A horrible show with an terrible ending and NO Sting.


----------



## Dell

LOL-ins said:


> lol they got an extra 700,000 viewers and *lost them all when they knew Sting wasn't coming*.


How would they know Sting wasn't coming in hour 2 or hour 3? 

Don't think you could answer that because they simply wouldn't know.


----------



## LOL-ins

NakedCall said:


> You're unintelligent. That much has already been established.
> 
> Sting wasn't there. It would be pretty stupid to attribute all of that to Sting. The Rock's appearance on RAW not too long ago didn't even boost ratings much. Granted, it was unannounced, but even the following week didn't see a huge increase and casual fans could very well have expected him to be there. The Rock is also a much bigger draw than Sting.
> 
> We also know, from previous quarter hour breakdowns, that Bryan segments draw pretty well.
> 
> Use your brain. I know there's not much for you to use, but try to use whatever you've got, kiddo. I know you can do it!


Shut up moron and go back to sucking that Bryan dick. I know you can do it maggot! (whoops auto correct fail)


----------



## NakedCall

LOL-ins said:


> Shut up moron and go back to sucking that Bryan dick. I know you can do it maggot! (whoops auto correct fail)


You are unintelligent and uneducated. It must suck having the shitty life that you do (poor, unemployed, single4life) *and* to get humiliated on an online forum on top of that. After all, your entire self worth is entirely dependent upon your online persona because you've got nothing else going for you.

You're a huge ****** (no auto correct fail.)


----------



## LOL-ins

NakedCall said:


> You are unintelligent and uneducated. It must suck having the shitty life that you do (poor, unemployed, single4life) *and* to get humiliated on an online forum on top of that. After all, your entire self worth is entirely dependent upon your online persona because you've got nothing else going for you.
> 
> You're a huge ****** (no auto correct fail.)


Wrestling is fake stop being so emotional about it.


----------



## NakedCall

LOL-ins said:


> Wrestling is fake stop being so emotional about it.


Of course it is. For me it's mindless entertainment that I use as an escape from important and intellectually stimulating things I do in my every day life. For you, I'm sure it's the highest form of entertainment your brain can comprehend.


----------



## The Bloodline

Was Bryan advertised? I dont pay that much attention at times so im not sure. But Im pretty sure the spike in ratings was a combination of the 2nd most buzz worthy PPV this year and 10 minutes in there was a returning Bryan after months and still the fallout of sunday to be revealed.


----------



## THANOS

I won't comment on the numbers until the breakdown comes out, but if the 1st half of hour 1 was high it's mostly due to Bryan. The Sting appearance last night would elevate the entire rating as a whole throughout all 3 hours, because people who were coming for Sting wouldn't know when he'd appear so would, theoretically, keep watching to not miss him.

This is why we need further analysis to really determine anything. PWTorch usually breaks ratings down to the highest minutes in each quarter to show when audiences were interested, so if quarter 1 jumps when Bryan's music hits and remains high after that, then it's due to him. Contrarily, if it drops when Bryan first comes down, then LOLins would have a leg to stand on with his point.


----------



## MaybeLock

Very good numbers. Sting was clearly the biggest factor, but Bryan's segment probably kept people watching for as long as it lasted.


----------



## Dell

lol that LOL-ins guy banned again.


----------



## The Bloodline

No doubt Bryan brings in viewers but im sure the first hour would have gotten a lot of viewers any way. Im not saying people tuned in for Sting exactly but news of sting showing up/the buzz of the PPV definitely made people tune in that maybe otherwise wouldnt have. Whether it was to see if sting appears or just what the product would have to offer. No doubt fans stayed through the Bryan segment out of interest but That segment didnt give fans any reason to stay after it. WWE should have capitalized on the extra viewers. However besides the feel good moment seeing Bryan do his yes routine again there was nothing exciting or viewer grabbing that came from it. The segment wasn't very compelling and the line up they gave for the rest of the night was bland. It was clear sting wouldnt be there by the time the first hour was over and nothing else of importance was hyped up for later. no reason to keep watching. They blew this opportunity.


----------



## Londrick

If this was like 10 years ago I can see Sting getting the credit but his star power had plummeted with him wasting so many years in TNA. The real reason people tuned in monday was cause Nikki won the divas title.



LOL-ins said:


> Wrestling is fake stop being so emotional about it.


Says the mark getting emotional about wrestling :ti


----------



## The Caped Crusader

CM Dell said:


> How would they know Sting wasn't coming in hour 2 or hour 3?
> 
> Don't think you could answer that because they simply wouldn't know.


It was pretty obvious he wasn't coming when he was nowhere to be seen for Triple H and Stephanie leaving, and then Daniel Bryan being announced as the nights GM. I also tuned out after the opening segment, which ran for like 40 minutes. The spike in that first hour is no doubt thanks to the fallout of Sting's return. It doesn't take a genius to guess that.


----------



## THANOS

The Caped Crusader said:


> It was pretty obvious he wasn't coming when he was nowhere to be seen for Triple H and Stephanie leaving, and then Daniel Bryan being announced as the nights GM. I also tuned out after the opening segment, which ran for like 40 minutes. *The spike in that first hour is no doubt thanks to the fallout of Sting's return. It doesn't take a genius to guess that.*


Overall? Definitely, but the breakdown still shows who in that quarter was drawing the most, whether it's the regular viewer or the casuals tuning in to see Sting. If the breakdown shows that viewers continue watching when Bryan comes out or even increase then it wouldn't be unreasonable to give Bryan strong credit for that, especially if he holds their attention for the entire segment.

We'll have to wait for the breakdown to confirm anything though.


----------



## joeycalz

I would say praise Goatface Killah Daniel Bryan, but that would actually imply that he "kills" the ratings, which has consistently been proven by the WWE Universe! YES! YES! YES!


----------



## JY57

final rating - 3.07


----------



## DanM3

Well done Daneil Bryan! Proving you are the most over superstar in years


----------



## The Buryer

So now Bryan is responsible for this average bump in ratings clearly Sting's debut brought. :maury Bryan marks are fucking pathetic. Didn't you people do the same when the Streak ending bumped up the Post-WM Raw? All this tells me is the undeniable fact that this midget can never draw on his own, EVER. He's always gonna need a Cena, a Authority, a Undertaker or a Sting in his career, no matter how big or long/sustained push he receives, he's not the star that can make a difference on his own. This midget is a *tag along*, that's what he really is at the end of the day. Fake overness, the YES chants. Not even debatable anymore.

He's as pathetic as his marks fighting with each other on a wrestling board. Fuck WWE and Fuck this shitty era, they ruined the larger than life spectacle pro-wrestling is meant to be, and turned the company into some wanna-be glorified bingo hall Indy promotion catering to marks.


----------



## Sam Fisher 2014

The Buryer said:


> So now Bryan is responsible for this average bump in ratings clearly Sting's debut brought. :maury Bryan marks are fucking pathetic. Didn't you people do the same when the Streak ending bumped up the Post-WM Raw? All this tells me is the undeniable fact that this midget can never draw on his own, EVER. He's always gonna need a Cena, a Authority, a Undertaker or a Sting in his career, no matter how big or long/sustained push he receives, he's not the star that can make a difference on his own. This midget is a *tag along*, that's what he really is at the end of the day. Fake overness, the YES chants. Not even debatable anymore.
> 
> He's as pathetic as his marks fighting with each other on a wrestling board. Fuck WWE and Fuck this shitty era, they ruined the larger than life spectacle pro-wrestling is meant to be, and turned the company into some wanna-be glorified bingo hall Indy promotion catering to marks.


:clap :clap :clap

Great post. I'm still waiting for the quarterly breakdown. If PWTorch's James Caldwell doesnt post quarterly breakdown, you can bet there is something fishy going on and Bryan did indeed lose viewers as time passed on and Sting's possible appearance appeared remotely bleak. James Caldwell is one of the biggest Bryan mark out there and every time Bryan appears on TV, only then does he post quarterly breakdown as evident in the past, and if Bryan has lost viewership then there is NO WAY Caldwell will post quarterly Breakdowns.

On another note, do you remember the WM special episode shown on NBC before SummerSlam? Bryan wasnt even advertised for the show. It did the highest viewership for WM specials ever on account of Taker's losing his streak. If Bryan was indeed featured on the show his marks here would no doubt leech off it and attribute the viewership solely to Bryan.

If Bryan lost viewers as time passed on, there is no way we're getting quarterly breakdown. Dont be surprised if that Bryan's cock sucker PWTorch's James Caldwell visits this board often. Pathetic.

If no breakdowns this week then it only means Bryan lost viewers. If not quarterly breakdowns WILL pop up. There is no way that hardcore Bryan dick rider PWTorch's James Caldwell wont capitalize on this and post quarterly breakdown singing praises all along.


----------



## mwk360

Daniel Bryan ratings hero! Damn hope he returns soon. That energy he brings is sorely missed.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Russo just went over the ratings breakdown on his podcast. WWE lost 750,000 viewers after the first hour, when Triple H dipped and they undoubtedly realized Sting wasn't coming. It's just retarded to give Bryan any credit for that dramatic boost, even from the most delusional mark. No one knew he was going to be on TV. They were waiting to see Sting, and when it was clear that he wasn't coming, they tuned out. If Bryan were the reason for the boost, then they would've stayed. It's that simple. *


----------



## THANOS

Bring Back Russo said:


> *Russo just went over the ratings breakdown on his podcast. WWE lost 750,000 viewers after the first hour, when Triple H dipped and they undoubtedly realized Sting wasn't coming. It's just retarded to give Bryan any credit for that dramatic boost, even from the most delusional mark. No one knew he was going to be on TV. They were waiting to see Sting, and when it was clear that he wasn't coming, they tuned out. If Bryan were the reason for the boost, then they would've stayed. It's that simple. *


Post the exact quote and a link to the breakdown.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

THANOS said:


> Post the exact quote and a link to the breakdown.


*
If you're looking for minute by minute, I'm talking about hour by hour. It's common sense why they left. Don't delude yourself.*


----------



## THANOS

Bring Back Russo said:


> *
> If you're looking for minute by minute, I'm talking about hour by hour. It's common sense why they left. Don't delude yourself.*


I didn't make a conclusive statement like that with only the hours to go by, so what makes you think you can? Until we get a quarter breakdown, there is only speculation.


----------



## Sam Fisher 2014

Pathetic Bryan marks. Just pathetic. Wait untill they shamelessly start using this week's ratings to credit it solely to Bryan in future arguments. 

No breakdown from James Caldwell. Not surprising at all. 100% sure now Bryan lost tons of viewers, else Bryan dickrider James Caldwell wouldn't have missed the boat for his dumbshit Calwell's analysis of ficticious "Bryan's RATINGS impact" like he did few months back after Bryan's injury and got embarrassed big time for getting his love of Bryan's cock influence rational analysis.


----------



## Lebyonics

Bryan still getting that hate


----------



## jcmmnx

People actually think Bryan got that hour one rating and not Sting? lol


----------



## funnyfaces1

Bring Back Russo said:


> *
> If you're looking for minute by minute, I'm talking about hour by hour. It's common sense why they left. Don't delude yourself.*


They left because of the Ferguson Grand Jury verdict.


----------



## Darkness is here

*Db marks are getting dumber by each passing day.*


----------



## The XL

Daniel Bryan fans might actually be more delusional than CM Punk fans.

He didn't draw, people just wanted to see Sting. Stop.


----------



## validreasoning

sd drew its highest viewership in months this past friday with 3.054 million viewers.

usually viewership for sd falls on black friday..last year the black friday episode lost 465,000 viewers from the previous week, year before that it lost 235,000 viewers

edit: most watched episode of sd since march 28th (last wwe broadcast before mania 30)


----------



## A-C-P

validreasoning said:


> sd drew its highest viewership in months this past friday with 3.054 million viewers.
> 
> usually viewership for sd falls on black friday..last year the black friday episode lost 465,000 viewers from the previous week, year before that it lost 235,000 viewers


Hmmmmm wonder why so many people would have tuned in to see SD this past Friday? I wonder who or what could have been on SD this past Friday that would have caused people to tune in?

Maybe it was :bryan2

NO, it was probably b/c they all thought Sting might appear on SD, right? :aj3


----------



## FITZ

Shopping habits on Black Friday are changing so there are more people going out during the Night on Thanksgiving which leads to more people at home on that night relaxing, which probably led to an increase in viewership. Basically it was a holiday of sorts but people weren't going out or doing anything I think.

And I'm as big of a Daniel Bryan fan as you can be but I will even admit that the reason all those people watched the first hour after Survivor Series was because they thought Sting would explain why he did what he did.


----------



## Blade Runner

validreasoning said:


> sd drew its highest viewership in months this past friday with 3.054 million viewers.
> 
> usually viewership for sd falls on black friday..last year the black friday episode lost 465,000 viewers from the previous week, year before that it lost 235,000 viewers
> 
> edit: most watched episode of sd since march 28th (last wwe broadcast before mania 30)


Bryan bringing dem ratings :yes


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Hey Santa It Wasn't My Fault! said:


> Shopping habits on Black Friday are changing so there are more people going out during the Night on Thanksgiving which leads to more people at home on that night relaxing, which probably led to an increase in viewership. Basically it was a holiday of sorts but people weren't going out or doing anything I think.
> 
> And I'm as big of a Daniel Bryan fan as you can be but I will even admit that the reason all those people watched the first hour after Survivor Series was because they thought Sting would explain why he did what he did.


"usually viewership for sd falls on black friday..last year the black friday episode lost 465,000 viewers from the previous week, year before that it lost 235,000 viewers" He just that wasn't the case though. But What could be different :bryan2


----------



## THANOS

The XL said:


> Daniel Bryan fans might actually be more delusional than CM Punk fans.
> 
> He didn't draw, people just wanted to see Sting. Stop.


That's pretty ironic, given the following post.



validreasoning said:


> sd drew its highest viewership in months this past friday with 3.054 million viewers.
> 
> usually viewership for sd falls on black friday..last year the black friday episode lost 465,000 viewers from the previous week, year before that it lost 235,000 viewers
> 
> edit: most watched episode of sd since march 28th (last wwe broadcast before mania 30)


I really wish the breakdown for last monday was posted by pwtorch, so we could actually get clarity on who drew, and whether viewers tuned out when Bryan entered, or maintained/grew.


----------



## joeycalz

LMFAO at shopping habits changing on Black Friday. Daniel Bryan draws. Get it over it, suckas


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Smackdown draws with Bryan. Must be a coincidence 

*- Friday's episode of WWE SmackDown, with Daniel Bryan as General Manager, drew 3.054 million viewers. This is up from last week's 2.878 million viewers. SmackDown was #3 on cable for the night, behind Gold Rush and College Football. This is the first time SmackDown has drawn over 3 million viewers since the March 28th episode.*


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

most people are done with their shopping by the time it comes on. people ship earlier in the day and on thanksgiving as well as cyber monday.


----------



## FITZ

StraightYesSociety said:


> "usually viewership for sd falls on black friday..last year the black friday episode lost 465,000 viewers from the previous week, year before that it lost 235,000 viewers" He just that wasn't the case though. But What could be different :bryan2


Oh, didn't even realize Bryan was on SD, that changes a lot of things then. I don't watch Smackdown because who wants to watch that?

I thought we were just talking about Raw in all honesty.

Yeah Bryan totally deserves the credit for that.


----------



## THANOS

Yep it's straight up Bryan, and I'm 90% sure that huge gain in hour 1 last week on RAW was due to Bryan. The initial high was Sting, but it probably increased when Bryan came out which says regular viewers stopped on the channel once they saw Bryan and/or casual viewers tuning in for Sting felt Bryan was interesting enough to continue watching for. Either way means Bryan drew viewers.


----------



## funnyfaces1

He's unstoppable :bryan2


----------



## Fissiks

BryanDrawsPERIOD


----------



## JY57

anyone remember how Bryan did on Smackdown in 2012 (in terms of viewership/ratings)?


----------



## THANOS

From what I remember he did well. Henry raised the ratings substantially after ending Orton's reign, and Bryan kept them them steady. Once he lost to Sheamus, they plummeted down again. I could be wrong, but I believe that's accurate?


----------



## Blade Runner

the detractors in this thread suddenly got whisper quiet. :hmm: i hope we can now finally put the silly "Bryan doesn't draw" argument to rest.


----------



## THANOS

SVETV988_fan said:


> the detractors in this thread suddenly got whisper quiet. :hmm: i hope we can now finally put the silly "Bryan doesn't draw" argument to rest.


The funny thing is, it was put to bed earlier this year but we still get posters like Samfisher2014 posting trite about how Bryan can't draw flies. It's quite embarrassing to be honest.


----------



## silverspirit2001

To be fair, People interested in sting, may have stopped watching whilst Smackdown was still relevant.


----------



## NastyYaffa




----------



## THANOS

silverspirit2001 said:


> To be fair, People interested in sting, may have stopped watching whilst Smackdown was still relevant.


Doubtful, they probably don't even know when it airs, and are much less likely to expect Sting to appear on it, and even less likely to use their Friday night to watch it.

Without the breakdown for last week, we'll never know for sure, but given Smackdown's number despite it being Black Friday and decreasing the past two years, and Bryan's history as a huge viewer gainer the past 6 months when he was active, it can reasonably be estimated that fans tuning in for Sting stuck around for Bryan on RAW and regular viewers stopped on RAW when they saw Bryan return. In both cases, this means Bryan drew viewers.


----------



## Rexx

Do people seriously cares about smackdown viewership?


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

Rexx said:


> Do people seriously cares about smackdown viewership?


Do I care? Not really. Do some people care? Perhaps. Does WWE? Abso-frakkin-lutely.

That's especially true because they're moving to Thursdays in January and are expected to emphasize it more than they have the past few years.


----------



## validreasoning

raw numbers..again big fall in hour 3

8pm = 4.227
9pm = 3.952
10pm = 3.471
*average = 3.88*

on the bright side viewership was well up from cyber monday last 2 years. 2012 saw raw average 3.44 million viewers and last year on this date raw averaged 3.54 million.



Rexx said:


> Do people seriously cares about smackdown viewership?


do people really care about raw viewership?

personally i think sd viewership is far more impressive across the board than raw considering its timeslot and channel.


----------



## Blade Runner

THANOS said:


> The funny thing is, it was put to bed earlier this year but we still get posters like Samfisher2014 posting trite about how Bryan can't draw flies. It's quite embarrassing to be honest.


i've seen Samfisher troll around before and resort to insults when countered with facts, so i don't really take his posts seriously.



validreasoning said:


> personally i think sd viewership is far more impressive across the board than raw considering its timeslot and channel.


exactly. it's more telling that a show like Smackdown did great numbers. RAW's numbers are harder to gauge because there's alot of people that tune in out of habit more than they do Smackdown. RAW as a show is more of a draw because it's live and it's where everything relevant happens. if people are tuning in droves to watch Smackdown, it's usually because they want to see someone or something specific that was already announced or spoiled.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wow, despite that terrible third hour, that's a big jump over the last couple of years on Cyber Monday. Kinda scary that there's a 1.3 million viewer difference between the highest viewership of the last two episodes and the lowest though.


----------



## A-C-P

What? A 30 minute 6 man tag main event was the lowest viewed hour? How can this be? unk2


----------



## The Boy Wonder

A weak main event. When I heard that was the main event I turned it off. WWE needs more creative main events. I realize it's hard to do that for build ups but they can do better.


----------



## Chrome

Maybe stop putting Kane in main-event matches and that 3rd hour wouldn't be so bad. On top of that, the 6-man tag matches are played out, c'mon why are we still having so fucking many when the Shield and Wyatt family have both disbanded?


----------



## Sam Fisher 2014

SVETV988_fan said:


> i've seen Samfisher troll around before and resort to insults when countered with facts, so i don't really take his posts seriously.


I'm a troll to those people who jack off to goats. I never said Bryan cant draw flies or cant draw at all. Never. NEVER ever. Butt hurt people who jack off to puny little goats keep bringing that up time and again in attempts to derail my original point after getting completely embarrassed. He is over but he is no where near over as Austin, Rocky. Only deluded marks who jack off to goats think he is as over as Austin, Rocky.

I provided many convincing arguments to back up my statements getting many goatfaced jackoffs here all riled up. Call me when Bryan becomes the no 1 merch mover consistently like Rocky, Austin. Call me when Bryan gets to star in EVEN a FUCKING Z grade movie. Call me when Bryan becomes the top draw in house shows. ONLY THEN say Bryan is more over than the YES chants just like Austin, Rocky are more over than their catchphrases. Austin, Rocky had fans thronging house shows to SEE them and NOT just chant catchphrases. So much for the most over guy in the roster. When Bryan achieves that feat then come and say he is as over as Austin, Rocky. Of course some people will shamelessly disregard everything because they jack off to puny goats and will continue to misquote me in the future.


----------



## bmtrocks

Sam Fisher 2014 said:


> I'm a troll to those people who jack off to goats. I never said Bryan cant draw flies or cant draw at all. Never. NEVER ever. Butt hurt people who jack off to puny little goats keep bringing that up time and again in attempts to derail my original point after getting completely embarrassed. He is over but he is no where near over as Austin, Rocky. Only deluded marks who jack off to goats think he is as over as Austin, Rocky.


Give me one quote of someone on this board who literally said that Bryan is as over as Austin and Rocky...you know, the two most over superstars in WWE history that was never matched in the past and won't ever be matched again.


----------



## THANOS

bmtrocks said:


> Give me one quote of someone on this board who literally said that Bryan is as over as Austin and Rocky...you know, the two most over superstars in WWE history that was never matched in the past and won't ever be matched again.


He can't. People have said he's the most over superstar _SINCE_ Austin, which is strong argument, given the fact that nobody got fan hijackings in non-smark cities before he came along, and his overness is dwarfing to the rest of the roster in this day and age.

The only person I can think of who actually claimed that Bryan was as over or more than Austin is actually wrestling legend DDP


----------



## Yes Era

It's good to know the more things change, the more they stay the same. Both Daniel Bryan led Raws and Smackdowns did well. As usual.


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

THANOS said:


> Yep it's straight up Bryan, and I'm 90% sure that huge gain in hour 1 last week on RAW was due to Bryan. The initial high was Sting, but it probably increased when Bryan came out which says regular viewers stopped on the channel once they saw Bryan and/or casual viewers tuning in for Sting felt Bryan was interesting enough to continue watching for. Either way means Bryan drew viewers.




Raw drew ratings because it was the end of The Authority angle and because Sting made an appearance (Bryan's appearance was unannounced while Sting's debut was on several news sites) and people probably waited throughout the show to see if Sting might still make an appearance.


----------



## THANOS

Kevin Lockard said:


> Raw drew ratings because it was the end of The Authority angle and because Sting made an appearance (Bryan's appearance was unannounced while Sting's debut was on several news sites) and people probably waited throughout the show to see if Sting might still make an appearance.


Explain Smackdown?


----------



## DoubtGin

Raw was mainly due to Sting, but the Smackdown rating shows that Bryan also had some impact on it (not as big as Sting though and I won't even argue that). +3 millions is pretty great and shows people love to see Bryan.


----------



## Londrick

Rexx said:


> Do people seriously cares about smackdown viewership?


More importantly do people seriously care about Smackdown?


----------



## Mr. Yes

Smackdown WAY down this past Friday

WWE FRIDAY NIGHT SMACKDOWN 12/5 2.494 MILLION


----------



## DoubtGin

Bryan > Santino


----------



## Yes Era

Mr. Yes said:


> Smackdown WAY down this past Friday
> 
> WWE FRIDAY NIGHT SMACKDOWN 12/5 2.494 MILLION


What will be the excuse that Bryan didn't make a differnce now?


----------



## Vyer

8:00pm- 3.761
9:00pm- 3.811
10:00pm- 3.530


----------



## Mr. Yes

Yeesh, who the heck even is a ratings draw in this company if Cena or Roman aren't?


----------



## Frico

Hour 2 had Ambrose and Bray correct?


----------



## krai999

yeah people tuned out when Roman was superstar of the year.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

The product in general is the reason they have shit ratings. Shit ratings for a shit show. People blamed Punk (who is a draw), then Bryan (who is a draw), etc. It's the fucking garbage show. They have lost millions of viewers since like 2006, where a couple things happened.


----------



## BullSpread

Mr. Yes said:


> Yeesh, who the heck even is a ratings draw in this company if Cena or Roman aren't?


Well, Reigns was outdrawn by two midgets (not even vanilla midgets, but actual midgets) so it doesn't look good for him as far as being a draw goes.


----------



## RatedR10

Who the fuck is a draw these days? Legit question. Cena's best drawing days are behind him when it comes to numbers. Punk and Bryan aren't there. Reigns isn't a draw right now. Ambrose seems to be able to draw people in based on numbers we do get, but even then, it's not like we get real breakdowns much anymore to really see. It just seems like people tune in on pattern that they've learned over the years.


----------



## Goldusto

Without Ratings draws like Daniel Bryan you see shit like *LOSE 1 MILLION VIEWERS IN HOUR 1 IN A FUCKING FORTNIGHT* .

smackdown down almost 600k. some 1.5 million viewers automatically lost without brian. One man contributes to 20-25 % viewership increase.

That is a ridiculous amount of people that automatically stop caring about the entire show without any star or story to watch it for.

AMbrose fueds with Rollins for 5 months, puts on classic matches, the feud of the year, so much story involved then what happens in their final clash???

1 : *Bray wyatt ruins the match, leaving it with no payoff and ambrose looking weak with no victory.*

2 : *Roidback, with a history of injuring people, who has been jobbing most of the year, Pins Rollins 100% clean a month later on the b show. Ambrose Couldn't do what a freaking jobber could.* 

No one draws, The show is a fucking mess, SCSA exposed Vince for who he was last week. IT is a show designed for 5 year olds when everyone in the audience is over 14, the stories have no logic or basis, the booking is a waste of time, Endless Filler, Endless commercials, nothing matters, months of feuds that amount to nothing.


----------



## Cliffy

WWE needs their ONLY draw Daniel Bryan back other wise they'll go out of business :haha


----------



## Goldusto

he literally is since cena buried or ruined by association eeverything else


----------



## LordKain

Mr. Yes said:


> Yeesh, who the heck even is a ratings draw in this company if Cena or Roman aren't?


Personally I think the product's so bad that nobody's a draw anymore.

You could have Lesnar, Sting, Hogan, Rock and Austin all on the one episode of Raw it would of been lucky to pop more then 4 million viewers.


----------



## Arcturus

wow, a slammy raw drawing less than the nothing RAW last week, they could have at least teased the TV audience beforehand into believing Sting, Lesnar & Bryan were gonna show.


----------



## Batz

Vyer said:


> 8:00pm- 3.761
> 9:00pm- 3.811
> 10:00pm- 3.530


:lol :clap


----------



## A-C-P

So that advertised Cena/Bigshow Main Event really kept the viewers tuned in, I see :heston


----------



## Algernon

Even the casuals are sick of Cena vs Big Show


----------



## The Power that Be

Final rating 2.66










"The look" drawing them nickles. lmao


----------



## vanboxmeer

They really need to get the WWE Superstar of the Year, The Look back on the show by next week. The fans clearly want him as he so easily won the poll that he broke the app.


----------



## RebelArch86

Daniel Bryan, the only draw in WWE.


----------



## DoubtGin

> Friday’s Smackdown did 2,531,000 viewers. That is up from the 2,494,000 viewers from the previous week.


.


----------



## damnbrose

12/15

8:00 PM: 3.703 mil(1.2)
9:00 PM: 3.477 mil(1.2)
10:00 PM: 3:385 mil(1.1)


----------



## bmtrocks

I like how Vince is willing to lose money to push who he wants on top. He's been doing this since Cena became the top guy in the company.


----------



## A-C-P

damnbrose said:


> 12/15
> 
> 8:00 PM: 3.703 mil(1.2)
> 9:00 PM: 3.477 mil(1.2)
> 10:00 PM: 3:385 mil(1.1)


:wow

A drop from the previous week on a Raw after a PPV and where the WWE Champion returned after 3 months and their next "top guy" returned, to action, at the PPV the night before?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Ouch, those are some terrible numbers. May even be the lowest non-holiday/holiday eve number in a long long long time.


----------



## joeycalz

damnbrose said:


> 12/15
> 
> 8:00 PM: 3.703 mil(1.2)
> 9:00 PM: 3.477 mil(1.2)
> 10:00 PM: 3:385 mil(1.1)


This is what happens when the company's two most over faces aren't on the show. (Ambrose and Bryan, for those who don't understand)


----------



## damnbrose

joeycalz said:


> This is what happens when the company's two most over faces aren't on the show. (Ambrose and Bryan, for those who don't understand)


"vanilla midgets" outdrawing lesnar/reigns









I kid I kid, I don't think one guy alone can make or break ratings. But I am surprised that with Jericho, Lesnar, Reigns all making returns the ratings tanked this badly. MNF wasn't that great either.


----------



## The True Believer

damnbrose said:


> 12/15
> 
> 8:00 PM: 3.703 mil(1.2)
> 9:00 PM: 3.477 mil(1.2)
> 10:00 PM: 3:385 mil(1.1)


:surprise::surprise::surprise:

Dafuq?


----------



## Lebyonics

Surprising, with all that Heyman and Jericho stuff, the teasing of their match, return of Lesnar, first time confrontation between Jericho and Lesnar, a steel cage match and returning Roman Reigns. I surely thought it would do good numbers.


----------



## checkcola

Lebyonics said:


> Surprising, with all that Heyman and Jericho stuff, the teasing of their match, return of Lesnar, first time confrontation between Jericho and Lesnar, a steel cage match and returning Roman Reigns. I surely thought it would do good numbers.


Lets see, I'd say Brock vs Cena round whatever is not what fans want


----------



## joeycalz

damnbrose said:


> "vanilla midgets" outdrawing lesnar/reigns
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I kid I kid, I don't think one guy alone can make or break ratings. But I am surprised that with Jericho, Lesnar, Reigns all making returns the ratings tanked this badly. MNF wasn't that great either.


No, I agree entirely. I'm just saying, there's obviously a direct correlation with Bryan's absence and viewership. From the few breakdown posts we've gotten in the last 3-4 months, Ambrose's segments always seem to gain. People want to see them.

They brought back Reigns in a segment where he interrupted... Fandango. I mean.. seriously, WTF did they think was going to happen? People WEREN'T going to tune out for Fandango?

The company is also stale. It's entirely possible a few extra thousand people saw/watched/heard about TLC and just said: "I'd rather do something else tonight rather than watch RAW."

I think the brand draws, and right now, the brand stinks. Why else would the main roster be pissed off and jealous of NXT? #brassring


----------



## TheLooseCanon

:ambrose :bryan2

WWE and their force fed guys:


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The "stronger" Reigns pop gets, the weaker ratings get. The Reigns drain has begun.


----------



## SBisOurs

It's worth noting that upon Ambrose's return, ratings increased from the previous 2 weeks. Also, the only quarter hour breakdown we've had of late shows that all of his segments increased viewership.


----------



## damnbrose

SBisOurs said:


> It's worth noting that upon Ambrose's return, ratings increased from the previous 2 weeks. Also, the only quarter hour breakdown we've had of late shows that all of his segments increased viewership.


imagine if he had even half of Reigns protective booking instead of geek booking


----------



## LordKain

That number is hardly a surprise and if things don't get better anytime soon then by mid next year I could very easily see that number dipping below 3 million viewers.


----------



## RatedR10

So Vince is really willing to lose viewers and money in favour of making Reigns the top guy?


----------



## bmtrocks

Ambrose is definitely more over than Reigns, the online sales success he had recently proves this (I also see more Ambrose merch in the audience than Reigns merch). Ambrose has that Jeff Hardy/CM Punk fanbase which is a very strong userbase, while Reigns soley has Cena's fanbase who may pop for him but isn't going to buy his merch or really watch when he's on.


----------



## Wynter

So, we're gonna ignore when Raw was getting low ratings even when Roman was out?? How Raw got the lowest rating since 2012 when Ambrose was being pushed all over Raw?? 

How is Roman Reigns at fault when he wasn't even being advertised for Raw?? They were touting "Roman Reigns returns to Smackdown!". Lesnar was advertised to return, THE CHAMPION. Hell, even Raw is Jericho was being pushed hard. Is Jericho at fault?? No? 

Face it, no one is spiking ratings unless they're a popular guy like The Rock. If WWE was doing this whole big "Roman Reigns returns to Raw!!Make sure to watch!!!" then I'd be like, yeah, that failed.

Hilarious when low ratings are ignored when your favorites are in the mix :lol

"that was a shit Raw!" So...wouldn't the ratings reflect that :no:

Being a draw doesn't happen over night.

And as far as merch?? Roman's merch is hideous. I legit want Ambrose's hoodie over his because that hoodie is legit as fuck :lol I'm not even a Dean mark.


EDIT: I've been corrected. Thanks


----------



## damnbrose

WynterWarm12 said:


> So, we're gonna ignore when Raw was getting low ratings even when Roman was out?? How Raw got the lowest rating since 2012 when Ambrose was being pushed all over Raw??
> 
> How is Roman Reigns at fault when he wasn't even being advertised for Raw?? They were touting "Roman Reigns returns to Smackdown!". Lesnar was advertised to return, THE CHAMPION. Hell, even Raw is Jericho was being pushed hard. Is Jericho at fault?? No?
> 
> Face it, no one is spiking ratings unless they're a popular guy like The Rock. If WWE was doing this whole big "Roman Reigns returns to Raw!!Make sure to watch!!!" then I'd be like, yeah, that failed.
> 
> Hilarious when low ratings are ignored when your favorites are in the mix :lol
> 
> "that was a shit Raw!" So...wouldn't the ratings reflect that :no:
> 
> Being a draw doesn't happen over night.
> 
> And as far as merch?? Roman's merch is hideous. I legit want Ambrose's hoodie over his because that hoodie is legit as fuck :lol I'm not even a Dean mark.


They did advertise his return like did you not see him plastered all over raw previews and word obviously got out that he came back the night before? I'm not saying he's at fault but let's not act like it was a surprise return either. The product as a whole is a stinker, but it is probably disappointing to them that reigns and lesnar returning didn't do a damn thing.
also i'm probably in the minority but I think roman's merch is actually better lol. the logo design is sick and doesn't have "unstable" plastered over it.


----------



## Cliffy

i'll be stunned if Brock is re-signed.


Only reason vince would do it is to keep him away from dana and the UFC. Business wise Brock has relatively bombed at the box office for most of this second run.


----------



## Wynter

damnbrose said:


> They did advertise his return like did you not see him plastered all over raw previews and word obviously got out that he came back the night before? I'm not saying he's at fault but let's not act like it was a surprise return either. The product as a whole is a stinker, but it is probably disappointing to them that reigns and lesnar returning didn't do a damn thing.


Ahhhh ok. I didn't know that, sorry. I don't really look at Raw previews and shit.

How exactly do you get pretty good viewership but low ratings?? I never understood that.

Roman Reigns sure as hell ain't spiking anything. The dude hasn't even had a good feud yet. Ambrose was part of the hottest feud at the time, I'd honestly be shocked if people weren't excited for his return. Shit, I was :lol


----------



## bmtrocks

WynterWarm12 said:


> So, we're gonna ignore when Raw was getting low ratings even when Roman was out?? How Raw got the lowest rating since 2012 when Ambrose was being pushed all over Raw??
> 
> How is Roman Reigns at fault when he wasn't even being advertised for Raw?? They were touting "Roman Reigns returns to Smackdown!". Lesnar was advertised to return, THE CHAMPION. Hell, even Raw is Jericho was being pushed hard. Is Jericho at fault?? No?
> 
> Face it, no one is spiking ratings unless they're a popular guy like The Rock. If WWE was doing this whole big "Roman Reigns returns to Raw!!Make sure to watch!!!" then I'd be like, yeah, that failed.
> 
> Hilarious when low ratings are ignored when your favorites are in the mix :lol
> 
> "that was a shit Raw!" So...wouldn't the ratings reflect that :no:
> 
> Being a draw doesn't happen over night.
> 
> And as far as merch?? Roman's merch is hideous. I legit want Ambrose's hoodie over his because that hoodie is legit as fuck :lol I'm not even a Dean mark.
> 
> 
> EDIT: I've been corrected. Thanks


Do you honestly feel the need to come in defending Reigns everytime he flubs? The markism is strong in this one. I like Reigns too but you have to be objective about this when it comes to numbers.

This IS worse ratings that what Ambrose got actually, and that is hampering cause Reigns was promoted heavily for the show itself.


----------



## Wynter

bmtrocks said:


> Do you honestly feel the need to come in defending Reigns everytime he flubs? The markism is strong in this one. I like Reigns too but you have to be objective about this when it comes to numbers.
> 
> This IS worse ratings that what Ambrose got actually, and that is hampering cause Reigns was promoted heavily for the show itself.


Cena, Heyman, Lesnar and Jericho were all on the show and every hour got a shit ass rating. So...how is this blamed on Roman?? The show as a whole got shit ratings.

I am no way saying Roman is a draw because he just isn't. But how is this all on him :lol

EDIT:



> That third hour is the lowest they've recorded all year. That hour featured the John Cena vs. Seth Rollins steel cage match that was promoted during the hour with the most viewers. This shows how little interest that match carried. What's more, the entire show revealed the complete lack of connection fans had to the TLC event.


----------



## BigTimeTimmyJim

*Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Last night's episode of Monday Night Raw in Detroit represented the fallout show to the TLC pay-per-view the night before. It also featured the return of WWE World Heavyweight Champion Brock Lesnar though, in fairness, that fact wasn't promoted beforehand. Still, the show drew the lowest viewership total all year.

All three hours averaged 3.52 million viewers, which beats the previous low of 3.60 million on Memorial Day. The hourly breakdown is even uglier:

Hour one: 3.70 million
Hour two: 3.47 million
Hour three: 3.38 million

*That third hour is the lowest they've recorded all year. That hour featured the John Cena vs. Seth Rollins steel cage match that was promoted during the hour with the most viewers. This shows how little interest that match carried. What's more, the entire show revealed the complete lack of connection fans had to the TLC event.*

The good news is football season is ending soon and the Royal Rumble is the next show on the schedule to kick off the road to WrestleMania.


----------



## Achilles

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Perhaps people just thought that Cena was going to win? :toomanykobes


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



Protokletos said:


> Perhaps people just thought that Cena was going to win? :toomanykobes


Or that even if Rollins would sneak one, Cena would still look like some wrestling god that took the world to hold him down... seriously, Cena and how he is booked is dragging the company down. There is no more denying this despite some continually trying to.


----------



## thesukh03

Dean Ambrose, a big draw? :laugh: This guy was cutting horribly awkward promos towards the HIAC build-up, laughed out of the building from his dummy promo and was pulling some of the lowest numbers this year. Hell, they had to quickly turn Orton babyface, because of the low numbers he drew on house shows. 



> Plans to turn Randy Orton babyface have been accelerated and a possible reason for that, according to the Observer, may be due to Dean Ambrose drawing poorly as the number one babyface on house shows he's headlined. It's also possible WWE wants to take advantage of the RKO Vines hitting the mainstream, but that may have died out already.


source: http://www.cagesideseats.com/2014/1...ndy-orton-babyface-turn-dean-ambrose-finisher


----------



## Wynter

Face it, the Shield members aren't big draws...yet. My god, they've only been out here as singles guys for 6 months. Give them time to get there. Hell, Rollins has been booked to near perfection for months and his main event with Cena still drew low ass ratings.


----------



## damnbrose

except randy didn't even end up doing house shows as a face so it's an irrelevant point that still doesn't change that ambrose's return got a higher rating. for whatever reason, it did and those are the facts. nice try though










also really annoying that lately every thread ends up as ambrose vs reigns.


----------



## LordKain

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

This rating is hardly a surprise and I'm willing to be the even the most hardcore of Cena fans are sick of him and are beginning to tune out at this point.


----------



## NameOfTheWind

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

I don't think it was the cage match itself. It was just the show was utter trash. Not a single interesting thing happened. A bunch of rematches with more or less the same results. Terrible RAW


----------



## GillbergReturns

Not sure how to break down drawing on someone's push who hasn't even started yet.

Terrible numbers though for a show with Brock Lesnar and Chris Jericho. Lesnar was announced but you'd at least think fans would of stuck it out after his return.


----------



## joeycalz

All the Shield guys draw. People pay to see them. People buy their merchandise. Same with guys like Wyatt, Ziggler and Barrett. If you want to direct your anger, direct it to the guy who has consistently headlined the third hour for years. The problem isn't that guys aren't catching on; the problem is: the entire show is stale. That's why people don't watch.

Lesnar has also turned off the casuals from watching. Sad truth.

What constitutes a draw is different these days.


----------



## Jimshine

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Their loss, it was an awesome match


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



Jimshine said:


> Their loss, it was an awesome match


It was Bray/Cena all over.. except this time we had Lesnar instead of a little kid. Though you wouldn't tell much difference by their voices.



It had to be said


----------



## Wynter

damnbrose said:


> except randy didn't even end up doing house shows as a face so it's an irrelevant point that still doesn't change that ambrose's return got a higher rating. for whatever reason, it did and those are the facts. nice try though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also really annoying that lately every thread ends up as ambrose vs reigns.


Believe me, I hate it too. But as you can see, people went straight to shitting on Roman for low ratings when there were BIGGER stars present on the show. I don't blame Ambrose for past low ratings or even low house show attendances(I'm sure that has changed now). These things take time. Cena is their number one guy and his feud with Seth(a guy who has been touted as the MVP of Raw, including by me) and it drew ass.

The product as a whole needs to be tweaked. I can't really blame anyone when you see how WWE books sometimes.


----------



## damnbrose

WynterWarm12 said:


> Believe me, I hate it too. But as you can see, people went straight to shitting on Roman for low ratings when there were BIGGER stars present on the show. I don't blame Ambrose for past low ratings or even low house show attendances(I'm sure that has changed now). These things take time. Cena is their number one guy and his feud with Seth(a guy who has been touted as the MVP of Raw, including by me) and it drew ass.
> 
> The product as a whole needs to be tweaked. I can't really blame anyone when you see how WWE books sometimes.


Imagine the mark wars when Ambrose and Reigns feud down the line lol.
But I agree completely. Get rid of Kane in house show main events, stop doing repetitive matches on raw, DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.


----------



## Geeee

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

The first hour of Raw was probably the worst thing on TV in it's block. I can see why there was such a huge drop off after that pile of crap.


----------



## retere

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Weird. I saw like 50 less sexy sounding RAW ME than Cena-Rollins in cage.
Those random 6 man tags drew better. It's hard to believe.
I saw about 50 worse matches as well.
They'll probably blame it on Rollins.


----------



## Viperdk

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Maybe Seth Rollins sucks as much as Cena is overrated and everyone is tired of him being shoved down our throats? What happened to the rumors about a failed cash in that was suppose to take place last night? 

I really don't understand some of the love Rollins is getting. I'm beyond bored watching him. If he's a future World Champion, WWE is as good as fucked.


----------



## LordKain

RatedR10 said:


> So Vince is really willing to lose viewers and money in favour of making Reigns the top guy?


Reigns has nothing to do with it.

The truth is a majority of the casual have finally had enough of the horrible product that Vince has been putting out for the last couple of years.


----------



## Wynter

damnbrose said:


> Imagine the mark wars when Ambrose and Reigns feud down the line lol.
> But I agree completely. Get rid of Kane in house show main events, stop doing repetitive matches on raw, DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.


:lmao I swear, I sometimes think of that. I mean, I know Roman is green as goose shit right now, but I honestly believe all 3 Shield members are gonna be THOSE guys. A year or two from now, I can see a really great Dean vs Roman feud. 

The mark wars between the fans of our favorites is already out of control. WF is going to be a hilarious battle zone during that showdown 

I hope the best for Ambrose, Seth and Roman. If Ambrose becomes a huge draw, then awesome. Somebody needs to get Cena the fuck out. Or at least nudge him out of a the main event scene a bit. Like you said, we need something different. I don't care who brings in the different, but I want it.

Thanks for the civil conversation and informing me of Roman being advertised. I didn't know


----------



## GillbergReturns

HHH did tell everyone the company would go in the tanks without him. Maybe this their plan for Cena to reinstate the Authority.


----------



## RatedR10

LordKain said:


> Reigns has nothing to do with it.
> 
> The truth is a majority of the casual have finally had enough of the horrible product that Vince has been putting out for the last couple of years.


Oh, trust me, I know.

I can't really blame Reigns. No one should. The 3rd hour dropped big, but it was a weird transition angle where Lesnar was done by 9:59pm, and people who tuned in at the top of the hour saw Fandango of all people -- and Reigns come out, what? 2-3 minutes after? Not good pacing at all.

RE: Reigns; I really want to like him, I saw him live when they came to Montreal for Raw in July and his charisma is off the chart. I really want to like him, but WWE makes it so hard by making it so obvious that he'll be in the main event at WM and winning the title rather than give him time to improve for a few months before giving him a title reign.

I fear that pushing Reigns too much too soon is going to affect what could have been a big draw, and a better all-round performer, if he was just given time to improve.


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

How are people even blaming Cena? :lol He lost and got beaten down by Brock Lesnar. There's nothing more that could've been done besides give him a different opponent.

Not taking anything away from his wrestling skill, but Rollins isn't exactly a draw and probably never will be. You can't fault booking either since he's been booked sparklingly strong for years.


----------



## HBK 3:16

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



Viperdk said:


> Maybe Seth Rollins sucks as much as Cena is overrated and everyone is tired of him being shoved down our throats? What happened to the rumors about a failed cash in that was suppose to take place last night?
> 
> I really don't understand some of the love Rollins is getting. I'm beyond bored watching him. If he's a future World Champion, WWE is as good as fucked.


fpalm


----------



## Wynter

RatedR10 said:


> Oh, trust me, I know.
> 
> I can't really blame Reigns. No one should. The 3rd hour dropped big, but it was a weird transition angle where Lesnar was done by 9:59pm, and people who tuned in at the top of the hour saw Fandango of all people -- and Reigns come out, what? 2-3 minutes after? Not good pacing at all.
> 
> RE: Reigns; I really want to like him, I saw him live when they came to Montreal for Raw in July and his charisma is off the chart. I really want to like him, but WWE makes it so hard by making it so obvious that he'll be in the main event at WM and winning the title rather than give him time to improve for a few months before giving him a title reign.
> 
> I fear that pushing Reigns too much too soon is going to affect what could have been a big draw, and a better all-round performer, if he was just given time to improve.


I feel you, I'm one of Roman's biggest marks and I'm just praying there is a swerve at the Rumble. Roman isn't quite ready yet. I do very much believe he has a lot of potential. He can be something...in a year or two. There shouldn't be a rush. Cena isn't going anywhere.


Either way. That was a sad ass rating. I wish I could say WWE would try to do better, but blah. They won't try until RTWM.


----------



## LordKain

GillbergReturns said:


> HHH did tell everyone the company would go in the tanks without him. Maybe this their plan for Cena to reinstate the Authority.


The low ratings aren't because of any thing recent such as the Authority no longer being in power. Their the end result of months and months of fuckery by the WWE and I guarantee if they were to bring the Authority back the ratings would be the same or they'll continue to get lower.



RatedR10 said:


> Oh, trust me, I know.
> 
> I can't really blame Reigns. No one should. The 3rd hour dropped big, but it was a weird transition angle where Lesnar was done by 9:59pm, and people who tuned in at the top of the hour saw Fandango of all people -- and Reigns come out, what? 2-3 minutes after? Not good pacing at all.
> 
> RE: Reigns; I really want to like him, I saw him live when they came to Montreal for Raw in July and his charisma is off the chart. I really want to like him, but WWE makes it so hard by making it so obvious that he'll be in the main event at WM and winning the title rather than give him time to improve for a few months before giving him a title reign.
> 
> I fear that pushing Reigns too much too soon is going to affect what could have been a big draw, and a better all-round performer, if he was just given time to improve.


I'm a Roman Reigns mark and even I can admit that he's not ready yet and neither are his former partners Ambrose and Rollins either. In fact I'd say that splitting up Shield was one the biggest mistakes they made this year wouldn't you?


----------



## CJohn3:16

That is an horrible rating for a show that had the return of Lesnar in two segments, Cena vs Rollins in a steel cage match, Jericho vs Heyman announced and the return of Roman Reigns.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Damn,even with Brock and Jericho on the show, every hour drew abysmal ratings. I guess TLC turned off a lot of people.


----------



## jcmmnx

thesukh03 said:


> Dean Ambrose, a big draw? :laugh: This guy was cutting horribly awkward promos towards the HIAC build-up, laughed out of the building from his dummy promo and was pulling some of the lowest numbers this year. Hell, they had to quickly turn Orton babyface, because of the low numbers he drew on house shows.
> 
> 
> 
> source: http://www.cagesideseats.com/2014/1...ndy-orton-babyface-turn-dean-ambrose-finisher


How can Ambrose be expected to draw when he hasn't won a singles match on ppv in 2014? The biggest star he's beat this year is Kane lol.


----------



## Wynter

That was around HIAC. Dean can very well be doing great on house shows now.


----------



## RatedR10

WynterWarm12 said:


> I feel you, I'm one of Roman's biggest marks and I'm just praying there is a swerve at the Rumble. Roman isn't quite ready yet. I do very much believe he has a lot of potential. He can be something...in a year or two. There shouldn't be a rush. Cena isn't going anywhere.
> 
> 
> Either way. That was a sad ass rating. I wish I could say WWE would try to do better, but blah. They won't try until RTWM.


They won't even try during the RTWM. They'll throw the part-timers out there, completely ignore their biggest problem (not developing their full-time mid-card, and pretty much anyone not in the main event), and they'll be fucked the night after WM again. It's the same pattern, every single time.

And I was one of those hoping that Roman Reigns' injury was a blessing in disguise. It would allow WWE to reevaluate their plans, give Roman time to work out the kinks, build an organic following and an organic build to fans wanting him to win his first title, but instead, he missed 3 months that could have been devoted to improving and developing due to his injury and he's right back on track to win the Rumble and, most likely win the World Title at Wrestlemania. That's not on Reigns, Reigns did what he could while out with injury (going to an acting coach) - this is on WWE for not ALLOWING him to improve and not allowing him to build an organic following.

It's crystal clear that WWE, or rather, Vince, doesn't know how to build a star who has the adult males cheer him anymore. They failed with Cena, and they're doing the exact same thing with Reigns now.



LordKain said:


> The low ratings aren't because of any thing recent such as the Authority no longer being in power. Their the end result of months and months of fuckery by the WWE and I guarantee if they were to bring the Authority back the ratings would be the same or they'll continue to get lower.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a Roman Reigns mark and even I can admit that he's not ready yet and neither are his former partners Ambrose and Rollins either. In fact I'd say that splitting up Shield was one the biggest mistakes they made this year wouldn't you?


I wouldn't say it was the biggest mistake but I'd say it was obviously rushed and they didn't have a plan at all. It was poorly booked afterwards though, because Roman Reigns didn't start going after Rollins until September. Three months after the split happened. Ambrose fought tooth and nail for Rollins breaking up The Shield, and Reigns just moved on like it was nothing and circled back to that point. It was horribly rushed and there was no plan. Something as big as The Shield breaking up should have had a 3-4-5-6 month, however long plan.


----------



## kokepepsi

Not to make excuses but they fucked up the brock/reigns segment timing big time

Brock came in to early his segment ended like at 10:03 then fandango came out(probably drove ppl away)
and then Reigns came out.

I guess they thought they could stack it to get a huge increase 
Maybe it did work and whatever was next just lost too much I dunno

Can't get fandangos spanish theme out of my head right now


----------



## Arcturus

Brock's return was not advertised and thus should not be blamed for the ratings slump.


----------



## Wynter

RatedR10 said:


> They won't even try during the RTWM. They'll throw the part-timers out there, completely ignore their biggest problem (not developing their full-time mid-card, and pretty much anyone not in the main event), and they'll be fucked the night after WM again. It's the same pattern, every single time.
> 
> And I was one of those hoping that Roman Reigns' injury was a blessing in disguise. It would allow WWE to reevaluate their plans, give Roman time to work out the kinks, build an organic following and an organic build to fans wanting him to win his first title, but instead, he missed 3 months that could have been devoted to improving and developing due to his injury and he's right back on track to win the Rumble and, most likely win the World Title at Wrestlemania. That's not on Reigns, Reigns did what he could while out with injury (going to an acting coach) - this is on WWE for not ALLOWING him to improve and not allowing him to build an organic following.
> 
> It's crystal clear that WWE, or rather, Vince, doesn't know how to build a star who has the adult males cheer him anymore. They failed with Cena, and they're doing the exact same thing with Reigns now.


This is so spot on. I too was hoping WWE would get their shit together with Roman. I wanted a new entrance(he was actually thinking of new entrances, but I guess WWE turned that down), new gear, more freedom in character and him given time to improve since he's missed such crucial months in his build to Mania

. Vince is at that age where his patience has dwindled and he wants everything yesterday. It would be sad to see some potential shat on because they simply pushed him before he was ready.

The audience obviously wants to like Roman. Let the boy breathe for a while. Imagine how over he would be if he was ready as a whole??


Either way, sorry for hijacking the thread with Roman talk. I'll stop now lol


----------



## M_D_Q_

Interesting thing... the audience of yesterday was the worst since October of 2012... Just great see how people are reacting to the shitty product that WWE is showing.


----------



## Kabraxal

WynterWarm12 said:


> This is so spot on. I too was hoping WWE would get their shit together with Roman. I wanted a new entrance(he was actually thinking of new entrances, but I guess WWE turned that down), new gear, more freedom in character and him given time to improve since he's missed such crucial months in his build to Mania
> 
> . Vince is at that age where his patience has dwindled and he wants everything yesterday. It would be sad to see some potential shat on because they simply pushed him before he was ready.
> 
> The audience obviously wants to like Roman. Let the boy breathe for a while. Imagine how over he would be if he was ready as a whole??
> 
> 
> Either way, sorry for hijacking the thread with Roman talk. I'll stop now lol


I agree with this... Roman has at least some form of IT factor that makes him seem like he could be one of the top guys. Trying to create another Cena will only fuck all that up because the fans want it to happen organically and feel like they chose instead of the company. It's why Cena was ruined for most fans... no one wants a wrestler chosen for them and really, very few fans want another dominant face to rule the roost. It's boring.


----------



## Coyotex

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

im not going to lie the Cena/Rollins cage match was pretty good but the rest of the show was a task to sit through....most likely people just got fedup before the end or just who knows maybe they got sleepy? 3 hours of programming with about 5 minutes worth of advertisements every 10-15 minutes is a lot to sit through


----------



## Wynter

Kabraxal said:


> I agree with this... Roman has at least some form of IT factor that makes him seem like he could be one of the top guys. Trying to create another Cena will only fuck all that up because the fans want it to happen organically and feel like they chose instead of the company. It's why Cena was ruined for most fans... no one wants a wrestler chosen for them and really, very few fans want another dominant face to rule the roost. It's boring.




Agreed, That's why I hope Shied and any other talent ALL start drawing big. I want a group to carry the product, not one guy and everyone else is treated like shit. Of course there will always be that number one guy, but that doesn't mean fuck over everyone else.


----------



## Shenroe

WynterWarm12 said:


> So, we're gonna ignore when Raw was getting low ratings even when Roman was out?? *How Raw got the lowest rating since 2012 when Ambrose was being pushed all over Raw*??
> 
> How is Roman Reigns at fault when he wasn't even being advertised for Raw?? They were touting "Roman Reigns returns to Smackdown!". Lesnar was advertised to return, THE CHAMPION. Hell, even Raw is Jericho was being pushed hard. Is Jericho at fault?? No?
> 
> Face it, no one is spiking ratings unless they're a popular guy like The Rock. If WWE was doing this whole big "Roman Reigns returns to Raw!!Make sure to watch!!!" then I'd be like, yeah, that failed.
> 
> Hilarious when low ratings are ignored when your favorites are in the mix :lol
> 
> "that was a shit Raw!" So...wouldn't the ratings reflect that :no:
> 
> Being a draw doesn't happen over night.
> 
> And as far as merch?? Roman's merch is hideous. I legit want Ambrose's hoodie over his because that hoodie is legit as fuck :lol I'm not even a Dean mark.
> 
> 
> EDIT: I've been corrected. Thanks


With virtually no support cast. No Y2J/Ryback/Dolph/Rowan/big Show/ Heyman etc..

But I don't really blame the viewers tbh. The first 2 weeks upon his return he was heavily pushed but they didn't really saddled him with props yet at that point. Ratings were good. Then he became Dick Dastardly jr and was constantly with Cena..And then, you what happens in this case, you cool off. That's what happened.


----------



## almostfamous

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

This rating hurts. The MNF game didn't have any real playoff implications, you have a main event cage match with your biggest face and biggest "non-lesnar" heel and crickets. Really interested to see how things go into Wrestlemania season. It should pick up soon... hopefully...


----------



## Wynter

Shenroe said:


> With virtually no support cast. No Y2J/Ryback/Dolph/Rowan/big Show/ Heyman etc..
> 
> But I don't really blame the viewers tbh. The first 2 weeks upon his return he was heavily pushed but they didn't really saddled him with props yet at that point. Ratings were good. Then he became Dick Dastardly jr and was constantly with Cena..And then, you what happens in this case, you cool off. That's what happened.


Oh, I don't blame Ambrose at all. I blame shitty booking for bad ratings. Ambrose is great. No denying that. He can easily become a draw in the future


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



almostfamous said:


> This rating hurts. The MNF game didn't have any real playoff implications, you have a main event cage match with your biggest face and biggest "non-lesnar" heel and crickets. Really interested to see how things go into Wrestlemania season. It should pick up soon... hopefully...


The Saints needed a win to keep the #1 spot in the NFC South to keep their playoff hopes alive, so it definitely had playoff implications, but I doubt many people outside of NFC south fans (Saints winning affects the Panthers and Falcons, especially the Panthers, playoff chances) and Bears fans really cared. It was just two below-average teams.

I'm actually surprised at how some of the crappy MNF games take away from Raw.



Edit: and if this year's Road to Wrestlemania isn't exponentially better than last year, WWE is in serious trouble.


----------



## Shenroe

WynterWarm12 said:


> Oh, I don't blame Ambrose at all. I blame shitty booking for bad ratings. Ambrose is great. No denying that. He can easily become a draw in the future


And I don't blame Roman as well, i blame Cena tbh :lol


----------



## SBisOurs

WynterWarm12 said:


> So, we're gonna ignore when Raw was getting low ratings even when Roman was out?? How Raw got the lowest rating since 2012 when Ambrose was being pushed all over Raw??
> 
> How is Roman Reigns at fault when he wasn't even being advertised for Raw?? They were touting "Roman Reigns returns to Smackdown!". Lesnar was advertised to return, THE CHAMPION. Hell, even Raw is Jericho was being pushed hard. Is Jericho at fault?? No?
> 
> Face it, no one is spiking ratings unless they're a popular guy like The Rock. If WWE was doing this whole big "Roman Reigns returns to Raw!!Make sure to watch!!!" then I'd be like, yeah, that failed.
> 
> Hilarious when low ratings are ignored when your favorites are in the mix :lol
> 
> "that was a shit Raw!" So...wouldn't the ratings reflect that :no:
> 
> Being a draw doesn't happen over night.
> 
> And as far as merch?? Roman's merch is hideous. I legit want Ambrose's hoodie over his because that hoodie is legit as fuck :lol I'm not even a Dean mark.
> 
> 
> EDIT: I've been corrected. Thanks


Ratings were low before Ambrose's return as well but his return increased viewership and was the first time in a while RAW had received over 4 million in an hour.

As far as being involved in the hottest feud... a couple of weeks later, Cena and Rollins were in a match and the ratings dipped from the previous segment and only increased when Ambrose appeared towards the end. 

Would be nice to have a breakdown, but it's still funny watching the arguments of people who claim Reigns has mainstream appeal go down in flames. He was out drawn by two midgets and his return did a terrible number.


----------



## Shattered Dreams

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

The 3rd hour of Raw corresponded to halftime and the awful 3rd quarter of MNF. If someone even had the slightest desire to switch over they would have (unless they were Saints fans enjoying the carnage)


----------



## Wynter

SBisOurs said:


> Ratings were low before Ambrose's return as well but his return increased viewership and was the first time in a while RAW had received over 4 million in an hour.
> 
> As far as being involved in the hottest feud... a couple of weeks later, Cena and Rollins were in a match and the ratings dipped from the previous segment and only increased when Ambrose appeared towards the end.
> 
> Would be nice to have a breakdown, but it's still funny watching the arguments of people who claim Reigns has mainstream appeal go down in flames. He was out drawn by two midgets and his return did a terrible number.


Roman does have mainstream appeal, I believe. But him becoming a draw at this point in his career?? Yeaaaah..no :lol He's very green and hasn't even been part of a hot feud yet. His biggest feud was Randy and that was quite shit. Bella vs Stephanie had higher priority over that.

Either way. No one is a huge draw right now and I hope that changes. I'm ready for a new era to begin


----------



## SBisOurs

WynterWarm12 said:


> Roman does have mainstream appeal, I believe. But him becoming a draw at this point in his career?? Yeaaaah..no :lol He's very green and hasn't even been part of a hot feud yet. His biggest feud was Randy and that was quite shit. Bella vs Stephanie had higher priority over that.
> 
> Either way. No one is a huge draw right now and I hope that changes. I'm ready for a new era to begin


He doesn't have mainstream appeal. Only 2 wrestlers, maybe 3 if you include Andre, in the history of the company have had considerable mainstream appeal. That's it. And you're putting Reigns in that category now? Just think about how silly that sounds.

I agree no one outside Cena is currently a big draw. But it speaks volumes when someone who doesn't even receive 1/100 of Reigns' push out draws him.


----------



## Joe88

I dont know if you can blame one single guy for the ratings dip. No one really seems to be a ratings draw but Daniel Bryan and obviously he is not there. Ambrose shows some promise in that department but that is still to be determined. The show fucking sucks, and is boring as hell, it deserves shit ratings. I hope the ratings continue to suck, I hope they keep losing subscribers to the network. Stuff like that needs to happen for anything to get better.

And boy are they ruining Reigns, making him John Cena number two is completely idiotic. I am no fan of his by any means, but I remember seeing him live this past summer and thinking he is going to be a star, he does have a presence, but he is not ready. And it seems like they are doing him no favors and not really developing him. He needs serious work on his promos. Why isn't he cutting three or four a week? Now I understand not maybe embarassing him on live tv, but they have so many platforms, the wwe app, main event, smackdown, he could get alot of work without doing it without a net on Raw.


----------



## Wynter

SBisOurs said:


> He doesn't have mainstream appeal. Only 2 wrestlers, maybe 3 if you include Andre, in the history of the company have had considerable mainstream appeal. That's it. And you're putting Reigns in that category now? Just think about how silly that sounds.
> 
> I agree no one outside Cena is currently a big draw. But it speaks volumes when someone who doesn't even receive 1/100 of Reigns' push out draws him.


I'm sorry. I meant it as he has potential to be mainstream in the future. I'm not saying he's transcended now.

When someone new goes out there and draws to the point where it's significant, then we have a topic. Roman is getting pushed, but don't act like he's been part of amazing or hot programs. Like I said, his biggest feud was with Randy and it was so half assed with bellas getting better and bigger segments. The highlight of Roman vs Randy was Randy RKO-ing him through table. 

Roman hasn't done anything significant other than beat Randy in a match that had a shitty build and really meant nothing. 

This Raw had the likes of Jericho and Lesnar on the show and couldn't draw jack shit. Anyone who expects Roman Reigns, a guy who is green as hell and hasn't even had a proper or great feud, to draw anything is crazy lol

Like I said, I hope the boys can start drawing big time in the future. It will take a while, but I have faith in them.


----------



## Dangerous K

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Agree with that it indicates a declining interest into the product. Just not working.


----------



## shutupchico

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

uh... yea. did anyone actually think rollins could draw as a main eventer? he's a good wrestler and all that, and he has j & j to keep it entertaining, he doesn't have star qualities though. anyway, it wasn't a bad match.


----------



## Jingoro

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

the cage match was actually good too. people tune in and need something big to hook them in. vince has gotten really bad at that aspect of running raw. that along with several others.


----------



## Therapy

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

The casuals are wising up. They know anything Cena related is going to end in a DQ or LOLCENAWINS. You could put Cena in a steel cage vs 5000 midgets and 10 clones of Sabu in his prime and he'll still come out squeaky clean.


----------



## Armani

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Who cares? it's not like it's gonna be any better if it was someone else. All the full and part timers that matter showed up and it still didn't do shit. It's just how predictable it is when Cena wins all the time, people get sick of that and feel insulted, it always end with the same result. Nothing really creative comes out of that. Plus you already made the roster look like shit when you been feeding us nothing but rematches and most importantly Cena/Lesnar matches, for the third time now, WWE is telling us that nobody is good enough for Brock except for Cena which is stupid and far from the truth. One more thing Reigns sucks, it's lame that of all people he gets to beat Lesnar.


----------



## MrWalsh

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Bad tv gets bad ratings
they'll blame it on something other than the product being boring


----------



## Solf

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

The reigns marks in here trying to say it's Rollins fault :jordan5


----------



## dan the marino

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

That was with Lesnar and Jericho too.

Almost like you can't bring in viewers no matter who you drag in if the writing isn't any good...


----------



## Super Sonic

F4W/Observer:



> Raw did 3.51 million viewers last night, the lowest rating for the show since a Christmas Eve show in 2012. It was the lowest non-holiday audience for Raw since December 3, 2012, a show that did 3.43 million viewers, and one of the lowest rated non-holiday episodes since 1997.
> 
> The number can't be attributed to the NFL, since the game did 11.07 million viewers, a below average number. Plus it was the day after a PPV show, when the audience, in particular for the first hour, should be way up.
> 
> This was a reflection of declining interest in the product.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.70 million viewers
> 
> 9 p.m. 3.48 million viewers
> 
> 10 p.m. 3.39 million viewers


----------



## Believe That

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

People complain no matter what it was a great match


----------



## HOJO

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

It was a great match so who fucking cares


----------



## SBisOurs

WynterWarm12 said:


> I'm sorry. I meant it as he has potential to be mainstream in the future. I'm not saying he's transcended now.
> 
> When someone new goes out there and draws to the point where it's significant, then we have a topic. Roman is getting pushed, but don't act like he's been part of amazing or hot programs. Like I said, his biggest feud was with Randy and it was so half assed with bellas getting better and bigger segments. The highlight of Roman vs Randy was Randy RKO-ing him through table.
> 
> Roman hasn't done anything significant other than beat Randy in a match that had a shitty build and really meant nothing.
> 
> This Raw had the likes of Jericho and Lesnar on the show and couldn't draw jack shit. *Anyone who expects Roman Reigns, a guy who is green as hell and hasn't even had a proper or great feud, to draw anything is crazy* lol
> 
> Like I said, I hope the boys can start drawing big time in the future. It will take a while, but I have faith in them.


Believe me, I'm not expecting him to draw at all. I've been pretty vocal about him lacking every single quality it takes to be a draw in the WWE. This is exactly what I expected and what I expect going forward.

There is no money to be made off of Reigns in the long term.


----------



## LordKain

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



BEST FOUR COLLY BIRDS said:


> That was with Lesnar and Jericho too.
> 
> Almost like you can't bring in viewers no matter who you drag in if the writing isn't any good...


And Vince has no one else to blame for it other them himself.


----------



## RebelArch86

Daniel Bryan has to be looking real fucking good right now.


----------



## Lordhhhx

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Its not shocking i actually stopped watching raw the moment jericho announced the steel cage match between cena and rollins and was actually incredibly suprised to learn that rollins actually beat cena last night.

I blame the cenawinslol curse for this rating.


----------



## Londrick

Reigns is already taking in the ratings and they haven't even put the title on him yet. :ti


----------



## 2Slick

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Considering most of the show was pretty much garbage, I can't say that I honestly blame any one that tuned out. The main event was decent, love watching Rollins win. 

Who wouldn't love the leap off the stairs and J&J Security rooting him on, pointing at one stair at a time as he frolicked off the steps to victory? Hilarious.


----------



## Donnie

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



The_It_Factor said:


> The Saints needed a win to keep the #1 spot in the NFC South to keep their playoff hopes alive, so it definitely had playoff implications, but I doubt many people outside of NFC south fans (Saints winning affects the Panthers and Falcons, especially the Panthers, playoff chances) and Bears fans really cared. It was just two below-average teams.
> 
> I'm actually surprised at how some of the crappy MNF games take away from Raw.
> 
> 
> 
> *Edit: and if this year's Road to Wrestlemania isn't exponentially better than last year, WWE is in serious trouble.*




well if they go with roman and brock that means we get 3 solid months of no brock bad reigns promos an heyman trying to salvage it. yeah the next few months are going to fucking horrible


----------



## Jingoro

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



MrWalsh said:


> Bad tv gets bad ratings
> they'll blame it on something other than the product being boring


it can't be vince's fault. no way can that be the problem. :leo :leo :leo


----------



## DudeLove669

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

You're a fucking fool if you blame Rollins. The heel is NEVER the main draw. The person that should take ALL responsibility for any drawing implications should always be the babyface. People watch to see the babyface. The heel only exists to counter the babyface and to give the babyface someone to overcome.

Cena is 100% to blame here.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

You know Brock isn't safe from humiliation either. Dude appeared twice on this show and his return drew Diesel numbers.


----------



## Jingoro

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



funnyfaces1 said:


> You know Brock isn't safe from humiliation either. Dude appeared twice on this show and his return drew Diesel numbers.


the bloom off the lesnar rose disappeared once they had him feud with big show. while he beat taker at wm, i'm sure a good amount of people remember the match was shit. his matches with cena are exciting, but really what can he do on a raw anymore that will move the needle even an inch? nobody is switching from the nfl to see him do german suplex's and the F5 for the millionth time. 

i also think the rumor of a briefcase cash in seemed squashed by how they set up the main event at the start of the show. the marks tuned in and could figure out it wasn't happening.


----------



## Bad For Business

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

The problem is simple. Cena's not a draw, and Rollins isn't a star yet, so of course it wasn't going to do well. Plus having to sit through 2 and half hours of Garbage to get to the main event doesn't really help either.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

This is going to get a lot of hate, but I truly believe that DB is the biggest TV draw they have, if you look at all his hours and whatnot over the last year, they've actually been super high. I never understood the notion that Bryan couldn't draw. He's a FAR bigger TV draw than Punk if nothing else.

Reigns and Lesnar coming back in the same hour, and that hour tanking is a horrible thing. I've been saying it for a while now, but Lesnar is not worth it anymore, the dude does not draw anymore, they took the luster out of the guy. Time to let him go. Roman's just a mystery, they've booked him really well, and he comes back and doesn't help the number at all. It's hard to get an exact gauge without quarter hours to be fair though.


----------



## p862011

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

even coma patients waking up after 10 years are sick of cena


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Can't blame either without quarter hours, Lesnar's and Reigns' returns were also a part of that hour. All 4 of them bombed tbh. That's not good for their main event scene.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Casuals starting to figure out NXT is the only show worth watching these days.


----------



## Joff

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

The hardcores from the AE and first few years of the RA era have left. They didn't like John Cena in 2006 and they don't like him now. He draws his niche fans in, but for being the top guy for 10 years, getting a Hogan like push not as much to show for it as he should considering the train.

Next era starts when he is gone and the others on the roster don't have to get buried or pushed aside for that MF'er

I wouldn't even mind Cena if not for the bs push after push, protection, burials, etc. He has talent. Just sick of the guy.


----------



## DemBoy

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



Viperdk said:


> Maybe Seth Rollins sucks as much as Cena is overrated and everyone is tired of him being shoved down our throats? What happened to the rumors about a failed cash in that was suppose to take place last night?
> 
> I really don't understand some of the love Rollins is getting. I'm beyond bored watching him. If he's a future World Champion, WWE is as good as fucked.


A guy that constantly needs help to win, loses all the time when he doesn't have said help and acts like a chickenshit, its hardly someone you would say that is "shoved down your throat."


----------



## RebelArch86

TakeMyGun said:


> This is going to get a lot of hate, but I truly believe that DB is the biggest TV draw they have, if you look at all his hours and whatnot over the last year, they've actually been super high. I never understood the notion that Bryan couldn't draw. He's a FAR bigger TV draw than Punk if nothing else.
> 
> Reigns and Lesnar coming back in the same hour, and that hour tanking is a horrible thing. I've been saying it for a while now, but Lesnar is not worth it anymore, the dude does not draw anymore, they took the luster out of the guy. Time to let him go. Roman's just a mystery, they've booked him really well, and he comes back and doesn't help the number at all. It's hard to get an exact gauge without quarter hours to be fair though.


Daniel Bryan is without a doubt and objectively their biggest full time draw.

There's only two types who deny it:

The attitude era marks who swear if you're not pulling a 7 rating you can't be called a draw.

And

Marks who believe the storylines and get worked.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

RebelArch86 said:


> Daniel Bryan is without a doubt and objectively their biggest full time draw.
> 
> There's only two types who deny it:
> 
> The attitude era marks who swear if you're not pulling a 7 rating you can't be called a draw.
> 
> And
> 
> Marks who believe the storylines and get worked.


I still think Cena is better draw, he does better for the Gate and Merch, but I think Bryan is #2 in those aspects, and as much as I'm going to get crucified for this, I think Bryan is a bigger TV draw than Cena in 2014. There was a time where Cena was bigger, but now, Cena doesn't really move TV numbers the way you think he would.


----------



## JY57

final rating - 2.66 (same as last week)


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

JY57 said:


> final rating - 2.66 (same as last week)


Holy shit, if you told me in 2012 that a Lesnar show was going to do a 2.6, I would've laughed in your face.


----------



## BigTimeTimmyJim

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



SinJackal said:


> How are people even blaming Cena? :lol He lost and got beaten down by Brock Lesnar. There's nothing more that could've been done besides give him a different opponent.
> 
> Not taking anything away from his wrestling skill, but Rollins isn't exactly a draw and probably never will be. You can't fault booking either since he's been booked sparklingly strong for years.


Rollins is a IWC darling so it can't possibly be his fault.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Main event needed more J&J promotion to really be a draw. They barely got a mention, how was anyone supposed to know that the real stars were out there with that jobber Cena?


----------



## Lastier

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

THOSE DAMN MILLENNIALS CANT DRAW DAMMIT

Or...could it be that there was nothing at stake and either outcome doesn't effect anything going forward? It was a steel cage match for the sake of having a steel cage match, nothing else.


----------



## Tangerine

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Don't worry, 100% of the blame will be put on Rollins and he will be buried in due time.

It has nothing do do with the fact that Cena matches are predictable and this is just Bray Wyatt burial 2.0


----------



## Reservoir Angel

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

People blaming one individual or another for any ratings drop when they should be blaming the fact that RAW is a 3-hour show with enough good content to maybe fill a 1-hour show at a stretch, and that people just kind of have better shit to do than watch the entire show from start to finish, especially when they pretty much know how it's going to end anyway.


----------



## Joshi Judas

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

The entire show bombed. Hour 1 was pretty low and viewership kept falling, as is the trend with most editions of Raw.

The terrible TLC ppv certainly made matters worse.


----------



## cmase

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



NameOfTheWind said:


> I don't think it was the cage match itself. It was just the show was utter trash. Not a single interesting thing happened. A bunch of rematches with more or less the same results. Terrible RAW


This.



Kabraxal said:


> It was Bray/Cena all over.. except this time we had Lesnar instead of a little kid. Though you wouldn't tell much difference by their voices.
> 
> 
> 
> It had to be said


Haha, every time he tries to do a roar and it comes out as a girly squeal, i laugh. Brie Bella sounds more manly than Lesnar ffs.


----------



## xDD

Brock is DRAW :lelbrock:lelbrock:lelbrock



xDD said:


> RAW without Brock: 3,987,000 average viewers.
> Next week with Brock: 3,826,000 average viewers.


Best champ ever :lelbrock:lelbrock:lelbrock:lelbrock:lelbrock:lelbrock


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

RebelArch86 said:


> Daniel Bryan is without a doubt and objectively their biggest full time draw.
> 
> There's only two types who deny it:
> 
> The attitude era marks who swear if you're not pulling a 7 rating you can't be called a draw.
> 
> And
> 
> Marks who believe the storylines and get worked.


No matter how many times you say this, it isn't true. He can't match Cena in terms of merch or house show gates, nor does he have some huge impressive resume of PPV numbers behind him. Also, the general ratings for his segments back when he was around before and after Wrestlemania time weren't any bigger than Cena's. Live crowd reaction is one of the least biggest indicators (at least in this day and age) of how big of a draw someone is.


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

xDD said:


> Brock is DRAW :lelbrock:lelbrock:lelbrock
> 
> 
> 
> Best champ ever :lelbrock:lelbrock:lelbrock:lelbrock:lelbrock:lelbrock


99.9% of people watching (or not watching) didn't even know Brock was gonna be there, so I'm not sure this says anything about him. His main draw is in PPV buys, not television ratings anyhow.


----------



## goldigga

TakeMyGun said:


> This is going to get a lot of hate, but I truly believe that DB is the biggest TV draw they have, if you look at all his hours and whatnot over the last year, they've actually been super high. I never understood the notion that Bryan couldn't draw. He's a FAR bigger TV draw than Punk if nothing else.
> 
> Reigns and Lesnar coming back in the same hour, and that hour tanking is a horrible thing. I've been saying it for a while now, but* Lesnar is not worth it anymore, the dude does not draw anymore, they took the luster out of the guy.* Time to let him go. Roman's just a mystery, they've booked him really well, and he comes back and doesn't help the number at all. It's hard to get an exact gauge without quarter hours to be fair though.


I feel like a lot of Brock's appeal and attraction was lost once everyone realised his only legitimate feud since Taker is Cena, Cena and Cena again.

Yeah great to see him back, but he beats up Cena, a week later Cena gets the upperhand, and then finally on PPV Cena almost beats Lesnar only to be cheated out of victory.

Had Brock been going up against younger talent there would have been a ton more interest in his storyline. The fact that the WWE never had some form of a King of the Ring, where the winner gets a shot at Brock was a huge missed opportunity.


----------



## tabish.f16

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

the worse most PPV Raw


----------



## What_A_Maneuver!

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

That's interesting for three reasons:

1) Cena is a top star
2) Cena vs Rollins in a steel cage match is a reasonably exciting main event for RAW (to me anyway). And steel cage matches in general you'd think a casual fan would stick around for
3) Everyone knew Brock Lesnar was in the building, and you could have bet that he would show up at some point in that match.

So it means that a fair number weren't interested in seeing: John Cena wrestle, Seth Rollins wrestle, a steel cage match, and Brock Lesnar. Weird.


----------



## BruceLeGorille

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

They saw that Ambrose wouldn't be here, they saw Rumang Ragins was here, they changed the channel.


----------



## squeelbitch

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

it ain't rollins fault and it ain't cena's fault, the product as whole is a bore and poorly booked, even a limited appearance from lesnar can do shit about raw's dwindling ratings.


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Go back to the ratings thread ut


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



What_A_Maneuver! said:


> That's interesting for three reasons:
> 
> 1) Cena is a top star
> 2) Cena vs Rollins in a steel cage match is a reasonably exciting main event for RAW (to me anyway). And steel cage matches in general you'd think a casual fan would stick around for
> 3) Everyone knew Brock Lesnar was in the building, and you could have bet that he would show up at some point in that match.
> 
> So it means that a fair number weren't interested in seeing: John Cena wrestle, Seth Rollins wrestle, a steel cage match, and Brock Lesnar. Weird.


That's not weird imo those 3 guys are damn boring.

Cena stale for obvious reasons, Lesnar as been boring since his return and Rollins got stale for getting an authority gimmick, I was already tired of the authority and this guy still comes whining wanting them back with his geek voice I don't care how good hes in the ring with that shitty annoying character, I'm gonna start changing channel every time those guys appear.


----------



## TripleG

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Well OBVIOUSLY, Rollins just isn't a draw! He's just not grabbing that brass ring! 

Isn't that right Vince?


----------



## ErickRowan_Fan

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Obviously it's all Rollins's fault. Brock and Cena can do no wrong, right?


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

That show didn't do so bad considering how awful it was.

I skimmed through both last RAW episodes in 5 minutes each, the only thing that I stayed for was the short Wyatt/Ambrose segment and Lesnar killing Jericho and Cena again and even there I skipped the entrances and just went straight to the point. 

Cena/Rollins is a boring feud so of course it's gonna tank, Cena doesn't even look like he's taking him seriously so why should I?


----------



## OMGeno

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

People didn't stick around because the rest of the show was weak as fuck and they likely figured it would end in some fuckery anyways with no clear result as per usual.


----------



## Krispenwah

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

So people started to criticize Rollins drawing power already?

:tii


----------



## kendoo

Paul Heyman vs Jericho will never draw even with the thought of it ending up Brock Lesnar vs Jericho. The ratings won't change.


----------



## eskymi

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Firstly, the show was not good. It just wasn't. 

Secondly, you can't blame just Cena or Lesnar as to why people tuned out. Guess what? I either fast forward, or turn off when Rollins wrestles. So there ya go, I am not a indy guy lover and don't care for the man. Of the three in the shield, he was the one I disliked the least. So all people are to blame for poor ratings. 

Thirdly, enough with long promos...the first promo with Jericho lasted what like 25 minutes? How many long dull promos can we hear from Wyatt? Why do we have matches on a PPV and then do rematches the very next night? Why can't they actually have 1.5 to 2 hours of wrestling in a show...hell after a a PPV is perfect cause you are the furthest you will be away from the next PPV...you can just have good, long matches without DIRTY endings and people would enjoy them.


----------



## BreakTheWallsDown2

The ratings sucked because the show was clearly a phone in. They pretty much replayed the PPV from last night, putting the people who just feuded in matches with eachother with very little promo progression.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

As I said in the rating thread, these #s have to be a concern for the WWE, their lowest # since MEMORIAL DAY on a show that:

Was A PPV Fallout Raw
Had Lesnar Return (actually had his 1st appearance at "halftime" so people knew he was there to
Had a returning Roman Reigns (who is their next "guy")
Had a ME Cage Match between the current top face and current full-time top heel
Jericho return

Don't get me wrong 1/2 (or more) of the show was BAD (IMO) but even with everything that had going on that is a BAD #


----------



## Saber Rider ^-^

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

If you put on a horrendous PPV that most would agree was of an inferior quality to your development system's live special just 3 days prior and expect a good number to start off your show, you're wrong.

If you put on a horrible show for the duration of the 2½ hours of TV even if your absent World Champion does show up and expect people to stay tuned for the main event, you're equally as wrong.

Putting the blame on a *young* *Heel* for drawing a poor number when his working with your *TOP* babyface, a top babyface that's been at the top for about 10 years is actually lel worthy. Like a heel is your main draw anyway.

Hell we don't even have the segment by segments. The only way you truly ascertain what's turning people off and keeping people turned in is by looking at the numbers over a long period, not just one night.

Also Ratings discussions by fans = the worst. As fans should we even freaking care, the main event was actually a decent match before Brock got involved, and that's about all I as a fan care about.


----------



## TheMechXYZ

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Rating gonna get lower next week i bet.


----------



## Issues_Sunshyne

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

I'm a wrestling fan, I don't care about ratings. 

Or rather, I don't find them important for me to enjoy something and rarely, unless they are exceptional either way, care about them. Still surprises me how a lot of fans do.


----------



## Crasp

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Maybe if they had well written and well booked storylines, and had entertaining matches, people would watch the show?

You know, like that show on the WWE network, NXT I think it's called.


----------



## SBisOurs

This is more an indication of how little the TV audience cares about Reigns, given that he made his return the previous night at TLC and people were thus expecting him to be on RAW.

But difficult to tell without a breakdown.

Either way, Ambrose's return did over 4 million viewers in the first hour when he made his appearance.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



Therapy said:


> The casuals are wising up. *They know anything Cena related is going to end in a DQ or LOLCENAWINS.* You could put Cena in a steel cage vs 5000 midgets and 10 clones of Sabu in his prime and he'll still come out squeaky clean.


You are aware neither of those scenarios happened right?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

I've been saying this for MONTHS, but no one is a draw anymore. Not even the part timers. They have fucked the product and it's way too late. Hope Cena keeps selling those t-shirts for that company's sake. Because he's the only one who consistently gets booked like a star.


----------



## HBK 3:16

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

If the WWE doesn't change their course soon things will fast go down hill even more then they already have.


----------



## Shenroe

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

It goes to show you that Rollins without an authority stable to protect and big him up everytime is more vulnerable. Thank God he's the best or 2nd wrestler currently, because as far as his character goes, nothing really original.


----------



## xagon

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Do you millennials still not get it?: It's always Cena's opponent's fault when one of his matches doesn't draw!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



Shenroe said:


> It goes to show you that Rollins without an authority stable to protect and big him up everytime is more vulnerable. Thank God he's the best or 2nd wrestler currently, because as far as his character goes, nothing really original.


No one's character in WWE today is original.


----------



## Confuzzled

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

I tried to stream it the next day and couldn't make it past the cringe worthy opening promo and match ups. 

I generally find myself indifferent to Cena on the mic but that night was just too much. The sarcasm based comments between him, Heyman, Rollins and Jericho were a joke and you knew exactly what was going to happen in the main event based upon the first 10 minutes of the show. Even as a Jericho mark I didn't care enough to finish watching. That speaks volumes really.

Also what does Show have to gain by crushing Rowan anyway? Are they just trying to pump him up a little to feed him to Reigns?


----------



## D.M.N.

Yikes, SmackDown's live show flopped: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...rse-of-oak-island-nba-basketball-more/340381/

WWE Smackdown	USA	8:00 PM	2.027	0.6
CHRISLEY KNOWS BEST	USA	10:00 PM	1.470	0.6


----------



## Starbuck

Lol Jericho. 

Nah, I think this is more a reflection on the sheer amount of disinterest in WWE right now than anything else. For numbers to drop so badly _after _a PPV is proof enough. People, or however many actually bothered to watch TLC which I doubt was many at all, don't give a shit to see Cena/Lesnar again. Honestly, as big a Brock mark as I am it is getting tiresome seeing him do the exact same thing every single time he has an appearance. Don't get me wrong, the no sell of Jericho was pretty :lol but there's only so many times he can come out, stalk the ring, hit an F5 and leave before you get bored of it. Besides, he's been off TV for so long now that any heat he had from the streak and Summerslam is long gone. Now we're just looking at another Cena/Lesnar match that nobody wants to see. They also seem intent on booking Reigns in a way that is going to make a lot of people real sick of him real fast. 

The sky isn't falling. It's almost Xmas and next week will probably do worse. But I do think WWE has a lot of work to do heading into the Rumble. Cena/Lesnar is a hard sell for the 4th time and if Cena actually wins then fuck everything. At least there's always NXT...


----------



## Batz

damnbrose said:


> 12/15
> 
> 8:00 PM: 3.703 mil(1.2)
> 9:00 PM: 3.477 mil(1.2)
> 10:00 PM: 3:385 mil(1.1)





D.M.N. said:


> Yikes, SmackDown's live show flopped: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...rse-of-oak-island-nba-basketball-more/340381/
> 
> WWE Smackdown USA 8:00 PM 2.027 0.6
> CHRISLEY KNOWS BEST USA 10:00 PM 1.470 0.6


:clap

Gotta love it.


----------



## Starbuck

Didn't even see that thing about SD. :lol SUPERsmackdown? Did they even promote it at all? Dat Reigns drawing powa belee dat.


----------



## SBisOurs

So...more evidence of Reigns' lack of appeal.


----------



## A-C-P

BEST FOR CHRISTMAS said:


> Didn't even see that thing about SD. :lol SUPERsmackdown? Did they even promote it at all? Dat Reigns drawing powa belee dat.


Come on now, we all know it is Fandango's fault that Reigns didn't draw last night :jericho2


----------



## Frico

They advertised Reigns returning on SD on Monday and then atleast 5 times on twitter yesterday. The ONLY thing they were heavily advertising for Smackdown Live was Roman's return and then two tweets about Ambrose/Bray.

DA LOOK! :reigns

But it sucks the show didn't do better cause Dolph/Rollins added another great match in their series of matches.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

BEST FOR CHRISTMAS said:


> Didn't even see that thing about SD. :lol SUPERsmackdown? Did they even promote it at all? Dat Reigns drawing powa belee dat.


I belee


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Guess Mark and his friends really decided to take HHH advice and leave.


----------



## Paul Rudd

Smackdown being on Tuesday meant it was the 3rd day in a row WWE had a show on. A lot of people were probably just sick of it, especially since neither TLC or Raw were any good. As much as I dislike Reigns, I don't think it's fair to blame bad ratings on one guy. 

Also despite the fact that it was live, people have been conditioned for years to not care about Smackdown. I know I certainly didn't care about the show.


----------



## Super Sonic

Meltzer:



> Raw on 12/15 did a 2.65 rating and 3.51 million viewers (a horrible 1.36 viewers per show, which is almost TNA level). While not the lowest rated show of the year, it did draw the second lowest rating (behind the 10/6 show) of the year and was the least watched show of the year. In fact, it was the least watched episode of Raw since a Christmas Eve show in 2012.
> 
> It was the second lowest amount of viewers for a non-holiday Raw show in the last three years (trailing only the December 3, 2012 episode) and among the lowest amount of viewers for the show since 1997.
> 
> It was made worse by the fact that the football game wasn’t a big one at all (New Orleans Saints vs. Chicago Bears doing 11.07 million viewers, a below average figure) and it was the day after a PPV show, where the audience, particularly for the first hour, is usually up. It was also the return of Brock Lesnar, but in their infinite wisdom, they decided against advertising it. It was the return of Chris Jericho, but he was just on TV in November so he hadn’t been gone long enough that his return was going to make a difference. Ultimately, it’s the bad product coming home to roost because these last two weeks historically should have done better numbers.
> 
> The three hours were 3.70 million for the first hour, 3.48 million for the second hour and 3.39 million for the third hour.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

I'd hate to work with Cena. You can't win for losing. The fans could like the program, the promos and the matches. The feud could get nice ratings and good marks for PPV matches from the fans and dirt sheets from people like Dave Meltzer and almost all the credit goes to Cena. 

The angle could fail, and do poor ratings and have lousy PPV matches and it will get blamed on the person working with Cena. Cena hasn't changed his wrestling style, moveset, appearance, persona, promo content or match style for about 8 years now. On account of this, Cena should shoulder the blame in a 50/50 split _at minimum_ if a feud doesn't go over. The built in explanation for fan disinterest, Cena's staleness, is so apparent. However, the other guy will always be unfairly blamed. 

Also, you know you're never going to truly go over him, even if that is something booking sort of dictates (Wade Barrett, CM Punk, Daniel Bryan), and there is a very real chance that you're gonna look like a jabroni in the feud or get purely jobbed out.


----------



## Ratedr4life

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

They should should air NXT on Monday nights.

Monday Night NXT!!! 

:trips2


----------



## bmtrocks

Kevin Lockard said:


> 99.9% of people watching (or not watching) didn't even know Brock was gonna be there, so I'm not sure this says anything about him. His main draw is in PPV buys, not television ratings anyhow.


Hell in the Cell did better buyrates than Night of Champions though...


----------



## Captain Edd

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

Maybe its because I didn't watch Raw for a few weeks but the match was really good, no idea what went wrong there. Mercury & Noble cheering for Seth while he was walking down the steps was glorious.


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



Captain Edd said:


> Maybe its because I didn't watch Raw for a few weeks but the match was really good, no idea what went wrong there. Mercury & Noble cheering for Seth while he was walking down the steps was glorious.


It was a simply a complete rehash of Bray/Cena in the cage except Brock as the kid. Cena cannot take a loss against most guys without so much interference. It was good through much of it, but it was ridiculous that it took 4 men and multiple match ending shots to put Cena away.


----------



## Captain Edd

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*



Kabraxal said:


> It was a simply a complete rehash of Bray/Cena in the cage except Brock as the kid. Cena cannot take a loss against most guys without so much interference. It was good through much of it, but it was ridiculous that it took 4 men and multiple match ending shots to put Cena away.


Yeah I totally forgot what happened in that match except for the kid :lol


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

It was a repeat of a match from the night before. 

Rollins isn't a huge draw or star (yet).

Raw is 3 hours long.

Some other factors at play here, but yeah lets put all the blame on Cena.


----------



## Bret_Hart86

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

WWE isn't going anywhere and even if their ratings are substandard, they're "at the top of the food chain" because no other pro-wrestling company can dominate them. Thus, even if they are mediocre (because they are putting on mediocre shows), they don't need to make massive improvement or take high risks to the point where they need to change the product; they have no real competition...but they're also a publicly-traded company. This can only mean they'll get hurt in the pocketbooks and investors will detract, but only if their ratings truly jump the shark; we have yet to see that. What lies ahead of us isn't certain and I hope, for the sake of this company, that they improve. I am no business expert but, given the climate of the pro-wrestling world these days, there's no real competitor for this company as I said, yet there's one small but very vital factor to take into consideration. A lot of what WWE does beyond the curtains has to do with pleasing the investors, so, the reality here is, if they have to take extreme measures and pull the plug on the WWE Network...*then we're headed into trouble*. WWE has been striving hard to satisfy Wall Street and much of that surrounds investors getting wooed by the WWE Network subscription numbers, and there's a quarterly report on that stuff...that last report they had wasn't that great. It wasn't terribly bad (the post-Wrestlemania numbers were far worse) but it wasn't good either. The constant to the WWE's success lies solely on the Network, nothing else matters.

I think that the ratings do wear down the product in a significant way, but from the business aspect of things, everything has to do with the WWE Network. I haven't read anywhere about the subscription numbers now that:

1.) CM Punk finally spoke out
2.) Vince went on the "Stone Cold Podcast", which aired on the WWE Network
3.) TLC finally took place (this might not make a significant impact, because though it was bad, TLC is more of a filler PPV event than anything else)
4.) WWE also has an international market, so the Network seeks to satisfy their international viewers. The biggest hit they took in their numbers was in the UK. Anyone know if the WWE Network is fully functioning out in the UK by the way?
5.) WWE's "NXT Takeover: R Evolution" was a big hit. Though it is the developmental body of the WWE, NXT's success has flourished. This right here may be the silver lining with the subscription numbers for the Network. 

(I can't watch NXT :doh)


In a matter of weeks it will be Royal Rumble season, and if this past RAW episode is supposed to set the trend for the road to Wrestlemania, then this is very alarming. WWE's perspective, presumably, was that "pulling out the big guns" by having Cena vs. Rollins in a cage match while Lesnar finally shows up with the WWE title and F-5s/delivers suplexes to Cena while having Rollins form an alliance with Heyman/Lesnar, while having Jericho host RAW- all of that would've helped them but it didn't. In fact, the numbers from last years' post-TLC RAW episodes were higher right? (Eh...I wasn't a full-fledged, avid WWE/RAW watcher last year to be honest..)

That right there is alarming because Royal Rumble season is right around the corner and this show didn't even make a dent; here's to hoping things pick up. No doubt that the WWE will have more tricks up their sleeve in order to combat these issues. It is rumored that big names are scheduled to show up for RAW tapings in these next few weeks so all we can do now is wait and see. 

Question is:

Will those big names be able to draw in not only better ratings, but most importantly, better Network subscription numbers?


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

bmtrocks said:


> Hell in the Cell did better buyrates than Night of Champions though...


One buyrate isn't enough to damn Lesnar. That's kind of a knee-jerk reaction towards looking at it. Night Of Champions' buyrate could have easily been because people just weren't interested in a rematch between Cena and Lesnar, perhaps because they assumed Cena would simply win the title back or vice versa. I believe HIAC usually does a better buyrate than NOC anyway, though. 

And why even harp on buyrates anyway when the vast majority of people who used to watch on PPV are now viewing it on the Network? Unless you have a whole body of evidence to go on (here, we're only comparing two shows), I find that going by PPV buys to be a flawed methodology.


----------



## markdeez33

*Re: Rollins vs Cena BOMBS!!!*

I'd rather watch Seth Rollins wrestle his money in the bank briefcase or a broom than wrestle John Cena. 

I'm so sick of John Cena's stale ass character. But it's not like it really matters to me, I haven't watched RAW in months. If it wasn't for this forum, I would be entirely out of the loop in regards to WWE's flagship programs. NXT is the only show worth a damn to me. I guess because it doesn't have Kevin Dunn's grubby little paws all over it.


----------



## Not Lying

Kevin Lockard said:


> One buyrate isn't enough to damn Lesnar. That's kind of a knee-jerk reaction towards looking at it. Night Of Champions' buyrate could have easily been because people just weren't interested in a rematch between Cena and Lesnar, perhaps because they assumed Cena would simply win the title back or vice versa. I believe HIAC usually does a better buyrate than NOC anyway, though.
> 
> And why even harp on buyrates anyway when the vast majority of people who used to watch on PPV are now viewing it on the Network? Unless you have a whole body of evidence to go on (here, we're only comparing two shows), I find that going by PPV buys to be a flawed methodology.


Lesnar has never been a draw in WWE, only in UFC, just get over it everyone.


----------



## ElTerrible

Roman Reigns Slammy win over Daniel Bryan was legit. He draws in the real world not with the internet geeks. :laugh:


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

ElTerrible said:


> Roman Reigns Slammy win over Daniel Bryan was legit. He draws in the real world not with the internet geeks. :laugh:


You do realize Daniel Bryan also got the same exact slammy last year?


----------



## wb1899

USA NETWORK CONTINUES UNPRECEDENTED RATINGS STREAK WITH 9TH CONSECUTIVE YEAR AS #1 IN CABLE IN TOTAL VIEWERS
[...]
WWE Powers USA To #1 In Cable Entertainment On Monday Nights for 2014 In All Key Demos
[...]
WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW – the most-watched, regularly scheduled program on cable, 52 weeks a year, delivered 4.68MM total viewers P2+, 2.15MM P25-54, and 2.08MM P18-49, making USA #1 Monday nights in 2014 for all three categories among cable entertainment networks. RAW made USA the #1 entertainment network in all of television Monday nights for M18-34.
[...]
Note: Data reflects the most up-to-date M-Su 8-11p time period data with all DVR playback information available at this time, which includes Live+7 for all possible dates, Live+3 for dates when Live+7 is not available and Live+Same for dates when Live+3 is not available.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/12/18/usa-continues-unprecedented-ratings-streak-with-9th-consecutive-year-as-1-in-cable-with-total-viewers/341114/


----------



## Frico

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...how-the-colbert-report-mob-wives-more/340794/


> WWE TRIBUTE TROOPS USA 8:00 PM 2.230 0.7


----------



## SBisOurs

Tribute to the Troops did better than Smackdown. Interesting.


----------



## RatedR10

etrbaby said:


> Lesnar has never been a draw in WWE, only in UFC, just get over it everyone.


He was early in his return.

263,000 buys for his return match at Extreme Rules 2012, up from 209,000 in 2011 in a time where PPV buys were declining.
358,000 buys for Summerslam 2012 vs. Triple H, up from 296,000 in 2011.

Then, it sort of went to shit after that because of the weird booking. They probably made a mistake having him lose his return match against Cena. And then his 2nd match with Triple H at Wrestlemania. They handled his return poorly, but he was drawing really early in the return and then it tapered off.


----------



## Shenroe

Slightly higher than the previous year and way higher than 2012.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

RatedR10 said:


> He was early in his return.
> 
> 263,000 buys for his return match at Extreme Rules 2012, up from 209,000 in 2011 in a time where PPV buys were declining.
> 358,000 buys for Summerslam 2012 vs. Triple H, up from 296,000 in 2011.
> 
> Then, it sort of went to shit after that because of the weird booking. They probably made a mistake having him lose his return match against Cena. And then his 2nd match with Triple H at Wrestlemania. They handled his return poorly, but he was drawing really early in the return and then it tapered off.


I think everyone expected too much, if people thought this dude was going to do UFC numbers upon returning, they were fucking crazy.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

SBisOurs said:


> Tribute to the Troops did better than Smackdown. Interesting.





Shenroe said:


> Slightly higher than the previous year and way higher than 2012.


I wonder who appeared on it :bryan2


----------



## Shenroe

StraightYesSociety said:


> I wonder who appeared on it :bryan2


:harper


----------



## validreasoning

usa network for the 9th consecutive year is number one cable network in total viewers...and they give alot of the credit to wwe raw

if only vince defined wwe as a "sport" all those years ago he would be rolling in billion dollar tv contracts right now not getting paid peanuts for his programming despite outdrawing every live sport in the us outside the nfl



> *WWE Powers USA To #1 In Cable Entertainment On Monday Nights*
> 
> NEW YORK - December 18, 2014 – USA Network will finish the year as the most watched ad-supported cable entertainment network for an unprecedented 9th consecutive year. Fueled by a strong stable of original series, the powerhouse WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW, and top-rated acquired series, USA’s winning streak continued with 2.14MM total viewers P2+, 7% higher than the closest competitive cable entertainment network.
> 
> “In an increasingly competitive landscape, maintaining our leadership position is a true feat and a testament to our quality programming,” said Chris McCumber, president of USA Network. *“2014 was also a financial success for the network, as we once again achieved our most profitable year ever. *I am excited to build on this momentum in 2015, as we roll out more new dramas than ever before, starting with the much-anticipated event series DIG.”
> 
> *WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW – the most-watched, regularly scheduled program on cable, 52 weeks a year, delivered 4.68MM total viewers P2+, 2.15MM P25-54, and 2.08MM P18-49, making USA #1 Monday nights in 2014 for all three categories among cable entertainment networks. RAW made USA the #1 entertainment network in all of television Monday nights for M18-34.*


http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...year-as-1-in-cable-with-total-viewers/341114/


----------



## JY57

bmtrocks said:


> Hell in the Cell did better buyrates than Night of Champions though...


there were also over 150,000 Network Subscribers up for expiration right before Hell In A Cell. So most likely had way lower numbers then they did @ NOC.


----------



## RebelArch86

I'm starting to notice a pattern with this Daniel Bryan guy and good ratings boosts.

The days he's on TV must be good draws not him.


----------



## RKOAJ

Terrible booking. What can we expect with ratings!


----------



## SBisOurs

RebelArch86 said:


> I'm starting to notice a pattern with this Daniel Bryan guy and good ratings boosts.
> 
> The days he's on TV must be good draws not him.


Also, a negative relationship between Reigns being on a show and ratings.


----------



## joeycalz

RebelArch86 said:


> I'm starting to notice a pattern with this Daniel Bryan guy and good ratings boosts.
> 
> The days he's on TV must be good draws not him.


Glad somebody else has finally seen the light.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

joeycalz said:


> Glad somebody else has finally seen the light.


Some are just too "dazzled" to see Bryan's ratings dominance this year.


----------



## Shenroe

Think most know about Bryan drawing powers by now. They just don't want to admit it publicly.


----------



## TheGodsofChristmas

Shenroe said:


> Think most know about Bryan drawing powers by now. They just don't want to admit it publicly.


This. Bryan being a big ratings draw this year is common knowledge at this point.


----------



## JamesK

TheGodsofChristmas said:


> This. Bryan being a big ratings draw this year is common knowledge at this point.


And yet he will not get pushed as the main guy because you know..Genetics and stuff


----------



## D.M.N.

With 2014 nearly over, here are the most watched WWE TV moments from this year on their official YouTube channel:

1. 9.5 million views - Brock Lesnar is surprised by the return of The Undertaker (Raw - 24/02)
2. 5.5 million views - The Rock confronts Rusev (Raw - 06/10)
3. 5.2 million views - 2014 WWE Hall of Famer Ultimate Warrior speaks (Raw - 07/04)
4. 3.9 million views - Nikki Bella reveals her secret to John Cena (Total Divas - 23/03)
5. 3.4 million views - Arnold Schwarzenegger and Joe Manganiello join Hulk Hogan in the ring (Raw - 24/03)
6. 3.4 million views - Team Cena vs. Team Authority Survivor Series contract signing (Raw - 17/11)
7. 3.4 million views - Undertaker rises from a coffin to attack Brock Lesnar (Raw - 24/03)
8. 3.1 million views - Big Show and Brock Lesnar come face-to-face (Raw - 20/01)
9. 2.9 million views - John Cena and Brock Lesnar brawl before Night of Champions (Raw - 15/09)
10. 2.9 million views - Daniel Bryan vs Triple H - WWE World Heavyweight Championship Match (Raw - 07/04)

The moment of the year for me, Daniel Bryan turning on the Wyatt Family is down on 1.3 million views.


----------



## DoubtGin

9.5 million? Wow, that's big.

Also, I wouldn't say Bryan is a BIG draw, but he seems to draw more than everyone else, so the show should regularly feature him in a top position. Cena doesn't make that much of a difference anymore, so I hope the focus will be on Bryan once he comes back.


----------



## Punkholic

8 pm - 3,632,000
9 pm - 3,907,000
10 pm - 3,353,000

*Average:* 3,631,000

Up from 3,522,000 viewers last week, but still lower than what Raw usually does.

*Note:* The 10 pm hour, with 3,353,000 viewers, became the lowest segment since the 2012 Raw Christmas episode, beating last week's viewership of 3,385,000 for the third and final hour.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...op-major-crimes-vanderpump-rules-more/342430/


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Wynter

Punkholic said:


> 8 pm - 3,632,000
> 9 pm - 3,907,000
> 10 pm - 3,353,000
> 
> *Average:* 3,631,000
> 
> Up from 3,522,000 viewers last week, but still lower than what Raw usually does.
> 
> *Note:* The 10 pm hour, with 3,353,000 viewers, became the lowest segment since the 2012 Raw Christmas episode, beating last week's viewership of 3,385,000 for the third and final hour.
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...op-major-crimes-vanderpump-rules-more/342430/
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


What the hell happened in the second hour?? It jumped up 300,000 views.

Siiiigh. I really want someone from the Shield to become a draw. I understand they're still early in their careers, but I truly want to see some new stars. Hopefully soon. Shield have time


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Second hour did relatively well, and probably due to the IC Title bout. Reigns/Big Show match took up the first 5 minutes, Dean Ambrose interview, Nikki vs. Natalya, Gold and Stardust vs. Los Matadores, and then the Dolph/Harper match that took up most of the last half hour.

At least that's how it'd appear anyway, but as usual we'll probably not get a breakdown and so we'll never know.


----------



## The Bloodline

WynterWarm12 said:


> What the hell happened in the second hour?? It jumped up 300,000 views.
> 
> Siiiigh. I really want someone from the Shield to become a draw. I understand they're still early in their careers, but I truly want to see some new stars. Hopefully soon. Shield have time


:reigns lead off the hour, divas match, tag match and the i.c title match. It's a shame the last hour was the weakest considering they advertised a main event that wasn't a awful tag match. I just think people are burned about by the last hour.


----------



## Wynter

Ravensflock88 said:


> :reigns lead off the hour, divas match, tag match and the i.c title match. It's a shame the last hour was the weakest considering they advertised a main event that wasn't a awful tag match. I just think people are burned about by the last hour.


Yeah, and I'm sure there are some who are desensitized by Dean vs Bray in gimmick match number 38384(ok, I'm being dramatic) :lol Doesn't help every finish has been dumb as hell.


----------



## The Bloodline

WynterWarm12 said:


> Yeah, and I'm sure there are some who are desensitized by Dean vs Bray in gimmick match number 38384(ok, I'm being dramatic) :lol Doesn't help every finish has been dumb as hell.


:lol I was being kind leaving that out but yeah I don't think that match really made people want to tune in. Especially considering this was their 3rd gimmick match in 8 nights for a feud that many just want to be over.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Knew Ambrose/Wyatt would flop, shittiest main event feud of the year.

Glad to see hour two did good and that was a big Ziggler hour(think he had two or three segments)


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ratings tanking at the dawn of The Reigns regnum. Looks like Reigns is bringing his version of the Playboy Buddy Rose blow away diet to the ratings. Feature Reigns and watch WWE shed those pesky viewers.


----------



## brxd

IDONTSHIV said:


> Ratings tanking at the dawn of The Reigns regnum. Looks like Reigns is bringing his version of the Playboy Buddy Rose blow away diet to the ratings. Feature Reigns and watch WWE shed those pesky viewers.


Even though his return match, Reigns vs Big Show, gained 300k viewers.


----------



## The Bloodline

IDONTSHIV said:


> Ratings tanking at the dawn of The Reigns regnum. Looks like Reigns is bringing his version of the Playboy Buddy Rose blow away diet to the ratings. Feature Reigns and watch WWE shed those pesky viewers.


Kind of a silly time to say that when his segment was in the highest rated hour AND none of the shows have been based around him


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ravensflock88 said:


> Kind of a silly time to say that when his segment was in the highest rated hour AND none of the shows have been based around him


He's the de facto face of the company, so I ascribe everything to him. Plus the joke writes itself.


----------



## RebelArch86

brxd said:


> Even though his return match, Reigns vs Big Show, gained 300k viewers.


If we can't blame last weeks awful ratings on him, or every show bryan is on getting strong ratings BC we aren't seeing a breakdown, Reigns can't get any credit for that hour 2 without a breakdown.

One thing is obvious though. Ratings are down, going down fast, and the majority believe the company direction is at Roman's back.


----------



## El Capitano

Ziggler with that draw :ziggler2


----------



## Frico

:ziggler2:ziggler2:ziggler2


----------



## elhijodelbodallas

It's not Ziggler, it's Reigns and the MONSTER Harper. Luke Harper should be the next face of WWE. He has the look and the skill to be the biggest babyface in the world.


----------



## RatedR10

Not surprising everyone is sick of Ambrose/Wyatt.

*3 FUCKING GIMMICK MATCHES.* Unacceptable considering how close together these matches have been - TLC match and two street fights or whatever the fuck a boot camp match is anyways. It's boring, it's played out, it's overdone -- like a lot of match-ups in WWE today (I remember Cena/Rollins main eventing the Raw I went to in Montreal in JULY.) WWE needs to stop overdoing every fresh (at a time) match-up.


----------



## Wynter

Yes, Roman's five minute match tanked ratings despite it being the THIRD HOUR that did the shittiest since 2012. You know, the match that had DEAN AMBROSE in the main event unk2

Let that had been Roman and the trolls would have flooded this thread :lol

Roman hasn't been part of this shitty ass product in months. You can't go "Man, Raw has been so sucky lately." And then put it on one guy when the ratings reflect this shitty ass product. A product that has been focused on people like Seth, Cena, Ambrose and Bray lately.

Please stop. Only people who should be blamed are Vince, bookers and the creative team.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Reigns' hour GAINS 300,000 viewers and people are trying to blame him for the ratings :lel. Meanwhile, Ambrose vs. Wyatt closes the show and ZERO fucks are given.*


----------



## Armani

Why are you guys even talking about ratings at this point lol, it's not supposed to be any good. The product reminds me of the days when WCW was going out of business except it's even worse now but still in business, I feel offended when I watch WWE nowadays, it's so childish and in every aspect of it, it's frustrating.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Reigns getting the blame for the show's numbers as a whole being shit or credit for hour 2 being the highest is :lol

That third hour number definitely doesn't speak well to Ambrose/Wyatt, but being that it's their third match in 8 days and it's not like they were ever exactly proven draws to begin with, I'm not all that surprised. Of course, it could've been the rest of the hour that tanked and Wyatt/Ambrose's match shot through the roof. Again, a lack of a breakdown keeps things shrouded in mystery.


----------



## Frico

Pretty sure Reigns/Show started at around 8:50 or 8:55 so to say he took part in any gains for hour 2 doesn't seem fit until if/when we get a breakdown. 

I'm giving cred to Ziggler/Harper and Piper's Pit. Especially because those got way more time.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Didn't they mention Bryan won celebrity couple of the year on hour two? Coincidence? :bryan2


----------



## Kabraxal

All I got from this is the one guy fans have been behind for years and the WWE seems to be giving some time and effort to in Ziggler is actually paying off in some little ways... the rest of the card? No one gives a shit anymore.


----------



## Redzero

It's Ziggler credit not fucking Reigns.


----------



## Wynter

> The three hours were 3.63 million viewers in the first hour, 3.91 million in the second hour (high point was apparently Roman Reigns vs. Big Show)
> 
> -Wreslting Observer


..I"m judging everyone for watching that match...

But as a Roman fan?? :


----------



## TheLooseCanon

Keepin It Stylish said:


> *Reigns' hour GAINS 300,000 viewers and people are trying to blame him for the ratings :lel. Meanwhile, Ambrose vs. Wyatt closes the show and ZERO fucks are given.*


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

WynterWarm12 said:


> ..I"m judging everyone for watching that match...
> 
> But as a Roman fan?? :


*Reigns has the worst match on the card and still draws :banderas*


----------



## K4L318

Punkholic said:


> 8 pm - 3,632,000
> 9 pm - 3,907,000
> 10 pm - 3,353,000
> 
> *Average:* 3,631,000
> 
> Up from 3,522,000 viewers last week, but still lower than what Raw usually does.
> 
> *Note:* The 10 pm hour, with 3,353,000 viewers, became the lowest segment since the 2012 Raw Christmas episode, beating last week's viewership of 3,385,000 for the third and final hour.
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...op-major-crimes-vanderpump-rules-more/342430/
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Last week Brock, Cena, Rollins ended RAW. 3.3M

This week 

8 PM got better draw. 

here's what probably happened. 

Cena's match is done. You don't have to see him again. Dolph is announced for hour #2 , Roman Reigns is also announced. 

Dolph and Roman Reigns drew that 300,000 upswing for hour #2 .
When that ended, you knew all they had left for hour #3 was Ambrose and Wyatt. And it's a christmas episode and you anticipate hi-jinks.

Hour 3 was Piper (no one cares), Miz vs Jey Uso (why), divas clusterfuck , you're waiting for Ambrose and Wyatt. 3.3 M, same closing number from the week prior.

So your MVP players are clearly 

Dolph Ziggler, Roman Reigns, Dean Ambrose and Bray Wyatt drew.


----------



## K4L318

I want to give credit to Seth Rollins too. And they need to move him off Cena into another time slot to see what effect he has on the ratings.


----------



## El Capitano

WynterWarm12 said:


> ..I"m judging everyone for watching that match...
> 
> But as a Roman fan?? :


But wasn't Reigns' match for only 2 minutes into that hour? How can he be considered the main draw of that hour? :aries2

Can't blame him for the shit drawings for hour 3 though


----------



## Wynter

El Capitano said:


> But wasn't Reigns' match for only 2 minutes into that hour? How can he be considered the main draw of that hour? :aries2
> 
> Can't blame him for the shit drawings for hour 3 though


Not gonna lie, as a Roman fan, I said "no way that happened because of Big show vs Roman" lol I attributed that to Ziggler. 

But then I read that part in the Observer and I'm like wait.. Roman was the one with the highest views?!! The fuck?? Did they say Brock was interfering in his match or something :lol

Baffling. I'm only playfully bragging because Roman gets slaughtered here. Small victories :lmao


----------



## El Capitano

WynterWarm12 said:


> Not gonna lie, as a Roman fan, I said "no way that happened because of Big show vs Roman" lol I attributed that to Ziggler.
> 
> But then I read that part in the Observer and I'm like wait.. Roman was the one with the highest views?!! The fuck?? Did they say Brock was interfering in his match or something :lol
> 
> Baffling. I'm only playfully bragging because Roman gets slaughtered here. Small victories :lmao


Unfortunately Reigns will forever be given stick for any low draws or ratings on this board.


----------



## The Bloodline

WynterWarm12 said:


> ..I"m judging everyone for watching that match...
> 
> But as a Roman fan?? :





Keepin It Stylish said:


> *Reigns has the worst match on the card and still draws :banderas*


That drawing power of :reigns :lol. Seriously i don't usually care about the ratings but it seems to matter on this board & used against him so I'm happy :dance



El Capitano said:


> But wasn't Reigns' match for only 2 minutes into that hour? How can he be considered the main draw of that hour? :aries2
> 
> Can't blame him for the shit drawings for hour 3 though


I believe Reigns entrance started at 8:59 and their segment was the first 10 minutes


----------



## Wynter

El Capitano said:


> Unfortunately Reigns will forever be given stick for any low draws or ratings on this board.


Honestly, none of the boys are true draws yet, and that's OK. They haven't even had a whole year by themselves. Give them a break :lol it takes a while, let them grow. 

Like I said, I only pointed it out because Roman gets blamed for every low rating, even if he wasn't in the hour :lmao 

Us Roman fans gotta take the small victories around here lol its a war in this place for us


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

WynterWarm12 said:


> Honestly, none of the boys are true draws yet, and that's OK. They haven't even had a whole year by themselves. Give them a break :lol it takes a while, let them grow.
> 
> Like I said, I only pointed it out because Roman gets blamed for every low rating, even if he wasn't in the hour :lmao
> 
> Us Roman fans gotta take the small victories around here lol its a war in this place for us


*
The best part is Reigns being blamed for ratings while injured :lol. Some people go as far as to point to his satellite interview as evidence that he doesn't draw :frankielol*


----------



## THANOS

That's good to hear for Reigns, but surprisingly, Big Show's matches almost always draw when they are spotlighted.

Personally, I have no interest seeing Big Show wrestle anyone, let alone my favourites, but the guy drew huge wrestling Bryan and Punk in the past.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

If they have access to Reigns/Show "apparently" being the high point of the show, why not post a breakdown? Or at the very least, numbers for that segment (if it looks to be a high number compared to the rest of the show, I definitely wouldn't argue)? I could accept the latter for what it is, but I'm not sold on a "high point was apparently Reigns/Show" and then receive nothing to possibly even suggest it's true outside of the sentence.

That being said, if that is actually true then Reigns does have some merit as a TV draw. He was in the 9PM slot which helps, and as Thanos mentioned working with Big Show in certain situations definitely helps too, but ultimately it's a good sign for Reigns. I do wonder how Ziggler/Harper did though? Did Reigns/Show just go through the roof in viewership and carried the whole hour while Ziggler/Harper was disappointing, or was it only a normal 9PM bump and then Ziggler/Harper only fell a little short of it to keep the whole hour at a good average?


----------



## JY57

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



> - Here are some stats on recent WWE TV ratings:
> 
> * RAW in September averaged a 2.79 rating with 3.92 million viewers, down from an average 2.84 rating with 3.85 million viewers in September 2013 and a 2.83 rating with 4.04 million viewers in September 2012. It's worth noting that viewers per home were way down in 2013, but have went up in 2014.
> 
> * SmackDown averaged a 1.89 rating with 2.63 million viewers in September, down from a 1.92 rating with 2.63 million viewers in 2013 and a 1.90 rating with 2.78 million viewers in September 2012. Like RAW, viewers per home would be slightly up from 2013, and while viewers are identical, staying even in viewership is a slight positive because there was a drop in cable customers.
> 
> * RAW in October averaged a 2.70 rating with 3.74 million viewers, down from a 2.81 rating with 3.92 million viewers in October 2013 and close to the 2.72 rating with 3.85 million viewers in October 2012.
> 
> * SmackDown in October averaged a 1.85 rating with 2.52 million viewers, down just a bit from a 1.86 rating and 2.58 million viewers in 2013 and a 1.90 rating with 2.68 million viewers in October 2012.
> 
> * RAW in November of this year averaged a 2.84 rating with 3.99 million viewers, up a bit from the 2.79 rating with 3.89 million viewers in November 2013 and the 2.78 rating with 4.00 million viewers for the same period in 2012.
> 
> * SmackDown in November averaged a 2.00 rating with 2.77 million viewers, compared to a 1.98 rating with 2.81 million viewers in November 2013 and a 1.80 rating with 2.58 million viewers in 2012.


some fall comparisons for RAW & Smackdown (via Metzler in the new WON)


----------



## Wynter

THANOS said:


> That's good to hear for Reigns, but surprisingly, Big Show's matches almost always draw when they are spotlighted.
> 
> Personally, I have no interest seeing Big Show wrestle anyone, let alone my favourites, but the guy drew huge wrestling Bryan and Punk in the past.


Bryan and Punk were/are way more popular than Roman though. And i didn't see any of these Big Show numbers for any of his other singles matches recently. That hard just to say Roman did good this week?? 



The Evil Santadow said:


> If they have access to Reigns/Show "apparently" being the high point of the show, why not post a breakdown? Or at the very least, numbers for that segment (if it looks to be a high number compared to the rest of the show, I definitely wouldn't argue)? I could accept the latter for what it is, but I'm not sold on a "high point was apparently Reigns/Show" and then receive nothing to possibly even suggest it's true outside of the sentence.
> 
> That being said, if that is actually true then Reigns does have some merit as a TV draw. He was in the 9PM slot which helps, and as Thanos mentioned working with Big Show in certain situations definitely helps too, but ultimately it's a good sign for Reigns. I do wonder how Ziggler/Harper did though? Did Reigns/Show just go through the roof in viewership and carried the whole hour while Ziggler/Harper was disappointing, or was it only a normal 9PM bump and then Ziggler/Harper only fell a little short of it to keep the whole hour at a good average?


From how I understand it, Roman and big show drew in the peak of 300,000 and the number decreased as the show went on. As you can tell by the third hour it fell by 600,000. We won't know how much Ziggler got of that 300,000 increase unless we get a breakdown. Imma assume he def did a great percentage of that. I hope so. I like Ziggler quite a lot. Keeping most of those 300,000 interested would get some trust in him.


----------



## Wynter

That spike in second is unusual. Second hour hardly ever eclipses third AND first hour. Usually the second is filler with a lull, so it usually decreases from the first hour. 300,000 increase is a significant spike.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

WynterWarm12 said:


> From how I understand it, Roman and big show drew in the peak of 300,000 and the number decreased as the show went on. As you can tell by the third hour it fell by 600,000. We won't know how much Ziggler got of that 300,000 increase unless we get a breakdown. Imma assume he def did a great percentage of that. I hope so. I like Ziggler quite a lot. Keeping most of those 300,000 interested would get some trust in him.


As you said, we don't know for sure without a breakdown. It's all speculation. It could've been Reigns/Show pulled in like a million viewers, and then they lost viewers to eventually average to a 300,000 gain for the hour, or maybe they had something like a 400,000 viewer gained, lost 500,000 in quarter 2 and then increased by 300,000 or so for Ziggler/Harper... or however much it would end up being. Or that report could be bullshit and someone made a mistake looking at the numbers and Reigns/Show gained a small amount and then Ziggler/Harper gained a bunch of viewers. Or maybe the Reigns/Show and Ziggler/Harper quarters both lost viewers and quarter 2 picked up the slack. 

Or the most likely case is Sandow drew so much in the third hour when he was on TV doing his thing and the ratings gods deemed it too high for the third hour, and this they balanced everything out by transferring much of the increase from the third hour to the second hour. :sandow

We need a Sandow/Mizdow smilie.


----------



## JY57

September - Bryan/Authority > Cena/Punk > Cena's Superman Recovery (Brock only appeared once in September on TV so it really was more about Cena coming back from the beatdown)

October - Bryan & Big Show/Authority > Punk/Ryback > Cena & Ambrose vs Rollins

November - Team Cena vs Team Authority > Big Show/Orton > Cena/Punk/Ryback 

for the the last 3 years for RAW & SD (going by the ratings trend)


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

JY57 said:


> September - Bryan/Authority > Cena/Punk > Cena's Superman Recovery (Brock only appeared once in September on TV so it really was more about Cena coming back from the beatdown)
> 
> October - Bryan & Big Show/Authority > Punk/Ryback > Cena & Ambrose vs Rollins
> 
> November - Team Cena vs Team Authority > Big Show/Orton > Cena/Punk/Ryback
> 
> for the the last 3 years for RAW & SD (going by the ratings trend)


And going by viewership (averaged between Raw and SD):

September - Punk/Cena>Lesnar/Cena>Bryan/Authority

October - Punk/Ryback>Bryan+Big Show/Authority>Ambrose+Cena/Rollins

November - Team Cena vs. Team Authority>Show/Orton>Punk/Cena/Ryback


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Without a breakdown, I am always skeptical of what could well be apocryphal data. One thing might prove that Reigns/Show did well. WWE will take whatever did well and drive it into the ground. Expect an ad nauseam regurgitation of Reigns/Show over the next month if they got good numbers for it.


----------



## Wynter

IDONTSHIV said:


> Without a breakdown, I am always skeptical of what could well be apocryphal data. One thing might prove that Reigns/Show did well. WWE will take whatever did well and drive it into the ground. Expect an ad nauseam regurgitation of Reigns/Show over the next month if they got good numbers for it.


Annnnnd that's why I hate every single viewer who watched that god damn Big Show vs Roman match. Are you god damn serious?? I don't want to see that bullshit on my tv again :lol

Fucking hell fpalm. Every year I have to see a Big Show push. And with him being attached to Roman, you know it's gonna be a prolong torture :no:


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

WynterWarm12 said:


> That spike in second is unusual. Second hour hardly ever eclipses third AND first hour. Usually the second is filler with a lull, so it usually decreases from the first hour. 300,000 increase is a significant spike.


*
Last time we saw those kind of spikes was after Bryan got stripped of the title and the spotlight was on The Shield, then eventually The Shield breakup and Roman main eventing MITB.*


----------



## RKOAJ

I think the match booking needs to be better and so does the segments.


----------



## Kane4Retirement

Ratings are doing pretty good when you consider the Network.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Tribute to the Troops dropped 33% in the demo from a .6 to a .4. I wonder who was missing this year? HMMM..... :bryan2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

IDONTSHIV said:


> Tribute to the Troops dropped 33% in the demo from a .6 to a .4. I wonder who was missing this year? HMMM..... :bryan2


CM Punk unk2


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

If the third hour flops this week, there is a problem, they LOADED the third hour. Reigns/Rollins, Daniel Bryan Announcement and the Rollins/Cena angle.


----------



## Londrick

TakeMyGun said:


> If the third hour flops this week, there is a problem, they LOADED the third hour. Reigns/Rollins, Daniel Bryan Announcement and the Rollins/Cena angle.


If it tanks it's Bryan, if it succeeds it's Reign.

IMO


----------



## Punkholic

TakeMyGun said:


> If the third hour flops this week, there is a problem, they LOADED the third hour. Reigns/Rollins, Daniel Bryan Announcement and the Rollins/Cena angle.


I think people are just tired of watching after the second hour. Three hours of ANYTHING is too much, at least for me.


----------



## DoubtGin

I am sure many were interested in what Bryan has to say.


----------



## Darkness is here

Brie Bella said:


> If it tanks it's Bryan, if it succeeds it's Reign.
> 
> IMO


*Imo it will be the other way around, if the hour does bryan will praised to no ends but if it tanks......god have mercy on cena/reigns marks. *


----------



## RKOAJ

This Raw was good, I hope it gain good ratings too.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

RKOAJ said:


> This Raw was good, I hope it gain good ratings too.


This. I especially hope it increases throughout because that will show people stayed interested as more viewers piled on. If a show ever deserved great numbers, it's this one. Not sure how this being News Years week will play into it.


----------



## FITZ

I think they should be shielded from the time of year since the show was right between New Year's and Christmas and one a day where a lot of people were back to a normal schedule for at least a few days. And there was no Monday Night Football.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw's twitter rating surges 44% from last week. I wonder what piqued people's interest? Waiting for people to credit Edge and Christian.

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_82512.shtml


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

IDONTSHIV said:


> Raw's twitter rating surges 44% from last week. I wonder what piqued people's interest? Waiting for people to credit Edge and Christian.
> 
> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_82512.shtml


Mizdow is advertised in advanced and twitter ratings soar. No denying he's the biggest drawing stunt double in the business today. yeah yeah he's the only stunt double blah blah


----------



## Chrome

Dat :bryan2!


----------



## looper007

IDONTSHIV said:


> Raw's twitter rating surges 44% from last week. I wonder what piqued people's interest? Waiting for people to credit Edge and Christian.
> 
> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_82512.shtml


:fuckedup :bryan2

It's D Bryan all the way


----------



## Parrulo

looper007 said:


> :fuckedup :bryan2
> 
> It's D Bryan all the way


But . . . but. . . . Bryan doesn't draw :Wat?


----------



## validreasoning

8pm = 3.174 million
9pm = 3.476 million
10pm = 3.726 million

really disappointing numbers for raw..in fact the numbers from the slammy episode on have been well below what should be expected. there were two college bowl games head to head on espn that drew six (9-11pm) and 5 million (8pm) but thats not really a good excuse as last years final raw drew over 4 million average for the 3 hours and that had college football competition too

the one crumb of comfort was viewership climbing steadily throughout the night but wwe are going to have to get their act together big time because in 2 weeks the college championship game will be head to head with raw and that normally does 25-30 million viewers...


----------



## dan the marino

Feel like that's the first time in a while that the third hour actually had the most views without a part timer appearance at least.


----------



## MaybeLock

Damn. That first hour was a disaster. When was the last time they had such a bad number?


----------



## DoubtGin

Ouch, pretty bad numbers overall. 

1st:
Edge&Christian, Lesnar&Heyman, Cena promo
Ziggler Rusev, Ryback save
Ryback promo
Nikki Bella Natalya
Miz/Mizdow Naomi segment

2nd:
Miz/Mizdow Usos, post-match interview
Cesaro promo, BNB return, match
Harper promo
Harper Swagger
Cena Christian Edge segment
beginning Reigns Rollins, Big Show commentary

3rd:
Reigns Rollins, beatdown
Rollins segment
Wyatt promo
Bryan backstage
Bryan promo
Edge Christian Miz Mizdow segment
Miz Mizdow Ascension
beginning Peep Show/Cutting Edge, Rollins


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I assumed the numbers would be depressed but jumping almost 600,000 viewers from hour one to hour 3 is a positive sign. The demo in hour 3 was a 1.3 while the first 2 did a 1.1 This show has been in the doldrums and needs to get out of the ditch.


----------



## validreasoning

the taped christmas eve episode back in 2012 drew 2.94 million for the first hour..thats the only lower viewed hour i can think of since moved to 3 hours


----------



## Darkness is here

*pretty bad numbers. *


----------



## RKOAJ

Bad numbers


----------



## validreasoning

despite it being lower than normal since the slammy episode raw live viewership remained incredibly consistent this year (with the past 2 years) during football season 

2012
sep 3 = 4.2 million 
sep 10 = 4.14 million 
sep 17 = 4.05 million 
sep 24 = 3.79 million 
oct 1 = 3.5 million 
oct 8 = 4.11 million 
oct 15 = 3.99 million 
oct 22 = 3.55 million 
oct 29 = 4.1 million 
nov 5 = 4.08 million 
nov 12 = 4.19 million 
nov 19 = 3.83 million 
nov 26 = 3.92 million
dec 3 = 3.44 million
dec 10 = 3.76 million
dec 17 = 4.23 million
dec 24 = 3.14 million
dec 31 = 3.55 million
*average = 3.86 million viewers *

2013
sep 2 = 3.94 million 
sep 9 = 3.87 million 
sep 16 = 4.01 million 
sep 23 = 3.74 million 
sep 30 = 3.59 million 
oct 7 = 3.71 million 
oct 14 = 3.99 million
oct 21 = 3.83 million 
oct 29 = 4.16 million 
nov 4 = 3.89 million 
nov 11 = 3.77 million 
nov 18 = 3.80 million 
nov 25 = 4.14 million
dec 2 = 3.54 million
dec 9 = 4.15 million
dec 16 = 4.11 million
dec 23 = 3.82 million
dec 30 = 4.13 million
*average = 3.9 million *

2014
sep 1 = 3.92 million
sep 8 = 3.99 million 
sep 15 = 3.83 million 
sep 22 = 3.88 million 
sep 29 = 4.04 million 
oct 6 = 3.80 million 
oct 13 = 3.75 million 
oct 20 = 3.70 million 
oct 27 = 3.75 million 
nov 3 = 4.04 million 
nov 10 = 3.93 million 
nov 17 = 3.77 million 
nov 24 = 4.29 million 
dec 1 = 3.88 million
dec 8 = 3.70 million
dec 15 = 3.52 million
dec 22 = 3.63 million
dec 29 = 3.46 million
*average = 3.83 million *


the average breakdown by month is as follows

*September *
2012 = 4.05 million
2013 = 3.83 million
2014 = 3.93 million

*October*
2012 = 3.85 million
2013 = 3.92 million
2014 = 3.75 million

*November *
2012 = 3.89 million
2013 = 3.90 million
2014 = 4.01 million

*December*
2012 = 3.62 million
2013 = 3.95 million
2014 = 3.64 million


----------



## machomark

Interesting stuff, thanks for posting.

Raw deserved better.

Maybe next week because of "Word of Mouth" it will be better.

Also now that storylines have changed and it being the first Raw of the NEW YEAR it should be much better.

You'd think....


----------



## Kane4Retirement

The ratings always die in December. I remember 2012 had a 2.2 rating.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Kane4Retirement said:


> The ratings always die in December. I remember 2012 had a 2.2 rating.


Yup Christmas Eve.

Looking at the year by year comparisons, I can't believe the last Raw in December of 2012 actually did better than the last one of this year, and the 2012 one was New Years Eve.

Next week things should pick back up, like they did for 2013 and 2014 on the first Raw of the year.


----------



## Wynter

Damn, the second hour of last week actually drew better than every hour this week. First hour was abysmal though lol. At least interest picked up towards the end.


----------



## Empress

Darkness is here said:


> *pretty bad numbers. *


Awful. The first hour bombed. At least the viewership rose throughout the night.


----------



## kendoo

It would take a month of decent Raws before the figures actually go up and as we all know that isn't going to happen.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

kendoo said:


> It would take a month of decent Raws before the figures actually go up and as we all know that isn't going to happen.


As I said, it'll more than likely go back over 4 million next week as it has the last couple of years. If it doesn't, it'll surely go back up for Mania season regardless of the quality of the shows. If it doesn't, then yeah, they'll really need to up the quality and produce Raws like last night weekly. As mentioned already, at the very least the viewership went up each hour and increased roughly equally each hour. Bryan no doubt helped big time and I'm sure the Cutting Edge Peep Show helped keep everything afloat (even if from the hourly numbers, Edge/Christian didn't do so well at first). 

I also would like to think that the tag title match actually did help bring viewers in for the second hour. And while I'd love to credit Sandow for that, there's no substance to back that up. You could maybe make the case that Miz was the draw of that match, but he's been as inconsistent as anyone for 3+ years. Still, not sure why hour 2 would've increased. Maybe hour 1 was just so low and the bare bones of fans who would watch anything WWE throws at them, that hour 2 had nowhere to go but up.


----------



## D.M.N.

Interesting: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-12-29-2014.html

USA Network
19:00 - It Takes a Choir: 320k
20:00 - WWE Raw: 3.17m
21:00 - WWE Raw: 3.48m
22:00 - WWE Raw: 3.73m

I've no idea what 'It Takes a Choir' is, but I'm pretty certain that repeats of NCIS do better than 320k!

I don't like deflecting the blame, but I think some of Hour 1's poor number is down to a shockingly low lead-in.


----------



## Shenroe

:ti Yeah kiss the "promo heavy" raws goodbye :maury


----------



## LOL-ins

Although I hate his horrible YES! promos. Bryan is a draw. He didn't help the post Survivor Series RAW like the dumb marks say he did but he did help increase this and also that Smackdown he was on. 

If the Bryan marks didn't take the claim for what Sting did then I'd listen to them more but after that shit they get ignored most of the time.


----------



## D.M.N.

*2013 versus 2014*
2013 average = 4.16 million
2014 average = 4.14 million

_Percentages below represent 'boost average' based on previous quarter, previous year, and two years ago_

*Quarter 1 - January to March*
2013 = 4.62 million (+3.9%)
2014 = 4.44 million (+2.5%)

_Reason: As good as Daniel Bryan versus The Authority was, The Rock becoming WWE Champion was always going to be a bigger draw. To drop only 3.8 percent year-on-year was pretty good going all considering._

*Quarter 2 - April to June*
2013 = 4.13 million (-11.9%)
2014 = 4.24 million (-2.5%)

_Reason: The Undertaker's streak ending, Daniel Bryan becoming champion and the return of Evolution. It's easy to forget, but the product after WrestleMania through to late June was red hot, and the ratings reflected that._

*Quarter 3 - July to September*
2013 = 4.00 million (-8.1%)
2014 = 4.11 million (-2.7%)

_Reason: The product continued the post-Mania bounce, with Lesnar vs Cena helping through the Summer, as well as the demise of The Shield boosting numbers above 2013 level, which was when Bryan started his rise._

*Quarter 4 - October to December*
2013 = 3.93 million (-3.5%)
2014 = 3.78 million (-4.2%)

_Reason: The relatively small drop between Q3 and Q4 in 2013 perhaps shows that fans were becoming invested in Bryan despite WWE's insistence to shove wrestlers such as Big Show down our throats. In comparison, 2014 dropped significantly, I think most are in agreement that after SummerSlam, the product turned to garbage, not helped by the lack of Daniel Bryan._

Overall, its been a solid year for WWE where Raw's ratings are concerned, especially with the ongoing rise of online streaming and alternative methods to watch. But the drop in the last few months has been concerning, which they'll hope will not be replicated in early 2015.


----------



## Shenroe

LOL-ins said:


> Although I hate his horrible YES! promos. Bryan is a draw. He didn't help the post Survivor Series RAW like the dumb marks say he did but he did help increase this and also that Smackdown he was on.
> 
> If the Bryan marks didn't take the claim for what Sting did then I'd listen to them more but after that shit they get ignored most of the time.


Imagine if Bryan wasn't teasing anything and didn't appear at all, 3.1/3.4/3.3 :ti


----------



## RKOAJ

Honestly not surprise with the low numbers for the first hour because the segment wasn't good to me and Edge/Christan looks uncomfortable together. Raw started to get better the second half Seth was truly the star of last Monday RAW.


----------



## RatedR10

Daniel Bryan DA GOAT :bryan2


----------



## Londrick

Not surprised at the third hour. Everyone was hoping to see that vanilla midget retire and leave for good.


----------



## Armani

How ironic, people were shitting on Punk for ratings, even tho viewership in his title reign was higher than the last 2 years :lol.


----------



## Sweettre15

I hope WWE takes that gradual increase for what it's worth and realize that when you book the show where everything seems to have a purpose, they'll get viewers in return.


----------



## Randy Lahey

The Raw rating for the December 29th show was a 2.57.

That is terrible. Not sure why anyone would think that is good news or acceptable. The yearly average rating for Raw in 2014 is 2.95. First time they've been under a 3 in over 20 years.


----------



## Sweettre15

Randy Lahey said:


> The Raw rating for the December 29th show was a 2.57.
> 
> That is terrible. Not sure why anyone would think that is good news or acceptable. The yearly average rating for Raw in 2014 is 2.95. First time they've been under a 3 in over 20 years.


That was the December 22th show

ut


----------



## TheGmGoken

Daniel Bryan!
Yes chants are over!
He isn't a draw!

Apologize. Now.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I remember after Bryan got stripped of the title earlier this year the RAW ratings started to improve. They had the hour by hour increase and overall increase for the entire show. Do you remember what stropped that trend???

It was when they booked Steph and Brie in 2 out of 3 final segments on RAW


----------



## NastyYaffa

The Boy Wonder said:


> I remember after Bryan got stripped of the title earlier this year the RAW ratings started to improve. They had the hour by hour increase and overall increase for the entire show. Do you remember what stropped that trend???
> 
> It was when they booked Steph and Brie in 2 out of 3 final segments on RAW


I remember when you didn't post about how Daniel Bryan sucks & isn't a draw...

Oh wait I actually don't. :eyeroll


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*I love how all the Bryan marks flocked in here to give him all the credit, yet found every excuse in the world that Reigns should receive none for bringing in 300,000 viewers last week. Hilarious. Lets just ignore the :fact that Reigns vs. Rollins took up 25 minutes. I'm just going to use your pathetic excuse: "UNTIL WE HAVE A BREAKDOWN THIS MEANS NOTHING!!!"*


----------



## A-C-P

Still a "holiday season" Raw, good to see that the 3rd hour was actually the highest rated since they basically put ALL their eggs in that hour, except for Ambrose/Wyatt.

I think the real indication on how well this Raw did from a ratings standpoint is the first hour # for this upcoming Monday, that will show how many people Raw this week got people to want to tune in this upcoming week.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

A-C-P said:


> Still a "holiday season" Raw, good to see that the 3rd hour was actually the highest rated since they basically put ALL their eggs in that hour, except for Ambrose/Wyatt.
> 
> I think the real indication on how well this Raw did from a ratings standpoint is the first hour # for this upcoming Monday, that will show how many people Raw this week got people to want to tune in this upcoming week.


*
I think the biggest eye sore is Lesnar being advertised and zero fucks being given during the first hour. At this point, he feels like nothing. The way they used him didn't help that sentiment at all.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Keepin It Stylish said:


> *
> I think the biggest eye sore is Lesnar being advertised and zero fucks being given during the first hour. At this point, he feels like nothing. The way they used him didn't help that sentiment at all.*


Seriously, I'm starting to think this "rub" he was going to give his conqueror will be far less than anticipated. It really has become out of sight out of mind with him.


----------



## MaybeLock

Keepin It Stylish said:


> *
> I think the biggest eye sore is Lesnar being advertised and zero fucks being given during the first hour. At this point, he feels like nothing. The way they used him didn't help that sentiment at all.*


Pretty much. Lesnar not showing up hasn't helped his star power at all. He was red hot when he returned and he had some great numbers in 2012. After that, he's been slowly losing momentum and IMO he isn't as relevant as some people make him out to be. Mostly because Lesnar's returns got old fast.

People saying that every time Lesnar shows up, fans would tune in to watch because it is must see were clearly wrong. Part-time champion experiment failed and I hope it is never repeated. 1-2 months reign a la Rock is alright, but not this.



IDONTSHIV said:


> Seriously, I'm starting to think this "rub" he was going to give his conqueror will be far less than anticipated. It really has become out of sight out of mind with him.


I've always believed giving Lesnar the streak was a waste, and for what we have seen until now, I think it is true. Beating a well booked Lesnar in WM31 would have been huge without the streak. Shitty booked Lesnar with the streak doesn't mean that much. A full timer should have beaten the streak, so he could really use that to establish himself. Whoever beats Lesnar now, he only beats Lesnar, he doesn't beat the streak.


----------



## DarkLady

Keepin It Stylish said:


> *I love how all the Bryan marks flocked in here to give him all the credit, yet found every excuse in the world that Reigns should receive none for bringing in 300,000 viewers last week. Hilarious. Lets just ignore the :fact that Reigns vs. Rollins took up 25 minutes. I'm just going to use your pathetic excuse: "UNTIL WE HAVE A BREAKDOWN THIS MEANS NOTHING!!!"*


Hey, you had your victory, now we have ours. So in the words of every obnoxious Reign's mark: "DEAL WITH IT."


----------



## joeycalz

Show needs more Ambrose. When Ambrose and Bryan start appearing on the show regularly, then numbers will boom again.


----------



## Randy Lahey

If its good TV, people will watch:



> The first College Football Playoff semifinals drew the two largest audiences in cable television history.
> 
> ESPN had a 15.2 rating and averaged 28,271,000 viewers for its Allstate Sugar Bowl broadcast Thursday night after drawing a 14.8 rating and averaging 28,164,000 viewers for the Rose Bowl Game presented by Northwestern Mutual, Nielsen said Friday.
> 
> Both games had significant increases from last year on ESPN, when the Rose Bowl had a 10.2 rating and averaged 18,636,000 viewers and the Sugar Bowl had a 6.6 rating and averaged 11,304,000 viewers.
> 
> ESPN also will broadcast the Jan. 12 College Football Playoff National Championship presented by AT&T between Oregon and Ohio State. The network has drawn the 18 largest audiences in cable TV history and 36 of the top 40.
> 
> Despite technical problems during the Rose Bowl, WatchESPN averaged 864,000 unique viewers for the two games.


----------



## THANOS




----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The college football championship on January 12 is going to do huge ratings. The semifinals were monsters, but the final could be LEGION. Other network shows are going to do reruns, Raw should follow suit and do a best of or something that is just considered time filling special.


----------



## Kabraxal

IDONTSHIV said:


> The college football championship on January 12 is going to do huge ratings. The semifinals were monsters, but the final could be LEGION. Other network shows are going to do reruns, Raw should follow suit and do a best of or something that is just considered time filling special.


Knowing the WWE and Vince, they'll throw all the guys the fans want out and keep their chosen back so they can go "see?! No one wants to see them!". I think WWE and accepting reality is something we will not say for a long long time still.


----------



## Chrome

Kabraxal said:


> Knowing the WWE and Vince, they'll throw all the guys the fans want out and keep their chosen back so they can go "see?! No one wants to see them!". I think WWE and accepting reality is something we will not say for a long long time still.


:jordan4

Sad thing is, they would do exactly that. I expect Bryan to be in a lot of segments on that Raw while Reigns is strangely absent.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Chrome said:


> :jordan4
> 
> Sad thing is, they would do exactly that. I expect Bryan to be in a lot of segments on that Raw while Reigns is strangely absent.


And then viewership/ratings will go through the roof and Vince will be all :vince7 (for some reason...)



> The college football championship on January 12 is going to do huge ratings. The semifinals were monsters, but the final could be LEGION. *Other network shows are going to do reruns, Raw should follow suit* and do a best of or something that is just considered time filling special.


I'm sure we'll get enough recaps on that Raw of whatever the first segment is to the point it feels like a rerun.


----------



## LilOlMe

BEST FOR BUSINESS said:


> Feel like that's the first time in a while that the third hour actually had the most views without a part timer appearance at least.


I can understand why the first hour did awful ratings. Anyone who watched last week, probably figured that this show too would be bullshit. I know that I did, considering that it was another show around the holidays, so I figured they'd be on creative autopilot.

I see how people could not bother to tune into RAW right away, thinking it'd be awful. 

Shows you why the WWE really needs to try to be consistent. The 12/29 show actually ended up being really good.


----------



## vanboxmeer

If I were WWE I wouldn't have him at the TV shows, but each week I would have a new music video to promote Daniel Bryan's rehab, set to some dramatic music (think Triple H or Kurt Angle). After 4 weeks, the reaction to Bryan's return would be amazing and it may even help sell a few subscriptions to that network they keep pushing. 

Of course, this is the same company that hasn't mentioned anything about Bryan and any little mainstream pub he gets, because he's supposed to be a support player and not the leading man. So that's not gonna happen. But it'd be nice if they felt he was important in the slightest to at least mention he returned a week ago.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw's twitter rating this week was down 50% from last week. Doesnt correlate with tv ratings, but,still, DAT BUZZ. What could have happened last week that had more social media interest than the Authority's big return? :bryan2


----------



## NastyYaffa

IDONTSHIV said:


> Raw's twitter rating this week was down 50% from last week. Doesnt correlate with tv ratings, but,still, DAT BUZZ. What could have happened last week that had more social media interest than the Authority's big return? :bryan2


I wonder..


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

IDONTSHIV said:


> Raw's twitter rating this week was down 50% from last week. Doesnt correlate with tv ratings, but,still, DAT BUZZ. What could have happened last week that had more social media interest than the Authority's big return? :bryan2


A certain someone and his stunt double wrestled twice last week. It's gotta be them.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

#BadNewsSanta said:


> A certain someone and his stunt double wrestled twice last week. It's gotta be them.


Well played. :clap I cannot dispute this.


----------



## RKOAJ

If that Raw gained good rating it's because people were expecting Bryan.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

RKOAJ said:


> If that Raw gained good rating it's because people were expecting Bryan.


And if it doesn't get a good rating it's because of not-Bryan.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

One thing that would help Raw is the previous one was really well received,it would also help that it did not have any football competition, whatsoever. This changes dramatically next Monday, with the College Football Playoff Championship game.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Good thing for WWE Bryan's not a pro-football player and playing every Monday night. Bryan's drawing power+football drawing power = :bryan2


----------



## DoubtGin

> Friday's episode of WWE SmackDown, the first show of 2015, drew 2.582 million viewers. This is up from last week's 2.490 million viewers.


.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw did 3.801million viewers at 8, 3.888m at 9pm and 3.599m at 10pm. Without any football competition, I dont know if this can be construed as good.


----------



## validreasoning

It was doing better numbers against football in November so no it's not good and well below what it should be. 

What you should be looking at (going on the past few years) is something like this

Jan-April between 4.2-5 million viewers
May-August between 3.8-4.4 million viewers
September-December 3.5-4 million viewers.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

Can't even get over 4 million now. I thought things would pick up again after the football, but apparently not.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> Can't even get over 4 million now. I thought things would pick up again after the football, but apparently not.


People say Mania season is going to turn things around, and I'm sure Stings going to help, but shitty programming equates shitty ratings. You can be shit for a few weeks, even a month or two, but this show has been dreadful for like 6 months now, and eventually you will start losing people. And getting them back is tough.

I'm sure Mania will get a bump, but is a bump for January-March going to make up for the show being in the toilet from April-December?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The last couple of years if I'm not mistaken, all hours got over 4 million viewers. This year they couldn't even get one hour over 4 million. Those are terrible numbers for this week and it shows how much The Authority angle, the big hook from last week, is played out.


----------



## Cliffy

lol they're slowly eroding the hardcores

well played wwe


----------



## Chrome

TakeMyGun said:


> People say Mania season is going to turn things around, and I'm sure Stings going to help, but shitty programming equates shitty ratings. You can be shit for a few weeks, even a month or two, but this show has been dreadful for like 6 months now, and eventually you will start losing people. And getting them back is tough.
> 
> I'm sure Mania will get a bump, but is a bump for January-March going to make up for the show being in the toilet from April-December?


It'll come down to who main-events Wrestlemania and wins, but I'll say this much, if they have Reigns/Show or Reigns/Kane feuds after 'Mania for the World title I could see the ratings getting REALLY bad. Think I'd just start watching NXT exclusively if they did that.


----------



## Shenroe

They should have booked a match for the RAW main event instead of that cena apreciation crap.


----------



## Wynter

Big Show and Kane shouldn't be in anyone's main event. Whether Seth, Bryan or whoever wins the title. I don't want to see big show or Kane against them.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The only hour to decrease from the previous week was hour 3. HMMMM....must be an aberration.  :yes


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Chrome said:


> It'll come down to who main-events Wrestlemania and wins, but I'll say this much, if they have Reigns/Show or Reigns/Kane feuds after 'Mania for the World title I could see the ratings getting REALLY bad. Think I'd just start watching NXT exclusively if they did that.


Bryan/Show is kind of fresh, I wouldn't hate it THAT much.

Vince probably thinks Reings/Show and Reigns/DEMON KANE is $$$. 6 months worth of Reigns/Show and Reigns/Kane would be comical.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Th only thing "reigning down" on WWE right now is lackluster ratings.


----------



## Shenroe

And we still don't know shit about WM and RR plans. No clear cut face to follow for this RTWM,start-stop push galore, same stale storyline, no advancement made since october and so on fpalm


----------



## Empress

Shenroe said:


> They should have booked a match for the RAW main event instead of that cena apreciation crap.


Agree. I expected more from the main event but I'm surprised the ratings are holding steady.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Reigns' hours keep increasing and he keeps getting no credit. If he was in that 3rd hour this forum would be ready to bury him.*


----------



## Wynter

Are breakdowns hard to do or something? I wish they were more frequent.


----------



## DoubtGin

WynterWarm12 said:


> Are breakdowns hard to do or something? I wish they were more frequent.


The site that usually has them (pwtorch), for some reason, only provides breakdowns if it somehow supports that Bryan does huge numbers. Wish they'd do it every week.


----------



## The Bloodline

Keepin It Stylish said:


> *Reigns' hours keep increasing and he keeps getting no credit. If he was in that 3rd hour this forum would be ready to bury him.*


:reigns hour has been the highest rated for the last 3 weeks. Coincidence? :shrug


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Ravensflock88 said:


> :reigns hour has been the highest rated for the last 3 weeks. Coincidence? :shrug


*There's always a different excuse every week. Can't wait for today's :sip*


----------



## Wynter

Keepin It Stylish said:


> *There's always a different excuse every week. Can't wait for today's :sip*


They were expecting Bryan :shrug













:troll


----------



## The Bloodline

WynterWarm12 said:


> They were expecting Bryan :shrug
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :troll












I expected a bigger first hour coming off last week to be honest. Maybe they should open the show with Reigns next week.


----------



## Flashyelbow

Roman fans acting like he carried the 2nd hour even though Ambrose had his match during the same hour smh.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## LOL-ins

Those numbers are fucking awful for no Football competition. If the RTWM is full of 2.7's and 2.8's they need to push the panic button.


----------



## RKOAJ

No football match the ratings are awful but I'm sure people expected worst.


----------



## LOL-ins

RKOAJ said:


> No football match the ratings are awful but I'm sure people expected worst.


Actually I expected 4 million+ easily. This is a really bad rating and one that would get Vince and co panicking. Last years show did 4.5 million viewers which means they have lost over 700,000 viewers.


----------



## RKOAJ

LOL-ins said:


> Actually I expected 4 million+ easily. This is a really bad rating and one that would get Vince and co panicking. Last years show did 4.5 million viewers which means they have lost over 700,000 viewers.


Yes it's horrible, WWE needs better booking and storyline should be stronger.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Shenroe said:


> And we still don't know shit about WM and RR plans. No clear cut face to follow for this RTWM,start-stop push galore, same stale storyline, no advancement made since october and so on fpalm


In some ways, the uncertainty around Mania is kind of a blessing in disguise. In the past few months, everyone believed that it was a certainty that Reigns would face Lesnar. Now with Bryan returning and uncertainty over Reigns' status as the future face of the company, we have multiple possibilities as to what Mania would be like. I'd rather have this type of uncertainty over Mania than in 2013 when everyone knew what the three main event matches would be 6 months before the actual show.


----------



## Cobalt

funnyfaces1 said:


> In some ways, the uncertainty around Mania is kind of a blessing in disguise. In the past few months, everyone believed that it was a certainty that Reigns would face Lesnar. Now with Bryan returning and uncertainty over Reigns' status as the future face of the company, we have multiple possibilities as to what Mania would be like. I'd rather have this type of uncertainty over Mania than in 2013 when everyone knew what the three main event matches would be 6 months before the actual show.


Yea I didn't mind Mania 29 dunno about others but it was the most predictable show I had watched in many many years, everyone knew the matches well before their announcement and everyone knew who was winning it.

So the uncertainty adds to the excitement IMO.


----------



## Loader230

#BadNewsSanta said:


> The last couple of years if I'm not mistaken, all hours got over 4 million viewers. This year they couldn't even get one hour over 4 million.


3.5-3.9m viewers is the standard viewership these days, nothing is really drawing, competition or no competition. Last week for instance, even with Bryan advertised, his announcement and all that buzz drew *the lowest viewership in last two whole years. *

None of the current top stars main eventing are ratings draws anymore including John Cena. Bryan is average as ever with ratings, Rollins appears to be a ratings bust and Reigns is yet to be tested. Ambrose ofcourse never actually wins and is hard to even consider him a main eventer. Brock's appeal is at his lowest, breaking the streak didn't do shit for him it seems. The three hour format is exhausting all possible matches and over-exposing most if not all mid-carders, who might still have potential to be big stars, and the storylines/angles are quickly becoming stale because of it. Look at Wyatt/Ambrose for instance, no one cared about the feud in the end.

Last year they had Batista's return which they gave them a big boost in numbers, the Rock's return and title win did that the year before. WWE needs something like that this year, how Sting's return will do, it remains to be seen.


----------



## RatedR IWC Star

this is very bad for the 1st raw of the new year. anything under 4 million is atrocious. i laugh at the people who say but it went up from last week as some type of evidence that this weeks raw ratings were good. hello- last week was their worst viewership in 2 years. if it didn't go up the 1st raw of the new year it would be catastrophic.

-1/7/2013 - 4.420 M
-1/6/2014 - 4.538 M
-1/5/2015 - 3.763 M

this should be a wake up call to vince but it wont be .


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Loader230 said:


> 3.5-3.9m viewers is the standard viewership these days, nothing is really drawing, competition or no competition. Last week for instance, even with Bryan advertised, his announcement and all that buzz drew *the lowest viewership in last two whole years. *


I was talking about this week last year, not the average as a whole. The 12/29 show didn't do so well, but that week normally doesn't do so well from what I recall (if you can find the numbers for the last couple of years and prove me wrong on that, go for it). Plus at the very least the show kept increasing throughout as opposed to this week, which decreased throughout. 

RatedR IWC Star shows what I was talking about. It's true Rock returned in 2013 and probably helped that out, but 2014 was... I don't even remember the first Raw of 2014. Batista was being advertised to return at the Rumble, but hadn't returned yet. Was that the old-school Raw where Punk vs. Reigns main evented and Jake Roberts made an appearance? 

Either way, this week saw much lower viewership than that of year's past on this week and I think it's down to two things:

1) Terrible creative. Raw last year started out great, but then slowly got worse between Mania and the build for Summerslam. It picked up for the build to Summerslam, and then took a nose dive in quality right after, with it being at it's absolute worst from October-December. While the last show of December was one of the best Raw's of 2014 easily and an excellent show, this week's Raw was business as usual and absolutely horrible.

2) HHH/Stephanie/The Authority. December was bad without them, but the two previous months were just as bad if not worse with them. The angle got really old after Wrestlemania. Thankfully they had Evolution and then Rollins joining initially to keep things from getting too bad, but the more Authority centered the shows became, the worse they got. I think the audience is sick of them and it's showing now in the viewership. 

Unless Bryan is on the show (which as last week showed won't necessarily help the show as a whole) and/or Sting/Undertaker/Rock/some big star/a returns, I don't think we'll see much improvement leading up to the Rumble or Elimination Chamber. Maybe directly for Mania we'll see things pick up, but I expect it'll drop off quickly after. 

On the other hand, it is just one show and next week's Raw could jump right back to over 4 million easily. We'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

Gosh! How much this thread and WWE need him. Come back Rocky:rock4.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Boots2Asses said:


> Gosh! How much this thread needs him. Come back Punk unk2.


Agreed.


----------



## Kabraxal

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Agreed.


I'll take either or both... preferably putting Cena through a table then tossing him in the trash alongside Vince.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

IDONTSHIV said:


> Th only thing "reigning down" on WWE right now is lackluster ratings.


This is an understatement. Did you see Smackdown and how edited in the cheers were for him? As if no one watches or goes to the show for Reigns.


----------



## murder

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Batista was being advertised to return at the Rumble, but hadn't returned yet. Was that the old-school Raw where Punk vs. Reigns main evented and Jake Roberts made an appearance?


No Batista returned the week before the Rumble, which was not the Old School Raw, I think it was a week later. Batista's return drew well over 5million viewers. Too bad they fucked him up at the Rumble.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

murder said:


> No Batista returned the week before the Rumble, which was not the Old School Raw, I think it was a week later. Batista's return drew well over 5million viewers. Too bad they fucked him up at the Rumble.


When he returned is irrelevant to the point I was making. He didn't return that week and my point being there was nothing major to boost the viewership up that much on the first Raw of 2014 as the biggest thing happening was a Punk vs. Reigns match. Batista was advertised for the Rumble... or maybe it was the Raw before the Rumble? In any event, I know for sure he wasn't advertised for that old-school Raw, which I believe was the first show of the year. So if 2014's first Raw went well above 4 million, 2015's shouldn't have had a problem. 

Will be interesting to see if things picked back up this week. Bryan was there and so was Brock.


----------



## binex2010

hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


----------



## Cliffy

R.I.P. Raw rating:



> Monday night’s inaugural College Football Playoff National Championship Presented by AT&T (8:30 p.m. – midnight ET) — Ohio State’s 42-20 victory over Oregon at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas – generated a 18.5 overnight rating, the highest metered market ever for ESPN according to Nielsen. Last night’s National Championship game was a 21% increase over the 2014 BCS National Championship on ESPN (Florida State vs. Auburn, 15.3). Also, the final game of the new College Football Playoff format surpassed the 16.1 overnight rating for the 2011 BCS National Championship (Auburn vs. Oregon) which held the previous best in ESPN history.


----------



## validreasoning

#BadNewsSanta said:


> So if 2014's first Raw went well above 4 million, 2015's shouldn't have had a problem.


wwe did a great job advertising stuff in advance last year. they were building to old school raw for like 2 weeks and they ran a video of batistas return every 5 minutes for over a month

they have done nothing like this so far this year. lesnar and bryan were there last night but neither were advertised as appearing on tv last week or on sd which is baffling especially going up against a game that looks to have drawn upwards of 35 million viewers

honestly i think vince has given up caring about ratings...he realizes at this point that whatever raw does won't make a difference with networks and advertisers, raw drew more viewers in 2013 than the nba but still got a shit tv deal while the nba/nhl and even mls (doing 1/10th of raw viewership rakes in the cash from tv). back in the day vince would have put something like lesnar vs bryan on free tv for the wwe title up against a national championship game..today he doesn't even advertise either as appearing and hasn't had a wwe title match on raw in over 2 years!!


----------



## A-C-P

*R*atings
*A*re
*W*eak

:vince7


----------



## Shenroe

Instead of everybody talking about apocalypse why doesn't someone post those damn ratings hm?


----------



## Wynter

:lol word, where are the damn ratings??

Shenroe has been getting gangsta lately bama


----------



## Empress

> – Monday night’s WWE RAW ranked #2 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen’s new Twitter TV ratings, behind The Bachelor. RAW had a unique audience of 2.169 million, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This was up from last week’s 1.234 million. RAW had total impressions of 20.736 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was way up from last week’s 7.582 million.


Read more: http://www.pwmania.com/latest-on-st...paul-heyman-raw-twitter-ratings#ixzz3Ojms7o8n


----------



## Batz

13 million more tweets? Well, damn.

Macho still draws!


----------



## A-C-P

Batz said:


> 13 million more tweets? Well, damn.


I guess that #AuthoritySucks really revved up the Twitter Machine


----------



## Wynter

Brock, Macho and Bryan bringing in them twitter ratings bama


----------



## Batz

A-C-P said:


> I guess that #AuthoritySucks really revved up the Twitter Machine


Did that trend anywhere at all? I was barely watching RAW, but I didn't see that come up on twitter.


----------



## A-C-P

Batz said:


> Did that trend anywhere at all? I was barely watching RAW, but I didn't see that come up on twitter.


No idea, do not really use Twitter, I am so behind the times :lol


----------



## Empress

I didn't see it trend on Twitter. And you know the announcers would've made a big deal if it had.


----------



## dan the marino

I'm assuming Macho Man is behind the twitter talk but not using twitter I have no idea if that's true or not.


----------



## LOL-ins

Oh shit. Terrible numbers for royal rumble build up shows.

Hour 1 - 3.75 million 
Hour 2 - 3.42 million
Hour 3 - 3.14 million


----------



## Wynter

Is that legit, because that last hour is ouch.

Didn't even crack the 4 millions :lmao

The second hour of the christmas show did better than this whole Raw :lmao

WWE needs to get it together. 

Please tell me that isn't real. Hell nah that can't be real :lol


----------



## Empress

BEST FOR BUSINESS said:


> I'm assuming Macho Man is behind the twitter talk but not using twitter I have no idea if that's true or not.


I think Macho was behind the surge. 

His name trended all day and during RAW. #RAWNewOrleans trended too. 

Wow @ the ratings. The third hour bombed again.


----------



## Wynter

I want a source for those ratings lol


----------



## The True Believer

LOL-ins said:


> Oh shit. Terrible numbers for royal rumble build up shows.
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.75 million
> Hour 2 - 3.42 million
> Hour 3 - 3.14 million


:aryalol

Terrible. Absolutely terrible. Fans watching RAW be like...

"Jack and the Beanstalk? I didn't know Sesame Street ran this late. Fuck this shit, I'm out!"


----------



## Batz

LOL-ins said:


> Oh shit. Terrible numbers for royal rumble build up shows.
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.75 million
> Hour 2 - 3.42 million
> Hour 3 - 3.14 million


Ouch. :lmao

Nearly hit the 3mil low mark!


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*I need a legit source for those ratings. If they're true, WWE killed themselves by not bringing out Sting. This may be the worst Rumble build in history.*


----------



## A-C-P

If those ratings are legit the College Football Championship game had a much bigger effect than I thought they would.


----------



## Wynter

I have yet to find a source lol


----------



## Batz

Same here. The wait continues I guess?


----------



## MaybeLock

Damn. Pretty poor ratings. Probably people are also tired of contract signings as usually it's always the same and we already had segments with Cena/Bork/Rollins.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Nielsen announced this about Mondays cable ratings.

Monday Jan 12 nationals rescheduled to Wednesday 6 am PT (normally Tuesday afternoon)

so.see ya tomorrow:


----------



## Shenroe

So those numbers are not legit? :banthat guy


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Watch the real numbers be even worse. :lol


----------



## Wynter

I knew those numbers were too low to be legit. I mean, Savage, Bryan and Brock being advertised?? No way.


----------



## Shenroe

WynterWarm12 said:


> I knew those numbers were too low to be legit. I mean, Savage, Bryan and Brock being advertised?? No way.


Some here badly wants the numbers to be this low just to say: " i told you so!"


----------



## Chrome

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Watch the real numbers be even worse. :lol


Can see that happening. :lol

It'd be a shame too, as last night's Raw wasn't too bad. Last week's deserves the shitty rating because it was a shit show, not this one.


----------



## joeycalz

Cena doesn't draw anymore. Time to face facts and turn him heel.


----------



## JY57

> NCAA Championship Football game last night on ESPN drew a record 33 million viewers, a bad sign for anything that was competing against it last night, including Monday Night Raw.


will be interesting how RAW did against that


----------



## D.M.N.

4.095m, 3.897m and 3.722m: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-1-12-2015.html


----------



## Wynter

The numbers look good, but I can't tell if this is good compared to previous years :lol


----------



## validreasoning

WynterWarm12 said:


> The numbers look good, but I can't tell if this is good compared to previous years :lol


the last time they ran a *non-themed raw* against the college championship game was 2012 and they averaged 4 million viewers over 2 hours.

that game attracted 24 million viewers not the 33 million this past mondays did http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-liars-t-i-and-tiny-wwe-raw-much-more/116055/


----------



## MaybeLock

Seriously, why isn't Lol-ins banned already? Terrible poster and it's not the first time he trolls in this thread inventing the Raw ratings. 

ut


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 had the fewest viewers but was the top for the demo. The football championship was even more monstrous than previously expected.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Looks like Roman "Hour 2" Reigns outdrew Ratings God Bryan :cena*


----------



## A-C-P

Keepin It Stylish said:


> *Looks like Roman "Hour 2" Reigns outdrew Ratings God Bryan :cena*


OR after that abortion of a promo Reigns cut people turned off the show and refused to turn it back on :jericho2

The show losing viewers as it got later doesn't really surprise or concern me personally. I expected the viewership to go down as the football game got further in, and I would say I am sure there was a small spike during halftime of the game, but for some reason during halftime the WWE decided to have 2 commercial breaks and a diva's match.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

A-C-P said:


> OR after that abortion of a promo Reigns cut people turned off the show and refused to turn it back on :jericho2
> 
> The show losing viewers as it got later doesn't really surprise or concern me personally. I expected the viewership to go down as the football game got further in, and I would say I am sure there was a small spike during halftime of the game, but for some reason during halftime the WWE decided to have 2 commercial breaks and a diva's match.


*
Well, that's 4 weeks in a row Reigns has had the highest drawing hour. It can't be ignored. Secondly, there were 2 commercial breaks and a Divas match during halftime because Vince is an idiot. Russo books Rock vs. Mankind in an empty arena during the Superbowl and this moron runs commercials and a pointless 2 minute match from the worst division in the company.*


----------



## The Bloodline

Keepin It Stylish said:


> *Looks like Roman "Hour 2" Reigns outdrew Ratings God Bryan :cena*


:reigns That draw power. Wonder why hour 3 couldn't keep up. They were advertising 2 important things for it throughout the night. :shrug


----------



## Shenroe

Not good not bad, I expected them to be a little bit better tho


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Keepin It Stylish said:


> *Looks like Roman "Hour 2" Reigns outdrew Ratings God Bryan :cena*



Not in the all important demo, it didnt. *DA DYNAMIC DAZZLING DEMO-DRAWING DARLING DANIEL DESTROYS DUCK-FACED DEVELOPMENTALLY-SKILLED DREIGN DEFINITELY!!! DISBELEE DAT? DENIED!!!*

Behold Bryan and tremble at the sexy ratings god!!!


----------



## The True Believer

Have there been any breakdowns lately?


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

IDONTSHIV said:


> Not in the all important demo, it didnt. *DA DYNAMIC DAZZLING DEMO-DRAWING DARLING DANIEL DESTROYS DUCK-FACED DEVELOPMENTALLY-SKILLLED DREIGN DEFINITELY!!! DISBELEE DAT? DENIED!!!*
> 
> Behold Bryan and tremble at the sexy ratings god!!!


*
DON'T CARE! It's all about overall ratings. Hold the L closely to your chest :lose and BELIEVE in Roman Reigns*


----------



## Wynter

I'm terrified to ask IDONTSHIV how old he is, becaue either his posts are appropriate for his age or I'm going to end up disappointed when I find out he's actually in his 30s :lol

Anyone bragging needs to settle down. The ratings were solid and that's it. The second hour of the damn Xmas show nearly reached the height of the first hour of the recent Raw.

I was expecting much better, but then again, the product has been pretty fpalm lately


EDIT: Hold this L close to your chest :lmao You ain't shit.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

In all seriousness, advertisers only care about the demo. It's why Walking Dead gets higher ad rates that NCIS, even though NCIS has more total viewers. Dead's demo destroys everything except special events and football.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

KINGPIN said:


> Have there been any breakdowns lately?


I havent seen a breakdown in ages.


----------



## The True Believer

IDONTSHIV said:


> I havent seen a breakdown in ages.


:hmm: Really? Then it's kind of hard to see who draws and who doesn't without them.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

IDONTSHIV said:


> In all seriousness, advertisers only care about the demo. It's why Walking Dead gets higher ad rates that NCIS, even though NCIS has more total viewers. Dead's demo destroys everything except special events and football.


*I'm watching NCIS right now 8*D. It's really not fair to compare RAW to Walking Dead considering we'll be dead before WWE gets those kind of ratings again.*


----------



## Sweettre15

At face value...

If Reigns really does help the viewership then it's going to be interesting if Bryan and Reigns continue to begin different hours on the show.

Two weeks ago Bryan was at the beginning of the third hour and the hour got the highest viewership though Reigns/Rollins match helped the viewership upswing that happened that night arguably.

Now it's pretty much going to be a contest of who's viewers get sustained after the shit segments that are bound to follow these guys up on the shows.

Sadly we don't have breakdowns and Keller/Caldwell on PWTorch use to do them frequently so we can't te either way.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Sweettre15 said:


> At face value...
> 
> If Reigns really does help the viewership then it's going to be interesting if Bryan and Reigns continue to begin different hours on the show.
> 
> Two weeks ago Bryan was at the beginning of the third hour and the hour got the highest viewership though Reigns/Rollins match helped the viewership upswing that happened that night arguably.
> 
> Now it's pretty much going to be a contest of who's viewers get sustained after the shit segments that are bound to follow these guys up on the shows.
> 
> Sadly we don't have breakdowns and Keller/Caldwell on PWTorch use to do them frequently so we can't te either way.


*
As long as Reigns gets credit for pulling good numbers, I don't care. People just need to admit he's not a flop like they've been shouting for the last 7 months.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

How in the hell did I do a letter "D" diatribe for Daniel without using Dragon? fpalm. I am slipping in my old age. I do agree that breakdowns would be a welcome sight instead of us just waxing hyperbolic on our respective favorites.


----------



## Sweettre15

Keepin It Stylish said:


> *
> As long as Reigns gets credit for pulling good numbers, I don't care. People just need to admit he's not a flop like they've been shouting for the last 7 months.*


Sigh if he does get them numbers, you better hope Vince don't make him lose those numbers with dumb promos he's writing for him. Sheesh

Don't know if viewers will be able to handle when Vince finally makes Roman Reigns scream Yabba Dabba Doo like Fred Flintstone.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Sweettre15 said:


> Sigh if he does get them numbers, you better hope Vince don't make him lose those numbers with dumb promos he's writing for him. Sheesh
> 
> Don't know if viewers will be able to handle when Vince finally makes Roman Reigns scream Yabba Dabba Doo like Fred Flintstone.


*
I agree. Just when his delivery and confidence started to show on WWE programming, Vince gave him AWFUL material. It makes me so angry.*


----------



## Wynter

:lol Ratings breakdown won't stop us from being obnoxious, let's be real :

Though, Vince is doing a HELL of a job in trying to make Roman as unappealing as possible :side: Bless that boy for any positive that comes his way like reactions and ratings :lol He is 













overcoming those odds :troll





...I'll see my way out


----------



## #Mark

Hour two was during half time so I suspect a lot of people watching the National Championship game flipped over. Plus, I'm certain that was the hour when they aired the Macho video package which was the big draw of the night. That said, would not be surprised if both Bryan and Reigns did well.


----------



## Chrome

Maybe people are tuning in to see how goofy and ridiculous Reigns promos will get? :troll


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wait, why are people saying Reigns was in the highest hour this week? I'm on my phone so I'm looking at a small screen, but 8PM hour was the highest. Reigns/Show was in the 9PM hour which based on the viewership on the last page went down. Am I missing something? Am I misreading? Reigns' hour did get more than Bryan's so there is that, but I'm clearly missing something. 

Anyway, decent numbers but still seem low for this time of year. Not sure how last year did his week though. I know last year was Batista's return that did over 5 million, so it'll be interesting to see how next week's show does.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Reigns isnt over his "animated" promos are.


----------



## THANOS

Where oh where did my breakdowns go, oh where oh where could they be??


----------



## Empress

IDONTSHIV said:


> Not in the all important demo, it didnt. *DA DYNAMIC DAZZLING DEMO-DRAWING DARLING DANIEL DESTROYS DUCK-FACED DEVELOPMENTALLY-SKILLED DREIGN DEFINITELY!!! DISBELEE DAT? DENIED!!!*
> 
> Behold Bryan and tremble at the sexy ratings god!!!


:lol

What is this? You don't know how much I'd love to see this Bryan in the WWE. 



Keepin It Stylish said:


> *
> As long as Reigns gets credit for pulling good numbers, I don't care. People just need to admit he's not a flop like they've been shouting for the last 7 months.*


This.

But since the third hour has been consistently losing viewers, it may be time to switch it up. RAW should be building viewers over the course of the night, not losing them. Bryan and Reigns should be moved to the third hour. As much as I like Seth, he doesn't need to come out fifty 'leven times during the course of the show and drop 20 minute promos each week.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

THANOS said:


> Where oh where did my breakdowns go, oh where oh where could they be??


*Inexplicably buried, just like the guy in that photo :hunter*


----------



## Reaper

IDONTSHIV said:


> Reigns isnt over his "animated" promos are.


Reigns isn't over. Dat look is.


----------



## MaybeLock

This thread needs breakdowns so badly... :cry

Oh, and CM Punk :lol


----------



## RKO 4life

#Mark said:


> Hour two was during half time so I suspect a lot of people watching the National Championship game flipped over. Plus, I'm certain that was the hour when they aired the Macho video package which was the big draw of the night. That said, would not be surprised if both Bryan and Reigns did well.


You are lying, but what is new. Anything to spin the suck of Bryan. The title game got under way at 8:35ET, halftime wasn't in the second hour you silly, half time was during the Bryan promo which didn't do good numbers as you can see.


----------



## Londrick

MaybeLock said:


> This thread needs breakdowns so badly... :cry
> 
> Oh, and CM Punk :lol


Can't wait for Punk to make his UFC debut. The return of CM Punk draws/can't draw :banderas


----------



## Frico

> SMACKDOWN VIEWERSHIP UP ON ITS NEW NIGHT
> By Dave Scherer on 2015-01-16 18:04:35
> 
> The return to Smackdown on Thursday nights, featuring Daniel Bryan coming back to the ring, did 2,675,000 viewers, up from last week’s 2,432,000 viewers that the show did in its final Friday time slot. To change nights and grow the audience is a big positive for WWE.


- PWInsider


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Frico said:


> - PWInsider


Bryan draws once again. The beat goes on...


----------



## dan the marino

Dat draw. 

:yes


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

His name is Daniel Bryan. Gaze upon his works, Ye Mighty and *DESPAIR!*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

And you see that... when he's advertised to wrestle, viewership goes nowhere but up.

I'm of course referring to BEE EN BEE! 


:barrett


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Wow, I was expecting the number to be lower this week than last week. I know they did a decent job advertising it, but usually when they change days, ratings are way down.

Gotta give it up to the GOAT for that rating.


----------



## THANOS

TakeMyGun said:


> Wow, I was expecting the number to be lower this week than last week. I know they did a decent job advertising it, but usually when they change days, ratings are way down.
> 
> Gotta give it up to the GOAT for that rating.


Yeah pretty much. It's the first day on the new schedule, it's NOT live (and even aired in Canada the night before), and the spoilers didn't paint an extraordinary show outside of Bryan's in-ring return. 

No real excuses this time lol.


----------



## Londrick

SD still gets above 2 million viewers? :wee-bey


----------



## Chrome

Brie Bella said:


> SD still gets above 2 million viewers? :wee-bey


The power of :bryan2 brother!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Please WWE, no more Bryan v Kane on any of your shows.I could see Vince thinking, Hey it did pretty well. Let's see if we can milk that for the next month. Let next Thursday be the denouement of their series. Please.


----------



## Punkholic

RKO 4life said:


> You are lying, but what is new. Anything to spin the suck of Bryan. The title game got under way at 8:35ET, halftime wasn't in the second hour you silly, half time was during the Bryan promo which didn't do good numbers as you can see.


Bryan's promo was before halftime.

How the hell would you know Bryan's promo didn't do good numbers without a breakdown? You're just assuming.


----------



## Londrick

IDONTSHIV said:


> Please WWE, no more Bryan v Kane on any of your shows.I could see Vince thinking, Hey it did pretty well. Let's see if we can milk that for the next month. Let next Thursday be the denouement of their series. Please.


Kane to somehow win the title @ RR, Bryan wins the Rumble and we get Bryan vs Kane for the title @ WM :vince$


----------



## JBLoser

Brie Bella said:


> Kane to somehow win the title @ RR, Bryan wins the Rumble and we get Bryan vs Kane for the title @ WM :vince$


The greatest WrestleMania main event of ALL TIME :vince$


----------



## NastyYaffa




----------



## DoubtGin

Thursday night is a much better spot than Friday night, though.

Let's see how the ratings develop.


----------



## RKO 4life

Guys Smackdown did not get a good rating. It got just an ok rating.

Lord


----------



## dan the marino

Considering it moved nights and actually got a better rating than last week, that's damn good.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Well,looks like no Monday ratings today. Thankfully, we didnt have a troll post any fakes ones,so I imagine they will be out early tomorrow morning just like last week.


----------



## Empress

> Monday night’s WWE RAW ranked #2 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen’s new Twitter TV ratings, behind The Bachelor. RAW had a unique audience of 2.450 million, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This was up from last week’s 2.169 million. RAW had total impressions of 13.348 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was down from last week’s 20.736 million.


Read more: http://www.pwmania.com/wwe-rumor-ki...lk-hogan-raw-twitter-tv-ratings#ixzz3PTxDy5IS


----------



## DoubtGin

edit


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This is the chart. 4.292m at 800pm, 4.135 at 9:00pm, 3.874 at 10:00pm. Bryan's hour had the highest demo and overall viewership. The Reigns streak has been broken. Commence the marking, :mark: :mark: :mark:


----------



## Wynter

IDONTSHIV said:


> This is the chart. 4.292m at 800pm, 4.135 at 9:00pm, 3.874 at 10:00pm. Bryan's hour had the highest demo and overall viewership. The Reigns streak has been broken. Commence the marking, :mark: :mark: :mark:


Roman came down for a save. He didn't have a match or segment that was hyped beforehand to be about him.

Not broken :troll


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

WynterWarm12 said:


> Roman came down for a save. He didn't have a match or segment that was hyped beforehand to be about him.
> 
> Not broken :troll


Bryan broke the only significant streak left in WWE.This ain't no fairy tale. Belee!!!!


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Bryan worked a pretty long match in the open right? That's a pretty good number for the first hour.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Good news for Bryan fans. But him losing to Bray should be concerning. Even more concerning is that the live crowd bought the fact that Bray beat Bryan. There wasn't a feeling of "WTF" was that. The more losses that Bryan takes like that the more fans will start to view him differently. Bryan was very much protected from the Summer of 2013 up to this point.


----------



## Wynter

The first hour generally does the best in most circumstances. It would have been a great disappointment if it didn't break over 4 million.

Brock/Heyman/Authority/Cena took like 20 minute of the first hour alone lol They managed to not drive away viewers with another long promo sequence. 

Although, Brock with a mic would have kept my ass there too since he doesn't talk much lol


----------



## dxbender

RKO 4life said:


> Guys Smackdown did not get a good rating. It got just an ok rating.
> 
> Lord


Being the #1 show on Thursday night in primetime cable tv ratings(both viewer total and rating number), isn't considered good? Not to mention one of the things that Smackdown on Thursday beat, was a nationally televised NBA game.


And Raw this week...the most watched show on cable tv for Monday and had highest rating too(and people still not happy?). The show that had the next highest viewer total to Raw on Monday had 1.5M LESS viewers.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Bryan has his first match back and Raw does over 4 million? Coincidence? Maybe, but still.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

The Boy Wonder said:


> Good news for Bryan fans. But him losing to Bray should be concerning. Even more concerning is that the live crowd bought the fact that Bray beat Bryan. There wasn't a feeling of "WTF" was that. The more losses that Bryan takes like that the more fans will start to view him differently. Bryan was very much protected from the Summer of 2013 up to this point.


Considering he lost to Bray clean at the Rumble in 2014 and the crowd bought that too, your point is completely invalid.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wait, wasn't Reigns "streak" broken last week when he was in hour 2 but hour 1 was what did the most? 

Well, way down from this week last year which I think did over 5 million, but at least it's slowly going up. Would be really bad if it wasn't.


----------



## The Bloodline

I guess the Legends/go home show worked this week. Deliver a good rumble and hopefully next Monday rises too.


----------



## LOL-ins

A 3 million hour in January? A ROYAL RUMBLE GO HOME SHOW TOO?

American Pro Wrestling is seriously on a decline.


----------



## CM punker

TakeMyGun said:


> Considering he lost to Bray clean at the Rumble in 2014 and the crowd bought that too, your point is completely invalid.


No they didnt. they knew it was a fluke so they kept chanting his name the entire night. bryan's pops are slowing down; he used to be maddddd over now hes just over. you can hear that his pops arent as loud as they used to be


----------



## MaybeLock

Tbh 3rd hour rating is pretty bad considering this was last Raw before the Rumble. Probably people are tired of Rollins vs Cena. 

Bryan still goating btw. They should have Bryan matches 24/7 in the WWE Network to improve subscriptions :vince


----------



## dan the marino

CM punker said:


> No they didnt. they knew it was a fluke so they kept chanting his name the entire night. bryan's pops are slowing down; he used to be maddddd over now hes just over. you can hear that his pops arent as loud as they used to be


He's been as over as he always has been especially considering the crowds they've had at the past few shows. This last Monday, yeah I'd say his reaction was only on par with main eventers instead of blowing them away, but he's not going to get the same exact reaction every week.


----------



## THANOS

BEST FOR BUSINESS said:


> He's been as over as he always has been especially considering the crowds they've had at the past few shows. This last Monday, yeah I'd say his reaction was only on par with main eventers instead of blowing them away, but he's not going to get the same exact reaction every week.


Exactly and he has to realize that WWE has been in the South these past few shows, where the crowds are mostly dead and only pop for big muscular babyfaces. I'd say his pops are still pretty good and are definitely beating everyone else on the show, even still.

Wait til Philly this Sunday, sit back and be amazed.


----------



## Wynter

I don't expect Bryan to get rabid reactions every week. I mean, last year the fans had a cause and a storyline they were emotionally invested into to really amp it up. 

I think it would be wild to think he can do that every time he's on tv lol Give the guy some slack here.


EDIT: @THANOS Did you really use the muscle excuse?? An over guy is an over guy. The most over guy in the company shouldn't have a problem anywhere unk2 That was a great crowd and it's a shame you want to discount them because they didn't go ape shit for your guy.

And seriously, are we gonna judge based on one night in smark haven?? Come on now lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

CM punker said:


> No they didnt. they knew it was a fluke so they kept chanting his name the entire night. bryan's pops are slowing down; he used to be maddddd over now hes just over. you can hear that his pops arent as loud as they used to be


Perhaps,but what does that say about the rest of the roster? As Erasmus said,"in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king". Vince needs to get opening the eyes of some other wrestlers because the current model with semi dead crowds isnt working as well as it used to be.

Spinal Tap perfectly summed up Bryan's overness compared to the rest of the crowd.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

TakeMyGun said:


> Considering he lost to Bray clean at the Rumble in 2014 and the crowd bought that too, your point is completely invalid.


That was then, this is now. Did the Dallas crowd chant his name after that match? Nope. And if you want to get excited about that YES chant at the end of RAW consider this: Triple H yelled, "No, No, No" in reference to Sting. Then the crowd chanted YES. 

In non-smark cities DB not as over as you think.


----------



## THANOS

WynterWarm12 said:


> I don't expect Bryan to get rabid reactions every week. I mean, last year the fans had a cause and a storyline they were emotionally invested into to really amp it up.
> 
> I think it would be wild to think he can do that every time he's on tv lol Give the guy some slack here.
> 
> 
> EDIT: @THANOS Did you really use the muscle excuse?? An over guy is an over guy. The most over guy in the company shouldn't have a problem anywhere unk2 That was a great crowd and it's a shame you want to discount them because they didn't go ape shit for your guy.
> 
> And seriously, are we gonna judge based on one night in smark haven?? Come on now lol


Criticize it all you like it's true and always has been. In southern cities guys like Cena, Sheamus, Ryback, and yes Reigns are very over, in Northern cities it's usually the opposite. I'm not making up a bias, it is what it is and has been that way for years.


----------



## Wynter

THANOS said:


> Criticize it all you like it's true and always has been. In southern cities guys like Cena, Sheamus, Ryback, and yes Reigns are very over, in Northern cities it's usually the opposite. I'm not making up a bias, it is what it is and has been that way for years.


WWE was still in Texas for Smackdown and Bryan was the most over guy. Try again. This Southern only likes muscle heads excuse is beyond fpalm

Oh nevermind, Texas isn't the South unk2 But, then that means Raw wasn't in the south either....

You can't say he's the most over guy on the roster and then say he's only over in Northern cities. Most over guy is the most over everywhere :lol


----------



## Empress

Rollins/Cena need to be dialed back or switched to a different hour. They've consistently lost viewers the past few weeks.

As for Bryan being over, why are we going by northern and southern states? That's such a random argument. You're either over or not. He is. Some places just aren't rabid for him but it's not as if he's coming out to crickets.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

WynterWarm12 said:


> WWE was still in Texas for Smackdown and Bryan was the most over guy. Try again. This Southern only likes muscle heads excuse is beyond fpalm
> 
> Oh nevermind, Texas isn't the South unk2 But, then that means Raw wasn't in the south either....
> 
> You can't say he's the most over guy on the roster and then say he's only over in Northern cities. Most over guy is the most over everywhere :lol


*"Reigns doesn't have enough crowd support to be a top guy." *Gets loudly cheered and his named chanted weeks on end*. "Wow, stupid crowds only cheer muscleheads." :kobe8*


----------



## THANOS

WynterWarm12 said:


> WWE was still in Texas for Smackdown and Bryan was the most over guy. Try again. This Southern only likes muscle heads excuse is beyond fpalm
> 
> Oh nevermind, Texas isn't the South unk2 But, then that means Raw wasn't in the south either....
> 
> You can't say he's the most over guy on the roster and then say he's only over in Northern cities. Most over guy is the most over everywhere :lol


Texas most certainly IS the south, what map are you looking at :lol?










Bryan is usually the most over in everyone city no matter what, south/north/west/east, it makes no difference, but he's the exception. It's very common to see guys like Ziggler and other smaller guys to get lackluster reactions compared to the "big guys" in southern states, and get monster pops in northern ones. It's not a bias, ut is what it is.

Wait til we get to Philly this Sunday and see what I mean.


----------



## Wynter

THANOS said:


> Texas most certainly IS the south, what map are you looking at :lol?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bryan is usually the most over in everyone city no matter what, south/north/west/east, it makes no difference, but he's the exception. It's very common to see guys like Ziggler and other smaller guys to get lackluster reactions compared to the "big guys" in southern states, and get monster pops in northern ones. It's not a bias, ut is what it is.
> 
> Wait til we get to Philly this Sunday and see what I mean.


Your sarcasm meter has certainly failed you :lol

That's the thing, Bryan is over everywhere like you said. So I don't get this whole "well, they like muscle heads so." that's a terrible excuse. Especially after I just showed that Bryan got love in Texas on SD. To basically say Roman got that reaction because it's the South is ridiculous and you know it.

No one said Roman got a monster pop, but he did get a great reaction. And so did Bryan. The crowd was great on Raw imo. They reacted very well to majority of the segments. 


No one is disputing Bryan won't get a big reaction on Sunday. It's a freaking PPV full of smarks. Smarks who are on a mission to shit on Roman. Let's not act like this is the norm. Because Bryan has been back and no one has hijacked a Raw for DB or a Roman segment for him. Some may have tried, but it surely didn't catch on yet.

Rumble is RUMBLE. Not some random Raw. I shouldn't even have to wait until we get in smark city to hear a monstrous pop for Bryan anyways lol


----------



## Empress

THANOS said:


> Texas most certainly IS the south, what map are you looking at :lol?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bryan is usually the most over in everyone city no matter what, south/north/west/east, it makes no difference, but he's the exception. It's very common to see guys like Ziggler and other smaller guys to get lackluster reactions compared to the "big guys" in southern states, and get monster pops in northern ones. It's not a bias, ut is what it is.
> 
> Wait til we get to Philly this Sunday and see what I mean.


Why do we have to wait for Philly to get a monstrous pop for Bryan? Why does Bryan have to be in the right state? If so, doesn't that counter your argument that Bryan is the most over since Austin and Rock? Neither of those two ever had to worry about which state they were in to blow the lid off.


----------



## THANOS

WynterWarm12 said:


> Your sarcasm meter has certainly failed you :lol
> 
> That's the thing, Bryan is over everywhere like you said. So I don't get this whole "well, they like muscle heads so." that's a terrible excuse. Especially after I just showed that Bryan got love in Texas on SD. To basically say Roman got that reaction because it's the South is ridiculous and you know it.
> 
> No one said Roman got a monster pop, but he did get a great reaction. And so did Bryan. The crowd was great on Raw imo. They reacted very well to majority of the segments.
> 
> 
> No one is disputing Bryan won't get a big reaction on Sunday. It's a freaking PPV full of smarks. Smarks who are on a mission to shit on Roman. Let's not act like this is the norm. Because Bryan has been back and no one has hijacked a Raw for DB or a Roman segment for him. Some may have tried, but it surely didn't catch on yet.
> 
> Rumble is RUMBLE. Not some random Raw. I shouldn't even have to wait until we get in smark city to hear a monstrous pop for Bryan anyways lol


To people that aren't ultra over like Bryan, yes that rule usually applies. Bryan is different because he can 9.9/10 times raise the dead when he comes out, Voodoo style :, like when he got that absolutely ridiculous pop for leaving the Wyatt's in Providence, RI (a notoriously weak crowd). 

For everyone else under that umbrella on the current roster, bar maybe Cena (since his combined reaction is still pretty powerful almost everywhere), that rule about the south like the big babyfaces more than the smaller ones, and vice ver sa in the north usually holds true.



Olivia Pope said:


> Why do we have to wait for Philly to get a monstrous pop for Bryan? Why does Bryan have to be in the right state? If so, doesn't that counter your argument that Bryan is the most over since Austin and Rock? Neither of those two ever had to worry about which state they were in to blow the lid off.


The South doesn't usually hijack anything, most of the time, they are just happy to watch the show. The North is usually where you find the hijacking and we've seen how contagious it is once it happens. This is why I said "wait til Philly", because if what people are expecting to happen happens, then it will begin a shitstorm that will bleed into almost every show after, just like it did with Batista (who keep in mind, got a thunderous pop when he returned on RAW).


----------



## TheGmGoken

People still debating about Daniel Bryan's overness? 

Smfh.

This forum a joke.


----------



## Wynter

THANOS said:


> To people that aren't ultra over like Bryan, yes that rule usually applies. Bryan is different because he can 9.9/10 times raise the dead when he comes out, Voodoo style :, like when he got that absolutely ridiculous pop for leaving the Wyatt's in Providence, RI (a notoriously weak crowd).
> 
> For everyone else under that umbrella on the current roster, bar maybe Cena (since his combined reaction is still pretty powerful almost everywhere), that rule about the south like the big babyfaces more than the smaller ones, and vice ver sa in the north usually holds true.


Well duh, Bryan was red hot last year and was still on this long journey of getting his proper due from WWE. His ride from Summerslam to Mania was an emotional rollercoaster that everyone was on, whether they wanted to be or not lol

Now, what if I said, "well, Bryan just came back! Of course the crowd is responding to him. Everyone gets that welcome back love!"

You would look at me like I grew two heads right? It sounds ridiculous to play down any of Bryan's pops with crazy excuses, yeah?

That's how it looks when you go "well, yeah, he's in the South." A crowd likes who they like. They will give a pop to those they want to pop for. It's as simple as that.

Me going "Well, the northern states like vanilla midgets! So that doesn't count." I'd look like a complete dumbass.


----------



## Empress

THANOS said:


> *The South doesn't usually hijack anything, most of the time, they are just happy to watch the show.* The North is usually where you find the hijacking and we've seen how contagious it is once it happens. This is why I said "wait til Philly", because if what people are expecting to happen happens, then it will begin a shitstorm that will bleed into almost every show after, just like it did with Batista (who keep in mind, got a thunderous pop when he returned on RAW).


What's so wrong with that? 

If I wanted to be petty, I'd wish Philly to pull a Santa on Daniel Bryan but I like him. And Reigns. It's so silly that Reigns needs to be shit on just because it's not going to be all about Daniel Bryan. Again. But Sunday is only a few days away. You may get your wish.


----------



## Shenroe

So Bryan/Reigns will be the new CM Punk/?? in this thread from now on? Why did you have to start this IDONTSHIV? fpalm


----------



## CM punker

I'm a big fan of Rollins but has this guy actualy proved to draw? Seems like hes just as bad of a draw as Randy Orton.. all his hours seem to be low


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

2015 is going to be a blast with the Bryan/Reigns war. Might Rival the Punk/Bryan war in 2013.


----------



## THANOS

Thing is I can't even really comment too much on the ratings because we still don't have a damn breakdown. Where art thou breakdowns?


----------



## Chrome

TakeMyGun said:


> 2015 is going to be a blast with the Bryan/Reigns war. Might Rival the Punk/Bryan war in 2013.


Same here. The triple threat match at Mania between Lesnar, Bryan, and a freshly turned heel Reigns should be a lot of fun.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Chrome said:


> Same here. The triple threat match at Mania between Lesnar, Bryan, and a freshly turned heel Reigns should be a lot of fun.


Eh, I don't think the crowd is going to turn on Reigns, but we shall see. I do think that a singles between Reigns and Lesnar would be pretty horrific as a main event, and Rollins/Reigns has been done so many times now that I don't think anyone would give a shit about that match. 

BRING ON CENA/REIGNS BABY.


----------



## THANOS

TakeMyGun said:


> Eh, I don't think the crowd is going to turn on Reigns, but we shall see. I do think that a singles between Reigns and Lesnar would be pretty horrific as a main event, and Rollins/Reigns has been done so many times now that I don't think anyone would give a shit about that match.
> 
> BRING ON CENA/REIGNS BABY.


If Cena/Reigns means Bryan/Brock than I can roll with that.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

THANOS said:


> If Cena/Reigns means Bryan/Brock than I can roll with that.


Brock is going baby face, I think that much is clear. Probably going to job to Rusev on his way out, which I can dig. Pretty sure Rollins/Reigns is the Main Event tho.


----------



## Yes Era

If Lesnar was to lose to Rusev at WM 31 after he beat the Undertaker in the middle of the motherfucking ring, it would be one of the most bashed things in our lifetime. Vince would never hear the end of it.


----------



## Frico

http://wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/201...-fare-in-its-second-week-in-its-new-timeslot/


> Viewership for WWE SmackDown increased once again, as last night's episode averaged 2.814 million viewers. That number was up 5% from last week's debut in its new timeslot, which averaged 2.675 million viewers.


Dat increase. :bryan2


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Frico said:


> http://wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/201...-fare-in-its-second-week-in-its-new-timeslot/
> 
> Dat increase. :bryan2


Thanks for posting this. It completely slipped my mind. Who woulda thunk Kane would be such a ratings draw in 2015?


----------



## DoubtGin

oh god not again :lmao


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

THE GOAT HAS BEEN UNLEASHED.


----------



## Wynter

IDONTSHIV said:


> Thanks for posting this. It completely slipped my mind. Who woulda thunk Kane would be such a ratings draw in 2015?


"Someone give Kane the yes chant, damn it! :vince3"


----------



## Sweettre15

Definitely glad to see viewership increasing on Smackdown especially knowing that it was able to increase without Cena being there.

So far the Bryan as the face of Smackdown experiment has been working and I hope it continues to work. Bryan as the face of Smackdown with the other "stars of tomorrow" being prominent too.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Does anyone know the rating for Smackdown last week? Was it a 2.2 or somewhere around there?


----------



## NastyYaffa

I am just gonna keep posting this here.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

TakeMyGun said:


> Does anyone know the rating for Smackdown last week? Was it a 2.2 or somewhere around there?


Here's the chart:


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

WynterWarm12 said:


> "Someone give Kane the yes chant, damn it! :vince3"


Kane + YES! = Yes, we Kane! bama or maybe KANYES :kanye


----------



## Chrome

Sweettre15 said:


> Definitely glad to see viewership increasing on Smackdown especially knowing that it was able to increase without Cena being there.
> 
> So far the Bryan as the face of Smackdown experiment has been working and I hope it continues to work. Bryan as the face of Smackdown with the other "stars of tomorrow" being prominent too.


Bryan should be the face of Raw too while they're at it.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Bryan becomes the face of Smackdown then feuds with Rock next year over custody of it.

Happy to see Bryan has played a major part of establishing Smackdown on its new night.


----------



## Sweettre15

Chrome said:


> Bryan should be the face of Raw too while they're at it.


Won't hear any disagreements from me on that one.


----------



## Batz

Nothing trended worldwide tonight but #CancelWWENetwork , same goes for trends in the United States.

Curious to see what the ratings will be for this show.
http://twitter.com/search?q=#CancelWWENetwork


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Could be high, this is the first time they pretty much gave away a PPV from the previous night for free.


----------



## Batz

TakeMyGun said:


> Could be high, this is the first time they pretty much gave away a PPV from the previous night for free.


Yeah that's I figure. Interested so see how much social media trends tell.

Twitter was dead for most of the show as far as trends go, when usually on a Monday night there are 2-5 things trending Worldwide, even on a bad RAW.


----------



## Frico

Batz said:


> Yeah that's I figure. Interested so see how much social media trends tell.
> 
> Twitter was dead for most of the show as far as trends go, when usually on a Monday night there are 2-5 things trending Worldwide, even on a bad RAW.


Only things that trended WW were:

Phoenix Splash rollins)
Bubba Ray Dudley
R-Truth
Boogeyman
Diamond Cutter
Renee Young
Paul Heyman
Fast Lane/Cena vs Rusev


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Rumble had way higher twitter ratings than last year. I guess WWE repeating its folly of last year struck a nerve with fans.:

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_82963.shtml


----------



## validreasoning

you could associate some of that rise with more people using social media than a year ago though. this years rumble had a unique audience of 3.275 million...survivor series 2 months ago drew a unique audience of 2.823 million so the true audience didn't rise all that much even with the #cancelwwenetwork movement.

if it were not obvious before it should be now. the audience who watch total divas and wwe's other programming are completely different. TD head to head with the rumble drew 1.207 million viewers barely down from last weeks 1.253 million viewers


----------



## DoubtGin

1st hour: 4.468
2nd hour: 4.657
3rd hour: 4.135 

Rating: 3.28


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Giving away the 2 biggest matches from The Rumble and all the ensuing controversy drew. Screwing Bryan is a big draw.


----------



## Empress

Good numbers.


----------



## Loader230

*WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



> WWE Raw TV Ratings
> 
> -- January 26: WWE Raw jumped to a 3.28 rating the night after the Royal Rumble, increasing from a 3.03 rating for the "Legends Reunion" Raw leading into the Rumble.
> 
> It was the highest rating since the post-WrestleMania Raw drew a 3.70 rating on April 7, 2014 and second-highest since February 24, 2014, which drew a 3.31 rating the night after the Elimination Chamber PPV.
> 
> Raw being a studio show outside of the arena setting apparently did not deter the audience. It helped that WWE presented on cable TV the WWE Title match and Royal Rumble match from the previous night's Rumble pay-per-view...
> 
> Hourly Break Down: 4.468 million first hour viewers for the title match, 4.657 million second hour viewers for the majority of the Rumble, and 4.135 million third hour viewers for interview follow-ups.
> 
> Also, last year's post-Rumble Raw scored a 3.24 rating, but followed the episode that drew more attention and buzz - Batista's comeback show, which drew a 3.46 rating.
> 
> 
> - Triple H and Vince Mcmahon personally thanked the fans for this overall tremendous success.


Vince Mcmahon always wins.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

:reigns
:vince2
:trips5


Yep


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Good. They had to gave away a PPV for that rating, but no problem, I guess. They should give WM for free, so Reigns can beat more records :reigns


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

i dont get it. why do people fucking still tune in after that abortion of a show? is it really that hard to find something else to watch? 

holy fuck.


----------



## KingCosmos

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

:reigns Draws. Believe dat


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Drawing a big rating the night after the Rumble is supposed to be a surprise? Oh wait, you're just looking to antagonize people here like an idiot. Sorry.


----------



## MEMS

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Lol

Oops


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



MaybeLock said:


> Good. They had to gave away a PPV for that rating, but no problem.


How? they hit a million subs thanks to the PPV, and a huge increase.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Screwing Bryan is best for business.


----------



## Empress

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Vince is laughing his ass off today. :vince


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Given this Raw was an anomaly, I wouldn't consider it yet until things go back to normal next week(Raw on Monday).


----------



## Smoogle

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

It's some odd ass timing to announce this probably damage control for Cancel WWE. It'll be interesting to see what the subscription is in a few months.


----------



## looter

The people that unsubscribed from network hasn't been added yet. This report is bout all the people that subscribed previous to rumble. The fans that canceled have not been added to report yet. And won't be till next month.


----------



## LetsLightItUpxo

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

The power of Roman Reigns.

The marks need to shut the fuck up cause clearly they don't know shit. The ratings prove Reigns is #BestForBusiness 

xoxox


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



IDONTSHIV said:


> Screwing Bryan is best for business.


Bryan wasn't screwed, he just already had his moment on top.


----------



## MEMS

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



GOD said:


> i dont get it. why do people fucking still tune in after that abortion of a show? is it really that hard to find something else to watch?
> 
> .


You and many others have to come to terms with the fact that not as many fans thought it was an "abortion of a show"


----------



## Mr W

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*










that drawing power..Stocks go up,Ratings go up,and Network Subscriptions hit a million.

BEE-LEE DAT :reigns2 

Daniel Bryan Smark Fans face's right now


----------



## TrentBarretaFan

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

3rd hour drew the least, I wonder why...


----------



## FlashPhotographer

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



LetsLightItUpxo said:


> The power of Roman Reigns.
> 
> The marks need to shut the fuck up cause clearly they don't know shit. The ratings prove Reigns is #BestForBusiness
> 
> xoxox


Belee dat


----------



## MEMS

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



looter said:


> The people that unsubscribed from network hasn't been added yet. This report is bout all the people that subscribed previous to rumble. The fans that canceled have not been added to report yet. And won't be till next month.


Lol. So just subtract like what...40 people?


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Lets see, super controversial ending to their 2nd biggest PPV of the year, not to mention basically showing their 2nd biggest PPV on free TV only 24 hrs after it aired drew a great rating?

You Don't Say?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Giving away the 2 big matches from the ppv is best for business.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



TrentBarretaFan said:


> 3rd hour drew the least, I wonder why...


Because that's been the trend for months, kids go to bed at that time.


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

What were the numbers after the Monday of last years Rumble?


----------



## Darkness is here

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Roman ''THE DRAW'' Reigns
BELIEVE THAAAATTT.


----------



## wwefan4life619

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Wrestling fans, myself included are like drug addicts. Believe dat. #theaddictionistrong


----------



## Bob the Jobber

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Kickoff of RTWM gets the highest ratings since last WM? Tell me more.


----------



## Stone Hot

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

I said this many times yesterday that WWE always wins. I'm sorry but its the truth.


----------



## Łegend Ќiller

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

LOLReignsWINS


----------



## Reptilian

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

That's still a low number.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



A-C-P said:


> Lets see, super controversial ending to their 2nd biggest PPV of the year, not to mention basically showing their 2nd biggest PPV on free TV only 24 hrs after it aired drew a great rating?
> 
> You Don't Say?


Umm...actually a "great" as in highest in a year is a big deal. Average would've been nothing worthy of discussion. 

If the rating had gone down, i'll you'd be playing marks are unhappy card.


----------



## Green Light

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Roman Ratings revolutionizing the business. Believe that.


----------



## DeeGirl

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*











Raw was basically giving out a free PPV, no wonder people were tuning in, to tape that shit. I personally taped raw as I was intrigued to see how they were doing the show under extraordinary circumstances. Not for Reigns.


----------



## Batz

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Impressed, especially since twitter wasn't as active as usual. 

Giving away RR title match and main event could be the reason for it, or it could be because of the after-math of RR, or it could be because of Roman Reigns - or all of it. No way to tell from just this week. We'll have to see next week.

But really impressed nonetheless.


----------



## MarkL316

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

This is why Vince will shove Reigns down our throat for as long as he damn well pleases! Even the people that hated the Rumble and the constant garbage that WWE put on TV will carry on watching. 

I will not be one of those people. Mania is going to garbage this year and I will not be watching. 

Have fun watching Daniel Bryan vs Sheamus which will probably be the first or second match of the show. Wouldn't want to put Roman Superman but I can't wrestle Reigns straight after the most over superstar in the company would we. Might look bad.


----------



## Waffelz

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Did RAW not show two matches completely in full from RR? Probably had a part to play. Lol if folk watched it all though. christ.


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

BREAKING NEWS: 2nd biggest PPV of the year for free draws ratings.


----------



## silverspirit2001

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Its called rubberneck TV. 

When something goes hideously wrong, people want to watch the fallout.


----------



## ImitationGame

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Darkness is here said:


> Roman ''THE DRAW'' Reigns
> BELIEVE THAAAATTT.


His hour had the lowest viewership.


----------



## wwefan4life619

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



silverspirit2001 said:


> Its called rubberneck TV.
> 
> When something goes hideously wrong, people want to watch the fallout.


Yep, bad publicity was actually good. It got people who normally don't give a flying fuck about rassling to tune in.


----------



## Snake Plissken

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Seth Rollins was obviously the reason to watch RAW. The Triple Threat was fantastic and his interview was good.


----------



## ElTerrible

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

The Royal Rumble match is the greatest gimmick in wrestling. Obviously it drew a decent rating on free TV. A good rating would have been over 4.0. A great rating over 5.0, not a 3.28 on a night with literally no competition. The 3rd hour dropped hard, despite the Rumble running into it big.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> Umm...actually a "great" as in highest in a year is a big deal. Average would've been nothing worthy of discussion.
> 
> *If the rating had gone down, i'll you'd be playing marks are unhappy card.*


If the ratings had gone down that is exactly the reason it would have gone down, there would be no "card to play"

The WWE had to basically re-show their 2nd biggest PPV of the year to get their highest TV rating in a year. And re-showing your 2nd biggest PPV of the year SHOULD bring in the highest TV rating in a year. If last night's Raw hadn't pulled a rating like this I would've made a bigger deal out of it, b/v it would have been a bigger deal.

The only one playing "cards" here are the Reigns fans who are going to be quick to point out anything that can MAYBE show people that don't like Reigns they are wrong.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Very good numbers. And with the network numbers being so good? Things are going good for the WWE


----------



## ImitationGame

Rumble match drew big. It was mostly in hour 2 but the conclusion happened in hour 3. People tuned in for the Rumble and then most tuned out after it was over, given the drop off of hour 3.

Who was it who had two segments in hour 3?


----------



## HIGHLIGHT

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Controversy always brings in the fans, nothing to see here.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Not having an actual worked out so well for WWE and so terribly for anyone who hoped for Reigns backlash/Bryan hijacking. Next week RAW is in Denver. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Empress

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



A-C-P said:


> If the ratings had gone down that is exactly the reason it would have gone down, there would be no "card to play"
> 
> The WWE had to basically re-show their 2nd biggest PPV of the year to get their highest TV rating in a year. And re-showing your 2nd biggest PPV of the year SHOULD bring in the highest TV rating in a year.
> 
> The only one playing "cards" here are the Reigns fans who are going to be quick to point out anything that can MAYBE show people that don't like Reigns they are wrong.


If the overall ratings had gone down, it would've been another reason for some to put an asterisk next to Roman's name because he's seen as "bad for business". But publicity is publicity, even when it's bad. The ratings went up, stock is up and the Network hit 1 million. I know much of today has been about PR for the WWE but they got in a TKO. Their empire didn't come crashing down as was predicted when #CancelWWENetwork started trending. At least for today, Vince got the last laugh.


----------



## ajmaf625

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Kevin Lockard said:


> Drawing a big rating the night after the Rumble is supposed to be a surprise? Oh wait, you're just looking to antagonize people here like an idiot. Sorry.


What's surprising is a 3hr show with 2 matches from the night before plus interviews drew a big rating....sorry #cancelwwenetwork marks try again


----------



## TrentBarretaFan

ImitationGame said:


> Rumble match drew big. It was mostly in hour 2 but the conclusion happened in hour 3. People tuned in for the Rumble and then most tuned out after it was over, given the drop off of hour 3.
> 
> Who was it who had two segments in hour 3?


Keep in mind that many people didn't know the outcome of RR Match.
Maybe they were disappointed by the result and tuned out right after Reigns won...


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Showing matches from the PPV draws!


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

If anyone is actually dumb enough to attribute this to Reigns officially having been chosen, I feel sorry for you. Giving away a PPV for free the next day which included one of the best title matches in years + all the controversy = ratings.

If the ratings skyrocket once Reigns takes the belt at WrestleMania, y'all can start gloating. Until then, just shut up...


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



ajmaf625 said:


> What's surprising is a 3hr show with 2 matches from the night before plus interviews drew a big rating....sorry #cancelwwenetwork marks try again


A Raw the night after a big PPV like the Rumble... especially one that shows the two most important matches of that very same PPV for free.... is of course always gonna draw a big rating. Or did you forget that the Rumble was the official start on the road to Wrestlemania?


----------



## Juggernaut Reigns

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*


----------



## RLStern

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Airing PPV matches for free will give you high ratings, one of WCW Nitro's last victory over WWF Raw is War, before Rock & Mankind beat them permanently in late 1998, was when they aired Goldberg vs DDP from Halloween Havoc in October of 1998 on Nitro.


----------



## King-of-the-World

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

No shit. Giving away (what matters of) the 2nd biggest PPV of the year is obviously going to draw good numbers. 

Clear damage control. It's all PR people.


----------



## Karma101

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



GOD said:


> i dont get it. why do people fucking still tune in after that abortion of a show? is it really that hard to find something else to watch?
> 
> holy fuck.


They didn't see that abortion of a show so they tuned into RAW to see the parts worth watching.


----------



## Ultimo Warrior

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

That's quite an increase considering last I heard their sub numbers were in the 7k range not so long ago. They were worrying if they would ever hit one million. Congratulations from me then.


----------



## Diavolo

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Like it or not Reigns draw more than Bryan


----------



## NastyYaffa

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

RAW's after big PPV's ALWAYS draw well.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



ElTerrible said:


> The Royal Rumble match is the greatest gimmick in wrestling. Obviously it drew a decent rating on free TV. A good rating would have been over 4.0. A great rating over 5.0, not a 3.28 on a night with literally no competition. The 3rd hour dropped hard, despite the Rumble running into it big.


Raw is not 2 hrs show anymore, 3hrs is not going to bring 4.0/5.0 rating even if it was the greatest product in the world. Be realistic.








A-C-P said:


> If the ratings had gone down that is exactly the reason it would have gone down, there would be no "card to play"
> 
> The WWE had to basically re-show their 2nd biggest PPV of the year to get their highest TV rating in a year. And re-showing your 2nd biggest PPV of the year SHOULD bring in the highest TV rating in a year. If last night's Raw hadn't pulled a rating like this I would've made a bigger deal out of it, b/v it would have been a bigger deal.
> 
> The only one playing "cards" here are the Reigns fans who are going to be quick to point out anything that can MAYBE show people that don't like Reigns they are wrong.


Except it could've gone down since Raw was actually cancelled and presented from the studio, or the fact it was a re-run of previous night's PPV that is already on multiple loops on the network. 

You keep talking like last night's show was first run live content, its not. It was a freaking replay of select matches. There is no proof to suggest this would happen, can you show me facts to back up your post that re-run of a PPV on RAW the next night would draw a "great" rating every single time?


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



> You keep talking like last night's show was first run live content, its not. It was a freaking replay of select matches. There is no proof to suggest this would happen, can you show me facts to back up your post that re-run of a PPV on RAW the next night would draw a "great" rating every single time?



Is it that difficult to comprehend? They didn't just give away a B- PPV. They gave away the freaking Royal Rumble, a title match that was praised all over social media as one of the best in recent years and there was a shitload of controversy. Major mainstream media outlets reported about the Rumble backlash. Jesus Christ...


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



A-C-P said:


> Lets see, super controversial ending to their 2nd biggest PPV of the year, not to mention basically showing their 2nd biggest PPV on free TV only 24 hrs after it aired drew a great rating?
> 
> You Don't Say?


Oh, come on, we ALL know Roman Reigns drew that rating by himself. 

Ughh, how did they pull this shit off? 1 million subscribers and the highest rating in months....for this tv. The product is gonna get even worse now than it's been for months. fpalm


----------



## Marrakesh

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

This rating really has nothing to do with Reigns ''being a draw'' and neither do the network numbers :lol 

That being said WWE will try and claim that it does. 

Raw drew a high rating last night because people were tuning in to see how WWE were going to handle the backlash after the #CancelWWENetwork trend brought mainstream attention to WWE. 

They maintained the rating because they decided to air two huge matches for free on network television were as we all know the majority of the audience will not have paid for it the night before. 

So essentially Lesnar/Cena/Rollins and the Rumble match drew last night. 

Interest tailed off in the last hour for the Reigns/Lesnar interview segments but were still fairly strong numbers but it's easy to see why when the fans were kept watching by getting PPV entertainment for free.

As for the network getting past 1m subscribers well Reigns winning the rumble will have had nothing at all to do with this given that as we all know all his win did was lose them a minority of customers. 

The network launched in the Uk, Ireland and i believe some other countries were WWE has a solid fan base in the past month or so. This is why the network has gained subscribers overall. 

How could a guy who has had one PPV singles match in his entire career, who has no gimmick or history of incredible merch sales or TV ratings suddenly single handedly bring the network up to over 1m subscribers :lmao

He didn't. He is completely irrelevant in all of this. He's just that guy everybody boo'ed when he won the rumble.


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Diavolo said:


> Like it or not Reigns draw more than Bryan



Again, we will see about that when he takes the belt at WrestleMania. Let's see what happens with the ratings between Mania and SummerSlam. Last night didn't have jack shit to do with Reigns. 

If he draws post-Mania as the WWE Champ, I'll be the first one to congratulate him.


----------



## deepelemblues

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



> Ughh, how did they pull this shit off?


ppv matches for free on raw

no actual raw

it was the best raw in months because there was literally no monday night raw. it was a replay of the rumble and the title match and some interviews. and it was way better than any raw in a while.


----------



## JamesK

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Reigns with that draw.. The show was only for Reings so the people clearly joined for it..

Who gives a fuck about the Rumble the people wanted to see Reigns that's why they are watching all these months...


----------



## Jonasolsson96

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Wtf is wrong with people. Cancel wwe network my ass. You keep going after wwe like an abused girlfriend who cant end the relationship with her boyfriend.


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

I heard the ratings went through the roof when Roman told us the story of how he learned to swim...


----------



## The Cool Guy

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Lol at these neck beards. Sorry but your theory of WWE goin down the shitter was wrong. 

Vince obviously made the right move pushing the Samoan Superman.

Deal with it.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



deepelemblues said:


> ppv matches for free on raw
> 
> no actual raw
> 
> it was the best raw in months because there was literally no monday night raw. it was a replay of the rumble and the title match and some interviews. and it was way better than any raw in a while.


When I said that, I really meant the 1 million Network subscribers, and then I realized I was in a ratings thread so I edited it to include the rating as well. 

This is unbelievable to me. They are gonna try so much LESS than they already do now. If they can get one million subscribers for this kind of product.....we're doomed. I'm legitimately worried we're never gonna see a good WWE show again. I can't even remember the last decent one.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



KC Armstrong said:


> I heard the ratings went through the roof when Roman told us the story of how he learned to swim...


Because the word "drown" was heard


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> Except it could've gone down since Raw was actually cancelled and presented from the studio, or the fact it was a re-run of previous night's PPV that is already on multiple loops on the network.
> 
> You keep talking like last night's show was first run live content, its not. It was a freaking replay of select matches. There is no proof to suggest this would happen, can you show me facts to back up your post that re-run of a PPV on RAW the next night would draw a "great" rating every single time?


Really, we are really going to have this discussion? You need facts to back up what I said? It is common sense, the WWE showed one of the best title matches they have had in a long-time, a Brock Lesnar match, and one of if not their most hyped event match, The Rumble, of the year on free TV.

There is no "proof" b/c the WWE has rarely (if ever) done this before, but I would be willing to bet IF the WWE were to go with the same format for the Raw after every Royal Rumble going forward it will draw the highest TV rating for a Raw since the Raw after Mania the year before.


----------



## Dan Pratt

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

It was the night after Rumble. It also was the night of the big storm so I am sure a lot of people wanted to see how WWE was actually going to handle still going ahead with Raw. And as some have said, not hard to drag good ratings when you give your two main matches at one of the biggest PPV's of the year away from free. 

Not saying I expected some record breaking low as fallout for the "Reigns catastrophie of 2015" I didn't. But given the extenuating circumstances, I am not sure we can attribute that all to Reigns winning. Or even most of it.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



NastyYaffa said:


> RAW's after big PPV's ALWAYS draw well.


post summerslam raw last year fell in viewership..people were clamouring to see lesnar as champion 

change the thread title op because a number of raws since mania 30 have had a higher audience (viewership) than last nights e.g. 2 weeks after mania drew over 4.7 million for 3 hours, april 28 drew 4.6 million.


----------



## ajmaf625

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Kevin Lockard said:


> A Raw the night after a big PPV like the Rumble... especially one that shows the two most important matches of that very same PPV for free.... is of course always gonna draw a big rating. Or did you forget that the Rumble was the official start on the road to Wrestlemania?


But here's what I don't get....people knew Reigns won the Rumble even if they didn't watch it live on Sunday thanks to Twitter, Facebook, etc and still watched it on tv. Guess a lot of people don't mind him winning after all. The triple threat was awesome needed to watch that again


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

ACP with that "Rocky-da fuck" avatar


----------



## deepelemblues

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> When I said that, I really meant the 1 million Network subscribers, and then I realized I was in a ratings thread so I edited it to include the rating as well.
> 
> This is unbelievable to me. They are gonna try so much LESS than they already do now. If they can get one million subscribers for this kind of product.....we're doomed. I'm legitimately worried we're never gonna see a good WWE show again. I can't even remember the last decent one.


we are in the age of the unbelievable being accepted fact.

beleeeeeee _dat,_ brother.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



KC Armstrong said:


> Is it that difficult to comprehend? They didn't just give away a B- PPV. They gave away the freaking Royal Rumble, a title match that was praised all over social media as one of the best in recent years and there was a shitload of controversy.


The same freaking Rumble that was buried and shat on all over the social media? When was the last time great matches drew viewers? if it did NJPW would be #1 right now.




> Major mainstream media outlets reported about the Rumble backlash. Jesus Christ...


They reported negative news, not positive. Yeah, controversy probably drew some interest but not a difference maker to the extent of taking it all the way to the highest number in close to a year. You're over-valuing all these "mainstream" media interest, people who frequent those media probably don't even watch wrestling.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

It's too unique of a circumstance to draw something about it. A snowstorm wiped out their original programming and they were forced to air the ppv from the day before. Surprised it drew well though considering everyone knew the results.


----------



## brxd

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

They gave away their biggest match of the year on free TV. :lol


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



> The same freaking Rumble that was buried and shat on all over the social media? When was the last time great matches drew viewers? if it did NJPW would be #1 right now.




That's a dumb comparison and you know it. But you know what, I give up, you win. Reigns winning the Rumble and telling us how he learned to swim was solely responsible for the ratings. It had nothing to do with the fact that they gave away their 2nd biggest PPV of the year.

Just know one thing... Henceforth, since he is now officially the chosen one, I will consider Roman directly and solely responsible for every single rating every single week, positive or negative.

I just can't wait for the Reigns lovers justifying the shitty ratings we will see in around May/June when the Golden Boy is wearing the gold around his waist. Should be fun...


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

I never said Reigns was solely responsible, he was a big factor however. IWC's Social media campaign has been a failure overall, in any case.


----------



## Mr. I

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

And some Reigns fans will actually claim this proves he's a "draw".

The post-Rumble RAW (usually the second biggest of the year), on which they aired most of the Rumble PPV, on a night with low TV viewership (meaning the same numbers give higher rating numbers), and it's still below the viewing numbers for most recent post-Rumble RAWs.

Keep your socks on.


----------



## Krispenwah

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Well, it seems like WWE is not going to bankrupt after all. :cena


----------



## Joshi Judas

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

I find it funny that when they can't have an actual Raw, that's when ratings go up :lmao

Only in WWE.


Anyway, ratings now should be better than August-December since it's RTWM time.


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



> Anyway, ratings now should be better than August-December since it's RTWM time.



Stop it, you hater. It's all because of Roman and the fact that he has now arrived. BELEE DAT!


----------



## NatsuMaki

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Free RR, you'd expect people to tune in.


----------



## Zarra

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

So people now think is because of Reigns?
There were *two huge PPV matches for free*,how stupid are you?


----------



## Ultimo Warrior

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> I never said Reigns was solely responsible, he was a big factor however. IWC's Social media campaign has been a failure overall, in any case.


Makes me wonder if this very news would've broke out today had Bryan won instead.


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Zarra said:


> So people now think is because of Reigns?
> There were *two huge PPV matches for free*,how stupid are you?



To be fair, I'd like to give most of them the benefit of the doubt. I don't think they actually BELEE DAT, they're just trying to get under people's skin.


----------



## Born of Osiris

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Holy fucking shit, the Raw after the 2nd biggest PPV filled with extreme controversy during the RTWM season gets a good rating? :wtf

Also those subscriptions probably don't even count the cancelations. You're deluded if you seriously think it'll stay this high. Intrest always peaks around this. After WM shit is going to drop harder than @Keepin It Stylish pants whenever Reigns does his little wink.


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



> After WM shit is going to drop harder than @Keepin It Stylish pants whenever Reigns does his little wink.




... which will then be blamed on creative or Reigns being the only good thing about the product. lol


----------



## LordKain

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

I'd say that it's a little early for a victory celebration Hunter and Vince. Lets all wait and see how business is post-WM because that determine everything.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Ultimo Warrior said:


> Makes me wonder if this very news would've broke out today had Bryan won instead.


If it reached 1m, then yes absolutely. There is no reason to suspect otherwise.




Mr W said:


> Daniel Bryan Smark Fans face's right now


:lmao :lmao man, this gif is really fucking fantastic.


----------



## Lord Humongous

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

1 million but they have to include not only the US but the UK. Not that impressive for how long its been out. Plus are they including the free November trial period. Im sure there was a spike in subscriptions during that month.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

:brock the mega draw


----------



## FabioLight

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Americans...whatelse :v (trying to get heel heat)


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



LordKain said:


> I'd say that it's a little early for a victory celebration Hunter and Vince. Lets all wait and see how business is post-WM because that determine everything.


Why? to what end? Even if Reigns fails, its not like Bryan was going to sustain interest if put in his place. He couldn't last year even at his hottest, why would it be different now?


----------



## Marv95

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



NastyYaffa said:


> RAW's after big PPV's ALWAYS draw well.


Last year's Summerslam didn't.


----------



## Mr. Kanefan

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> Bryan wasn't screwed, he just already had his moment on top.


Sure, you're only allowed one chance to be the top guy, despite still garnering the biggest crowd reaction even after being out injured for 9 months.

Correct me if I'm wrong but Austin spent the good part of 4 years on top, and Cena, Cena has spent the last 10 years and counting as the top guy, but Bryan has had his one moment, sure!


----------



## LordKain

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> Why? to what end? Even if Reigns fails, its not like Bryan was going to sustain interest if put in his place. He couldn't last year even at his hottest, why would it be different now?


I think the booking post last years WM played a huge hand in that don't you think? Besides nothing is going to sustain interest fan interest at this point anyway.


----------



## WWE_Ultrastar

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

They gave away the previous fucking nights Royal Rumble PPV for free! 

And they still only got 0.04 more than last years post Rumble Raw which is always traditionally one of the highest rating Raws of the year.

Is this a big fucking deal that they got 3.28 last night?


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Mr. Kanefan said:


> Sure, you're only allowed one chance to be the top guy, despite still garnering the biggest crowd reaction even after being out injured for 9 months.
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong but Austin spent the good part of 4 years on top, and Cena, Cena has spent the last 10 years and counting as the top guy, but Bryan has had his one moment, sure!


I discussed a lot about this in a related thread few days back, can't remember which one though. 

Difference between Austin and Bryan is the fact that one guy was a super mega draw, the face of an entire era with actual mainstream popularity and the other, Bryan who just gets great reactions in this smark heavy era. He is not a difference maker in any way for WWE. You could put Ambrose or Punk in his place last year and seen the same wresltlemania business figures. Unlike Austin, he just rides on the brand strength. His supposed mainstream popularity is false overness, again unlike Austin. 

And make no mistake about it, if Austin just received big reactions but didn't to draw, he would be in the exact same spot. If WM 14 had done the exact same buys as WM 13(which is the lowest), Vince would be complete justified in pushing him to the back and going with a new name for WM 15 headline.

As for Cena, that's obviously a reliability thing. Bryan's future with his health risks is uncertain, you know it. Hell, Bryan's injury was what caused all this trouble in the first place. We were supposed to get Bryan vs Lesnar for summerslam, your boy gets injured, unfortunate but not WWE's fault.


----------



## dmccourt95

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

I'm glad they got that milestone 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## ElTerrible

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



deepelemblues said:


> it was the best raw in months because there was literally no monday night raw.


:LIGHTS

You won the internet.


----------



## Mr. Kanefan

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> I discussed a lot about this in a related thread few days back, can't remember which one though.
> 
> Difference between Austin and Bryan is the fact that one guy was a super mega draw, the face of an entire era with actual mainstream popularity and the other, Bryan who just gets great reactions in this smark heavy era. He is not a difference maker in any way for WWE. You could put Ambrose or Punk in his place last year and seen the same wresltlemania business figures. Unlike Austin, he just rides on the brand strength. His supposed mainstream popularity is false overness, again unlike Austin.
> 
> And make no mistake about it, if Austin just received big reactions but didn't to draw, he would be in the exact same spot. If WM 14 had done the exact same buys as WM 13(which is the lowest), Vince would be complete justified in pushing him to the back and going with a new name for WM 15 headline.
> 
> As for Cena, that's obviously a reliability thing. Bryan's future with his health risks is uncertain, you know it. Hell, Bryan's injury was what caused all this trouble in the first place. We were supposed to get Bryan vs Lesnar for summerslam, your boy gets injured, unfortunate but not WWE's fault.


I know he got injured, and that's a shame, but hasn't Reigns just got back from quite a lengthy injury? What makes him able to jump straight back into the top spot and not Bryan?


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Mr. Kanefan said:


> I know he got injured, and that's a shame, but hasn't Reigns just got back from quite a lengthy injury? What makes him able to jump straight back into the top spot and not Bryan?


Reigns injury isn't career threatening like Bryan's obviously. Again, it comes down to the simple fact marks don't want to accept, Bryan was expendable. If all these great reactions and internet fandom let to huge business or hell even above average, no way WWE would consider taking him off the main events. That's not the case, WWE knows it, so they did what they thought was best for the company long term. 

Besides, its not like Reigns becoming the next big star is a guarantee. He could fuck-up and fail(look what happened to Orton in early career), he could even end up in a situation like Bryan where WWE drops him and goes with someone else. Ofcourse right now, they are firmly behind him but that's only because he is new and they know he needs their support, especially when the crowds are being trollish.


----------



## Heath V

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Tremendous show, I loved the format. Those ratings are much deserved.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

The show (with the promos from Brock/Heyman/Reigns, Rollins, Bryan and Ambrose's little segment) did more to advance storylines than a normal Raw does.

How sad is that?


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



ShowStopper said:


> The show (with the promos from Brock/Heyman/Reigns, Rollins, Bryan and Ambrose's little segment) did more to advance storylines than a normal Raw does.
> 
> How sad is that?


Oh RAW does advance main event storylines always, its just most of the time the awfulness of rest of the show overshadowes it and the three hour format with filler mid-card matches drains us out to notice it by the end.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> Oh RAW does advance main event storylines always, its just most of the time the awfulness of rest of the show overshadowes it and the three hour format with filler mid-card matches drains us out to notice it by the end.


I agree they do pay more than enough attention on the main event. I just think they advanced a storyline more effectively last night than they have in awhile. They did it with the "less is more" mindset last night (only because they didn't have much of a choice due to the storm) and it actually paid off.


----------



## Empress

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



ShowStopper said:


> I agree they do pay more than enough attention on the main event. I just think they advanced a storyline more effectively last night than they have in awhile. They did it with the "less is more" mindset last night (only because they didn't have much of a choice due to the storm) and it actually paid off.


This so much.

I'd still love to know whose idea it was to do the sit down interviews and bullet point promo's. Each person who spoke came off very natural. Heyman was the best. He's better than most professional actors.

I know creative was behind it all, but someone stepped up and guided the process.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

*Vince is a genius for airing The Rumble for free. Like I said yesterday, controversy creates cash. I was never worried. Meanwhile Wynter is having her usual panic attack :HHH2.

The Reigns Train is coming in right on schedule :maddox. Soon everybody will BELIEVE THAT :drose*


----------



## Empress

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Keepin It Stylish said:


> *Vince is a genius for airing The Rumble for free. Like I said yesterday, controversy creates cash. I was never worried. Meanwhile Wynter is having her usual panic attack :HHH2.
> 
> The Reigns Train is coming in right on schedule :maddox. Soon everybody will BELIEVE THAT :drose*


Rolling Stone just did a write up on him because of all the controversy. 

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture...an-rescue-roman-reigns-20150127#ixzz3Q4PIAMgX


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Olivia Pope said:


> Rolling Stone just did a write up on him because of all the controversy.
> 
> http://www.rollingstone.com/culture...an-rescue-roman-reigns-20150127#ixzz3Q4PIAMgX


Wow... Like a lot of others have said, I think all this controversy may be a good thing. At least it's creating a buzz.


----------



## PepeSilvia

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Numbers never lie but they can be very deceiving


----------



## Big Wiggle

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Socko316 said:


> Numbers never lie but they can be very deceiving


This.

Make no mistake about it, the WWE have f*cked up again.


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Hour three lost half a million viewers though.. that tells me quite a bit more than the raw numbers after a PPV (which should have a bump after the controversy since some will want to see what the fuss is about). It looks like most of the draw was getting to see the Rumble match itself... hopefully any newbies weren't scared away by that atrocity. We promise, the Rumble is usually not that bad.


----------



## Kabraxal

TrentBarretaFan said:


> Keep in mind that many people didn't know the outcome of RR Match.
> Maybe they were disappointed by the result and tuned out right after Reigns won...


Seems to be exactly what happened.


----------



## The Bloodline

When's the last time every hour was over 4 . Well good for them, hopefully they come back strong next week


----------



## thingstoponder

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



GOD said:


> i dont get it. why do people fucking still tune in after that abortion of a show? is it really that hard to find something else to watch?
> 
> holy fuck.


Yet you still find the time to complain about it on a wrestling forum.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Olivia Pope said:


> Rolling Stone just did a write up on him because of all the controversy.
> 
> http://www.rollingstone.com/culture...an-rescue-roman-reigns-20150127#ixzz3Q4PIAMgX


*But Reigns won't draw mainstream attention :HHH2*


----------



## CM punker

TrentBarretaFan said:


> Keep in mind that many people didn't know the outcome of RR Match.
> Maybe they were disappointed by the result and tuned out right after Reigns won...


Thats a huge stretch. Reigns haters will find anything to talk shit about him.. they mentioned several times on Raw that reigns won, plus they can easily read up the results


----------



## kwab

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

A talented street performer draws a huge crowd by doing and performing amazing acts of skill.

A horrific car accident draws a huge crowd by curiosity and intrigue.


Same thing? Of course.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



kwab said:


> A talented street performer draws a huge crowd by doing and performing amazing acts of skill.
> 
> A horrific car accident draws a huge crowd by curiosity and intrigue.
> 
> 
> Same thing? Of course.


Except the horrific accident happened a day before and everyone already knew who died. There is no reason for you to be still standing in the middle of the street looking at the wasted carnage a day after the event, is there? 




Kabraxal said:


> Hour three lost half a million viewers though..


That's been the RAW viewing pattern for months, hour three typically loses viewership. Its probably has to do with kids going to bed at that time.


----------



## X Spectrum

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Well, of course it drew ratings. The Rumble fiasco even got his way into TIME. They had mainstream exposure.

I honestly don't know how this comes as any surprise.


----------



## kwab

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> Except the horrific accident happened a day before and everyone already knew who died. There is no reason for you to be still standing in the middle of the street looking at the wasted carnage a day after the event, is there?


Analogy still stands. You don't know whether viewers are tuning in to see Reigns, Lesnar, (insert name), or if they're tuning in to see how WWE reacts to all the negative publicity.


----------



## Phaedra

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

The fallout Raw after one of the most controversial royal rumbles in recent memory was always going to draw. And a lot of us watched because we wanted to see what the fuck they were going to do in a studio lol.


----------



## AttitudeEraMark4Life

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

:lol To all the Reigns marks gloating about this the true real test of Reigns drawing power will be post mania in the after WM hangover that always tends to suck ass. Let's see how the "Chosen One" draws then.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Phaedra said:


> The fallout Raw after one of the most controversial royal rumbles in recent memory was always going to draw. And a lot of us watched because we wanted to see what the fuck they were going to do in a studio lol.


They maintained viewership well above average levels throughout the three hours, that says different. Those who tuned in because of the controversy or the curiosity of RAW being cancelled would've left in the first 30 mins. No way they stayed till late 11:00 pm to watch the same thing over again.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



kwab said:


> Analogy still stands. You don't know whether viewers are tuning in to see Reigns, Lesnar, (insert name), or if they're tuning in to see how WWE reacts to all the negative publicity.


This is after you assuming that the negative publicity even mattered to the casuals viewers who tuned in.


----------



## Trifektah

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Basically all of the fans who don't have a subscription got to watch the Rumble for free, and they got to to see how completely fucking awful it was and decided to never sign up for the network.


----------



## adamtj14

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

It's probably the biggest Raw since last Wrestlemania, so why wouldn't it draw big numbers?


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

If next week's Raw outdraws the one that just passed, I'm gonna say it-

WWE Studios outdraws Roman Reigns


----------



## TexasTornado

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

This surprises me but it shouldn't. They gave away the 2nd most popular PPV for free.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



adamtj14 said:


> It's probably the biggest Raw since last Wrestlemania, so why wouldn't it draw big numbers?


No, it was a cancelled RAW airing from the studio replaying select matches from the PPV the night before, which was collectively buried and shat on by the social media community, and also the event that was already playing in multiple loops on the network.


----------



## Hawkke

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

I firmly believe this, in part, speaks to something I have been saying off and on for a little while.. WWE Needs to go a little more back to it's roots, make somethings simpler. more down to Earth.. I think it would go a long way to reconnecting with the adult crowd maybe?


----------



## adamtj14

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> No, it was a cancelled RAW airing from the studio replaying select matches from the PPV the night before, which was collectively buried and shat on by the social media community, and also the event that was already playing in multiple loops on the network.


Yeah but most of the causal fans tuning in probably still don't have the network and wouldn't have known it was airing from the studio. Tuning in and hearing that you'll be able to see the Rumble match and WWE WHC title match on free tv is a big deal, even if the Rumble match was complete dog shite. 

Also if you did know it was cancelled, interactions between Lesnar and Reigns and other appearances were still advertised before hand and storylines were advanced so it isn't surprising people tuned in. Especially after the chaos caused by the end of the rumble the night before( a lot of big media outlets picked up on the CancelWWENetwork trend so people were interested to see how the WWE reacted). I know a few people even here in Ireland who were interested in seeing who the WWE responded and they are very casual viewers.


----------



## Phaedra

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

sorry xx


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Everyone knew it was airing from the studio and that live RAW was cancelled. Like I said, if it was just curiosity or controversy, it wouldn't have lasted all three hours.


----------



## Stone Hot

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Phaedra said:


> No Vince, it gives it prestige you silly cunt, yeah it makes it sound old, but for an event that is good. Why does he not understand this? You put the number on it and people see just how long this event has been going, just how important it is and the prestige that it carries to main event it.
> 
> Oh Vincey ... I think he doesn't like being old, he doesn't like the reminders of his age.


Wrong thread pal


----------



## Blackbeard

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



GOD said:


> i dont get it. why do people fucking still tune in after that abortion of a show? is it really that hard to find something else to watch?
> 
> holy fuck.


Curiosity to see how they'd handle the Rumble fallout. I give them credit though, at least the didn't mute the crowd reactions from the PPV.


----------



## DudeLove669

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

That's a bad thing in the end because it means more people got to see Reigns completely flop at the Rumble


----------



## Marv95

TrentBarretaFan said:


> Keep in mind that many people didn't know the outcome of RR Match.
> Maybe they were disappointed by the result and tuned out right after Reigns won...


Many of them would find out eventually before Raw with the mainstream media covering it. And again if they were disappointed the dropoff in hour 3 would have been much larger and the overall rating would not have been as high since they mentioned that Reigns was the winner throughout the night.


----------



## Loose Reality

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

How ironic that Raw draws high ratings without a 25 minute opening promo featuring John Cena and The Authority? In fact apart from the replayed match in which he was easily 3rd rate, was there any Cena references? Anything from HHH? 

Only got the first hour here in Australia because they were still trying to sell PPV replays and wouldn't air it for free, despite their "technical difficulties" claim.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> Bryan wasn't screwed, he just already had his moment on top.


Are you gonna say that when Reigns main events Mania a second time next year? Of course you won't.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



DudeLove669 said:


> That's a bad thing in the end because it means more people got to see Reigns completely flop at the Rumble


No it doesn't. If people tuned in after knowing the result of Rumble and stayed past the first hour, it means they were interested in his ascension. Plus, the show itself with Cole, Heyman, Brock, Reigns interviews and all that, was structured to ensure Roman comes out looking well. Marks might hate it, but it served its purpose and drew well. WWE hitting a million post Rumble only shows people aren't buying into this IWC hate. In the end, people like what they like, they aren't going to dislike someone just because marks are trolling with crowd reactions.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



KoЯn;44585017 said:


> Are you gonna say that when Reigns main events Mania a second time next year? Of course you won't.


I actually would, if he fails to become a difference maker for WWE.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> I actually would, if he fails to become a difference maker for WWE.


So Bryan isn't a difference maker? He's the most over guy since Batista a decade ago. :dahell


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



Loader230 said:


> No it doesn't. If people tuned in after knowing the result of Rumble and stayed past the first hour, it means they were interested in his ascension. Plus, the show itself with Cole, Heyman, Brock, Reigns interviews and all that, was structured to ensure Roman comes out looking well. Marks might hate it, but it served its purpose and drew well. WWE hitting a million post Rumble only shows people aren't buying into this IWC hate. In the end, people like what they like, they aren't going to dislike someone just because marks are trolling with crowd reactions.


So they wait to see the win but not the actual aftermath and response from him? Sorry, but that screams people only wanted to see the free PPV matches and then many decided "well, that sucked" and left immediately than it was "o yay he won! Now I don't have to watch him speak or anything because I saw the real story already!". See how much sense that makes?


----------



## The One Man Gang

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

definitely wanted to see how they'd handle the Reigns situation.


----------



## Loader230

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



KoЯn;44585537 said:


> So Bryan isn't a difference maker? He's the most over guy since Batista a decade ago. :dahell


And that's my point, because its fucking shocking. He gets Austin level reactions but he is not a difference maker to the business. I still remember post WM 30 house show report last year, where Cena's crew totally outdraws Bryan's crew and this is the guy coming right off huge wrestlemania wins. I can't even understand how a guy so over, can't even draw above average business.


----------



## Hazaq

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

RAW was actually great this week despite being taped from the studios. They deserved this good rating imo.


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Yeah, couldn't be the fact that they gave away the 2nd biggest PPV of the year on Raw.

I literally. . .at least used to, look forward to the RR more than any other PPV including WM. If they ever gave that shit away in the past they would've pulled their highest ratings every time I'd assume.


----------



## Redzero

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



GOD said:


> i dont get it. why do people fucking still tune in after that abortion of a show? is it really that hard to find something else to watch?
> 
> holy fuck.


People wanted to see Roman response or get booed out of the building.


----------



## TNA is Here

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Seems like the WWE believe their own bullshit at this point.


----------



## IHaveTillFiveBitch

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

For all we know this is a lie for damage control


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

People wanted to tune in for the shitfest.


----------



## #Mark

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

They put the second biggest PPV of the year on free TV. It would be alarming if the show did not do well.


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



MEMS said:


> You and many others have to come to terms with the fact that not as many fans thought it was an "abortion of a show"


You did see the 30,000 people on fB that gave it a thumbs down to only like 8,000 for a thumbs up right


----------



## looper007

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



#Mark said:


> They put the second biggest PPV of the year on free TV. It would be alarming if the show did not do well.


This

I love how many are trying to make it into "Reigns did it" and "the show wasn't all that bad". Come on they gave a free PPV away.


----------



## LoveHateWWE

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*

Hold on, so #CancelTheNetwork was trending worldwide for 2 days and they still hit 1 Mil subscribers? So much for that. Has it not been updated yet or something?


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



LoveHateWWE said:


> Hold on, so #CancelTheNetwork was trending worldwide for 2 days and they still hit 1 Mil subscribers? So much for that. Has it not been updated yet or something?


Doubt that many people unsubscribed, but if they did unsubscribe, their subscription would still be active until the end of the one month period that they signed up for.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

This was Lesnar's first TV match in over a decade.

How were the ratings btw? I see that they were good, but I can't find the exact ratings in any of the posts.

EDIT:NVM Found it, so the hour with the Reigns/Lesnar angle and Reigns winning the Rumble got the lowest hour. LOL


----------



## Lebyonics

Three main reasons why the numbers are high

1) Its Royal Rumble, the 2nd biggest ppv shown for free, the most exciting and fun match of the entire year for the casuals.

2) After the fuckfest and all the twitter bullshit, casuals who did not have the network or have not seen the Rumble would have definitely wanted to see the reason behind the hate and whether it was justified.

3) People who watched the Rumble and wanted to see how WWE responsed with the backlash

One good thing coming out of it is a lot of exposure and spotlight for Roman Reigns with the casuals, a good opportunity to step up his game during RTWM and prove his critics wrong or continue like the boring fuck he has been uptil now and drive away audience


----------



## The Bloodline

TakeMyGun said:


> This was Lesnar's first TV match in over a decade.
> 
> How were the ratings btw? I see that they were good, but I can't find the exact ratings in any of the posts.
> 
> EDIT:NVM Found it, so the hour with the Reigns/Lesnar angle and Reigns winning the Rumble got the lowest hour. LOL


Even though it dropped in hour 3 it still did a 4.1 which is higher than hour 3 has been in a long time, correct? Im not sure. All that was advertised were sit down interviews with Reigns, Bryan and Reigns/Brock face to face. Very impressive numbers even in its lost


----------



## JTB33b

Rollins should have attempted to cashin in against Brock out in the snow. Then have Ambrose arrive like he did and foil it. Ambrose could have said he walked from Philly to make Rollins doesn't cashin.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Ravensflock88 said:


> Even though it dropped in hour 3 it still did a 4.1 which is higher than hour 3 has been in a long time, correct? Im not sure. All that was advertised were sit down interviews with Reigns, Bryan and Reigns/Brock face to face. Very impressive numbers even in its lost


500k loss tho? And considering it had the first staredown between the WRESTLEMANIA Headliners, and the conclusion to the Rumble, and a DB interview, it was a failure IMO.

Still a great number, glad nearly 5 million people saw that terrific triple threat match. Real coming out party for Seth Rollins, and now everyone saw that breakthrough performance.


----------



## The Bloodline

TakeMyGun said:


> 500k loss tho? And considering it had the first staredown between the WRESTLEMANIA Headliners, and the conclusion to the Rumble, and a DB interview, it was a failure IMO.
> 
> Still a great number, glad nearly 5 million people saw that terrific triple threat match. Real coming out party for Seth Rollins, and now everyone saw that breakthrough performance.


4.1 sticking around for the conclusion of the rumble and just sit down interviews I think is probably more than many would expect. 3rd hour drops as is. I think it sustained a lot of interest throughout. in the end people DID care to hear what the guys had to say. A lot tuned out after the match and naturally after 10 o clock but a hell of a lot stayed put . 3rd hour of a canceled raw getting over 4 is a victory. I cant downplay it cause it was literally just short promos people stuck around for.

& I'm happy more people got to see Seth last night too, I think that was his statement match. He's that guy now, it was his most important performance of his wwe career. Blizzard worked wonders for this show.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

Controversy really does create cash...


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



ajmaf625 said:


> But here's what I don't get....people knew Reigns won the Rumble even if they didn't watch it live on Sunday thanks to Twitter, Facebook, etc and still watched it on tv. Guess a lot of people don't mind him winning after all. The triple threat was awesome needed to watch that again


Or it's because they love the Rumble match in general(i.e. the most popular gimmick match of all time.) Or because they were interested in seeing the controversy of the ending with their own eyes. Or both. Nothing immediately says that they were in love with Reigns winning. 

And yes, that triple-threat match was awesome.


----------



## SinJackal

I don't know if twitter had much at all to do with people tuning in tbh. I mean. . .I come to this forum of all places, and literally had no idea about twitter stuff regarding the RR. I simply tuned into Raw to see what happened with the PPV. I'd assume most people did the same, and were surprised that they were airing the RR, so they stuck around for it.

The Raw after RR usually pulls a lot of viewers. Everyone telling their friends they're showing the RR match is probably what spiked viewership the most. Twitter and "seeing the fallout of it" was probably among the least responsible for the ratings. If anything that'd make people not watch.


----------



## MEMS

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



birthday_massacre said:


> You did see the 30,000 people on fB that gave it a thumbs down to only like 8,000 for a thumbs up right


Lol, this whole internet thing is clouding your judgement. You're foolish if you can't realize that an extremely large percentage of wrestling fans have nothing to do with message boards and Facebook polls. 

Very small minority is your new friend for today. Learn it, understand it, accept it.


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



MEMS said:


> Lol, this whole internet thing is clouding your judgement. You're foolish if you can't realize that an extremely large percentage of wrestling fans have nothing to do with message boards and Facebook polls.
> 
> Very small minority is your new friend for today. Learn it, understand it, accept it.


This is 2015. Most wreslting fans have an Internet connection and talk about wrestling in forums, Facebook, twitter, WWE oficial page or whatever.

Learn it, understand it, accept it.


----------



## MEMS

*Re: WWE Draws The Highest Audience Since Post-Mania 30 show!!*



MaybeLock said:


> This is 2015. Most wreslting fans have an Internet connection and talk about wrestling in forums, Facebook, twitter, WWE oficial page or whatever.


Wrong. Lol


----------



## murder

This 10% shit might have been true in 2000, but in 2015, uh nah, not likely.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Smackdown up again. Bryan vs Kane drew. Anyone up for a best of 7? 

http://goo.gl/JKH3GF


----------



## gr8

Clearly it had to have been the heavily promoted Reigns vs Show match.Daniel Bryan vs Kane for the 3rd week and ratings are up again just shows that Kane still draws as the big slacks wearing monster.Bryan has clearly shown that the masses don't want him and have gotten behind fresh faces at the top like Reigns and Cena.Bryan had his time last year and its time for the younger generation to take over like Sting,Big Show,Kane,HHH,and Cena.Because without a change of scenery the view gets really old.


----------



## DoubtGin

Think Smackdown being live and a few Taker rumours also played a role in it.

What a shit SD that was, though.


----------



## MaybeLock

IDONTSHIV said:


> Smackdown up again. Bryan vs Kane drew. Anyone up for a best of 7?
> 
> http://goo.gl/JKH3GF


SD ratings tend to infinity as long as Bryan keeps being booked :bryan2


----------



## DoubtGin

They should restart that Bryan-Kane feud :bryan2


----------



## JY57

same match (just with stipulations) for 3 straight weeks and each week increase in viewership.

Pretty Impressive


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Shouldn't the rating have been a lot higher considering there was no RAW this week? And this SD was live too.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

The Boy Wonder said:


> Shouldn't the rating have been a lot higher considering there was no RAW this week? And this SD was live too.


The Live Smackdowns in the past have done lower than the taped shows. And there was a RAW, everyone saw all of the results and a form of fallout as well. 

Smackdown doing nearly 3 million viewers in 2015 is a huge success.


----------



## Blade Runner

well done bryan :clap

now give him meaningful feuds and watch smackdown reach even greater heights. it's just unfortunate that the show isn't Live every week, that will always be a hindrance.


----------



## The Bloodline

Glad ratings went up. A lot of people went into this show thinking it would be a 2 hour Raw but it was just a filler show, It even started the show with HHH saying you'll have to tune into Raw for the important stuff. nothing really happened storywise all show fpalm. Even though they knew a lot of people would tune in for the first live event since rumble. Raw was oddly better this week.


----------



## Sweettre15

Ravensflock88 said:


> Glad ratings went up. A lot of people went into this show thinking it would be a 2 hour Raw but it was just a filler show, It even started the show with HHH saying you'll have to tune into Raw for the important stuff. nothing really happened storywise all show fpalm. Even though they knew a lot of people would tune in for the first live event since rumble. * Raw was oddly better this week.*


Sadly that's what happens when Smackdown is composed of a leftover Raw script and Vince is within Smackdown's reach. Reminds me why it's better Vince doesn't work Tuesdays.


----------



## murder

Sweettre15 said:


> why it's better Vince doesn't work Tuesdays.


Vince works 8 days a week, that's the problem.


----------



## Londrick

Bryan saving SD again. It's Late 2011/early 2012 all over again. Now all we need is Heel Henry fucking shit up again and giving us a proper feud with Bryan. Keep Show the fuck away this time.


----------



## NastyYaffa




----------



## FITZ

SVETV988_fan said:


> well done bryan :clap
> 
> now give him meaningful feuds and watch smackdown reach even greater heights. it's just unfortunate that the show isn't Live every week, that will always be a hindrance.


I don't think that's true from a ratings perspective. 

TNA is probably the best example that I can use as they tape their shows months in advance. There was no correlation between it being live and them doing better. In fact they got a big increase (for TNA at least) when they advertised that next week Dixie Carter was going through a table. They even showed clips from the next episode on that episode. 

If you can advertise something that people want to see they are going to watch the show. And in some cases people will tune in if they do know what's going to happen. The most famous example being when they said Foley was winning the WWE title on an episode of Nitro and Nitro lost viewers to Raw. 

Personally I remember when Edge cashed in MITB on Undertaker on a taped SD. They gave away that Edge cashed in on that week's ECW. I didn't watch SD every week (but I guess I watched ECW every week?) but I sure as hell made sure I watched it that time.


----------



## Sweettre15

_The Thursday, January 29th live edition of WWE SmackDown from Hartford, Connecticut scored a final *2.06 (2.1)* 
cable rating, according to Nielsen Media Research. The 2.06 (2.1) final draw marks a slight increase compared to last week's show, which delivered a 1.97 final cable rating.

*Thursday's live SmackDown show averaged 2.952 million* viewers for the SyFy Network, which was also up from the previous week's show, which averaged 2.814 million viewers.

The rating and viewership for this week's show is the biggest audience to watch WWE SmackDown on their new Thursday night weekly time slot. Additionally, SmackDown was once again the highest rated original programming on cable television for Thursday night.

The last time SmackDown drew a bigger number than this week was for the January 31, 2014 edition of the show, which delivered a 2.18 rating and averaged 3.027 million viewers._


----------



## validreasoning

8pm = 4.466 million
9pm = 4.403 million
10pm = 4.008 million

average = 4.29 million


----------



## brxd

validreasoning said:


> 8pm = 4.466 million
> 9pm = 4.403 million
> 10pm = 4.008 million
> 
> average = 4.29 million


Wow. Bryan vs. Rollins bombed. Shame.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This is the chart. Hour 3 was the poorest of the night.


----------



## D.M.N.

Date....... / H1...... / H2...... / H3...... / Average
04/02/13 - 4.863m / 4.857m / 4.711m => 4.81 million
03/02/14 - 4.428m / 4.221m / 3.983m => 4.21 million
02/02/15 - 4.466m / 4.403m / 4.008m => 4.29 million

Marginally up versus 2014, down on 2013 unsurprisingly when The Rock was champion.


----------



## Empress

Bad numbers for Bryan/Rollins but the third hour of the show has been struggling for some time now. 

The first two hours held up well.


----------



## Chrome

Yeah that's a disappointing number. Shame too, as it was a great match.


----------



## Sweettre15

So the third hour was the lowest despite the Reigns/Bryan backstage segment and the Bryan/Rollins match with the Reigns run in?

Something tells me those things are the only things that kept it from going any lower


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So it appears Bryan/Rollins hour didn't do too well, but I wonder how the match did? This is where a breakdown would be good to see.

First two hours did well, so there's that. I would've expected the first hour to be higher considering the major announcement by HHH was advertised to start at the beginning of the show, but then again maybe that segment knocked it out of the park and the rest of the hour fell (although that and the Reigns/Show match took up most of the first hour. Fans probably tuned in for the opener and then tuned out for Show/Reigns, although again without a breakdown who knows?).


----------



## Wynter

God damn, what happened to the 3rd hour?? I mean, at least they kept a consistent 4 million though. But the fuck??


----------



## DoubtGin

Third hour is quite low. I think it was a strong RAW overall.

I'd say the announcement made some turn off the TV, but the second hour still has decent ratings.


----------



## Empress

#BadNewsSanta said:


> So it appears Bryan/Rollins hour didn't do too well, but I wonder how the match did? This is where a breakdown would be good to see.
> 
> First two hours did well, so there's that. I would've expected the first hour to be higher considering the major announcement by HHH was advertised to start at the beginning of the show, but then again maybe that segment knocked it out of the park and the rest of the hour fell (although that and the Reigns/Show match took up most of the first hour. Fans probably tuned in for the opener and then tuned out for Show/Reigns, although again without a breakdown who knows?).


Why would you attribute the drastic drop to Reigns/Show? The first two hours did well. It was in the third that it suffered the most. All signs point to some not caring enough to watch the main event. They missed a great match though.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Olivia Pope said:


> Why would you attribute the drastic drop to Reigns/Show? The first two hours did well. It was in the third that it suffered the most. All signs point to some not caring around to watch the main event.


Read the post, please. I'm speculating on what happened in The FIRST hour. It's possible the opening segment with how it was advertised did near 5 million or in the high 4 millions, and then it drops to low 4 million during Reigns/Show match. It's the only reason I'd see hour 1 and hour 2 doing almost the same instead of hour 1 being near 5 million in anticipation of the announcement, but ultimately as I pointed out without a breakdown we don't know.


----------



## Chrome

Olivia Pope said:


> Why would you attribute the drastic drop to Reigns/Show? The first two hours did well. It was in the third that it suffered the most. All signs point to some not caring enough to watch the main event. They missed a great match though.


Because it's an awful match that's been done to death and nobody wants to see Show wrestle anymore.


----------



## Empress

Chrome said:


> Because it's an awful match that's been done to death and nobody wants to see Show wrestle anymore.


Big Show/Reigns is an awful match and feud. I barely paid attention to it, but the ratings still held up and into the 2nd hour. And Bryan/Rollins had been advertised as the main event by that point. That was the bait for viewers to stay tuned in. But they didn't.


----------



## Wynter

Chrome said:


> Because it's an awful match that's been done to death and nobody wants to see Show wrestle anymore.


First and second hour did great. If Big Show vs Roman was that much of a turn off, the second hour would have had a drastic drop :shrug I hate Big Show vs Roman, but it didn't kill the second hour or anything :lol

Third hour always does the worst,but it's a shame such a excellent match received that bad of a drop off.

I mean, this was a match that was determining if Bryan was going to wrestle Roman in who could wrestle Brock. Surely that's important enough to stick around?

Either way, I don't see how this could be blamed on Roman. Rollins vs Bryan was heavily advertised as a big deal and directly affects the main event of Mania.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Bryan/Rollins could have still been the peak of the show so it didn't "fail" as of yet and we may never know if it did.


----------



## Chrome

Yeah, we really need some breakdowns. The hell ever happened to them?


----------



## Joshi Judas

Nothing too surprising. There is always a drop for the 3rd hour and we hardly get breakdowns anymore to know how the segments fared individually.


----------



## Wynter

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Bryan/Rollins could have still been the peak of the show so it didn't "fail" as of yet and we may never know if it did.


They were in the third hour. Even if they were the peak of the third hour, it still is a 400,000 drop off from the second. It was a match that was advertised throughout the night and was an important one. The results of the match could directly affect the main event of MANIA. Daniel Bryan might get Brock! Surely that's big enough to tune in for?

But, it's not really a huge deal. The third hour always drops unless something huge is expected.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

WynterWarm12 said:


> Either way, I don't see how this could be blamed on Roman. Rollins vs Bryan was heavily advertised as a big deal and directly affects the main event of Mania.



I will always blame Reigns . I have always blamed Reigns:









I would really enjoy a breakdown to see where the exodus occurred.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

WynterWarm12 said:


> They were in the third hour. Even if they were the peak of the third hour, it still is a 400,000 drop off from the second. It was a match that was advertised throughout the night and was an important one. The results of the match could directly affect the main event of MANIA. Daniel Bryan might get Brock! Surely that's big enough to tune in for?
> 
> But, it's not really a huge deal. The third hour always drops unless something huge is expected.


It's three hours of television, I'm sure the average viewer isn't going to stick around through the regular stuff, they knew the match was the main event. If big advertised overruns in the past are anything we can go by, combined with Bryan's track record, the. Bryan/Rollins match could've done over a million viewers and peak of the show but the rest of the hour is what was in the gutter because as you said, people normally tune out during the third hour. This week's third hour didn't have anything that would normally draw except for that match. Even the 10PM slot only had the last minute of Wyatt/Ziggler and then most of it was divas action.


----------



## Wynter

IDONTSHIV said:


> I will always blame Reigns . I have always blamed Reigns:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would really enjoy a breakdown to see where the exodus occurred.


Maybe that boring ass Miz match :lol At least it had me like Zzzzz lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

WynterWarm12 said:


> Maybe that boring ass Miz match :lol At least it had me like Zzzzz lol


I really wish there were breakdowns. it would at least end speculation and allow us to point fingers at the most deserving culprits.. Oh well, there is a certain charm to people going off on mark inspired rants, I suppose. I used to be at the forefront of that movement.


----------



## funnyfaces1

The breakdowns left after Mania last year. Why that happened is beyond me. When did they even start getting publicized? Earliest I can go back to was during the Summer of Punk, which is why we have this thread in the first place :rock unk2


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This shows the decline of hour 3 during 2015. The audience is conditioned to tune out, it appears. I got this from PWTorch website:

*Third Hour Viewership Decline 2015*

-- Jan. 5 Raw: 7.4 percent decline from second hour
-- Jan. 12 Raw: 4.5 percent decline
-- Jan. 19 Raw: 6.3 percent decline
-- Jan. 26 Raw: 11.2 percent decline
-- Feb. 2 Raw: 8.9 percent decline


----------



## Londrick

WWE still not learning from having midgets in the main event.


----------



## Nyall

you people are fucking hilarious.. daniel bryan gets all the credit for increases in SD ratings that he main evented, yet a plethora of excuses when the ratings drop for the first Raw that he's main evented in almost a year? 

Could it possibly be that Daniel Bryan perhaps just isn't that big a draw? that beyond the smarks of the IWC, people really don't give a shit about him? 400,000 people decided to stop watching Raw despite knowing full well the most over guy and supposed savior and new SCSA was going to be in the main event, these are the facts.. 

But yeah, go on, continue to demand that Vince makes this goat faced troll the face of his company because he'll create the next Wrestling boom, by Yessing every 30 seconds.. he's as bland as Spam and the fact, that he has to yes before he enters the ring, yes all through out his match, yes after his match, yes when he's on the mic, yes while he's doing a promo... no wonder people said Yes when prompted with the decision to change the channel with his match coming up.


----------



## Hennessey

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Read the post, please. I'm speculating on what happened in The FIRST hour. It's possible the opening segment with how it was advertised did near 5 million or in the high 4 millions, and then it drops to low 4 million during Reigns/Show match. It's the only reason I'd see hour 1 and hour 2 doing almost the same instead of hour 1 being near 5 million in anticipation of the announcement, but ultimately as I pointed out without a breakdown we don't know.


The Reign's/Show match was like 5 minutes long.


----------



## Wynter

Hennessey said:


> The Reign's/Show match was like 5 minutes long.


Doesn't matter. Roman could not show up, get his name mentioned on commentary during a certain hour and that would used to be blame for lower ratings/views in that hour :lol

Low ratings/views=Roman's fault

Good ratings/views=everyone but Roman's contributions.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

IDONTSHIV said:


> This shows the decline of hour 3 during 2015. The audience is conditioned to tune out, it appears. I got this from PWTorch website:
> 
> *Third Hour Viewership Decline 2015*
> 
> -- Jan. 5 Raw: 7.4 percent decline from second hour
> -- Jan. 12 Raw: 4.5 percent decline
> -- Jan. 19 Raw: 6.3 percent decline
> -- Jan. 26 Raw: 11.2 percent decline
> -- Feb. 2 Raw: 8.9 percent decline


It wouldn't decline if they announce randomly that 'the WWE champion Brock Lesnar will defend his title tonight in the main event'. They need to switch up the format. Same six man tag, contract signings, opening 30 minute promos.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

TheLooseCanon said:


> It wouldn't decline if they announce randomly that 'the WWE champion Brock Lesnar will defend his title tonight in the main event'. They need to switch up the format. Same six man tag, contract signings, opening 30 minute promos.



completely agree. The format is stale. They really need to shake things up.


----------



## Batz

WynterWarm12 said:


> Doesn't matter. Roman could not show up, get his name mentioned on commentary during a certain hour and that would used to be blame for lower ratings/views in that hour :lol
> 
> Low ratings/views=Roman's fault
> 
> Good ratings/views=everyone but Roman's contributions.


Yeah I don't ever blame low ratings/views on one person, or two, or three, etc. Low numbers are due to multitude of reasons.

Same goes for high numbers. First hour is a combination of RtWM, Roman, Bryan, the Authority "addressing the controversy". It's the first RAW in a long while I actually bothered to sit down and watch right at a 8:00 PM mark. :lol

Second hour took a huge dip, because everyone saw the opener and decided to tune out. That's what I did too, I just had RAW playing in the background as I worked.

Third hour saw a slight bump - which is good. Obviously not a fantastic number, but still a bright sign, especially because the third hour tends to have the most significant dip in viewership ever since the programming adopted it.

Overall, ratings/viewership is still not a good sign at determining who's a "draw" in this day of age. I think both Bryan and Roman are a draw, I also think Cena and Rollins are a draw. Even Ambrose and some other guys do draw. 

The biggest draws today are Lesnar and Bryan. But that isn't saying much either. Most of the time the TV numbers show it, on the most random weeks they don't.

In the end this conversation usually leads to nowhere. Also because number breakdowns are scarce, and this thread just ends up with people throwing around assumptions and playing the blame game.


----------



## Nyall

Batz said:


> Yeah I don't ever blame low ratings/views on one person, or two, or three, etc. Low numbers are due to multitude of reasons.
> 
> Same goes for high numbers. First hour is a combination of RtWM, Roman, Bryan, the Authority "addressing the controversy". It's the first RAW in a long while I actually bothered to sit down and watch right at a 8:00 PM mark. :lol
> 
> Second hour took a huge dip, because everyone saw the opener and decided to tune out. That's what I did too, I just had RAW playing in the background as I worked.
> 
> Third hour saw a slight bump - which is good. Obviously not a fantastic number, but still a bright sign, especially because the third hour tends to have the most significant dip in viewership ever since the programming adopted it.
> 
> Overall, ratings/viewership is still not a good sign at determining who's a "draw" in this day of age. I think both Bryan and Roman are a draw, I also think Cena and Rollins are a draw. Even Ambrose and some other guys do draw.
> 
> The biggest draws today are Lesnar and *Bryan*. But that isn't saying much either. Most of the time the TV numbers show it, on the most random weeks they don't.
> 
> In the end this conversation usually leads to nowhere. Also because number breakdowns are scarce, and this thread just ends up with people throwing around assumptions and playing the blame game.


you spelled Cena wrong.. crowd reactions =/= drawing ability


----------



## Wynter

Batz said:


> Yeah I don't ever blame low ratings/views on one person, or two, or three, etc. Low numbers are due to multitude of reasons.
> 
> Same goes for high numbers. First hour is a combination of RtWM, Roman, Bryan, the Authority "addressing the controversy". It's the first RAW in a long while I actually bothered to sit down and watch right at a 8:00 PM mark. :lol
> 
> Second hour took a huge dip, because everyone saw the opener and decided to tune out. That's what I did too, I just had RAW playing in the background as I worked.
> 
> Third hour saw a slight bump - which is good. Obviously not a fantastic number, but still a bright sign, especially because the third hour tends to have the most significant dip in viewership ever since the programming adopted it.
> 
> Overall, ratings/viewership is still not a good sign at determining who's a "draw" in this day of age. I think both Bryan and Roman are a draw, I also think Cena and Rollins are a draw. Even Ambrose and some other guys do draw.
> 
> The biggest draws today are Lesnar and Bryan. But that isn't saying much either. Most of the time the TV numbers show it, on the most random weeks they don't.
> 
> In the end this conversation usually leads to nowhere. Also because number breakdowns are scarce, and this thread just ends up with people throwing around assumptions and playing the blame game.


Hmmm? The second hour didn't take a huge dip

8pm = 4.466 million
9pm = 4.403 million
10pm = 4.008 million

63,000 is big number, but not the worst. Third hour always drops a lot, but it's still disappointing when you realize the gravity the Seth vs Bryan match held. Still, they held at least 4 million throughout.

At this point, having a guy who comes in and just slaughters it with viewership and ratings hasn't come to fruition yet. It's debatable if it will happen again, but never say never.

Blaming one guy as you said is pretty dumb. There will always be variables in the equation to why Raw did a certain way. Hopefully things will pick up in the coming weeks


----------



## Batz

Nyall said:


> you spelled Cena wrong.. crowd reactions =/= drawing ability


Okay.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Hennessey said:


> The Reign's/Show match was like 5 minutes long.


True (and thank god!)

Just to be clear, I'm not saying Reigns/Show did lose viewers, I don't have those numbers. History shows that it's more likely it, the match itself, lost viewers off an opening segment that was majorly hyped than the main event that involves Bryan who has been very successful in a number of overruns in the past off of... whatever happened before it. It's also more likely the main event itself was the peak of it's hour where Reigns/Show wasn't. It's also possible that the main event was still the peak of the show, despite the overall hourly viewership. If we saw a breakdown and it went something like:

Q1- 5.0 million (opener)
Q2- 4.6 million (Opener continued and Reigns/Show)
Q3- 4.3 million (End of Reign/Show... and/or Ambrose/Axel segment)
Q4- 4.0 million (Ascension match)
Q5- 4.6 million (Cena/Ziggler/Ryback/Rowan)
Q6- 4.4 million (Ryback/Harper)
Q7- 4.1 million (Uso/Cesaro)
Q8- 4.6 million (Ziggler/Wyatt)
Q9- 3.8 million (Divas match)
Q10- 3.8 million (Miz/Sin Cara)
Q11- 3.6 million (Rusev attacking Rowan)
Q12- 4.1 million (Start of Bryan/Rollins)
OR- 5.1 million (End of Bryan/Rollins)

Not sure if the numbers add up to around what the hourly numbers were, but hopefully you get the idea. Bryan/Rollins in this case would be the peak of the show, be a clear strong gainer, gaining a massive 1.5 million viewers between quarter 11 and the overrun, and showing that hour 3 not being a strong hour is due to lack of starpower in that hour/a weak 10PM lead in/people just getting tired. 

Now 1.5 million is a crazy gain and I'm not sure I've ever seen that... I doubt Bryan/Rollins was peak of the night but going based off history I would still conclude, until a breakdown is presented that shows otherwise, that Bryan/Rollins gained a massive number and is the sole reason the 10PM hour didn't sink to embarrassing levels for a Raw that's on the road to WM. 

Also to save face with the Reigns marks (who are for some reason getting butthurt at speculative numbers), in this example that I used Reigns/Show still did a good number, despite losing some from the massive opener. I also think that's basically what happened here, and there's no reason to think it didn't.


----------



## Batz

WynterWarm12 said:


> Hmmm? The second hour didn't take a huge dip
> 
> 8pm = 4.466 million
> 9pm = 4.403 million
> 10pm = 4.008 million
> 
> 63,000 is big number, but not the worst. Third hour always drops a lot, but it's still disappointing when you realize the gravity the Seth vs Bryan match held. Still, they held at least 4 million throughout.
> 
> At this point, having a guy who comes in and just slaughters it with viewership and ratings hasn't come to fruition yet. It's debatable if it will happen again, but never say never.
> 
> Blaming one guy as you said is pretty dumb. There will always be variables in the equation to why Raw did a certain way. Hopefully things will pick up in the coming weeks


Saw different numbers off another site? Whoops. :lol

It's just a lot of assumptions that ultimately leads to nowhere. That's my point. People in here bickering about it is just nonsense really. I look forward to these numbers only when something significant happens. Like the RAW after Survivor Series I was eager to see how people react to Sting. Or after RR, to see the link between social media activity and RAW viewership. Both surprised me a ton.

Infact I'm surprised the third hour stayed about 4million! Third hour rarely draws, and as pointless as this thread can be sometimes - please stop taking the third hour into consideration. If there's a significant increase in it, then yeah, it's a factor. People, especially children, usually tune out by then. Either watching some other late night show, heading to bed, etc. And lets be honest, it takes some real work to sit through 3 hours of this show.

In the end of it, the viewership rarely ever has to do with one person. That's my point. Stop playing the blame game, and making assumptions, it doesn't lead to anything.


----------



## Empress

Bryan/Rollins just didn't draw this time around. Judging from the available numbers, the third hour suffered in comparison to the first two. Sometimes, it is what it is.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Oh what's that? Fans starting tuning out after Reigns lost and they thought he was done. How shocking. I was told that Reigns drawing for the 2nd hour for a month straight was just a fluke and no one cares about him







.*



Empress said:


> Bryan/Rollins just didn't draw this time around. Judging from the available numbers, the third hour suffered in comparison to the first two. Sometimes, it is what it is.


*And people wanted to save that for Wrestlemania :kobe8. Yes, the match quality will be great, but Rollins has no star power because he's been overexposed and booked like a bitch. *


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hanging onto alittle bit over 4 million for the 3rd hour isn't bad considering the 3rd hour always drops. :shrug It also shows that maybe not that many people care who will face Reigns at FastLane. Probably abit because everyone knows Reigns is being booked to win. These ratings fights in this era are hilarious. NO ONE draws on Raw today. Also, they're not going to put Rollins in the main event of WM when he has the briefcase. They probably like the tease factor that he could cash in after the main event.


----------



## Cobalt

IDONTSHIV said:


> completely agree. The format is stale. They really need to shake things up.


It's extremely repetitive and you always know your never gonna get huge title matches or things out of the "ordinary" occurring.


----------



## The Bloodline

I was told it was a big deal last week when hour 3 dropped because of Reigns interviews being advertised however last Week hour 3 still brought in a 4.1. So once again I'll say that's a hell of a number considering what was advertised for this week and last week.

Just happy the show is staying above 4 straight through for now.


----------



## Starbuck

I wish we had breakdowns. These Bryan vs. Reigns mark wars have the potential to top the Bryan vs. Punk mark wars of days gone by.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> I wish we had breakdowns. These Bryan vs. Reigns mark wars have the potential to top the Bryan vs. Punk mark wars of days gone by.


They sure do :lol

Could bring back the "good ol' days" of the Rating thread :dance


----------



## THANOS

Starbuck said:


> I wish we had breakdowns. These Bryan vs. Reigns mark wars have the potential to top the Bryan vs. Punk mark wars of days gone by.


Yep :, the fact we have no breakdowns anymore is the main reason I rarely comment in here anymore. What's the point of arguing if a guy did well in a segment when you only have the overall hour rating to go by? There's nothing to that at all. 

Reigns could be wrestling Cena in the main event of the third hour and the hour would drop by a lot and I wouldn't blame Reigns because it's very possible Adam Rose vs the Bunny lost millions of viewers and Cena/Reigns gained almost all of them back. 

I wonder why we don't have access to the breakdowns anymore?


----------



## brxd

Starbuck said:


> I wish we had breakdowns. These Bryan vs. Reigns mark wars have the potential to top the Bryan vs. Punk mark wars of days gone by.


You don't really need breakdowns. In the first segment, it was announced that Bryan/Rollins was the main-event. The show then went on to lose all of those viewers. Pretty simple that casuals had no interest in that match.


----------



## THANOS

brxd said:


> You don't really need breakdowns. In the first segment, it was announced that Bryan/Rollins was the main-event. The show then went on to lose all of those viewers. Pretty simple that casuals had no interest in that match.


I'm not sure you understand how ratings work friend, the hourly ratings that were released is the weighted average of each hour. It means that hours 1 and 2 were overall more consistent and higher than hour 3, but it doesn't mean that everything in hour 3 was worse than the rest of the show.

It's quite possible, and more than likely true (given past history) than Bryan/Rollins popped a huge number, especially since it bled into the overrun for a sizable portion of the match (which isn't even calibrated into the hourly rating averages), and everything else in the hour tanked really bad. Given what we've seen of Bryan's drawing power the past year and a half, it's very reasonable to assert that Rollins/Bryan did very well, but the fact remains that we need a ratings breakdown to prove anything.


----------



## #Mark

brxd said:


> You don't really need breakdowns. In the first segment, it was announced that Bryan/Rollins was the main-event. The show then went on to lose all of those viewers. Pretty simple that casuals had no interest in that match.


You don't understand how ratings work.


----------



## MaybeLock

Starbuck said:


> I wish we had breakdowns. These Bryan vs. Reigns mark wars have the potential to top the Bryan vs. Punk mark wars of days gone by.


Glorious days :banderas

People salivating right before the weekly breakdowns came up, because everybody knew shit would get real :mark:


----------



## Frico

SmackDown viewership down this week:

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-thursday-cable-originals-2-5-2015.html

Bryan vs Kane draws higher than Bryan vs Rollins. In 2015. (Granted he was with J&J) But still, fuck. :rollins


----------



## Wynter

I figured there'd be a drop. Hype and the live show made it desirable for a while. But it wasn't a drastic decrease at least.


----------



## Wynter

> WWE SmackDown viewership had been increasing since moving to Thursday nights but last night's show drew 2.441 million viewers, down from last week's live show that drew 2.952 million viewers.
> 
> This week's 2.441 million viewers is also down from the 2.814 million viewers on January 22nd.
> 
> SmackDown was still Thursday's highest rated cable original, earning a 1.1 adult 18-49 rating, up from last week's 0.9.


Again, not shocking with the draw of a live show and all. Still, that is down 400,000 from the the 22nd


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Ouch, that's a pretty big drop.


----------



## Wynter

Combination of a live show and the move to Thursday hyped to hell helped it for a couple weeks. Now no one gives a damn again and SD is back to its irrelevance 

Lol nah, SD gonna SD. It would have been nice if Bryan could have been the savior to SD, but it's gonna take consistent booking to get people interested in that mess of a show. The editing is horrific.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Bryan is one person, he was involved in 2 of the 12 segments in the show. Can't expect one person to save an entire brand from ratings hell.


----------



## Wynter

The Inbred Goatman said:


> Bryan is one person, he was involved in 2 of the 12 segments in the show. Can't expect one person to save an entire brand from ratings hell.


I definitely agree. That's why I said although it would have been nice, I wasn't expecting a miracle. I know some had high hopes and even attributed the successes of the last two weeks to him, but the real test is after the hype dies down. 

It's still very much a collective effort. From the talents and from the booking.


----------



## Chrome

Thread just isn't the same without breakdowns and Rock316AE saying that vanilla midget Punk couldn't draw a dime if he tried.


----------



## Wynter

Chrome said:


> Thread just isn't the same without breakdowns and Rock316AE saying that vanilla midget Punk couldn't draw a dime if he tried.


God, the smug that would ensue with evidence :lol

Why did pwtorch stop doing the breakdowns? Are they they hard to obtain?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

this is the chart of Thursday cable ratings if anyone wants to see it:


----------



## LilOlMe

WynterWarm12 said:


> Why did pwtorch stop doing the breakdowns? Are they they hard to obtain?


Keller just talked about this on today's show. He said that there was a time when both WWE & WCW would _race_ to send him quarterly ratings. He would get them from them, and also other independent sources. 

He said that the breakdowns are hard to get, because they're purchased at a higher price by the promotions themselves. They're not available as regular tv resources. He said that he has to call in a favor to get those breakdowns, and it doesn't always work out. He said that when he has been getting the breakdowns, he didn't see a lot of statistical variances that he found that would make the info all that relevant. 

Basically, he's not gonna keep calling in favors when he feels that it doesn't really show much of anything, which is what I've been saying about this thread for ages now, but people still like to have their mark wars...


ETA: He said that watching over time, things like a segment having two commercial breaks versus one, accounted for most of the big differences in viewership. He said that he found that viewers tended to tune out the more commercial breaks there were. So he sees no point in blaming guys for shit they have no control over like that, which is where he noticed the most in trends. He said that judging someone in a segment that only has 7 minutes of content (due to double commercials) vs. someone in a segment that has 15 minutes of content, is not fair. 

The gist of it it is that he feels that it leads to too much of "looking for something that isn't there" after following quarterlys & the trends for years.

He said that comparing quarterlys doesn't really show the big picture, and involves a lot of comparing apples to oranges.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Well that's the end of that. Everyone say your farewells to this thread.


----------



## MaybeLock

The end of an era :batista3


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

So WWE doesnt want us to know who actually are the biggest tv draws in each hour? That way we cant second guess them if they de-push someone who could actually be attracting viewers. Someone should start a crowdfunding push for detailed breakdowns.


----------



## TrentBarretaFan

Maybe WWE tries to hide quarter-hour ratings because if segment/match involving Reigns lost viewers that would make him look weak?









jk


----------



## D.M.N.

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-2-9-2015.html

Hour 1 - 3.786 million
Hour 2 - 3.670 million
Hour 3 - 3.518 million

Easily the lowest Road to WrestleMania Raw since at least the mid 1990s. Hideous numbers.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

About time the show flopped. The horrible writing, monotonous television, no character development, rehashed matches. It's about time people started tuning out. 

Fuck horrendous television, and to make it worse, it's during the RTWM, come the fuck on now. Last years RTWM was SO much more fun, even the lead up to the EC show was fun as fuck. This year, just so boring.


----------



## Wynter

Good. Raw was trash.

Though, the numbers are consistent at least. 3rd hour didn't drop to hell this time.


----------



## A-C-P

In before Bryan fans blame Reigns and Reigns fans blame Bryan....

I actually hope the ratings continue to under perform the WWE needs some kind of wake-up call. Their lazy booking and poor writing and poor creative decisions need to start effecting them.


----------



## Joshi Judas

Last week's show was a bit of fun, but it's gone back to same ol' now.

A weekly Authority opening segment (do they even TRY to change shit up now?), a Big Show/Kane vs Reigns/Bryan tag match or singles matches or handicap match- some variation of that, sometimes with Seth and J&J thrown in, always having interferences/disqualifications, not hard to see why everything's so dull atm.

Horrendous RTWM numbers.

Also, not that I think this will change anything but where the fuck is Randy Orton? Atleast he can feud with Seth and it will be somewhat refreshing.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

As I said before it's a cluster of a storyline that benefits no one. Hopefully they continue to go down and they get a wake up call.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

That show sucked, so it was justified. Here's the chart:


----------



## Wynter

A-C-P said:


> In before Bryan fans blame Reigns and Reigns fans blame Bryan....
> 
> I actually hope the ratings continue to under perform the WWE needs some kind of wake-up call. Their lazy booking and poor writing and poor creative decisions need to start effecting them.


:lol exactly. Silver lining? The numbers pretty much stayed in the same ballpark and the third hour didn't drop drastically from the second hour this time. Yaaaaaay? Small victories lmao


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

IDONTSHIV said:


> That show sucked, so it was justified. Here's the chart:


Better Call Saul HYPE



WynterWarm12 said:


> :lol exactly. Silver lining? The numbers pretty much stayed in the same ballpark and *the third hour didn't drop drastically from the second hour this time. *Yaaaaaay? Small victories lmao


That's because they practically lied to viewers and implied Sting would be on the show.


----------



## X Spectrum

Not surprised. Last night's Raw sucked. Badly.


----------



## A-C-P

IDONTSHIV said:


> That show sucked, so it was justified. Here's the chart:


WWE dominating the Male 50+ demo :banderas


----------



## StraightYesSociety

A-C-P said:


> WWE dominating the Male 50+ demo :banderas


That's their hardcore fanbase... They've been fans for ages. They should throw them a bone and push Hogan.


----------



## A-C-P

StraightYesSociety said:


> That's their hardcore fanbase... They've been fans for ages. They should throw them a bone and push Hogan.


Outside of the pushing Hogan joke, this is a pretty accurate statement. At the bar my buddy owns where we watch the PPV events, there is a group of people 50+ that always show up to watch the PPVs to.


----------



## SPCDRI

There is jack shit on television to compete with and they're in Road to WM and doing 3 straight hours of sub 4 million viewers. Just shocking. 

We're in the Ruthless Repetition Era. 

8*D

The same Authority song and dance that has been performed for 2 years, schmozz tag team matches, thrown together undercard trash, terrible Divas division, non-existent midcard scene, matches booked and structured so similarly that your own commentators mock the show as "de ja vu" and a "re run."

How was this week really and different than the prior one? A 60 year old Sting showed up on the TitanTron to set up a *conversation* at Fast Lane? Because that is what this product needs, right? More Triple H promos. 

:side:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

WynterWarm12 said:


> :lol exactly. Silver lining? The numbers pretty much stayed in the same ballpark and the third hour didn't drop drastically from the second hour this time. Yaaaaaay? Small victories lmao


Well, I'd hardly consider that a victory since the third hour did 3.5 million viewers. I'd rather the 3rd hour drop 500,000 to 4 million than 100,000 to 3.5 million, but that's me.

What's amazing is they were advertising Sting as well (albeit I don't know if they ever said he'd definitely be there), and not that it's his fault (his advertisement may or may not have kept it afloat), but it just goes to show how people just didn't seem to care about last night's show at all. Lost viewers throughout, and started horrifically to begin with for a show this time of year. No matter what way you slice it, it got bad numbers, that are even worse due to the fact this is a show in February and leading into the last PPV before WM.


----------



## Wynter

Seth's dick drew more than this Raw fpalm


----------



## StraightYesSociety

A-C-P said:


> Outside of the pushing Hogan joke, this is a pretty accurate statement. At the bar my buddy owns where we watch the PPV events, there is a group of people 50+ that always show up to watch the PPVs to.


So Vince technically is IN touch with his biggest demo :surprise:


----------



## Wynter

Sting couldn't even save this. Goes to show, horrible writing trumps anyone's drawing power lol People couldn't be arsed to care. It's another Authority vs insert wrestler(s) here.

The shows format is repetitive, predictable and boring. Entirely too much filler. Promos way too damn long. Show opens up the same every week. The writing is terrible for the most part. 

What do they expect. It's a reflection of their incompetence.


----------



## Londrick

StraightYesSociety said:


> That's their hardcore fanbase... They've been fans for ages. They should throw them a bone and push Hogan.


Hogan should've won the Rumble. Hogan vs Brock WM = :vince$


----------



## Armani

You guys don't realize how bad this is. WWE is dead. If you can't even draw with that much starpower, then nothing will ever get ratings back to normal. Nobody is a draw in this roster anymore.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The third hour was tied with hour 2 for the top demo rating. Big Show and Kane bringing in those younger viewers.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

WynterWarm12 said:


> :lol exactly. Silver lining? The numbers pretty much stayed in the same ballpark and the third hour didn't drop drastically from the second hour this time. Yaaaaaay? Small victories lmao


I hope so, but it's really amazing how stubborn they can be. 

They seriously need to downplay Big Show and Kane. They're doing more harm than good, and I like both those guys, but any mention of them to me just makes me think "Not very exciting TV."

And maybe they're doing more harm than good to Daniel Bryan and Reigns. I actually wanted to see the two of them go at it in a match, but maybe I was wrong on that. It's hurting Bryan's likeability and it's also making Reigns a full on heel.


----------



## CookiePuss

So who and what are we going to blame this week?

:kermit


----------



## Cliffy

i blame triple h


----------



## BKelly237

Better Call Saul was great, looking forward to that being my new Monday night must-see show. I can't even remember the last Raw I actually saw


----------



## brxd

I am very happy RAW did badly. Let's hope it continues, until the Authority stuff ends.


----------



## MaybeLock

cookiepuss said:


> So who and what are we going to blame this week?
> 
> :kermit


Triple H, Bryan, Reigns, Rollins, Sting, Lesnar and Cena don't drawz!

Someone better find a new roster ASAP (since good booking is out of the table it seems).


----------



## retere

Wow, that's really bad numbers.
I guess that would be a nice wake up call to a delusional Reigns and Bryan marks that think they are big draws. 
Seems like fans are not all that much into that storyline.


----------



## McCringleberry

retere said:


> Wow, that's really bad numbers.
> I guess that would be a nice wake up call to a delusional Reigns and Bryan marks that think they are big draws.
> Seems like fans are not all that much into that storyline.


Without breakdowns we don't know who is responsible. Reigns/Bryan could have been the biggest ratings getter of the night dragged down by other segments. We'll never know. And in lieu of that you have to blame everyone involved....talent and management.


----------



## retere

Their program is clearly the focal point of WWE right now.
I'm far from putting blame solely on them, but they deffinately should share the biggest chunk of it. 
The show was bad for sure, but those numbers are not just bad, they are atrocious.


----------



## Wynter

They received views from the whole Rumble fiasco. People tuned in and after few weeks, realized WWE's booking is as incompetent and atrocious as ever.

WWE failed to capitalize on the heightened interest. They went back to the same stale ass format and people went blah.

They blue ball people with Sting, have Kane/Show in the main event, booking the same matches over and over, Authority still one of the main focal points etc.

Viewership reflects quite well.

I guess SD gonna nosedive too.


----------



## funnyfaces1

:lmao They wasted a Brock Lesnar appearance for those numbers?


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Maybe WWE should give airtime to all titles and feuds
They only focus on a title and a feud
I do not want to know what is going on with WWE title, then I do not see RAW that is just about this.


----------



## Empress

funnyfaces1 said:


> :lmao They wasted a Brock Lesnar appearance for those numbers?


The WWE is so hit and miss with Lesnar. More misses than hit's. lesnar should've had an interaction with either Reigns/Bryan.

As for the numbers, I'm not surprised. RAW was uninspired. I was more into the Seth Rollins drama. The crowd was dead, could barely pop for their hometown boy Ambrose. I think they only really came alive for Mizdow. 

I still like the Bryan/Reigns story. The booking was scattered last night, but I like their chemistry together. I want to see Bryan's retaliation next week.


----------



## Joshi Judas

The Bryan/Reigns story would be a 100 times better without any Authority involvement.

HHH/Steph should only be feuding with Sting and featuring in the Seth vs Orton feud. Speaking of which, they should bring Randy back asap too.

Big Show/Kane can feud with Ziggler/Ryback or whoever.


----------



## ikarinokami

I'm happy the rating are tanking. vince is an idiot. most people want Lesner VS Bryan. and rollins vs RR. 

the stupid program with Bryan VS RR just kills the crowd, because every time Bryan has to put over RR, the crowd rebels and boos him. The crowd wants to cheer for Roman just not against bryan and not in the ME at wrestlemania.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

We'll see if Smackdown falls too or if it stems the tide.


----------



## Punkholic

cookiepuss said:


> So who and what are we going to blame this week?
> 
> :kermit


I blame the vanilla midget...Jamie Noble.


----------



## dan the marino

Horrid numbers considering this is the Road to Wrestlemania.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Raw 2/10/14 did 4.32 million average.

The 2/7/14 Smackdown show actually did 3.2 million viewers, almost as much as this episode of Raw.

The RTWM in 2014 was hype as shit, I think it doesn't get enough credit. Shield/Wyatt's, Bryan's chase for the belt etc. Just a lot of good television last year, this year is a far cry from that.


----------



## Chrome

Shit numbers for a shit show. Talent doesn't deserve any blame, this all falls on Vince and creative for failing to change up the format.


----------



## ElTerrible

D.M.N. said:


> http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-2-9-2015.html
> 
> *Hour 1 - 3.786 million
> Hour 2 - 3.670 million
> Hour 3 - 3.518 million*
> 
> Easily the lowest Road to WrestleMania Raw since at least the mid 1990s. Hideous numbers.


:vince4




The Inbred Goatman said:


> Raw 2/10/14 did *4.32 million average.*


 :hunter


----------



## PunkShoot

Obviously the ratings are in the shitter. Just look at the wrestle mania line up this year, seriously, so many awful matches.

Here was my original concept of WM, I think it would have significantly helped the build across the board.

*Here is the exact CARD they needed at WM, no and ifs or buts.*

*Rollins vs Orton to kick off WM *<--- High pace, crowd will get hyped. Orton wins.

*Andre the giant Battle Royal *<--- Wyatt family teams up again, and Bray wyatt eventually wins over Ambroise. Adrian Neville debut's in the battle Royal.

*HHH vs Reigns *<-- HHH puts over reigns in this match, and makes reigns a bigger star.

*The ascension vs the Usos* <-- Tag team match, For the titles <-- match will probably suck, but it makes sense.

*Cena says he is happy to be at WM, and want's to give an OPEN challenge to anybody in the back.*

*Sami Zayn Debut's at WM*, and has a long match with cena, show casing him, and pulling a upset victory, or at least a close match with cena.

*Rusev vs Jericho* <-- Jericho starts a feud with rusev before WM, and faces him.

*Undertaker vs Sting* <-- Match would be average, but the spectacle and story of it, that is THE ONLY match I wanna see sting in.

*Paige vs Natty* <--- Have a actual wrestling match take place. Put the title on Natty before WM. Filler to calm crowd down. Paige wins

*Main Event *- Brock Lesnar vs Daniel Bryan. Lesnar picks up the victory after a long match. Rollins comes in, and cashes in on lesnar after multiple Curbstomps.

*Summary*: Starting good, middle good, ending good. Everybody is happy. Lesnar stays strong, he leaves to UFC, rollins starts his reign as champ, Reigns looks strong, New star debut, Actual Diva's match, and great opener.


----------



## Batz

D.M.N. said:


> http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-2-9-2015.html
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.786 million
> Hour 2 - 3.670 million
> Hour 3 - 3.518 million
> 
> Easily the lowest Road to WrestleMania Raw since at least the mid 1990s. Hideous numbers.


Regardless of how bad RAW was, 3.8 mil for the first hour is really weird.

I guess it's because there was little to no "hype" for the opening segment, such as last week when HHH tried to milk the Rumble fiasco with "addressing the controversy".

Weird, but yeah, stale product with little effort being put in and going off of the same format pattern... what ya expect?


----------



## Stone Hot

Better Call Saul is to blame. That's going to be very hard to compete with that show.


----------



## The True Believer

I didn't even watch RAW this week TBH.


----------



## LOL-ins

These numbers are awful and there is no excuse for pulling these shitty numbers. WWE is dying a slow death they can't even hit 5 million hours at WRESTLEMANIA SEASON! A few years ago 5 million hours would happen outside WM season.


----------



## Silent KEEL

PunkShoot said:


> Obviously the ratings are in the shitter. Just look at the wrestle mania line up this year, seriously, so many awful matches.
> 
> Here was my original concept of WM, I think it would have significantly helped the build across the board.
> 
> *Here is the exact CARD they needed at WM, no and ifs or buts.*
> 
> *Rollins vs Orton to kick off WM *<--- High pace, crowd will get hyped. Orton wins.
> 
> *Andre the giant Battle Royal *<--- Wyatt family teams up again, and Bray wyatt eventually wins over Ambroise. Adrian Neville debut's in the battle Royal.
> 
> *HHH vs Reigns *<-- HHH puts over reigns in this match, and makes reigns a bigger star.
> 
> *The ascension vs the Usos* <-- Tag team match, For the titles <-- match will probably suck, but it makes sense.
> 
> *Cena says he is happy to be at WM, and want's to give an OPEN challenge to anybody in the back.*
> 
> *Sami Zayn Debut's at WM*, and has a long match with cena, show casing him, and pulling a upset victory, or at least a close match with cena.
> 
> *Rusev vs Jericho* <-- Jericho starts a feud with rusev before WM, and faces him.
> 
> *Undertaker vs Sting* <-- Match would be average, but the spectacle and story of it, that is THE ONLY match I wanna see sting in.
> 
> *Paige vs Natty* <--- Have a actual wrestling match take place. Put the title on Natty before WM. Filler to calm crowd down. Paige wins
> 
> *Main Event *- Brock Lesnar vs Daniel Bryan. Lesnar picks up the victory after a long match. Rollins comes in, and cashes in on lesnar after multiple Curbstomps.
> 
> *Summary*: Starting good, middle good, ending good. Everybody is happy. Lesnar stays strong, he leaves to UFC, rollins starts his reign as champ, Reigns looks strong, New star debut, Actual Diva's match, and great opener.


And Daniel Bryan continues to look like a chump. No different than WWE's actual booking.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Stone Hot said:


> Better Call Saul is to blame. That's going to be very hard to compete with that show.


I didn't know they extended Better Call Saul to 3 hours.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

PunkShoot said:


> *Summary*: Starting good, middle good, ending good. Everybody is happy. Lesnar stays strong, he leaves to UFC, rollins starts his reign as champ, Reigns looks strong, New star debut, Actual Diva's match, and great opener.


Why exactly does Brock need to look strong when he's leaving anyways? The point isn't that Bryan should just main event. Fans want him to win the title and have a good reign for once. Losing to Brock makes no sense, and if you just wanna make as many people happy as possible, Bryan winning would do just that.


----------



## LOL-ins

*WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Wrestlemania season has always been ratings season for WWE but since 2009 their ratings have been getting worse and worse each year. At first a 4.0+ would have been a successful number but now a 3.0+ is seen as a strong number.

How did the show do this week during Wrestlemania season? 2.7 and 3.6 million average which is pathetic for this time of the year. 

What do you think is happening? Are people getting smarter and walking away from the product? Is general interest in wrestling gone? Or is WWE marketing to kids with a show that ends at 11.15pm just dumb as fuck and causing them to lose viewers.

Discuss.


----------



## JoeChill

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

In before DB marks blame Reigns


----------



## Killbane

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

On-demand and online services are killing it. I have so many shows I have to catch up on.


----------



## I Ship Sixon

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



JoeChill said:


> In before DB marks blame Reigns


*Wellllllll.....:larry*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

They don't have anyone that draws people to sitdown in front of their TV and watch every Monday night. It's no longer appointment television, sadly. Those days are gone.


----------



## Jonasolsson96

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

I think tv in general is started to lose viewers. I can think of tons of places to watch raw in hd. There was a time the only way to watch raw was on tv. Plus alot of people probably dvr it aswell. Plus this isnt really mania season yet. And the week that had bryan vs rollins did a solid 4 in ratings.


----------



## LordKain

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

I think many long time fans have finally had enough and are leaving in masses.

Mark my words when I say that things are only going to get worse for the WWE from here on out and they only have themselves to blame for it.


----------



## Miss Sally

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

So many ways to watch and really WWE hasn't changed it's tune in the past decade. They try for a few months and then get scared and push Cena. Turns people off.


----------



## squeelbitch

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

it's nothing to do with a single wrestler but the overall product


----------



## bmtrocks

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

WWE is pretty much shittier than ever. No one gets pushed. Big Show and Kane are in the main event. Of course ratings are down.

A guy like Roman Reigns isn't the issue here. Roman Reigns SHOULD be over with the crowd. So should Dean Ambrose, Seth Rollins, Dolph Ziggler, Sheamus, Orton, R-Truth-, Cesaro, and anyone else who have worked hard to get to WWE. The problem is that he isn't all that over because WWE booking is so godawful and convoluted with no real direction.

As much as I disagree with Roman Reigns being in the main event at Wrestlemania, if booked properly, you could set it up for an awesome event with a lot of build-up and momentum. That isn't happening here. Reigns is getting mild pops in towns that love him and mild boos in towns that hate him.


----------



## arnoldlee895

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

People don't watch that much TV anymore.

How many of you here actually watch Raw on TV? come on....

Most people nowadays just watch it through internet.


----------



## Zac512

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

There is so much to watch now. It's harder to get peoples attention. 

Raw is still #1 in ratings on cable TV though, despite being 3 hours. If Raw was 2 hours, it's ratings would be even better.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

it was the number one show on all of cable just last week


----------



## RiC David

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Stories don't always go anywhere
Stipulations aren't honoured
Many matches are irrelevant
Bad writing
3 hours

No particular order, sure I'm missing a few things.


----------



## Scholes18

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

According to WWE, their ratings are no good because people stream Raw or don't watch TV anymore the traditional way. Yet 44 Million people watched the Green Bay vs Dallas game. 30 Million people watched the BCS championship on a Monday, and if you have the capability to watch ESPN (channel of the BCS championship), then you'd have USA Network and would be able to watch Raw. People are just choosing not to watch because WWE doesn't appeal to them. That's the issue, it has nothing to do with people streaming illegally or using services like Hulu or Netflix. And lets not act like you can't just as easy find a stream for a NFL game as you can Raw, but the NFL is getting record numbers despite people supposedly not watching their tv's like they did in the past.

Since they want to bang on about being entertainment, let's compare them to other episodic tv shows. For shows like Breaking Bad, once that shows ends you can't wait to watch next week to see what will happen next. Very rarely does that happen on Raw anymore.


----------



## Poyser

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

I just don't thing ratings are anywhere near as meaningful as they used to be. You got people streaming and downloading, plus they don't even take into account the people watching from outside of the US etc. I don't really know why people pay attention to them any more.


----------



## ★Th0t Patr0L★

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

*Because they're jobbing out their Real American, obviously.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



Scholes18 said:


> According to WWE, their ratings are no good because people stream Raw or don't watch TV anymore the traditional way. Yet 44 Million people watched the Green Bay vs Dallas game. 30 Million people watched the BCS championship on a Monday, and if you have the capability to watch ESPN (channel of the BCS championship), then you'd have USA Network and would be able to watch Raw. People are just choosing not to watch because WWE doesn't appeal to them. That's the issue, it has nothing to do with people streaming illegally or using services like Hulu or Netflix. And lets not act like you can't just as easy find a stream for a NFL game as you can Raw, but the NFL is getting record numbers despite people supposedly not watching their tv's like they did in the past.
> 
> Since they want to bang on about being entertainment, let's compare them to other episodic tv shows. For shows like Breaking Bad, once that shows ends you can't wait to watch next week to see what will happen next. Very rarely does that happen on Raw anymore.


Well said.


----------



## tducey

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

The product for sure, people have no reason to turn in these days.


----------



## IMissRandySavage

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Being one of the people that has left the WWE, came back for the last 2 years, and now refuses to watch anything but PPVs, here is my perspective....

I know the WWE cares about the viewer, I just do not feel like they are smart enough to give the viewer what they ultimately want....I am a DB fan, but not a "mark"....His story last year was well written, it had a start point, a struggle, and he overcame the odds....It was like a well written movie.....Cena getting beat up one week and then coming back the next and cracking jokes about Rusev is not a good, cohesive story....I am perfectly fine with Reigns winning the Rumble and headlining WM, but the WWE clearly isnt....They have to stop throwing crap against the wall and seeing what sticks....

"We will book Reigns to win and if it doesnt work, we will just do another triple threat match".....

"We will just throw Big Show, Kane, and Rollins out there against Reigns and Bryan in a handicap match"...

"We will have Stardust/Golddust take on the Ascension"

"We will have The Usos against the Miz/Mizdow or Kidd/Cesaro in one on one action so the belt isnt on the line"....

The WWE has lost all direction....They have the talent, they have the audience WANTING to like the product....Just give it a little damn effort to draw us in.....


----------



## silverspirit2001

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Because most pf their programming is shit, and do not have long term arcs with payoffs anymore. The problem with booking week to week which Vince has fallen into - mainly since he does not have the finger on the pulse of fans.


----------



## ItDoesntMatterWhat

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Overall cable television has been losing double digit percentages each year since 2009 the article I read the other day said. That's a lot of viewers if there's 10% or more reduction in viewers each year and it will only get worse until it reaches a plateau. With the number of subscribers to the WWE Network, I'd dare say they have more viewers today than they did during the attitude era even without the mainstream attention and appeal they had in the late 90's.

As others have stated, streaming services as well as DVR capabilities have greatly reduced viewership and the Nielsen ratings system is becoming obsolete in terms of gauging the success of the company.

Could the product be better? Absolutely with proper booking they have the talent to put out a much better product but they are definitely not in dire straits, nor will they be any time soon.


----------



## JamJamGigolo

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

I really don't think Cena has been mentioned enough. He is the main reason I stopped watching and when I talk to other adults and mention that I'm watching again, they always bring up how shitty wrestling is now and immediately mention Cena.

Everybody who is a casual fan who used to watch knows his name and hates him. A Marky Mark impersonator is not relatable to adults. At least in my region, he is the main reason and the symbol that people ALWAYS mention as to why they liked the attitude era but stopped watching when he came along.

As much hate as he gets on here, I feel like most people here at least respect his hard work and just think he's extremely overpushed. The casual adult fan who doesn't watch any more though, they hate him way more and won't allow him on their TV


----------



## Stinger Fan

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



ShowStopper said:


> They don't have anyone that draws people to sitdown in front of their TV and watch every Monday night. It's no longer appointment television, sadly. Those days are gone.


It doesn't just effect wrestling either. Unfortunately a lot of great shows are in danger of being cancelled because of ratings not being as strong as desired . While the WWE may not be in danger of cancellation for a long long time, it shows that people would rather watch something they can catch up on and Netflix and Hulu being so readily available and inexpensive WWE television(as well as other good shows) loses out. Most people consume television different now too, binge watching has become very popular because of streaming media


----------



## WWE_Ultrastar

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Many reasons:

It's now 3 hours - People just loose interest, especially with so many ads, recaps, boasting statistics and numerous pointless segments. It's a task to watch,

More people watch on the internet and OnDemand these days - these also provide the advantage of fast forwarding through all the bullshit!

There's a lot of strong competition from other TV shows now.

The product is lame, repetitive, predictable, dragged out and well past it's glory days and there appears to be little desire from the powers that be to take the product in a new direction.

The ratings have been dwindling for years and will continue to dwindle. It's hard work to increase TV ratings these days and there appears to be little effort or desire to improve Raw and Smackdown!


----------



## Kibosh

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

If you guys in the USA can see the WWE on the slow slide to oblivion, believe me, this view is shared by guys like me across the pond in Europe. Why does it have to be so terribly bad? Why so much inane gab, and idiocy, when we want to watch good ring wrestling , and hear articulate, sensible and interesting wrestlers on microphone. HHH was brought in to halt the slide, as I understand it, instead he has accelerated it. If you guys want buffoonery, and good technical wrestlers like Daniel Bryan marketed as clowns, then, so be it. I would prefer Bryan to replicate the good days of Bret Hart, and showcase his talent. Just my opinion.


----------



## elhijodelbodallas

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



Jonasolsson96 said:


> I think tv in general is started to lose viewers. I can think of tons of places to watch raw in hd. There was a time the only way to watch raw was on tv. Plus alot of people probably dvr it aswell. Plus this isnt really mania season yet. And the week that had bryan vs rollins *did a solid 4 in ratings.*


No it didn't. Raw hasn't done a 4 in like 5 years.

This may be unpopular but I think Bryan needs to get the fuck out of the title picture. His time was at the royal rumble, they didn't pull the trigger then so they shouldn't pull the trigger now. They need to go all in with someone, this bullshit of "maybe it's reigns, maybe it's bryan" only serves to drive people away. Nobody wants to see a face vs face feud as the main storyline, especially when both guys aren't good promos. From the royal rumble forward they should have pushed Reigns as hard as they could and have him destroy everybody in squash matches, especially big show and kane.

The only way to rectify this now is to make Reigns beat Bryan in a really violent match that makes Reigns look like a total badass. If they keep half assing everything the ratings will get even worse from now on, even with the possible returns of Orton and Undertaker.


----------



## Onyx

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

There's nothing special going on this year. Last year we had the Yes movement, prior to that Rock was there for 2 years. This year there's nothing. 

Maybe Sting might change things if he starts appearing regularly.


----------



## Phoenix rising

I think the commentary might be an issue aswell why can't they call the in ring action instead of making stupid jokes. The wrestling has been taken out of the show, story lines are important but right now they can't even get that right.


----------



## TheSeasonofReason

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Blame the writers


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Zac512

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

It still has more of an audience than anything else on American cable TV on most Mondays.


----------



## Nafstem

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Honestly, it's because WWE isn't considered quality entertainment by most people and I really think its due to lack of stars. The Attitude Era was the time where pro wrestling had a big presence in pop culture, and that was mostly due to them having a bunch of stars like Stone Cold and The Rock. Name me one current, fulltime guy on the WWE roster that could go on SNL and people would actually give a fuck about. They had a chance to make a star that people actually gave a fuck about in CM Punk, but they completely blew that. In my opinion, that's what is really comes down to.


----------



## LOL-ins

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



validreasoning said:


> it was the number one show on all of cable just last week


So? Last weeks ratings doesn't change the fact WWE just got an awful number during the RTWM. 

Unless you are a new fan you'd know RTWM RAW's used to pull over 5 million viewers/6 million viewers. 3.6 million is the kind of viewers you pull in the fall when wwe doesn't give a shit.


----------



## Jonasolsson96

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



elhijodelbodallas said:


> No it didn't. Raw hasn't done a 4 in like 5 years.
> 
> This may be unpopular but I think Bryan needs to get the fuck out of the title picture. His time was at the royal rumble, they didn't pull the trigger then so they shouldn't pull the trigger now. They need to go all in with someone, this bullshit of "maybe it's reigns, maybe it's bryan" only serves to drive people away. Nobody wants to see a face vs face feud as the main storyline, especially when both guys aren't good promos. From the royal rumble forward they should have pushed Reigns as hard as they could and have him destroy everybody in squash matches, especially big show and kane.
> 
> The only way to rectify this now is to make Reigns beat Bryan in a really violent match that makes Reigns look like a total badass. If they keep half assing everything the ratings will get even worse from now on, even with the possible returns of Orton and Undertaker.



I somewhat agree. They shot themselves in the foot. They could of had two superover babyfaces in Reigns and Bryan going into mania but now they have two guys that get mixed reactions. Reigns should of gotten attacked backstage by Rusev in the rumble. Then have rusev come out and squash some midcarders then Reigns comes back out to go after rusev and they kill eachother before double eliminating eachother. This sets up a Reigns/Rusev mania match. Reigns wins the us title and holds it through all of 2015. Works on his character. Maybe even has a short heelturn. Gets involved in a shortterm tagteam. Goes over Harper,Rusev,Kane,Big Show,Ryback,Rowan, some monsters from nxt to keep him strong. Bryan should of won the rumble and go on to defeat Lesnar. Hold the title until the summer going over the likes of Rusev,Heel Sheamus,Bray Wyatt before dropping the belt to Rollins by cash in during the summer.


Rollins could then proceed to hold the title until wm 32 getting booked as the topheel in the company and dropping it to Reigns in a shield triple threat with both Rollins and Ambrose as topheels and Reigns as the babyface. Ambrose could be the mitb holder and cash it in in a triple threat match at mania instead of the usual cashin. He could say he wants to know who the best really is and wants to mainevent wrestlemania. So many ways they could go with it. Thats how they should of freaking booked it. They dont know how to book shit. I hope they go with something similair. Theres still time if they have Bryan beat reigns at fastlane. That might get reigns babyface sympathy.


----------



## Zac512

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



LOL-ins said:


> So? Last weeks ratings doesn't change the fact WWE just got an awful number during the RTWM.
> 
> Unless you are a new fan you'd know RTWM RAW's used to pull over 5 million viewers/6 million viewers. 3.6 million is the kind of viewers you pull in the fall when wwe doesn't give a shit.


"awful"?

I doubt the USA network looks at the ratings as "awful".


----------



## Marv95

DVRs and streams aren't an excuse when the BCS title game got over 30 million on cable TV and the Super Bowl got over 100 million. The product, presentation and roster are total shit. It's been shit since 2007. The fact they are catering too much to its core audience doesn't help matters either.


----------



## Mark_Show-Off96

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



Scholes18 said:


> According to WWE, their ratings are no good because people stream Raw or don't watch TV anymore the traditional way. Yet 44 Million people watched the Green Bay vs Dallas game. 30 Million people watched the BCS championship on a Monday, and if you have the capability to watch ESPN (channel of the BCS championship), then you'd have USA Network and would be able to watch Raw. People are just choosing not to watch because WWE doesn't appeal to them. That's the issue, it has nothing to do with people streaming illegally or using services like Hulu or Netflix. And lets not act like you can't just as easy find a stream for a NFL game as you can Raw, but the NFL is getting record numbers despite people supposedly not watching their tv's like they did in the past.
> 
> Since they want to bang on about being entertainment, let's compare them to other episodic tv shows. For shows like Breaking Bad, once that shows ends you can't wait to watch next week to see what will happen next. *Very rarely does that happen on Raw anymore*.


Correction

Never does that happen.


----------



## LOL-ins

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



Zac512 said:


> It still has more of an audience than anything else on American cable TV on most Mondays.


You can't keep thinking like this when they used to pull 5-6 million viewers not that many years ago. Hell The Rock drew 7 million for one of his segments in 2011.

Looks bad now when you compare.


----------



## Marv95

Zac512 said:


> LOL-ins said:
> 
> 
> 
> So? Last weeks ratings doesn't change the fact WWE just got an awful number during the RTWM.
> 
> Unless you are a new fan you'd know RTWM RAW's used to pull over 5 million viewers/6 million viewers. 3.6 million is the kind of viewers you pull in the fall when wwe doesn't give a shit.
> 
> 
> 
> "awful"?
> 
> I doubt the USA network looks at the ratings as "awful".
Click to expand...

The disappointing TV deal WWE got from them says they don't look at them as great either.


----------



## LOL-ins

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



Zac512 said:


> "awful"?
> 
> I doubt the USA network looks at the ratings as "awful".


When you drop nearly 2 million viewers from a few years then questions are going to be asked by the USA Network. WWE probably sells USA Network the idea that this time of the year will be monster numbers that will even out the terrible numbers they do in the fall.

But they are pulling the same numbers. Unless USA Network are dumb as fuck you'll be questioning the product and asking why there is such a huge decline.


----------



## Natecore

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

I only watch because of Bryan. Huge wrestling fan here and I'm only around because a wrestler that made his name before the E is employed there. Yeah, they're losing their audience. Yet somehow this company runs and owns NXT. Go figure.


----------



## Mark_Show-Off96

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

man I miss WWE in 2010-2011.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

The booking sucks, the product is lackluster and nothing screams MUST SEE.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Unless you're the NFL every single other tv station is saying the same thing. Less people watch tv then before and that trend is only growing.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Overall television viewing. I know a lot of folks want to believe that its the quality of the program, but its really not. Unlike other live sporting events, there really isn't a need to watch WWE shows as they are happening. As long as you catch it prior to the next episode, you're good to go. Its not a social media event like a Scandal or Walking Dead where people need to watch immediately or it gets spoiled. The fact that they still dominate in their timeslot should tell you all you need to know.


----------



## TexasTornado

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

They have more competition now- netflix and all those things. Not to mention there are a ton of channels now. Plus, the product is not really MUST watch tv.. if you miss Raw, you can just watch next week and see any replays of the 'important' stuff you missed. Add to that, it honestly feels like the exact same show sometimes so if you miss anything you don't feel you missed out..


----------



## PepeSilvia

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Because its stupid! But I keep watching and bitching about it b/c its fun. Oh the irony


----------



## JJForReal

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Slowly?


----------



## Kaze Ni Nare

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

In all seriousness it's a matter of priority for me.

I keep up with New Japan, I'm trying to keep up with NOAH now as well since Suzukigun is over there for a bit as well as some All Japan. Over here I have NXT I'm watching every week as well as TNA which although has it's shit, I still prefer it over WWE & since I attend those shows & I'm trying to start going to the NXT shows down here so I care a little bit more about it. So you add all that wrestling up & then I hear nothing but good things about Lucha Underground, Dragon Gate etc. Ring of Honor isn't as good as it used to be but it's more my thing so it's like sheesh, so much fucking wrestling & WWE is the least interesting to me.

Plus with Punk gone all I really mark for in the WWE now is Ambrose so yeah, not much going on there.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



Jack Thwagger said:


> *Because they're jobbing out their Real American, obviously.*


What're you talking about?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

It is in part due to all of the other options. But lets not pretend that if they actually did put out a more entertaining the product or have more star power that the ratings wouldn't increase. They would, even if it's somewhat of a slight increase. Alot of it is due to the shit product, as well. Hell, WWE started losing ratings RIGHT after they turned Austin heel in 2001, and that was way before DVR, Netflix, etc. They've been slowly losing ratings since that time period.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

If the American tv audience is dissipating, it's time for a reign by an international performer. It's time for Wade Barrett.


----------



## rey09176

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

After Brock left and Eddie died WWE went waaay down hill


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

3 hours of crap that people just saw the past week basically. its like watching repeats every week. i am currently watching raw is wars from 1998 and the shows would end with a cliffhanger just about every week that made people want to tune in for more. sorry but the "cliffhangers" today are awful.


----------



## Godway

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Losing? They already lost it considering they could only muster 700K Network subscribers in America. And just watch the shows. The crowds are fucking dead if they're not in a smarkier city. It's embarrassing. The audience could not possibly be more bored with this product.


----------



## Zac512

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



Marv95 said:


> The disappointing TV deal WWE got from them says they don't look at them as great either.


Not great, but certainly not "awful"..

Like has been said, TV has changed.


----------



## Thanks12

Is Stephanie and HHH even DRAWS?!?!


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



IDONTSHIV said:


> If the American tv audience is dissipating, it's time for a reign by an international performer. It's time for Wade Barrett.


Ok, we need an international champion :vince4

...

...

...

...

Give the title to Sheamus dammit! :vince3


----------



## 260825

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

*WWE has taken its loyal fanbase for granted far too much for far too long.

Reality: 

Once the young adults / adults are gone, they're gone; WWE doesn't provide a product that attracts NEW* mature audiences. 

WWE Network is for the most hardcore of fans; once the nostalgia phase is gone you won't keep a sub up, yeah it's fine if you have 100+ hours of repeats to watch that's where you stand in the numbers. 

It really is the 'Reality Era' because WWE are sinking from change; the Network platform is great but ..

You can watch in HD any RAW, and PPV any program WWE or Not after a few hours of it airing for FREE, what incentive do you have to support the company.

People support things that they enjoy, some donate to organizations that give things away for free; 

Aside from going to house shows or live events; there's no real 'wanting' to support the company, some favour it to crash so they can rise with a product people actually want to watch.

They're so far deep into the hole they've dug they are pretty much have to change things drastically weekly to keep the audience interested; it's not like the good ol days where they have a kickass show & if you miss it, it's your loss; it's basically like .. owh shit, change this up.*


----------



## just1988

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

*As time goes on, it's bound to get lower ratings because.. 

*There's more ways of watching it
*There's more things to watch
*There's just more things to do with your time, everything is convenient nowerdays*


----------



## Trivette

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

Of all the guys I grew up with, who all watched WWF and WCW religiously, I am the only one who still watches. Even I had stopped watching from 2000-2012, just for the sheer fact that there were other things to do (mostly chasing women and such) but I digress. From what I've seen the last two years, there is more talented workers than ever, but creative, or Vince rather, genuinely despises his audience. It's the only way to explain the absolute refusal to build up everyone on the roster, especially the ones who get over organically. I haven't forgotten how they killed Ambrose's momentum at HIAC and the Rumble was another slap in the face: everyone involved, including Roman, looked like shit. I unsubbed immediate afterwards, and no, I will not renew for NXT tonight. Sorry. I'm not giving Vince anymore $ to wipe his ass with unto he proves that he actually gives a shit. That means merch, live tix, and yes Network sub as well. This RTWM could very well send me back to being a "former" viewer as I was for ten years. There's plenty of other things to watch in what free time I have.


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*

With streams, bars, dvrs, many people watch it who don't get counted, not to mention those who don't even have Nielsen boxes.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



Nikki Bella said:


> With streams, bars, dvrs, many people watch it who don't get counted, not to mention those who don't even have Nielsen boxes.


This is very true, but it's also a bad show that's getting bad ratings and there has to be a correlation. It's like all those people who think of all the AOL/Time Warner internal politics and blame it for the fall of WCW when the fact is it was also a terrible TV show doing terrible ratings.

If Vince wants to think of himself as an entertainment company, he has to start producing entertainment that can compete with other entertainment in prime time. His competition is Better Call Saul now, and that pulled some decent ratings, so it's not like the cable market is dead.


----------



## Zac512

For such a "bad" rating last week, Raw still was #1 in ratings on cable TV. 

Raw beat "Better Call Saul"(which was awesome btw)


----------



## murder

*Re: WWE is slowly losing its American audience*



Wrastlemondu said:


> *
> You can watch in HD any RAW, and PPV any program WWE or Not after a few hours of it airing for FREE, what incentive do you have to support the company.
> 
> *


But that's the way it's been for over twenty years now with PPV. Yet 1 million people in the US purchased Mania 17, even though they had 4 free hours of primetime television each week. 

Not to mention that Raw and Smackdown were so much better back then that you were essentially given a lot more for free in those 4 hours than you get nowadays in 5 hours.


----------



## Wynter

Smackdown did 2.60 million viewers last night, up 160,000 from the prior week, but below the week before that.

http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-...es/41193-smackdown-ratings-and-other-wwe-news\

Considering this was the filler of all filler SD's with Roman and Bryan having to carry over an hour of the show? It's a good thing to hear an increase.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Last Years Smackdown on Friday 2/14/14 did 2.83 million viewers.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Raw did a 2.72. 
A show on the Road to Wrestlemania.

If that doesnt say WWE is dead, nothing will.

And all of you apologists for the horrible TV ratings and the horrible PG era dont know what you are talking about. Good TV draws huge ratings. Look at Game of Thrones and the Walking Dead. 20 yrs ago cable shows never got as high of ratings as they do now. Plenty of people are watching TV. They just dont watch the lame boring childish WWE. They watch adult shows.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

WynterWarm12 said:


> Smackdown did 2.60 million viewers last night, up 160,000 from the prior week, but below the week before that.
> 
> http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-...es/41193-smackdown-ratings-and-other-wwe-news\
> 
> Considering this was the filler of all filler SD's with Roman and Bryan having to carry over an hour of the show? It's a good thing to hear an increase.


That show did well with the same guys in ring for an hour. here's the chart:


----------



## Wynter

IDONTSHIV said:


> That show did well with the same guys in ring for an hour. here's the chart:


Agreed. Considering there's a part of their fanbase who reads spoilers and didn't watch. And also running the risk of fans not wanting to watch an hour match, they did well. 

An increase with such a weak roster should give WWE some confidence in this Bryan and Roman program. And I've seen a lot of praise for the storytelling, so they did the best they could do with a limited roster and succeeded.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Next weeks Raw rating is going to be very interesting, if it's below 4 million again, it's safe to say they've done some short term damage to themselves.


----------



## murder

Not trying to play devil's advocate but the real Road to Wrestlemania starts the day after the February PPV. Once all the big players for Mania are there, i.e. Lesnar (regularly and in prominent roles), Orton, Sting, Taker and possibly Rock, that's when we can judge whether the Road to Mania is hot or not.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

murder said:


> Not trying to play devil's advocate but the real Road to Wrestlemania starts the day after the February PPV. Once all the big players for Mania are there, i.e. Lesnar (regularly and in prominent roles), Orton, Sting, Taker and possibly Rock, that's when we can judge whether the Road to Mania is hot or not.


True. But everyone agrees that 3 hours of RAW is simply an overkill. WWE should go back to 2 hour RAW ASAP.


----------



## murder

Everyone except Vince that is.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Raw is absolutely brutal these days at 3 hours. I try not to start until 10:00 pm so I can fast forward through most of it. 3 hours just makes everything so meaningless for me. There are only so many matches that I can watch every week.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*These low numbers only show that viewers are tired of watching Kane, Big Show, and Rollins lose every night. Almost every time viewers bomb, they're the constant. WWE has made Rollins worthless by giving him too much screen time and jobbing him out, and they've spammed us with Kane and Big Show matches while keeping the rest of the roster buried. It's idiotic business. A hero is only as good as its villains. If you keep feeding Bryan and Reigns a bunch of losers and two veterans who overstayed their welcome years ago, no one's going to watch. If you want to keep scaring viewers away, then by all means, announce Kane, Big Show, and/or Rollins will be in the first and last segment and give us another predictable ending. Maybe Seth's controversy can help him maintain viewers that want to see what they're doing with him.*


----------



## Empress

- Monday night's WWE RAW ranked #4 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen's new Twitter TV ratings, behind the Grammy Tribute to Stevie Wonder, The Bachelor and the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show. RAW had a unique audience of 1.572 million, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This was down from last week's 1.633 million. RAW had total impressions of 9.699 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was also down from last week's 11.020 million.
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0217/589546/wwe-diva-praises-vince-mcmahon/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

If anyone is expecting the cable ratings today, I would say that it probably isnt happening. Yesterday was a federal holiday, President's Day, and ratings are usually delayed by that.


----------



## Londrick

Vince needs to give up on Reigns and smarks need to give up on Bryan, neither are drawing and it's time to give both the ut. 

Call up Cass and Enzo and push them as the Diesel and HBK of this era.


----------



## Blade Runner

RAW is far too long, convoluted and inconsistant with quality to be drawing great numbers right now. I'd swear that if they brought back The Rock for 2 straight months, even HE wouldn't be drawing near the numbers he'd be getting on a one off appearance in Wrestlemania season. There's no clear direction. The WWE doesn't give a sh^t about effort more than half the time and the viewers don't ether. That's why the ratings always fluctuate around the same estimate every.single.week. Give us a year long program that is an hour shorter, have a long term plan for more than just 3 guys on the roster and up the writing quality and presentation of the shows. THEN you might see a ratings increase. No one man will pull that off on their own. Not The Rock, Not John Cena. Not Daniel Bryan. Not anyone. It's like buying yourself the quickest, strongest Stallion to pull a Wagon with a broken wheel and expecting to get anywhere.


----------



## chronoxiong

I remember those days when RAW used to get pre-empted for the Westminster Club Kennel Dog Show. Great times...


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

chronoxiong said:


> I remember those days when RAW used to get pre-empted for the Westminster Club Kennel Dog Show. Great times...


There have been a few episodes where it would have been better if they were preempted.


----------



## Frico

Numbers are in:


----------



## The Bloodline

Well at least it went up, I expect big numbers for next week.


----------



## Batz

Okay numbers.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Last years Raw on 2/17/14 did 4.4 million viewers.

With hours of 4.7 million, 4.3 million and 4.1 million.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Rating was up 9% from last week. They are going to need a series of good shows to start ticking the meter in their favor.


----------



## DoubtGin

numbers aren't good at all, imo, but at least they did higher numbers than last week

the buildup to this year's WM is way worse than last year, though


----------



## LOL-ins

These numbers are terrible for RTWM numbers. No hour should be 3.? million on a RTWM RAW. lol @ fanboys trying to say these numbers are even okay they had 400K more last year during the same time.


----------



## Wynter

Roman vs Bryan is just now getting hot. Most of the time it was pure build up and storytelling. Now shit has hit the fan. Some more time with these two would be a good thing. 

Their chemistry is amazing and WWE would be leaving money on the table if they ended the feud at Fast Lane. 

Do that and do some work in the midcard and they can get them viewers back.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

The post EC Raw last year did 4.7 million viewers over three hours. I could see this year doing close to that with the Sting hype.


----------



## Cobalt

The Inbred Goatman said:


> The post EC Raw last year did 4.7 million viewers over three hours. I could see this year doing close to that with the Sting hype.


Yeap, taker returned, Network launched that night too.

This year, Taker will most likely return again, Orton also and Sting may very well be on Raw too.

Things should and need to start heating up now.


----------



## The Bloodline

Yeah I expect the fall out from fastlane to get a high viewership. They always screw up their post big event raw. Hopefully they capitalize on the curious audience tuning in this time.


----------



## DoubtGin

SD had 2 403 000 viewers. Down from last week (2 596 000).


----------



## Empress

I didn't bother watching Smackdown. There was nothing of interest. I'm not surprised the ratings went down.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This is the chart;


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Check it out. Hour 3 was the highest. the Bryan/Reigns bromance sucked the viewers in:











8:00 4.082 1.37 demo

9:00 4.109 1.43

10:0 4.176 and the highest demo at 1.51


----------



## Batz

Third hour gained?

:clap


----------



## The True Believer

Guess people wanted to see The Viper implode.


----------



## CookiePuss

3rd hour highest viewers? 

Well, you don't see that too often.


----------



## The Bloodline

I think its thanks to Randy and a mainevent that hadnt already been done to death


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Woah, the show actually increased throughout and third hour was the highest.

Still is way down on last year's show, but I guess consistency is something good to take away from it.


----------



## A-C-P

Well the ME did not include Big Show or Kane in a match, so there was that.


----------



## Empress

Great numbers. The show gained throughout the night.


----------



## MyMoneyIsOnFailure

People were expecting Sting in hour 3. Pretty obvious.

Still down from last year, which speaks to how awful this RTWM has been.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

It is a positive sign that it built throughout the night. keeping Big Show and Kane as the new brisco and patterson is a winning strategy. They should not be main eventing either shows or ppvs.


----------



## kendoo

Decent ratings for the last hour, it probably helped that by the looks of it the general tv shows that were on at the same time sucked.


----------



## Empress

IDONTSHIV said:


> It is a positive sign that it built throughout the night. keeping Big Show and Kane as the new brisco and patterson is a winning strategy. They should not be main eventing either shows or ppvs.


And also scrapping the 20 minute Authority promo's to start off the show.


----------



## CoolestDude

Ravensflock88 said:


> I think its thanks to Randy and a mainevent that hadnt already been done to death


Also Reigns is already a huge draw for viewing figures.

Plus he is getting huge pops right now.


----------



## MyMoneyIsOnFailure

CoolestDude said:


> Also Reigns is already a huge draw for viewing figures.
> 
> Plus he is getting huge pops right now.


Reigns isn't any kind of draw for "viewing figures." All you have to do is look at the atrocious numbers in this year's RTWM as well as the poor numbers prior to RTWM to figure that out, kiddo. He can't draw.

Also, he isn't getting huge pops.


----------



## McCringleberry

Empress said:


> Great numbers. The show gained throughout the night.


No, terrible numbers. This isn't a regular Raw, this is the RTWM. Last years numbers were as follows and they were considered disappointing:

Hour 1: 4.89 million
Hour 2: 4.78 million
Hour 3: 4.31 million


----------



## MyMoneyIsOnFailure

"Great numbers." How delusional can you be?


----------



## Empress

McCringleberry said:


> No, terrible numbers. This isn't a regular Raw, this is the RTWM. Last years numbers were as follows and they were considered disappointing:
> 
> Hour 1: 4.89 million
> Hour 2: 4.78 million
> Hour 3: 4.31 million


The numbers are good for 2015. It's not last year, or even two years ago when they were probably better. For the first time in months, RAW snapped its streak of losing viewers in the final hour and actually improved throughout the night. That's better than a loss of viewers.


----------



## MyMoneyIsOnFailure

Empress said:


> The numbers are good for 2015. It's not last year, or even two years ago when they were probably better. For the first time in months, RAW snapped its streak of losing viewers in the final hour and actually improved throughout the night. That's better than a loss of viewers.


Of course it's not last year, or the year before, or the year before that. The difference is that they are currently pushing a guy who lacks entertainment value and drawing power as the top guy.


----------



## McCringleberry

Empress said:


> The numbers are good for 2015. It's not last year, or even two years ago when they were probably better. For the first time in months, RAW snapped its streak of losing viewers in the final hour and actually improved throughout the night. That's better than a loss of viewers.


Boy, you set the bar kinda high don't ya?


----------



## Empress

McCringleberry said:


> Boy, you set the bar kinda high don't ya?


The ratings could be better but they're much improved from recent weeks. It just is what it is.

If the ratings had gone down, some would've complained. They went up a bit and that's still bringing on the complaints.


----------



## McCringleberry

Empress said:


> The ratings could be better but they're much improved from recent weeks. It just is what it is.
> 
> If the ratings had gone down, some would've complained. They went up a bit and that's still bringing on the complaints.


Geez, really? Is the news complaining when they report on ISIS? I hate to break it to you but reporting things that happen, you know facts in life, isn't complaining.


----------



## Empress

McCringleberry said:


> Geez, really? Is the news complaining when they report on ISIS? I hate to break it to you but reporting things that happen, you know facts in life, isn't complaining.


Dial it back. Seriously. 

I thought the ratings were great all things considered and showed improvement over previous weeks. You didn't and wanted to point that they were higher last year. Cool. Let it be that. If you want to nitpick at the numbers some more and bring ISIS into the conversation, have at it and just no sell my posts.


----------



## McCringleberry

Empress said:


> Dial it back. Seriously.
> 
> I thought the ratings were great all things considered and showed improvement over previous weeks. You didn't and wanted to point that they were higher last year. Cool. Let it be that. If you want to nitpick at the numbers some more and bring ISIS into the conversation, have at it and just no sell my posts.


That wasn't fully aimed at you. Yours was the 4th post I'd just read where someone accused someone else of "complaining" for simply stating facts. Sorry kiddo.


----------



## JTB33b

Fans were tuning in to watch Orton RKO Rollins in the main event. but never happened.


----------



## Empress

McCringleberry said:


> That wasn't fully aimed at you. Yours was the 4th post I'd just read where someone accused someone else of "complaining" for simply stating facts. Sorry kiddo.


I fully understand where you are coming from in regards to the ratings. They are not "great" when you compare it to other years. But for a show that has been losing viewers over the weeks, it's great that they snapped the streak. I just don't want to get in the habit of attacking the WWE over everything. So, I just wanted to recognize the good of RAW being able to maintain and grow its viewers. 

I'm sorry if I came off dismissive in my replies to you.


----------



## CJohn3:16

RKO = draw.

People wanted to see infinite RKOs in the ME.


----------



## The Bloodline

Them gaining viewers throughout the night is a small victory. Ratings arent booming and haven't been for a while. wrestling is dying out when it comes to TV views and I cant blame people. 3 hours shows are too much. Especially for people who try to get back into it. I cant imagine sitting through these 3 hour raws unless you're a really big fan already. I think if they wanna see better overall ratings they wont until its 2 hours again. Plus they have trouble putting on consistent good shows. :shrug:


----------



## LOL-ins

Empress said:


> Great numbers. The show gained throughout the night.


Great numbers? Yes because losing around 15% of your audience from 2014 to 2015 is a good thing. 

I think I've found your account :vince


----------



## Empress

LOL-ins said:


> Great numbers? Yes because losing around 15% of your audience from 2014 to 2015 is a good thing.
> 
> I think I've found your account :vince


You figured me out. It's been me all along. :vince2


----------



## Randy Lahey

Raw's ratings are the worst in their history for this time of year. Anyone saying "great numbers" doesnt know what they are talking about. Pretty soon Raw breaking a 3.0 will be considered a "good" rating smh....


----------



## MyMoneyIsOnFailure

Randy Lahey said:


> Raw's ratings are the worst in their history for this time of year. Anyone saying "great numbers" doesnt know what they are talking about. Pretty soon Raw breaking a 3.0 will be considered a "good" rating smh....


Don't worry. It's just Reigns marks who are in denial about his lack of drawing power who are making these absurd claims.

The majority of us know these are horrible numbers. Some of us predicted many months ago that this would happen if they feature Reigns so prominently and push him as the top guy.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Fail Rating. Worst RTWM ratings in over 15 years, and the quality of the shows prove that. People last night were expecting Taker, Sting AND Lesnar on the show, and yet they are still doing hours under 4 million? FAIL.

Orton's return was the first thing and the first hour does 3.9 million, what a big star he is.


----------



## Marv95

The 30th Mania and a somewhat hot storyline are credited to the ratings last year which weren't that good to begin with. This year none of that is to their disposal. To fully put the blame on Reigns or one guy is naïve. If Bryan, Dolph or even Cena was in Reigns' spot do you think the ratings would be much higher, if higher at all? Show sucks.


----------



## Empress

- Monday night's WWE RAW ranked #4 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings, behind the The Bachelor, The Voice and BET Honors. RAW had a unique audience of 1.812 million, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This was up from last week's 1.572 million. RAW had total impressions of 10.410 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was also up from last week's 9.699 million.
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0225/589802/chris-jericho-filming-new-movie-photo/


----------



## McCringleberry

If the ratings are this bad on the road to Wrestlemania just imagine how bad they are gonna be during the usual lull after Mania.

So to all those who keep saying people will watch no matter what, where's your pithy comments now?


----------



## _CodyRhodes_

TV ratings don't just boil down to one wrestler and I would have thought that would have been obvious 327 pages ago. It's so easy for Reigns haters to point to him but let's just ignore the fact that the WWE Champion Brock Lesnar hasn't been seen for a month now, that Sting was probably expected to be on but when people realised he wasn't they switched off & that was probably a similar reaction for the Undertaker. 

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-better-call-saul-black-ink-crew-more/366753/

They're still killing it in Cable TV as well which is good news


----------



## NastyYaffa

Bet they are somehow blaming CM Punk & Daniel Bryan on these ratings.


----------



## DarkLady

_CodyRhodes_ said:


> TV ratings don't just boil down to one wrestler and I would have thought that would have been obvious 327 pages ago. It's so easy for Reigns haters to point to him but let's just ignore the fact that the WWE Champion Brock Lesnar hasn't been seen for a month now, that Sting was probably expected to be on but when people realised he wasn't they switched off & that was probably a similar reaction for the Undertaker.
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-better-call-saul-black-ink-crew-more/366753/
> 
> They're still killing it in Cable TV as well which is good news


And it's so easy for Reigns marks to make excuses. I mean, let's be honest here, why are they pushing him? To draw casuals, right? That's the justification we keep hearing. "Daniel Bryan is ugly but channel flippers are gonna cream themselves when they see Reigns and stay watching forever!"

But where are the casuals? Punk and Bryan get hated on relentlessly for not triggering a boom period, but where is the Reigns boom period that his marks promised? Oh, he needs more time? Well no fucking shit, that's why he shouldn't be the focal point of the show yet or maineventing WM.

Yeah, I know, ratings would suck no matter what, but still...


----------



## MaybeLock

Awful ratings. The top star of the show doesn't have a program for WM. Lesnar, Sting and Taker don't show up, which means you've got 3 storylines carried by only one man. And the chosen one to be the future top guy and beat Lesnar is not motivating people to watch. As simple as that.


----------



## Cobalt

NastyYaffa said:


> Bet they are somehow blaming CM Punk & Daniel Bryan on these ratings.


Of course they are, It'll be Punk's fault for another 10 years at this rate.

But yea, when people are tuning into a show to expect Taker, Sting and Lesnar and you get none of them it really is disappointing.


----------



## Londrick

Push Vanilla midgets and ratings suck

Push Vanilla gorillas and ratings suck.

It's lose/lose of WWE.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Brie Bella said:


> Push Vanilla midgets and ratings suck
> 
> Push Vanilla gorillas and ratings suck.
> 
> It's lose/lose of WWE.


Exactly, which is why we need Mizdow pushed to the moon. Obviously he's very over. He's not a vanilla midget and he's not a vanilla gorilla either. He's the fresh type face of the company that we need.


----------



## MaybeLock

Brie Bella said:


> Push Vanilla midgets and ratings suck
> 
> Push Vanilla gorillas and ratings suck.
> 
> It's lose/lose of WWE.


It's indeed the era of fat wrestlers. 8*D


----------



## Chrome

Doesn't really matter what they push, be it midgets, gorillas, or robots, show sucks and is in desperate need of a format change.


----------



## Londrick

Maybe they should sign actual animals and have them wrestle.


----------



## MaybeLock

Brie Bella said:


> Maybe they should sign actual animals and have them wrestle.


Vince is always ahead of us:


----------



## Londrick

The WeeLC match :drose


----------



## Srdjan99

Brie Bella said:


> The WeeLC match :drose


That was really an awesome match


----------



## Marrakesh

Srdjan99 said:


> That was really an awesome match


Was it Weelly?


----------



## Srdjan99

Marrakesh said:


> Was it Weelly?


I weelieve it was


----------



## A-C-P

Srdjan99 said:


> I weelieve it was


Wouldn't that actually be Welee That? :reigns2


----------



## Srdjan99

A-C-P said:


> Wouldn't that actually be Welee That? :reigns2


You got me here dude laugh::laugh::clap


----------



## DoubtGin

WWE Smackdown SYFY 8:00 PM 2.624 0.7

up from last week's 2.403


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This is the chart, if anyone wants to see it.


----------



## JY57

> Total Divas Viewership Figures via TVBytheNumbers.com.
> 
> - March 1: Week 8 jumped 32 percent compared to last week's show, which was against WWE's own Fast Lane PPV and the Academy Awards.
> 
> Total Divas drew 1.405 million viewers, nearly reaching the season premiere of 1.411 million.
> 
> This brought the season's average viewership from 1.175 million to 1.204 million, right in-line with Season 2, which ran March through June 2014.


-


----------



## Cliffy

posted it in the wrong thread earlier:



> Tuesday, 03 March 2015 13:57
> 
> 
> 
> Raw last night did 3.82 million viewers, again well below usual seasonal averages, even with the hype of Jon Stewart.
> 
> Stewart's appearance did keep the third hour from being the least-watched, as is the normal pattern, but the hour was still below the 4 million viewer threshold. The number was in the same realm of fall numbers against football.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.55 million viewers
> 
> 9 p.m. 4.07 million viewers
> 
> 10 p.m. 3.86 million viewers
> 
> The rating is likely to fall in the 2.7 or 2.8 range.


----------



## A-C-P

Replied to this in the wrong thread to, oops :ha

So the hour with no Reigns in it had the highest overall viewer #? :troll


----------



## xdoomsayerx

Shocking ratings went down from last week..... Reigns will run this company into the fucking ground.


----------



## CreditDefaultSwap

Reigns was in the two least viewed hours and absent from hour 2 which did a somewhat respectable number. Jesus fucking Christ at the 3.55 million in hour 1. Just fucking atrocious.

Be prepared for Reigns marks to invade this thread with the most illogical and inarticulate excuses.

BTW what happened in hour 2? I can't remember. Was that the hour they did the IC title segment with Ambrose, Barrett, Bryan, Ziggler, etc?


----------



## JY57

Only newsworthy so far on these Mania ratings this year is that Cena/Rusev has been in the top rated hour each time. Other than that YIKES. YouTube and Hulu Plus is smartest way to watch anyways.

^ Cena/Rusev/Stephanie, Hunter, Paige vs Nikki, & AJ Lee's return


----------



## Loader230

You can't blame Reigns when Lesnar isn't even there. Paul Heyman, as talented as he is, means next to nothing to the casual audience. Its like, imagine if last year Bryan was left to chase the title alone and Triple H, Stephanie, Batista or Orton never even appeared on RAW during RTWM. Lack of Lesnar is hurting Reigns pretty badly, same way lack of Sting is hurting HHH's character relevance on the show but the difference is Hunter is a pro and he is capable of carrying the feud alone, and he's been doing it pretty well despite Sting, who's contractual deal with WWE seems to be way worse than Lesnar's. What was it like only 6 appearances or something?


----------



## CreditDefaultSwap

JY57 said:


> Only newsworthy so far on these Manua ratings is that *Cena/Rusev has been in the top rated hour each time*. Other than that YIKES.
> 
> ^ Cena/Rusev/Stephanie, Hunter, Paige vs Nikki, & AJ Lee's return


Not surprising, I guess. Cena can still pull in those viewers.


----------



## Marrakesh

4.56m viewer average last year for the same Raw. 

I guess the lack of any unpredictability about this years RTWM is really hurting it. 

I mean it has to be the most unimaginative and predictable story progression they have ever done this year with Reigns and Lesnar is never even there :lol 

I'm guessing the same people who tuned in to Smackdown pre rumble for Bryans return and bumped the viewership to just under 3m in three weeks from 2.4m before abandoning ship post rumble are accounting for a lot of the lost Raw viewership also.


----------



## A-C-P

Marrakesh said:


> 4.56m viewer average last year for the same Raw.
> 
> I guess the lack of any unpredictability about this years RTWM is really hurting it.
> 
> I mean it has to be the most unimaginative and predictable story progression they have ever done this year with Reigns and Lesnar is never even there :lol
> 
> I'm guessing the same people who tuned in to Smackdown pre rumble for Bryans return and bumped the viewership to just under 3m in three weeks from 2.4m before abandoning ship post rumble are accounting for a lot of the lost Raw viewership also.


But, But, But, Bryan isn't a draw I thought :draper2 (Not directed at you @Marrakesh)


----------



## McCringleberry

History repeats itself and Reigns has become Diesel. Reigns is done.




CreditDefaultSwap said:


> Be prepared for Reigns marks to invade this thread with the most illogical and inarticulate excuses.


They have none. It's over.




Marrakesh said:


> 4.56m viewer average last year for the same Raw.
> 
> I guess the lack of any unpredictability about this years RTWM is really hurting it.
> 
> I mean it has to be the most unimaginative and predictable story progression they have ever done this year with Reigns and Lesnar is never even there :lol
> 
> I'm guessing the same people who tuned in to Smackdown pre rumble for Bryans return and bumped the viewership to just under 3m in three weeks from 2.4m before abandoning ship post rumble are accounting for a lot of the lost Raw viewership also.


Better Call Saul, The Following, Gotham....WWE might not have competition in the form of other wrestling companies but they do have competition. And so the ratings erosion continues.


----------



## CreditDefaultSwap

Loader230 said:


> You can't blame Reigns when Lesnar isn't even there. Paul Heyman, as talented as he is, means next to nothing to the casual audience. Its like, imagine if last year Bryan was left to chase the title alone and Triple H, Stephanie, Batista or Orton never even appeared on RAW during RTWM. Lack of Lesnar is hurting Reigns pretty badly, same way lack of Sting is hurting HHH's character relevance on the show but the difference is Hunter is a pro and he is capable of carrying the feud alone, and he's been doing it pretty well despite Sting, who's contractual deal with WWE seems to be way worse than Lesnar's. What was it like only 6 appearances or something?


The ratings were awful with Lesnar on the show as well.

We have a pretty big sample size (going back several months) of Reigns' lack of drawing power. Even the last time we had a full quarter hour break down, it showed Reigns' segment losing viewers and drawing less than an El Torit vs Hornswoggle match. People were trying to claim that was a one time thing. Well, it sure doesn't look like it right now.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Damn, what a shitty rating.

The 3/3/2014 show was a show that was pretty much built entirely around Daniel Bryan, and that show did 4.6 million viewers. Lesnar was on that show as well, but just on the first segment.


----------



## CreditDefaultSwap

McCringleberry said:


> They have none. It's over.


You really shouldn't underestimate the delusion of Reigns marks. Just a couple of days ago someone tried to argue that Reigns was marketable and had mainstream appeal.

They have no legitimate excuse, but that won't stop them.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

McCringleberry said:


> History repeats itself and Reigns has become Diesel. Reigns is done.


Diesel at least got to have a year-long title reign before they gave up on him, so buckle up.

Maybe if Reigns' look was updated with a title belt, that would be all he needs to draw.


----------



## Blade Runner

CreditDefaultSwap said:


> You really shouldn't underestimate the delusion of Reigns marks. Just a couple of days ago someone tried to argue that Reigns was marketable and had mainstream appeal.


He IS marketable, he COULD have mainstream appeal, but the WWE blew their load too fast and booked it all wrong while giving a very blatant middle finger to Bryan and his fans in the process. They're now reaping the consequences of their negligence, but that's not because of Reigns's lack of appeal. He was hot with the crowd last year.


----------



## Loader230

CreditDefaultSwap said:


> The ratings were awful with Lesnar on the show as well.


And who was Lesnar even feuding with before Rumble? He'd just pointlessly show up, maybe F5 few guys, have Heyman suck his cock and then go home. You atleast need a purpose even for a established star to draw. 

If Reigns/Lesnar was built up like Triple H/Bryan last year, as it should've been, things would be lot different. The product would seem hot, RAW would feel more credible and important and Reigns himself would gain ton of babyface momentum just by standing up to the badass dominant heel Brock. Shit, John Cena got more build against Lesnar to ultimately get squashed at his hands, than what Reigns is getting right now despite the fact he is set to beat Lesnar. Ridiculous. 



> We have a pretty big sample size (going back several months) of Reigns' lack of drawing power. Even the last time we had a full quarter hour break down, it showed Reigns' segment losing viewers and drawing less than an El Torit vs Hornswoggle match. People were trying to claim that was a one time thing. Well, it sure doesn't look like it right now.


Several months? Last time I checked he won the rumble only two months ago, where his real push started.


----------



## The Bloodline

I've sat with people who stopped watching wrestling a decade ago and that tries to watch now and just cannot get into this show. It's nothing about raw that would grab in new viewers. & it's mania season but Taker, Sting and Brock are absent from the show yet they're involved in the main feuds and one the MAIN EVENT. Nothing big is happening, feuds aren't igniting. I'll sit through it cause I'm use to it but the show it pretty shit for someone just tuning in Or trying to get back into it. :shrug. Keeping the show at 3 hours will continue to hurt the ratings in my opinion too. It's not interesting enough for 3 hours


----------



## Loader230

> it's mania season but Taker, Sting and Brock are absent from the show yet they're involved in the main feuds and one the MAIN EVENT.


That's exactly the problem.


----------



## DoubtGin

This WM feels pretty filler, tbh, I can understand why some wouldn't really want to tune in.

Was the Stewart/Rollins segment in hour two?


----------



## Choke2Death

Terrible rating and deservedly so. I shudder to think how bad it'll be AFTER WM when the non-appearing special attractions are also non-stories. They can't get 4 million average weeks before WM. Nowadays getting a 3 is considered success, soon it'll be 3 million average they will have to celebrate. Impact doesn't have to catch up with them because WWE will meet down there soon.

_"But... but they will always watch!!!"_ :vince4

I sure as hell haven't watched any of it after Royal Rumble other than the odd segment here and there on youtube. 



Loader230 said:


> And who was Lesnar even feuding with before Rumble? He'd just pointlessly show up, maybe F5 few guys, have Heyman suck his cock and then go home. You atleast need a purpose even for a established star to draw.
> 
> If Reigns/Lesnar was built up like Triple H/Bryan last year, as it should've been, things would be lot different. The product would seem hot, RAW would feel more credible and important and Reigns himself would gain ton of babyface momentum just by standing up to the badass dominant heel Brock. Shit, John Cena got more build against Lesnar to ultimately get squashed at his hands, than what Reigns is getting right now despite the fact he is set to beat Lesnar. Ridiculous.


Even if Lesnar showed up it wouldn't change anything. The feud simply has no heat and there's no reason to care about it. Reigns doesn't have an interesting story, he just won the Rumble and it's a generic "I'm going to win the title" story even if Lesnar was all over the weekly shows.


----------



## Saintpat

Jon Stewart is Bad for Business


----------



## LOL-ins

Those numbers are fucking awful. WWE is dying a slow death it seems. 

3.5 million hour during WM season is panic button kind of numbers.


----------



## Marv95

This may sound stupid but it won't surprise me at all if WWE goes TV-14 before the end of 2015 as a knee jerk reaction to the poor ratings and lower than expected network subs. Probably won't get rid of the 3rd hour anytime soon, but they should.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Reigns must be related to Dwayne because he has brought the ratings to *Rock Bottom*.


----------



## The Dazzler

IDONTSHIV said:


> Reigns must be related to Dwayne because he has brought the ratings to *Rock Bottom*.


:bryanlol


----------



## MaybeLock

:ti :ti

Bah gawd. Considering we are less than a month away from WrestleMania, this is probably one of the worst ratings results I've ever seen. First hour with 3.5 millions in the first hour is beyond ridiculous. I'm sorry, but Reigns is on his way to become the next failed pet project. 

Basically, previous year, when the RTWM was centered around Bryan, 1 more million people were watching. They thought they could get away with everything and clearly they couldn't.


----------



## NastyYaffa

IDONTSHIV said:


> Reigns must be related to Dwayne because he has brought the ratings to *Rock Bottom*.


hh


----------



## The Bloodline

MaybeLock said:


> :ti :ti
> 
> Bah gawd. Considering we are less than a month away from WrestleMania, this is probably one of the worst ratings results I've ever seen. First hour with 3.5 millions in the first hour is beyond ridiculous. I'm sorry, but Reigns is on his way to become the next failed pet project.
> 
> Basically, previous year, when the RTWM was centered around Bryan, 1 more million people were watching. They thought they could get away with everything and clearly they couldn't.


You have to take into account last year the weeks leading into rumble/mania season were also better. Batista returning, shield vs wyatt, Cesaro rise, the organic Yes Movement, the rise of bryan, bray/cena. This year we have nothing to even match shield/wyatts nevermind the main event.

The show did get a high rating not long ago but clearly it didn't hold any interest and I can't blame people. Too many absent guys, nothing has real heat. Even randy/seth hasn't been exciting cause they quickly decided it was better to cool down then go head on into the feud. I don't even know how well the show would do with bryan in reign spot cause brock isn't around and there would be no epic yes movement to get behind this year and wwe has proven they suck at booking. last 6 months of 2014 was brutal. They lost a lot of fans along the way and haven't won them back with their lack of effort


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

MaybeLock said:


> :ti :ti
> 
> Bah gawd. Considering we are less than a month away from WrestleMania, this is probably one of the worst ratings results I've ever seen. First hour with 3.5 millions in the first hour is beyond ridiculous. I'm sorry, but Reigns is on his way to become the next failed pet project.
> 
> Basically, previous year, when the RTWM was centered around Bryan, 1 more million people were watching. They thought they could get away with everything and clearly they couldn't.


The red roosters have come home to roost.. Maybe WWE will realize that its in their best interest to book not only one person as strong. Congrats, WWE. This is a dud of your own making so your bed is made now lie in it.


----------



## CookiePuss

Ratings drop this week and you all are attributing that to Reigns. How predictable. Surely if it was higher, it would be attributed to someone else not named Roman Reigns unk2

The fact of the matter is, with the most important matches that Wrestlemania is being built around, the guys involved aren't even on the show. No Taker (my favorite wrestler of all time), no Sting, and and most importantly, no Brock Lesnar. 

Heyman/Reigns, Wyatt, and Triple H can only do so much by themselves without it becoming repetitive by not having their dance partners out there.


----------



## McCringleberry

Marv95 said:


> This may sound stupid but it won't surprise me at all if WWE goes TV-14 before the end of 2015 as a knee jerk reaction to the poor ratings and lower than expected network subs. Probably won't get rid of the 3rd hour anytime soon, but they should.


Never gonna happen. Vince is all about those sponsors now as evidenced by Jericho's latest book for example. They'd balk if he got to risque. WWE is kiddie land from now on sadly.


----------



## Chrome

Those numbers. :haha

That said, if you're gonna blame one person for those ratings, blame Vince. Years of a trash product and neglecting most of his fanbase appears to be catching up to him finally.


----------



## JTB33b

They should have done HHH vs Ambrose instead of HHH vs Sting.


----------



## McCringleberry

cookiepuss said:


> Ratings drop this week and you all are attributing that to Reigns. How predictable. Surely if it was higher, it would be attributed to someone else not named Roman Reigns unk2


He opened and closed the show. He was advertised for the main event multiple times throughout the show. The show was built around him like last year's show was built around Bryan.The top guy is always responsible when the show is built around them. Deal with it.


----------



## wwe4universe

Blame Vince. 

No sting no Brock no taker. In effect wwe is not able to progress their 3 main matches storylines heading into mania. And That's why it's stupid not to have taker show up. Do ppl really think bray wyatt alone is able to carry this entire feud for a freaking mania match?

This is the road to mania. pay the part time guys to show up pls. Years and years ago we would see the main event guys show up every week on the road to mania. Somehow today it is viewed as a sin to book them to show up for an extra appearance on the flagship show.


----------



## MaybeLock

cookiepuss said:


> Ratings drop this week and you all are attributing that to Reigns. How predictable. Surely if it was higher, it would be attributed to someone else not named Roman Reigns unk2


:haha 

Reigns just lost 1 million viewers compared to what DB did last year and we still get excuses. How predictable. The whole show was focused on Reigns and it horribly failed. Period.


----------



## Frico

AXELMANIA ran wild in hour 2 and did more than the hour that featured the guy headlining WM. 










BELEE DAT!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Reigns is the face of the company. All of his booking is battering us with just how good he is. I take WWE at its word. The new face is the draw for the company. I expect excellence from him in every aspect. He should be getting the best reactions and putting on not only the best segments but also the highest rated. After all, this guy is the Main Event of Mania and the foreseeable future. This isnt the time for protection and training wheels. Now Vince wouldnt be foisting somebody upon us who isnt ready, now would he?


----------



## Empress

Jon Stewart was in the second hour. I'm not surprised his hour got the highest viewership. It still would've been high if Reigns was featured there or not. Just how last week it didn't matter that the numbers increased during the 3 hour period but some still found a reason to dismiss that.

And I'm not sure how the show was built around Reigns when others appeared on screen more than him. 

But I would like to see the show return to two hours.


----------



## Scarlett

Empress said:


> Jon Stewart was in the second hour. I'm not surprised his hour got the highest viewership. It still would've been high if Reigns was featured there or not. Just how last week it didn't matter that the numbers increased during the 3 hour period but some still found a reason to dismiss that.
> 
> And I'm not sure how the show was built around Reigns when others appeared on screen more than him.
> 
> But I would like to see the show return to two hours.


Jon Stewart was the 3rd hour. The second hour was the Cena/Rusev stuff, which in my opinion is by far the best stuff on WWE television right now.


----------



## Empress

Scarlett said:


> Jon Stewart was the 3rd hour. The second hour was the Cena/Rusev stuff, which in my opinion is by far the best stuff on WWE television right now.


I stand corrected then. 

I do like the Rusev/Cena angle. I hope they make the match already. I'm surprised Jon Stewart didn't get a higher bounce in the ratings. Still, he should return for future appearances. He was very funny.


----------



## Scarlett

Empress said:


> I stand corrected then.
> 
> I do like the Rusev/Cena angle. I hope they make the match already. I'm surprised Jon Stewart didn't get a higher bounce in the ratings. Still, he should return for future appearances. He was very funny.


Does Stewart really have any crossover with Wrestling fans? Celebrity appearances seem to never work unless their is some cross over in fan base like with boxing stars like Tyson and Floyd.


----------



## Empress

Scarlett said:


> Does Stewart really have any crossover with Wrestling fans? Celebrity appearances seem to never work unless their is some cross over in fan base like with boxing stars like Tyson and Floyd.


I expected higher numbers since the WWE has been hyping his appearance all week and Seth appeared on the Daily Show. I still loved the segment though. So, I hope he comes back because he was one of the best parts of RAW. Even the best segments don't pull in the most viewers.


----------



## The True Believer

Chrome said:


> Those numbers. :haha
> 
> That said, if you're gonna blame one person for those ratings, blame Vince. Years of a trash product and* neglecting most of his fanbase appears to be catching up to him finally.*


Yep. Didn't watch this week, either. WWE has finally killed any interest that I might have in their main product. Recaps, spoilers, and WF threads are the only way I keep up with what's going on. It's sad that based on what I heard, the only noteworthy thing about the entire show was a parody for erectile dysfunction medication.


----------



## Empress

KINGPIN said:


> Yep. Didn't watch this week, either. WWE has finally killed any interest that I might have in their main product. Recaps, spoilers, and WF threads are the only way I keep up with what's going on. *It's sad that based on what I heard, the only noteworthy thing about the entire show was a parody for erectile dysfunction medication.*


It was funny.






Miz really has a sense of humor about him. The guy will do whatever is asked.


----------



## metr0man

Low ratings. Belee dat.


----------



## Bushmaster

KINGPIN said:


> Yep. Didn't watch this week, either. WWE has finally killed any interest that I might have in their main product. Recaps, spoilers, and WF threads are the only way I keep up with what's going on. It's sad that based on what I heard, the only noteworthy thing about the entire show was a parody for erectile dysfunction medication.


I watched the opening tag match in FastLane and haven't watched Raw or SD since. The one feud I cared about is getting ruined with a slow build angle so like you I just hear what's happening via threads and some podcasts. 

Curtis Axel seems to be highlight though, haven't seen the niagra pills commercial or whatever it was but Axel has been great. Last week he had that great short promo, was even better this week and based on spoilers he's only improving.


----------



## Londrick

Roman should've taken art classes instead of acting classes in his absence so he would be able to draw.


----------



## throwbacktx

The low ratings prove one thing: *The WWE Championship is more important to the show than we thought. *

The booking of Brock Lesnar as champion has been disastrous. WWE's decision to book Brock like a UFC attraction has had a negative effect on the product. I think most of us would agree that when Brock became champion we were expecting something completely different. We were expecting him to defend the title against a host of wrestlers. Remember when Cesaro vs Brock for the title was a possibility? WWE should have had Brock defend the title against the likes of Cesaro, Ambrose, Ziggler, on the road to WM 31. Sure none of them were going to win the title, but them pushing Lesnar would have made for better storylines and programming in general.

By booking Brock that way they pretty much made it obvious of the direction they were going in, and with that came predictability. Ask yourself: do you feel at anytime since Night of Champions to the present that Seth Rollins was/is close to cashing in? Nope. If anyone else was champion (or if Brock wrestled/appeared more) there would always be that intrigue of a potential Rollins cash in. Remember how excited we got when it appeared that Rollins was going to cash in on Brock at Night of Champions? Looking back WWE should have went ahead and put the title on Rollins at that point.

What was the Triple H/Daniel Bryan storyline from last August to WM 30 all about? The WWE Championship. Take the championship away from that storyline and does it work as well? Right now there's no direction for the show, no intrigue, too much predictability. The WWE Championship is more important to the show than we thought, and Brock's absence proves that. 

I can almost guarantee that the ratings will be fine once Brock is no longer champion. This isn't a shot against him, it has more to do with his booking. But then again that might be on Brock for not wanting to work more dates. When WM 31 comes around Brock would have been champion for over 200 days. That doesn't mean much to you, right? 200 days with two title defenses? Wow!!!

The fans know that nothing exciting is going to happen as long as Brock is champion and is only appearing infrequently. There will be no title changes, no unique storylines, no cash ins. Hopefully WWE realized that they cannot book a WWE Champion like this ever again. The championship is more important than we thought. But there is a silver lining: the championship will have a unique prestige after WM 31. Whether Roman Reigns is the champion by the end of the night or Seth Rollins, the championship will have new meaning. The championship will have the legacy of Undertaker's streak and Brock's dominance attached to it going forward. When we look at the next champion we will know that person is carrying a more prestigious WWE Championship despite the lack of usage of that title. It's just too bad that by essentially adding prestige to the championship the championship had to be held hostage. Sometimes you have to sacrifice short term for the long term gain.

Look at the ratings when Brock became champion at Summerslam:

*Go Home RAW to Summerslam (8/12/14):*
Hour 1: 4082
Hour 2: 4360
Hour 3: 4458

*AVG: 4300*

*Night after Brock's title win at Summerslam (8/18/14):*
Hour 1: 4281 
Hour 2: 4330 
Hour 3: 3972

*AVG: 4194*

*8/25/14*: 
Hour 1: 3859 
Hour 2: 4057 
Hour 3: 4005

*AVG: 3973*

*9/3/14 *:
Hour 1: 4009 
Hour 2: 3925 
Hour 3: 3827

*AVG: 3920*

*9/9/14: *
Hour 1: 3984 
Hour 2: 4162 
Hour 3: 3814

*AVG: 3986*


----------



## K4L318

> Raw last night did 3.82 million viewers, again well below usual seasonal averages, even with the hype of Jon Stewart.
> 
> Stewart's appearance did keep the third hour from being the least-watched, as is the normal pattern, but the hour was still below the 4 million viewer threshold. The number was in the same realm of fall numbers against football.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.55 million viewers
> 
> *9 p.m. 4.07 million viewers*
> 
> 10 p.m. 3.86 million viewers
> 
> The rating is likely to fall in the 2.7 or 2.8 range.












They tuned in.


----------



## Wynter

Hmmm, it's funny how quiet this thread was when Bryan vs Seth dropped in viewership in the Main event too. Or the excuses pulled out your asses when it happened.

I loved how most of the show was built around Jon Stewart and Seth-who had 5 segments and a match- but it's Romans fault??? Roman, the guy whose feud can't be built up because Brock is never freaking here?? OK :lol 

Hit me up when Roman is actually in awesome segments worth investing in instead of just promos after dumbass promos. 


And comparing it to last year??? When we had Shield, Wyatts, Batista, an Authority who were on top of their game and garnering mega heat with a Daniel Bryan who was in a very organic and big storyline?? Are we forgetting all the great segments we got out of that?? 

Comparing last year to the lazy as fuck Mania build we are getting this year is asinine. WWE isn't even putting half the effort this year.


----------



## #Mark

WynterWarm12 said:


> Hmmm, it's funny how quiet this thread was when Bryan vs Seth dropped in viewership in the Main event too. Or the excuses pulled out your asses when it happened.
> 
> I loved how most of the show was built around Jon Stewart and Seth-who had 5 segments and a match- but it's Romans fault??? Roman, the guy whose feud can't be built up because Brock is never freaking here?? OK :lol
> 
> Hit me up when Roman is actually in awesome segments worth investing in instead of just promos after dumbass promos.
> 
> 
> And comparing it to last year??? When we had Shield, Wyatts, Batista, an Authority who were on top of their game and garnering mega heat with a Daniel Bryan who was in a very organic and big storyline?? Are we forgetting all the great segments we got out of that??
> 
> Comparing last year to the lazy as fuck Mania build we are getting this year is asinine. WWE isn't even putting half the effort this year.


Well, Bryan/Rollins rating is looking impressive compared to this week. Plus, Mania is only 3 weeks away and they can't even maintain four million viewers. Obviously it isn't Reigns fault but I do think Vince is getting his just due. There is no intrigue this year and rightfully so.


----------



## MaybeLock

WynterWarm12 said:


> Hmmm, it's funny how quiet this thread was when Bryan vs Seth dropped in viewership in the Main event too. Or the excuses pulled out your asses when it happened.
> 
> I loved how most of the show was built around Jon Stewart and Seth-who had 5 segments and a match- but it's Romans fault??? Roman, the guy whose feud can't be built up because Brock is never freaking here?? OK :lol
> 
> Hit me up when Roman is actually in awesome segments worth investing in instead of just promos after dumbass promos.
> 
> 
> And comparing it to last year??? When we had Shield, Wyatts, Batista, an Authority who were on top of their game and garnering mega heat with a Daniel Bryan who was in a very organic and big storyline?? Are we forgetting all the great segments we got out of that??
> 
> Comparing last year to the lazy as fuck Mania build we are getting this year is asinine. WWE isn't even putting half the effort this year.


Obviously this year RTWM is lazy as fuck. But I wouldn't say Reigns is the victim. I'd say he is the main cause along with part timers not showing up. Fans chose Bryan as their guy and he is stuck in an irrelevant IC title match, while the guy chosen by the company is generating close to zero interest. He's going to main event Mania and he should be. 

Ok, I buy it, he could get better material, but let's get serious. He can't talk, he could get the best promo ever written for him and he will still mess up. He's been getting a great build since The Shield days, protected and always looking strong. They basically sacrificed the streak for him and he is not proving that he deserves all that. 

Last year was good because it was all about Bryan. Nothing away from his feud with HHH/Batista/Orton was THAT good.


----------



## The Bloodline

WynterWarm12 said:


> Hmmm, it's funny how quiet this thread was when Bryan vs Seth dropped in viewership in the Main event too. Or the excuses pulled out your asses when it happened.
> 
> I loved how most of the show was built around Jon Stewart and Seth-who had 5 segments and a match- but it's Romans fault??? Roman, the guy whose feud can't be built up because Brock is never freaking here?? OK :lol
> 
> Hit me up when Roman is actually in awesome segments worth investing in instead of just promos after dumbass promos.
> 
> 
> *And comparing it to last year??? When we had Shield, Wyatts, Batista, an Authority who were on top of their game and garnering mega heat with a Daniel Bryan who was in a very organic and big storyline?? Are we forgetting all the great segments we got out of that?? *
> 
> Comparing last year to the lazy as fuck Mania build we are getting this year is asinine. WWE isn't even putting half the effort this year.


that's the biggest thing. The failure of this road to Wrestlemania doesn't fall on one guy, when there's nothing much on the show to get behind. Main matches have feuds built with one sided promos or having a unecessary slow burn or thrown together last week. :shrug. I dont care if im written off as a Reigns apologist, it's ridiculous to blame him. They are failing at building up this mainevent and mania. Though I still honestly believe it'll be a good show based on the card..


----------



## Wynter

MaybeLock said:


> Obviously this year RTWM is lazy as fuck. But I wouldn't say Reigns is the victim. I'd say he is the main cause along with part timers not showing up. Fans chose Bryan as their guy and he is stuck in an irrelevant IC title match, while the guy chosen by the company is generating close to zero interest. He's going to main event Mania and he should be.
> 
> Ok, I buy it, he could get better material, but let's get serious. He can't talk, he could get the best promo ever written for him and he will still mess up. He's been getting a great build since The Shield days, protected and always looking strong. They basically sacrificed the streak for him and he is not proving that he deserves all that.
> 
> Last year was good because it was all about Bryan. Nothing away from his feud with HHH/Batista/Orton was THAT good.


Wyatts and Shield were red hot last year. They surely helped keep interest. 

Really, my point was, EVERYONE is suffering from shit booking. Let's say if Bryan won and then WWE did jack shit during the build up because Brock's big ass head can't be arsed to show up?? Bryan would just be a guy who is talking to himself at this point. Just promos and more promos with no action. 

WWE managed to garner interest for Roman vs Brock during that snow day Raw. There was some legit build to it. And then it went all down hill from there. Brock actually appeared on a Raw after that one and had ZERO interactions with Bryan and Roman :lmao the two guys who were fighting to win the chance to beat him. 

He's interacted with Seth more than the guy who will face him at Mania. 

This Mania build is lazy as fuck. Vince is reaping what he sow. Mediocrity brings in mediocre ratings :shrug


----------



## Marrakesh

Ravensflock88 said:


> that's the biggest thing. The failure of this road to Wrestlemania doesn't fall on one guy, when there's nothing much on the show to get behind. Main matches have feuds built with one sided promos or having a unecessary slow burn or thrown together last week. :shrug. I dont care if im written off as a Reigns apologist, it's ridiculous to blame him. They are failing at building up this mainevent and mania. Though I still honestly believe it'll be a good show based on the card..


I agree with this in the sense that Reigns alone is not why the ratings have dropped but his ''RTWM'' as the main event is not helping matters either. 

I don't believe if we had Bryan/Brock instead that viewership would be this low (Could be totally wrong) 

My reason for this view though is to do with the increase in Smackdown viewership pre Royal Rumble disaster with Daniel Bryan having been heavily advertised as having matches there on his return and the anticipation that his return from injury was the beginning of a big comeback storyline for him. 

I've mentioned already but it went from 2.4m to just under 3m in this time in the span of a few weeks before dropping down near it's original numbers post Rumble when it became clear what WWE's plans were for the WM main event. 

I think it is safe to assume that a lot of the same people who were tuning in to Smackdown for the DB comeback series of matches and then immediately tuned out following the rumble are probably part of the reason why Raw viewership has dropped also. 

It seemed to me like Bryan was the only guy in WWE right now generating that kind of interest to actually draw viewers in and when he was mishandled/used as a bit of a pawn to try and get Reigns more over in the month after the rumble the fans they lost on Smackdown had already left Raw as well. 

I mean they were doing these numbers back in November against MNF. :shrug 

They certainly are worrying.


----------



## The Bloodline

Marrakesh said:


> I agree with this in the sense that Reigns alone is not why the ratings have dropped but his ''RTWM'' as the main event is not helping matters either.
> 
> *I don't believe if we had Bryan/Brock instead that viewership would be this low (Could be totally wrong)
> 
> My reason for this view though is to do with the increase in Smackdown viewership pre Royal Rumble disaster with Daniel Bryan having been heavily advertised as having matches there on his return and the anticipation that his return from injury was the beginning of a big comeback storyline for him*.
> 
> I've mentioned already but it went from 2.4m to just under 3m in this time in the span of a few weeks before dropping down near it's original numbers post Rumble when it became clear what WWE's plans were for the WM main event.
> 
> I think it is safe to assume that a lot of the same people who were tuning in to Smackdown for the DB comeback series of matches and then immediately tuned out following the rumble are probably part of the reason why Raw viewership has dropped also.
> 
> It seemed to me like Bryan was the only guy in WWE right now generating that kind of interest to actually draw viewers in and when he was mishandled/used as a bit of a pawn to try and get Reigns more over in the month after the rumble the fans they lost on Smackdown had already left Raw as well.
> 
> I mean they were doing these numbers back in November against MNF. :shrug
> 
> They certainly are worrying.


I attributed the Smackdown gain to Bryan returning(top face returning should do well) AND it moving to Thursday. The move is huge considering Friday is a dead spot for television .I know they had a live show in there too. 

Also if it was Brock/Bryan it would mean they haven't had any actual screen time together yet either. If i were going off of the splendid booking they have given reigns and brock so far. Idk what they would be having Bryan do but I still don't think it would be enough to save the show overall. Byan has been heavily featured the last month with Reigns and numbers weren't booming even if their segments were. He'd probably be main eventing with seth til brock shows up and we see that match up dropped views too.

I knew they were in trouble when football went away and it really made no big difference ratings wise.


----------



## Marrakesh

Ravensflock88 said:


> I attributed the Smackdown gain to Bryan returning(top face returning should do well) AND it moving to Thursday. The move is huge considering Friday is a dead spot for television .I know they had a live show in there too.
> 
> Also if it was Brock/Bryan it would mean they haven't had any actual screen time together yet either. If i were going off of the splendid booking they have given reigns and brock so far. Idk what they would be having Bryan do but I still don't think it would be enough to save the show overall. Byan has been heavily featured the last month with Reigns and numbers weren't booming even if their segments were. He'd probably be main eventing with seth til brock shows up and we see that match up dropped views too.
> 
> I knew they were in trouble when football went away and it really made no big difference ratings wise.


Yea well my view was not so much that Bryan was responsible for the whole 500-600k viewer gain but a significant enough number of those people had to have tuned in for Bryan given the promotion of his matches there and when you consider the ratings dropped back down to just above their original numbers after the Rumble mishap and haven't really recovered since. 

For some reason now they don't promote any matches at all for Smackdown again :shrug 

So i think if it were to do with it being Thursday night and a better slot then we'd see continued viewership at around the 3m mark (As we did for Bryans return matches and RR story) but we have not seen that at all now for the past month following the rumble. 

It seems to fluctuate between 2.4-2.7m. 

Don't get me wrong i don't believe the ratings would be ''good'' this year regardless but i think if the show were more Bryan centric as opposed to Reigns then we may see them break the 4m mark. 

However i know if this were actually the case Bryan would take a lot of heat anyway as the numbers would still be poor.

I don't think there is a big draw in WWE right now but Bryan is probably the best they've got when he's hot and in a decent story. I can't imagine though that WWE would have expected viewership to be this low no matter who they were pushing this time of year.

Edit: Another point to make as well is that i believe the writing would be a lot better for DB as he is more seasoned performer. Reigns just can't talk while DB has found what works for him and he is more than capable of it now. 

Along with the fan investment at the shows and the general buzz around DB going to WM again as the peoples choice i find it hard to believe that there would not be a lot more vibrancy to the shows and more people tuning in because of that.


----------



## The Bloodline

Marrakesh said:


> Yea well my view was not so much that Bryan was responsible for the whole 500-600k viewer gain but a significant enough number of those people had to have tuned in for Bryan given the promotion of his matches there and when you consider the ratings dropped back down to just above their original numbers after the Rumble mishap and haven't really recovered since.
> 
> *For some reason now they don't promote any matches at all for Smackdown again :shrug*
> 
> So i think if it were to do with it being Thursday night and a better slot then we'd see continued viewership at around the 3m mark (As we did for Bryans return matches and RR story) but we have not seen that at all now for the past month following the rumble.
> 
> It seems to fluctuate between 2.4-2.7m.
> 
> Don't get me wrong i don't believe the ratings would be ''good'' this year regardless but i think if the show were more Bryan centric as opposed to Reigns then we may see them break the 4m mark.
> 
> However i know if this were actually the case Bryan would take a lot of heat anyway as the numbers would still be poor.
> 
> I don't think there is a big draw in WWE right now but Bryan is probably the best they've got when he's hot and in a decent story. I can't imagine though that WWE would have expected viewership to be this low no matter who they were pushing this time of year.


They hurt themselves. Actually hyping up a smackdown and a mainevent is clearly the way to go but they already have stopped that. It's back to feeling unimportant 

Honestly if they brought Bryan back and was able to keep him red hot then maybe Because he actually felt like a star and this was his big come back. It's just I have no reason to believe they can do that fpalm. last year they fell into a epic story, but they were never gonna come close to duplicating last year build up. He probably would have fought Kane at fastlane  . Bryan would have got blamed for the similar numbers and that would have been ridiculous too. No one guy can carry these 3 hour shows. & until they get better stories throughout the night people will continue losing interest.

Just throwing this out there but honestly as much as a love him the show was much more centered around Seth than anyone else anyway. Both his Sewart and Orton story. Last week was centered around Seth and Orton more so too. I'd have no problem with that if the feud heat wasn't killed. Mania main event hasn't even been the focus of the show yet which is unfortunate Smh.


----------



## Marrakesh

Ravensflock88 said:


> They hurt themselves. Actually hyping up a smackdown and a mainevent is clearly the way to go but they already have stopped that. It's back to feeling unimportant
> 
> Honestly if they brought Bryan back and was able to keep him red hot then maybe Because he actually felt like a star and this was his big come back. It's just I have no reason to believe they can do that fpalm. last year they fell into a epic story, but they were never gonna come close to duplicating last year build up. He probably would have fought Kane at fastlane  . Bryan would have got blamed for the similar numbers and that would have been ridiculous too. No one guy can carry these 3 hour shows. & until they get better stories throughout the night people will continue losing interest.
> 
> Just throwing this out there but honestly as much as a love him the show was much more centered around Seth than anyone else anyway. Both his Sewart and Orton story. Last week was centered around Seth and Orton more so too. I'd have no problem with that if the feud heat wasn't killed. Mania main event hasn't even been the focus of the show yet which is unfortunate Smh.


Well yea i see your point but it's Roman's RTWM. That has always been the way with WWE. 

I also don't think it would be fair to say that Seth who is essentially just an upper midcard heel with an inflated ego :lol can be blamed for not drawing in viewers because that really shouldn't be his task anyway right now.

I feel kind of bad for him that he is having to go out there so much and being over exposed because Roman can't carry a segment or cut a promo longer than a few words without forgetting lines or completely messing up the flow or delivery of it. 

Celebrity segments aren't going to save shit either so Vince should really focus elsewhere but he's delusional so he won't. 

If viewership starts to increase with the Reigns/Lesnar interactions then maybe all these discussions will be proved wrong anyway but i don't see where WWE are going to pull another 700k viewers into their shows any time before WM this year to come anywhere near to last years numbers which if we remember were considered a bit of a let down as well :lol 

To have lost around ~15% of your viewership at this time of year is really a very bad sign for what is going to happen post Mania. 

I dread to think the numbers WWE might be doing this fall if the shows remain this stale and unimaginative. 

Part of me hopes it happens though to create a sense of urgency there. They've been playing safe for far too long.


----------



## TheBOAT

Roman Reigns = Ratings Killer

The Most Overrated Wrestler Of All Time!!


----------



## Londrick

K4L318 said:


> They tuned in.


Not surprising considering the Bellas were involved, and they're the biggest stars in the divas division. Also it seems joining Total Divas has turned Paige into a star instead of a nobody like she was before the show.


----------



## Reaper

#Mark said:


> Well, Bryan/Rollins rating is looking impressive compared to this week. Plus, Mania is only 3 weeks away and they can't even maintain four million viewers. Obviously it isn't Reigns fault but I do think Vince is getting his just due. There is no intrigue this year and rightfully so.


It's never a single wrestler's or even a single main event's fault imo. Vince has convinced far too many people that his decisions are unquestionably right and if the audience stops watching then it was booking the wrestler couldn't draw .. And suckers here fall for it every single time because they're just too gullible. 

WWE brand has lost its integrity and has significantly lost the trust of some its most hardcore faithful let alone the fickle casual with his start/stop booking. 

The idiots in the WWE keep claiming that the fans have short attention spans when what they're doing is projecting their short attention spans onto the fans. 

Bryan's sustained over-ness over 3 years now should have proven it to him that it's not the audience that is at fault now, but him. And I'm not here to claim that Bryan is the single answer to the WWE's woes because he's not. He's ONE of them. 

Anyways, this year should serve as a reminder to the WWE and its armchair analysts that at the end of the day if you keep putting out a shit product and keep shitting on popular faces, fans WILL eventually turn away. It takes time to draw and to repel and we're seeing that as it happens.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

TheBOAT said:


> Roman Reigns = Ratings Killer
> 
> The Most Overrated Wrestler Of All Time!!


Judging by the tv ratings, I think he is under rated.


----------



## Blade Runner

Speaking as a huge Bryan fan; The ratings would've tanked if the RTWM was built on the back of that horrendous Bryan / Kane feud from last year. People are drawn to compelling storylines with interesting characters, and right now the WWE are not providing this. The show as of late has been centered around trying to fabricate momentum for one guy at the expense of killing the momentum of another guy that fans love. The heat between Reigns and Lesnar is practically non existant right now. Everything else on the show is treated as secondary storylines and don't have that major draw element to them ether. No sh^t the ratings are bad.


----------



## MaybeLock

I think it's about time Kevin Nash updates his graph:


----------



## SóniaPortugal

How not to blame Reigns these ratings?
He is being the leading figure at this time in WWE
John Cena and DB are in the titles secondary

And do not come to me with the excuse of bad written material because the bad written material is the same for everyone
The difference is that some (Cena, Rollins, Ambrose, DB ...) can do this bad written material fun to see and others do not (Reigns)


----------



## AVX

Axlemania is starting to brew, so things will be looking up shortly.


----------



## Algernon

One things Reigns will do well is revitalize this thread. The ratings thread went into the FUCKING GRAVE when CM Punk left and Bryan got hurt. It's just no fun blaming Cena for ratings going up or down anymore.


----------



## The Tempest

At this point the only thing that can help the ratings is the Niagara.


----------



## LPPrince

Wow.


----------



## Primefirst

Wow, that's really big


----------



## Belee Dat

Bryan causing people to tune out as always. Fuck sakes, people want larger than life stars. The IC title mix is too high for him. Put him in A New Day pls.


----------



## Londrick

MaybeLock said:


> I think it's about time Kevin Nash updates his graph:


The graph :banderas


----------



## LPPrince

So Bryan and the rest of the card was getting a million more viewers on Raw last year as compared to Roman and this year's card.

Vince, you're goofin'


----------



## Cobalt

LPPrince said:


> So Bryan and the rest of the card was getting a million more viewers on Raw last year as compared to Roman and this year's card.
> 
> Vince, you're goofin'


Organic, natural, good and compelling TV as opposed to this year which is forced, horrible and just doesn't "feel right".

What do they expect, but it means shit to Vince.


----------



## The5150

I Wonder how the ratings the last few years around Wrestlemania Time compare to MIZ's WWE Title reign?


----------



## silverspirit2001

Gotta say. If shit booking lead to the poor raw figures....what is to distinguish those choices and Reigns as the face of WWE.


Please supply evidence here.


----------



## Londrick

LPPrince said:


> So Bryan and the rest of the card was getting a million more viewers on Raw last year as compared to Roman and this year's card.
> 
> Vince, you're goofin'


They have no stars right now though. Last year they had Batista bringing in the mainstream media while this year it's no existent.


----------



## Marrakesh

Londrick said:


> They have no stars right now though. Last year they had Batista bringing in the mainstream media while this year it's no existent.


GOTG hadn't even been released yet so Batista certainly did not bring mainstream media attention back with him.

His initial return segment popped the ratings to the highest they'd been for a single hour segment since march 2013 before the show then lost over 1 million viewers by the third hour. :lol That show was dreadful btw. 

In all honesty the ratings last year weren't spectacular either and sometimes they can be quite volatile with sometimes up to 10-15% of viewership being lost and then gained again the following week with no real explanation other than perhaps competition or it being an anomaly. 

If these numbers remain under 4 million over the next few weeks then Yes WWE have definitely lost viewers from last year so we'll have to wait and see. 

The last 4 Raws before Mania last year averaged for the three hours in order: 

Mar 10th 2014: 4.37m

Mar 17th 2014: 4.08m

Mar 24th 2014: 4.27m 

Mar 31st 2014: 4.39m 

We have had the first of the final four for this year this week. 

March 2nd 2015: 3.82m

Lets draw a better conclusion in the weeks to come.


----------



## Cut4Bryan

At this rate TNA will start catching up :vince2


----------



## Starbuck

If it was Bryan/Lesnar nothing would change. The entire product is cold right now as evidenced by the low hours across the board. Anybody thinking this is solely on Reigns is being a fool. He could be as over as Austin and Rock combined and he'd still be drawing shit because of problems that go much further than him. Reigns, Wyatt and HHH are building the top 3 Mania matches by themselves. There's only so many times Wyatt can cut a mysterious promo or HHH can talk about WCW. Not only that but while Reigns isn't fully responsible, he has to shoulder some blame or at least his booking does, because he simply isn't what the majority wants to see and that's a fact. He IS over. I don't dispute that. But he isn't the most over person on the show, not even close. With Lesnar not there and Heyman treading water it's a recipe for disaster. 

The biggest match on the card is being built with (arguably) Wrestlemanias biggest attraction this year not even showing up. The most beloved guy on the show has been completely left out and they're too busy building a feud with Jon Stewart to give focus to what should be a top match on the card. Oh, and Undertaker hasn't bothered to show up either yet. You can't blame Roman Reigns for all of that, not when the entire product is cold as ice. We're what? 2 weeks from Wrestlemania and they've only announced 2 matches that only half of the participants are there to build. Of course the ratings fucking suck and they would regardless of who was in the main event spot. 

I really think that the winter season turned a lot of people off last year and they simply haven't come back. Sure, every now and then they give us a really good show or at least a coherent one or something happens that gets everybody talking but when you insult the intelligence of viewers for a sustained period of time, they go and it's hard to get them back. I seriously think that's what has finally happened and if this is what they're getting for their 'hottest' period of the wrestling year then they're in big trouble when things cool off. Then again, none of the big names are even on the show for this RTWM so maybe the dropoff won't be as noticeable this time around. Who knows.


----------



## THANOS

^ Good post Starbuck.

I don't poke my nose in here much anymore because it's difficult to really attribute anything to a specific storyline or wrestler without quarter hour/minute breakdowns like we used to have.

It would be hypocritical to criticise Reigns for an overall rating and defend Punk when the overall ratings were crap for him in December 2012, while disregarding the fact that he had the highest rated segments on those shows.

Without more detailed information there's no point digging deeper.

Like you said, it's the overall direction of the show that's causing this imo. There are feuds that are terribly booked and one-sided where it almost seems like a wrestler is feuding with themselves and talking merely to hear their own voices. That shouldn't happen on the road to mania imo.

The show's doing poorly because the Mania hype just sucks overall and nothing is being built to a fever pitch, and if WWE is trying to, the crowd isn't buying it. This goes for every match from Wyatt/Taker, HHH/Sting, Lesnar/Reigns, Cena/Rusev (still not official), and the IC ladder match.

The majority could care less about any of these and it's evident in the reactions anytime the feud implications are teased.


----------



## Sweettre15

So Smackdown's numbers continue to increase after that dip from some weeks ago:

*- Last night's episode of WWE SmackDown on SyFy drew 2.694 million viewers, up 3%* from the 2.624 million viewers the show drew last week.


----------



## The Bloodline

I also think the last few months of 2014 really drove people away and we assumed they'd be back for Mania but if they did come back the show isnt entertaining enough to bring them back for 3 hours of weak booking. WWE has a chance to win back some fans by putting on a great wrestlemania and raw afterwards. more eyes will be on them, they have to have really strong showings those 2 nights..

Good news for smackdown I guess. Dont know what their expectations are for that show these days. I.C storyline seems to be carrying the load the last 2 weeks


----------



## LPPrince

I don't know what the fuck WWE can do to right the wrongs that have been going on lately that will steer them back on track.


----------



## Reaper

Ravensflock88 said:


> Good news for smackdown I guess. Dont know what their expectations are for that show these days. I.C storyline seems to be carrying the load the last 2 weeks


This. With Vince's impatience, he's essentially done to Reigns what he did to Del Rio, Sheamus and pretty all of his "chosen ones" before him. 

It's not Reigns' fault ... but it falls squarely on Vince at this point. 

The IC program that vince probably does not even care about (as it's on record that all Vince cares about are his chosen talents) is the best because Vince does not care about it. 

That said, the IC title program on its own is not enough to save Raws' ratings because once it catches on that that program is over-shadowing the main event, it will be destroyed. 

The tag division (which was all HHH's baby) in 2013 was out-doing the rest of the company and once it really started breaking out it was sabotaged with a mis-timed and poorly booked title program. I'm referring to the TLC where the tag division could've put on the most amazing TLC match in years but it was scrapped in favour of an Orton/Cena mediocrity. Then the entire division was decimated slowly and it hasn't recovered since

Everything since then has been a complete and utter mess --- and one of the main reasons why this year hasn't recovered and is declining so sharply isn't just because the main event talents aren't there, but because they've given fans no reason to trust them in terms of booking even what's left properly and consistently. 

SD has a growing audience in part because since Bryan's return he's been heavily featured on it consistently and people are switching. At this point it seems like SD is rivaling Raw in terms of viewership. That's an interesting story developing separately and we'll have to see what the WWE do about it. 

Everything about the WWE right now is closely mirroring everything about WCW with the top in complete shambles and the mid trying to hold the fort but not really because eventually fans give up when the midcard doesn't evolve either.


----------



## THANOS

Reptar said:


> This. With Vince's impatience, he's essentially done to Reigns what he did to Del Rio, Sheamus and pretty all of his "chosen ones" before him.
> 
> It's not Reigns' fault ... but it falls squarely on Vince at this point.
> 
> The IC program that vince probably does not even care about (as it's on record that all Vince cares about are his chosen talents) is the best because Vince does not care about it.
> 
> That said, the IC title program on its own is not enough to save Raws' ratings because once it catches on that that program is over-shadowing the main event, it will be destroyed.
> 
> The tag division (which was all HHH's baby) in 2013 was out-doing the rest of the company and once it really started breaking out it was sabotaged with a mis-timed and poorly booked title program. I'm referring to the TLC where the tag division could've put on the most amazing TLC match in years but it was scrapped in favour of an Orton/Cena mediocrity. Then the entire division was decimated slowly and it hasn't recovered since
> 
> Everything since then has been a complete and utter mess --- and one of the main reasons why this year hasn't recovered and is declining so sharply isn't just because the main event talents aren't there, but because they've given fans no reason to trust them in terms of booking even what's left properly and consistently.
> 
> *SD has a growing audience in part because since Bryan's return he's been heavily featured on it* consistently and people are switching. *At this point it seems like SD is rivaling Raw in terms of viewership.* That's an interesting story developing separately and we'll have to see what the WWE do about it.
> 
> Everything about the WWE right now is closely mirroring everything about WCW with the top in complete shambles and the mid trying to hold the fort but not really because eventually fans give up when the midcard doesn't evolve either.


It's slowly working :yes



> _*Looking past WrestleMania 31, what are your hopes and goals for 2015?*_
> 
> "I have a lot of hopes and goals for 2015, one of which [has a lot to do with Smackdown]. With Smackdown coming to Thursday and with me coming back, *I would like to be the main guy on Smackdown and have Smackdown start beating Raw in the ratings. That's really what I want.* I've been very open about that with management, and told them "let me be the face of Smackdown, *give me the opportunity* to show what I can do *and by the end of the year Smackdown will be getting just as many viewers as Raw if not more."*


:bryan2


----------



## DoubtGin

The SD ratings are I think still average as fuck, unfortunately. It was even above 3m for a bit last year, I think. 

At least Batista showed up every week (even on SD at times) last year. This year, half of every big feud doesn't bother to do so.


----------



## Cliffy

Smackdown needs to move back to fridays so i can laugh at TNA


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Here's the ratings chart featuring Smackdown, if anyone is interested.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Spoiler: Reigns catches the blame for the ratings despite not being on the shittiest show of the season for 3 hours.

Edit: Starbuck already addressed the type of people that do this. Good.

As already stated, the entire show is awful. There's nothing to be remotely excited for besides Triple H and Sting, and that is only because it's Sting's first match in WWE and it's Wrestlemania. The build has been lackluster. The IC title match consists of Daniel Bryan and a bunch of jobbers. The Tag Team Champions just got jobbed out clean and they aired 4 consecutive heatless matches. The Divas were thrown into an irrelevant tag match with no buildup and no promo time given to the challengers. 3 of the premier matches consist of part timers, 2 of which can't even show up to promote their feuds. Bray Wyatt has been rambling for WEEKS and no one gives a fuck about what he has to say. They want The Undertaker. Paul Heyman is carrying the main event. Reigns booking has been great, but that isn't doing anything to get people excited for this match because he never interacts with Lesnar, and Lesnar's appearances are wasted on him standing around like an idiot. It's completely retarded. Everything about this show is bad. EVERYTHING!*


----------



## Reaper

^ Yes ... But you have to admit that it's bad because they wanted to make Reigns look good and in effect made everything else worse when Reigns was not ready for the position. 

However, no one in their right mind at this point cannot also ignore the fact that Reigns as an individual talent is just not good enough to carry even his own program even if everything else is bad. 

He's bad and hence his program is bad. If he was good, his program would be at least slightly better because of his talent. 

:draper2

Edit: I do feel bad for your guy because he should have been given a couple of more years (or at least another year) to develop, grow, mature ... But he wasn't. The company is operating in the here and the now. Reigns is not ready to deliver in the here and the now. The company is therefore suffering in the here and the now. 

That said, the pre-emptive post is really not necessary. The ratings aren't even in yet. Who knows, they might actually be better - because seriously, how can they get worse than they already are? It is mania season and just for that I'm sure people are going to tune in regardless.


----------



## SnapOrTap

Hope they drop below 4 mill this week.


----------



## Stochastic_Process

"The entire show is awful" but Reigns happens to be among the very worst parts of it.

He still can't draw, btw.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

SnapOrTap said:


> Hope they drop below 4 mill this week.


I am indifferent. They featured a lot of wrestling "matches", not a lot of long matches, but a lot of action happened inside the ring. Think there was around 10 matches tonight, which is good for a wrestling show.


----------



## Marrakesh

Turn Reigns/Lesnar into Reigns/Lesnar/Orton/Rollins as the main event. 

Seriously Reigns/Lesnar is ice cold :lol and Reigns as the champion? You've got to be fucking kidding me after the last few weeks. 

WWE save yourself the embarrassment and have Rollins or Orton go over in a four way at Mania and then continue their feud in the following months. 

It's hot and these two guys are elite talents right now. They aren't future prospects who have a shit load of developing to do. 

I dunno if it will save your ratings but it certinaly won;t fucking hurt them. 

Reigns/Sheamus for the title after Mania? Vince you must be losing your fucking mind. 

Get the belt on Rollins or Orton. It's best for business :trips2 

Reboot Reigns after Mania away from the main event scene. You've failed. Accept it don;t try and force feed us it because we aren't going to buy into it this time.


----------



## Loader230

> Sunday's 9pm episode of the WWE Total Divas finale drew 1.214 million viewers and a 0.6 rating in the 18-49 demographic.
> 
> Sunday's 10pm episode of the finale drew 1.280 million viewers and the same 18-49 rating as the 9pm episode.
> 
> Both of these are down from last Sunday's episode, which drew 1.405 million viewers.


Paige not much of a draw for TD after all. Are there even TV shows where the season finale episode actually drops in viewership? This is pretty weird.


----------



## Reaper

Loader230 said:


> Paige not much of a draw for TD after all. Are there even TV shows where the season finale episode actually drops in viewership? This is pretty weird.


Are they linking storylines on TD and Mania season? If not, then that could be one reason for the drop off.


----------



## Marrakesh

Someone post the Raw ratings if they've been released. Be interesting to see if that shit heap last night beat last weeks show.


----------



## JY57

> Last night's episode of WWE RAW averaged 3.859 million viewers, up slightly (less than 1%) from last week's show, which scored 3.825 million viewers.
> 
> The positive for this week's show was that there was growth in every hour. The first hour averaged 3.699 million viewers, while the second drew 3.937 million viewers. The audience grew slightly to 3.94 million viewers in the final hour.
> 
> RAW was the top rated show on cable last night.


via wrestlinging (also # 1 on Cable last night)

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...etter-call-saul-black-ink-crew-more-2/372921/


----------



## throwbacktx

Not bad, but the lack of part timers is hurting the show.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

08:00pm 3.699m 1.3 18-49

09:00pm 3.937m 1.3

10:00pm 3.940m 1.4 


Last week

08;00PM 3.545M 1.1 18-49

09:00PM 4.066m 1.3 

10:00PM 3.864m 1.3



The numbers are quite similar. The 8pm hour did click up in viewers and demo by .2. Hour 2 was down slightly and hour 3 was up slightly. I imagine the extended overrun probably helped it.


----------



## Wynter

Viewership grew as time went on??! During that shitty raw?? :drake1

Sad, they'd be easily breaking 4.0 if they booked with sense. The have no reason to be even near a 4 with this shitty ass build.


----------



## 2Pieced

Wynter said:


> Viewership grew as time went on??! During that shitty raw?? :drake1
> 
> Sad, they'd be easily breaking 4.0 if they booked with sense. The have no reason to be even near a 4 with this shitty ass build.


People were expecting the Orton turn.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Clearly, everyone wanted to see today's GOAT get the ass-beating he was owed by Orton.

:rollins


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*:what

I'm legitimately shocked that everyone stayed to watch that garbage and more people joined in. Looks like Wiz is a draw :vince$*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The viewers got a contact high from Khalifa; there can be no other explanation.


----------



## MaybeLock

This Road to Wrestlemania is already a lost cause IMO. They better have something good stored for April, because if this is what they get now, I don't know what kind of numbers to expect in Nov/December.


----------



## Empress

Legit BOSS said:


> *:what
> 
> I'm legitimately shocked that everyone stayed to watch that garbage and more people joined in. Looks like Wiz is a draw :vince$*


The Wiz is a better draw than Jon Stewart. He'll probably be tempted to bring on Nicki Minaj and Kanye West. The WWE and Ye seem like a perfect fit: both are over the top. :kanye2


----------



## Choke2Death

Does the overrun count into the third hour? Because the entirety of the final match/segment took place after 11:00 (except Reigns' entrance I think).

Only watched that (and the opening segment online after it was up) so can't judge the overall show and speculate on what drew. Better than last week, but still pretty bad for RTWM.


----------



## Reaper

Looks like a certain % of the viewer really has tuned out for good. They did 4.35 million during the same week last year and it was Hogan's return. The week before that in 2014 they did 4.65 million. 

I think people stayed hoping for some Lesnar physicality. I know that was the only thing that kept me interested.


----------



## D.M.N.

With three Raw's left of quarter one (January to March), here are how things are provisionally looking percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q1 2015):

- the previous quarter (Q4 2014)
- one year earlier (Q1 2014)
- two years earlier (Q1 2013)

The most successful quarter one's in recent years were:

+3.9% = 2013
+2.5% = 2014
-6.0% = 2015 (will end up around -7.5%)
-8.8% = 2012

From a year perspective, the figures are frankly disastrous for the 'E:

Q1 2010 = 5.28 million
Q1 2011 = 5.22 million (down 1.1%)
Q1 2012 = 4.45 million (down 13.3%)
Q1 2013 = 4.62 million (up 2.1%)
Q1 2014 = 4.44 million (down 3.8%)
Q1 2015 = 3.99 million (down 10.1%)

The drop between 2011 and 2012 can be explained by the move from two to three hours, and by the 2011 WrestleMania build having some huge star attractions attached to it.

Maybe 2015 is the year the chickens come home to roost.


----------



## Stochastic_Process

Less Reigns on the TV = higher viewership.

Not surprised at all.

Although it's still a shitty average number.


----------



## Reaper

D.M.N. said:


> With three Raw's left of quarter one (January to March), here are how things are provisionally looking percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q1 2015):
> 
> - the previous quarter (Q4 2014)
> - one year earlier (Q1 2014)
> - two years earlier (Q1 2013)
> 
> The most successful quarter one's in recent years were:
> 
> +3.9% = 2013
> +2.5% = 2014
> -6.0% = 2015 (will end up around -7.5%)
> -8.8% = 2012
> 
> From a year perspective, the figures are frankly disastrous for the 'E:
> 
> Q1 2010 = 5.28 million
> Q1 2011 = 5.22 million (down 1.1%)
> Q1 2012 = 4.45 million (down 13.3%)
> Q1 2013 = 4.62 million (up 2.1%)
> Q1 2014 = 4.44 million (down 3.8%)
> Q1 2015 = 3.99 million (down 10.1%)
> 
> The drop between 2011 and 2012 can be explained by the move from two to three hours, and by the 2011 WrestleMania build having some huge star attractions attached to it.
> 
> Maybe 2015 is the year the chickens come home to roost.


The WWE had to spend 2014 building up local talent as the part time draw was extremely thin for 2015 ...and then they pull the shenanigans they did at the rumble and pissed off a pretty bug chunk of their viewers. 

2015-2016 looks worse as they have nothing left to build on. Coming out of mania 2014 they still had the Shield, Wyatts, Bryan hiting on cylinders with Batista, HHH and Lesnar filling up the part time slots. 

Post mania 2015 if they don't sign Lesnar, they have nothing to offer. Ratings will continue to decline as time goes on. Fan trust is also at an all time low given how stubborn the WWE has been in their booking this year. 

Bad times ahead for WWE fans. Really bad.


----------



## Chrome

Yeah, those numbers still suck for Wrestlemania season.


----------



## Choke2Death

D.M.N. said:


> The drop between 2011 and 2012 can be explained by the move from two to three hours, and by the 2011 WrestleMania build having some huge star attractions attached to it.


Is it only the first quarter (January - April)? In that case, 2012 did not have any three hours excuse as the move only took place at the end of July.

Knew that wasn't a great year for ratings, but such a huge drop that only 2015 looks to top? That's news to me. And they had The Rock show up every week leading into WM28 with HHH and Taker more official in "part-time" roles as opposed to 2011. Also a returning Jericho before everyone got burned out on his 3-4 month runs where he jobs to everyone.


----------



## Batz

> * Raw ratings notes*
> 
> Tuesday, 10 March 2015 13:19
> 
> Raw remains well below seasonal patterns, doing numbers very close to last week, with 3.86 million viewers, almost the same as the 3.82 million last week.
> it was the No. 1 show on cable for the night. *The difference in ratings pattern is usually the case with Daylight Savings time, as viewers arrive late and traditionally the third hour becomes the biggest instead of the first hour.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The three hours were
> 
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.70 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 3.94 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 3.94 million viewers


http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-stories/96-wwe-news/41571-raw-ratings-notes


----------



## Londrick

Fans tuning in to see Stone Cold Randy Austin bring back the Attitude Era.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

So Daylight Savings Time drew the larger third hour. Surprised that Vince doesnt try to sign him.


----------



## MaybeLock

I think we've certainly reached a true low point. It's time to push the panic button and remove Reigns from the main event. It's time for the real god of ratings. It's time for Mark Henry. Since he left ratings have been shit. He'll bring the viewers back

:justsayin


----------



## LOL-ins

Oh boy these ratings aren't good at all. They have lost a large chunk of viewers for good it seems.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Shit rating again, not Surprising at all, and this show even had Lesnar on it(albeit, doing nothing).

Reigns will forever be tied to the biggest flop of a Mania of all time. He's like The Miz going into Mania 27.


----------



## Goku

The Inbred Goatman said:


> He's like The Miz going into Mania 27.





D.M.N. said:


> Q1 2010 = 5.28 million
> *Q1 2011 = 5.22 million (down 1.1%)*
> Q1 2012 = 4.45 million (down 13.3%)
> Q1 2013 = 4.62 million (up 2.1%)
> Q1 2014 = 4.44 million (down 3.8%)
> Q1 2015 = 3.99 million (down 10.1%)


?????


----------



## Randy Lahey

WWE cant even pull 4 million viewers on Road to Wrestlemania? WWE Raw is dead. Completely.

They need to revamp the show and make it for adults. Bc the adults have left this garbage and they aint coming back.


----------



## Cobalt

Surprise surprise shit ratings again.


----------



## Dawnbreaker

Wow, those ratings are abysmal. 

I know WWE have been on a sharp decline in viewership over the last few years, but holy shit this year has driven more fans away than the usual. I am almost feeling second hand embarrassment for the WWE and probably will once the rating numbers for post-WM season start coming in.

I am not even going to blame any one wrestler for this as the whole booking plan for this RTWM is to blame. Christ, all the top babyfaces have been horribly damaged by trash booking and there are like three heels who get any actual heat. Part-timers not showing up despite the show being booked around them is a big contributing factor too.

This RTWM has just been a complete disaster and bodes doom for the future of the WWE.


----------



## Marrakesh

So WWE has lost nearly 500k viewers for this quarter compared to the same time last year :ti 

It's not even now that is the worry what happens after Mania when they put the belt on Reigns and have him feud with Sheamus? :lol 

Jesus. Last year post Mania there was a big drop off in viewership in the weeks that followed but the numbers were around what they are right now. 

They really can't afford to lose the viewers this year but i have no doubt that is exactly what is going to happen because they chose not to listen to their audience and they are putting on some horrible shows to go along with it. They've made Reigns look far worse than he could have done :lmao

When Raw is averaging 3.2-3.5m post Mania (Based on them only averaging 3.8m the last two weeks at peak time) for a flat product imagine what they'll be then in football season? 

WWE need to be worried here.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

lmao woohoo go reigns!


----------



## xDD

Let's go Reigns!


----------



## Stochastic_Process

The Inbred Goatman said:


> Shit rating again, not Surprising at all, and this show even had Lesnar on it(albeit, doing nothing).
> 
> Reigns will forever be tied to the biggest flop of a Mania of all time. He's like The Miz going into Mania 27.


Miz was far more entertaining than Reigns has EVER been and he also generated a lot more interest in the product as a whole.


----------



## Marrakesh

Stochastic_Process said:


> Miz was far more entertaining than Reigns has EVER been and he also generated a lot more interest in the product as a whole.


This is actually a fact. Kids were taking the time to carve ''Miz sucks cock'' into the toilets of bus depots were i live which is not in the US. :lol 

He had heat. Sure he wasn't main event material but his RTWM drew 5m viewers on average and maintained the audience from the previous year and he was loathed by a lot of people. 

Reigns is just ice cold and his RTWM has seen a 10% decline in ratings from last year and is averaging 3.99m viewers and less than that these past two weeks. 

:shrug Sure there are other factors at play in both scenarios but the reality is that Miz was a better candidate to main event Wrestlemania in 2011 than Reigns is in 2015. 

That says it all.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

mizs RTWM was largely in part thanks to the return of the rock...


----------



## LilOlMe

Marrakesh said:


> So WWE has lost nearly 500k viewers for this quarter compared to the same time last year :ti





D.M.N. said:


> From a year perspective, the figures are frankly disastrous for the 'E:
> 
> Q1 2010 = 5.28 million
> Q1 2011 = 5.22 million (down 1.1%)
> Q1 2012 = 4.45 million (down 13.3%)
> Q1 2013 = 4.62 million (up 2.1%)
> Q1 2014 = 4.44 million (down 3.8%)
> Q1 2015 = 3.99 million (down 10.1%)


In fairness, those other quarter numbers include the numbers all the way until the end of March. We're not there yet. I expect the next few weeks to go up, despite how shitty the shows have been. We're getting closer to WM.

That will help boost this quarter's average. It'll still be below what it has been, but probably not quite as drastic as 500,000 viewers.

Which sucks, because I want the downward trend to be blatant, so that there's nothing for Vince to hide behind. 

Does someone have access to all of the figures from this quarter? If someone does, could you do the math on what the average would be if WWE averages 4.1 million viewers for the rest of March?

If they don't even get that for the rest of March, that's really sad for the RTWM.


----------



## Marrakesh

LilOlMe said:


> In fairness, those other quarter numbers include the numbers all the way until the end of March. We're not there yet. I expect the next few weeks to go up, despite how shitty the shows have been. We're getting closer to WM.
> 
> That will help boost this quarter's average. It'll still be below what it has been, but probably not quite as drastic as 500,000 viewers.
> 
> Which sucks, because I want the downward trend to be blatant, so that there's nothing for Vince to hide behind.
> 
> Does someone have access to all of the figures from this quarter? If someone does, could you do the math on what the average would be if WWE averages 4.1 million viewers for the rest of March?
> 
> If they don't even get that for the rest of March, that's really sad for the RTWM.


True. I wouldn't expect a drastic improvement though. There are not hot angles apart from Orton/Rollins


----------



## MaybeLock

Marrakesh said:


> True. I wouldn't expect a drastic improvement though. There are not hot angles apart from Orton/Rollins


Yep. I think most people know Undertaker won't show up, and Sting probably has one more appearance before Mania, which I don't think they will announce, so it probably won't have a big effect except for a big spike when he shows up and that's it. As far as Lesnar goes, we saw what his effect in ratings was.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Ratings go up and Reigns STILL gets blamed despite having next to no television time :ti. So predictable. WWE creative at an all time low? Must be Reigns' fault cause fuck logic.*


----------



## MaybeLock

Legit BOSS said:


> *Ratings go up and Reigns STILL gets blamed despite having next to no television time :ti. So predictable. WWE creative at an all time low? Must be Reigns' fault cause fuck logic.*


He had the main event, and even though he didn't appear in the Heyman promo, I think we all thought he would come out. The promo was about him anyway. 

I think it's becoming pretty clear that Roman is not up for this challenge. He wasn't ready to carry the biggest show of the year. Hell, I think we all can imagine why he didn't appear in that segment. Either Heyman tones it down A LOT, or Reigns get annihilated on the mic.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

MaybeLock said:


> He had the main event, and even though he didn't appear in the Heyman promo, I think we all thought he would come out. The promo was about him anyway.


*The main event that saw a third hour increase. Your point?*



> I think it's becoming pretty clear that Roman is not up for this challenge. He wasn't ready to carry the biggest show of the year. Hell, I think we all can imagine why he didn't appear in that segment. Either Heyman tones it down A LOT, or Reigns get annihilated on the mic.


*Reigns and Heyman have interacted several times and Heyman always puts him over. That's not even an issue. The only thing that's clear is WWE is incompetent and THEY failed to maximize the potential of that segment, not Roman.*


----------



## MonteCarloSim

He had next to no TV time and ratings increased from last week. Meaning that the _less_ Reigns is on TV, the _better_.

That main event that saw the 3rd hour increase was built around Orton's face turn. Not around Reigns.

Any more brilliant remarks from Reigns marks?


----------



## MaybeLock

Legit BOSS said:


> *The main event that saw a third hour increase. Your point?*
> 
> 
> 
> *Reigns and Heyman have interacted several times and Heyman always puts him over. That's not even an issue. The only thing that's clear is WWE is incompetent and THEY failed to maximize the potential of that segment, not Roman.*


It was a despreciable increase. It stayed pretty much plain.

I know they have interacted before. I don't count the promo after the Rumble because it wasn't in front of a live crowd. And as far as the 2/23 promo goes I don't think it helps your point too much. That's pretty much what I'd like to avoid if a was booking Reigns. I don't think they're going to repeat that, he will probably just have the typical fight with Lesnar to close the go home show and that's it.


----------



## Empress

MaybeLock said:


> It was a despreciable increase. It stayed pretty much plain.
> 
> I know they have interacted before. I don't count the promo after the Rumble because it wasn't in front of a live crowd. And as far as the 2/23 promo goes I don't think it helps your point too much. That's pretty much what I'd like to avoid if a was booking Reigns.* I don't think they're going to repeat that, he will probably just have the typical fight with Lesnar to close the go home show and that's it.*


I agree. No thought has gone into this feud and I don't expect much. This is a cold feud and doesn't have much draw to it. Sadly, that's true of most of the angles. The ratings aren't surprising but it shouldn't fall just on Reigns.


----------



## Marrakesh

MaybeLock said:


> He had the main event, and even though he didn't appear in the Heyman promo, I think we all thought he would come out. The promo was about him anyway.
> 
> I think it's becoming pretty clear that Roman is not up for this challenge. He wasn't ready to carry the biggest show of the year. Hell, I think we all can imagine why he didn't appear in that segment. Either Heyman tones it down A LOT, or Reigns get annihilated on the mic.


He's willing to completely bypass all of the negativity surrounding Reigns and his garbage mic work that WWE are rightly trying to limit because he likes his facial expressions and his little finishing sequence and roar. 

It's not an argument worth having because you won't get any objectivity on the topic. 

Fwiw the rating increase in the last hour can no doubt be attributed to the fact that Orton cut an awesome promo to begin the night which was hyping the fact he'd be teaming with Rollins in that last hour and last segment.

As usual Reigns probably taking credit for something he had nothing to with in the eyes of some. 

It's getting tiresome. The level of delusion is off the charts. If people would just say ''I find him attractive or I'm a mark and i like his moveset and how he looks'' then no one would have any problem with anyone on here. 

It's the fact that some of these marks try and make him out to be something he's not or start talking about house show promos or pops or completely irrelevant shit just to paint a different picture.

You guys don't have to fucking get defensive and try and justify why you like the guy as every single one of you find him attractive and that is essentially what it boils down to. 

He is not over enough to be in the position he is in, his ring work is bang average and he's garbage on the mic. These points just are not contestable because every single one of them can be backed up definitively. 

Just say you like looking at him. :shrug What is the problem? Why pretend he's good at anything other than his 4 or 5 move sequences and posing for the camera? 

Accept the criticism he gets, don't cry over it. He will forever be criticized so long as his main talent is how he looks.


----------



## SPCDRI

Is this 3 straight sub-4 million viewer Raws deep into RTWM season? Ooftah.


----------



## JY57

RTWM for WM 33 will be under 2 million viewers at this rate.

Cena/Rusev being the only consistent in the ratings (each time in highest hour) it seems. Oh well.


----------



## DoubtGin

SD got 2,573,000 viewers, down from last week's 2,694,000.


----------



## A-C-P

DoubtGin said:


> SD got 2,573,000 viewers, down from last week's 2,694,000.


Calling Bryan a TURD and having Mark "Ratings" Henry verbally felate Reigns apparently doesn't draw.


----------



## MaybeLock

If not even Mark Henry can fix this, there is no hope for the ratings. :done


----------



## LilOlMe

DoubtGin said:


> SD got 2,573,000 viewers, down from last week's 2,694,000.


Terrible. They moved it to Friday to increase the ratings, not decrease them.

WWE has been doing a piss poor job of promoting Smackdown. The past few weeks, they haven't even announced the main events for Smackdown on RAW.


----------



## RomanRatingsReigns

Reigns bringing dem ratings :mark: OOOOAAHHHHHH 

Da Look draws. Deal with it.


----------



## Fighter Daron

LilOlMe said:


> Terrible. They moved it to Friday to increase the ratings, not decrease them.
> 
> WWE has been doing a piss poor job of promoting Smackdown. The past few weeks, they haven't even announced the main events for Smackdown on RAW.


SD will never have good ratings again. WWE is perfectly clear about which shows matters(Raw) and which shows don't(Everything else).

Why would anyone watch SD?


----------



## Londrick

A-C-P said:


> Calling Bryan a TURD and having Mark "Ratings" Henry verbally felate Reigns apparently doesn't draw.


Yup. Henry and Bryan pretty much saved SD from getting cancelled after Orton's WHC run several years ago, so why would you make them look like geeks? Henry as the top heel of SD and Bryan as the face = :vince$


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

If this show does less than 4 million, YIKES. 

Next week should do AT LEAST 4.4-4.5 million.


----------



## validreasoning

The Inbred Goatman said:


> Next week should do AT LEAST 4.4-4.5 million.


4.5 million is more than WWE have done for the final raw before mania last 3 years and 2 of those shows had rock and all of them had taker, neither of which will be there next week. 

2012 (2 hour show) = 4.44 million average
2013 = 4.3 million average
2014 = 4.39 million average


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

validreasoning said:


> 4.5 million is more than WWE have done for the final raw before mania last 3 years and 2 of those shows had rock and all of them had taker, neither of which will be there next week.
> 
> 2012 (2 hour show) = 4.44 million average
> 2013 = 4.3 million average
> 2014 = 4.39 million average


Was thinking post Mania Raw instead of Go home. Should do 4.2 million.


----------



## Reaper

Correction. I posted the wrong data.


----------



## Cliffy

Lol WWE


----------



## McCringleberry

Reptar said:


> Ratings for Monday 17th March 2015:
> 
> WWE Entertainment	08:00P-09:00P	3699
> WWE Entertainment	09:00P-10:00P	3937
> WWE Entertainment	10:00P-11:17P	3940
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...hip-for-the-week-ending-march-15-2015/376127/
> 
> Still haven't broken 4 million.



Even with us knowing Sting was gonna show up and they can't break 4 million. To all those posters who keep saying we're gonna watch no matter what, here's your receipt.


----------



## Chrome

Reptar said:


> Ratings for Monday 17th March 2015:
> 
> WWE Entertainment	08:00P-09:00P	3699
> WWE Entertainment	09:00P-10:00P	3937
> WWE Entertainment	10:00P-11:17P	3940
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...hip-for-the-week-ending-march-15-2015/376127/
> 
> Still haven't broken 4 million.


:Jordan2

Serves 'em right.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Reptar said:


> Ratings for Monday 17th March 2015:
> 
> WWE Entertainment 08:00P-09:00P	3699
> WWE Entertainment	09:00P-10:00P	3937
> WWE Entertainment	10:00P-11:17P	3940
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...hip-for-the-week-ending-march-15-2015/376127/
> 
> Still haven't broken 4 million.


 @Chrome @Cliffy
*These arent the numbers*. This is for the week ending on March 15. The raw rating is from the previous Monday. The new one hasn't been released yet.


----------



## Reaper

IDONTSHIV said:


> *These arent the numbers*. This is for the week ending on March 15. The raw rating is from the previous Monday. The new one hasn't been released yet.


You're right. I fucked up. I'm gonna edit my post.


----------



## McCringleberry

IDONTSHIV said:


> *These arent the numbers*. This is for the week ending on March 15. The raw rating is from the previous Monday. The new one hasn't been released yet.


I was counting on a ratings uptick thanks to Sting so those numbers were a shocker. So when do the real ones come out? Today or tomorrow?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

McCringleberry said:


> I was counting on a ratings uptick thanks to Sting so those numbers were a shocker. So when do the real ones come out? Today or tomorrow?


Usually within the hour. I always check on it. There wasnt a holiday, so it wont be that long from now.


----------



## Chrome

IDONTSHIV said:


> @Chrome @Cliffy
> *These arent the numbers*. This is for the week ending on March 15. The raw rating is from the previous Monday. The new one hasn't been released yet.


Oh whoops. :lol

Well let's see what the real ones look like.


----------



## JustJoel

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...lf-bates-motel-switched-at-birth-more/245621/

Hour 1: 4.001 million
Hour 2: 4.174 million
Hour 3: 4.051 million 

Final rating: 1.4


----------



## dan the marino

Well they managed to reach 4 mil...


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

JustJoel said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...lf-bates-motel-switched-at-birth-more/245621/
> 
> Hour 1: 4.001 million
> Hour 2: 4.174 million
> Hour 3: 4.051 million
> 
> Final rating: 1.4


 @BEST FOR BUSINESS

NO,These are numbers from a year ago. (Y)

Here is the real chart and the number was conistent throughout.


----------



## A-C-P

3rd Hour drop returns, but hey over 4 million :yay

Wait :lol fooled again


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

A-C-P said:


> 3rd Hour drop returns, but hey over 4 million :yay
> 
> Wait :lol fooled again


:lol Twice in just over a page. the numbers just came out a few minutes ago.

Hour 1: 3881m demo 1.36 18-49

Hour 2: 3961m demo 1.39

Hour 3: 3915m demo 1.40


----------



## SnapOrTap

IDONTSHIV said:


> :lol Twice in just over a page. the numbers just came out a few minutes ago.
> 
> Hour 1: 3881m demo 1.36 18-49
> 
> Hour 2: 3961m demo 1.39
> 
> Hour 3: 3915m demo 1.40


O boy.

Below 4 m again.

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.

WOOT.

:razor:rock4:y2j:trips2:cena6:brock4:hbk1:booklel:thecause


----------



## JustJoel

Zang


----------



## dan the marino

Welp, I take that back.


----------



## McCringleberry

IDONTSHIV said:


> :lol Twice in just over a page. the numbers just came out a few minutes ago.
> 
> Hour 1: 3881m demo 1.36 18-49
> 
> Hour 2: 3961m demo 1.39
> 
> Hour 3: 3915m demo 1.40



Jesus. Those are almost the exact same numbers Reptar posted from last week. So much for Sting. It's over Vince. Quit forcing us to watch what we don't care about and quit pushing part timers this time of year. It isn't working this time.


----------



## Chrome

Ouch.

Just wait until May or June or even the start of football season. That'll be fun.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

4m has become the glass ceiling that is becoming almost elusive. Is this a commentary on the lackluster product? Maybe, if so, Vince brought it on himself.


----------



## Chrome

IDONTSHIV said:


> 4m has become the glass ceiling that is becoming almost elusive. Is this a commentary on the lackluster product? Maybe, if so, Vince brought it on himself.


Perhaps Vince is the one who should start reaching for that brass ring.


----------



## Wynter

:lol not even the coming of Sting and Brock responding could get them over 4 mill :lmao


----------



## McCringleberry

IDONTSHIV said:


> 4m has become the glass ceiling that is becoming almost elusive. Is this a commentary on the lackluster product? Maybe, if so, Vince brought it on himself.


Yes. Someone in another thread said the only thing WWE has going for it today is WWE's war with its audience. I agree but that presents a BIG long term problem. Either the fans win and change Vince's approach (Highly unlikely without a competitor like WCW around) or Vince wins and the fans they are at war with give up and move on to other things....which is what IS slowly happening.




Chrome said:


> Perhaps Vince is the one who should start reaching for that brass ring.


:clap


----------



## Empress

Wynter said:


> :lol not even the coming of Sting and Brock responding could get them over 4 mill :lmao


Was Sting even advertised? 

The WWE needs to go all out next well for the go home show. Maybe Snoop Dogg will help with the numbers.


----------



## McCringleberry

Nina said:


> *Was Sting even advertised? *
> 
> The WWE needs to go all out next well for the go home show. Maybe Snoop Dogg will help with the numbers.


Yeah, we knew. Hell the crowd was chanting for Sting as soon as the Authority came out to confront Orton. Kinda ruined any semblance of a surprise for those who missed the news but what can you do?


----------



## Wynter

That's what they get for this lazy ass build. These numbers are a reflection of your incompetence. 


Every match except for Randy vs Seth and the IC title hasn't been properly built up. And IC is pushing it. Laziness gets you bad results. Who would have thought??.


----------



## Empress

If I were Vince and the WWE, I'd be in panic mode. At this point, I don't even think anyone can blame the talents. The RTW should be causing a spike in ratings but the booking isn't there. Randy and Seth feels like the main event and the actual main event isn't a draw. And Sting didn't bring in the viewers. Nothing seems to be working. 


I think the last time RAW averaged 4 million viewers for each hour was the snow show.


----------



## BigData

People on this forum, and some of the hardcore fans in attendance, may have known about Sting, but the vast majority who watch on TV did not. It was announced just hours before the event and most casuals don't frequent wrestling forums.

The night after Sting's first WWE appearance at Survivor Series the first hour drew 4.7 million when people were expecting him. So his drawing power is not in question.

What I would like to know is where are all those new viewers Roman Reigns was suppose to bring in with his massive "mainstream appeal?" We were told by Reigns marks that because of his look, marketability, social media followers, he was suppose to bring in new viewers to the product. If that was the case, that should have offset losing some of the more hardcore fans. But clearly it hasn't.

This RTWM has been a massive disaster.


----------



## A-C-P

Nina said:


> If I were Vince and the WWE, I'd be in panic mode. At this point, I don't even think anyone can blame the talents. The RTW should be causing a spike in ratings but the booking isn't there. Randy and Seth feels like the main event and the actual main event isn't a draw. And Sting didn't bring in the viewers. Nothing seems to be working.
> 
> 
> I think the last time RAW averaged 4 million viewers for each hour was the snow show.


And that show came off the heels of a major shitstorm and the show was them basically reshowing the 2nd biggest PPV of the year on free TV....yikes


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Maybe my pro-Sting bias is preventing me from being objective here, but it's hard to blame him for there not being a spike when he wasn't advertised to show up. If they hyped it up and made a big deal about it, and it flopped (which is very possible), then I'd say blame him.

Same goes for Brock or Undertaker. If he isn't advertised, it's hard to blame him for any drop.

I wish we still got quarter hours regularly, so we could get more specific analysis.


----------



## BigData

Nina said:


> If I were Vince and the WWE, I'd be in panic mode. At this point, I don't even think anyone can blame the talents. The RTW should be causing a spike in ratings but the booking isn't there. Randy and Seth feels like the main event and the actual main event isn't a draw. And Sting didn't bring in the viewers. Nothing seems to be working.
> 
> 
> I think the last time RAW averaged 4 million viewers for each hour was the snow show.


I disagree that you can't blame the talents. Booking is a huge part of it, because they are booking guys who can't draw as main eventers and upper carders. That's obviously the bookers fault, but also the fault of the individual talent for not living up to their push.

Orton has never been an impressive draw.

Rollins has been a bust.

Reigns has been an even bigger bust.

Perhaps they should, you know..._start pushing guys who are actually entertaining and have drawing potential._


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*If only we had featured Reigns more, the rating would have skyrocketed. Next Week. Wall to Wall Reigns!* :vince5


----------



## McCringleberry

BigData said:


> People on this forum, and some of the hardcore fans in attendance, may have known about Sting, but the vast majority who watch on TV did not. It was announced just hours before the event and most casuals don't frequent wrestling forums.



The ENTIRE arena was chanting for Sting by name when the Authority confronted Orton in the main event. Either the entire crowd was full of hardcore smarks or social media helped spread the news. Which sounds more logical? If that entire arena could find out in a few hours then a sizable portion of the tv audience did as well IMO.




BigData said:


> What I would like to know is where are all those new viewers Roman Reigns was suppose to bring in with his massive "mainstream appeal?" We were told by Reigns marks that because of his look, marketability, social media followers, he was suppose to bring in new viewers to the product. If that was the case, that should have offset losing some of the more hardcore fans. But clearly it hasn't.
> 
> This RTWM has been a massive disaster.


Only Vince and Reigns marks believed that. Everything Reigns did last night was a joke. he came out, thanked Heyman for the BJ (like, really), did a promo on Brock then disappeared for the night. WTF? 2 weeks left and he does nothing of interest? Next week better be some huge well thought out confrontation cause time is up.


----------



## LOL-ins

These numbers recently have been football season numbers. It's going to be interesting to see what the drop is this year. We don't have to wait long because the NBA playoffs takes viewers off RAW too. 

We could get 2 million hours soon.


----------



## BigData

McCringleberry said:


> The ENTIRE arena was chanting for Sting by name when the Authority confronted Orton in the main event. Either the entire crowd was full of hardcore marks or social media helped spread the news. Which sounds more logical? If that entire arena could find out in a few hours then a sizable portion of the tv audience did as well IMO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only Vince and Reigns marks believed that. Everything Reigns did last night was a joke. he came out, thanked Heyman for the BJ (like, really), did a promo on Brock then disappeared for the night. WTF? One week left and he does nothing of interest? Next week better be some huge well thought out confrontation cause time is up.


What can they honestly do with Reigns?

Reigns marks complain like little bitches because he isn't booked properly (even though he's booked stronger than anyone else on the roster) but he is just so limited that they can't do much other than short promos (which are always awful because he can't talk) and relatively short matches (which are always awful because he has zero understanding of ring psychology.) They could have him do some backstage brawling, but he would get gassed in a couple of minutes, and he just doesn't have the look of a brawler or a scrappy individual.

They've booked themselves into a corner with this talentless hack, and even they realize it now. Which is why his TV time has been so limited.


----------



## McCringleberry

LOL-ins said:


> These numbers recently have been football season numbers. It's going to be interesting to see what the drop is this year. We don't have to wait long because the NBA playoffs takes viewers off RAW too.
> 
> We could get 2 million hours soon.


I think WWE still have some time left. A lot of people who have been turned off are sticking around to see the crowd reaction at Mania and the Raw after. Well those reactions have the potential to continue for at least a month after what with the Euro tour and then Reigns first title defense being in Chicago. I could see some sticking around to see the crowd reaction to those events as well. After that however....





BigData said:


> What can they honestly do with Reigns?


Have Heyman insult the city, then have Reigns come out and lay him out. It's cheap but probably would have got Reigns a nice pop and some semblance of momentum however momentary it might be. A lot of people were expecting that to happen. Instead reigns comes out and thanks Heyman for blowing him and his family.


----------



## RatedR10

blah blah blah "people will still watch every week" blah blah blah. Suck it, Vince. The numbers speak for themselves. These are fall ratings during MNF season during the Road to fucking Wrestlemania. Open your fucking eyes.

It'll just get even worse after Wrestlemania when Sting, Lesnar, Taker are nowhere to be found (although, where's Taker right now, anyways, right?).


----------



## BigData

McCringleberry said:


> I think WWE still have some time left. A lot of people who have been turned off are sticking around to see the crowd reaction at Mania and the Raw after. Well those reactions have the potential to continue for at least a month after what with the Euro tour and then Reigns first title defense being in Chicago. I could see some sticking around to see the crowd reaction to those events as well. After that however....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have Heyman insult the city, then have Reigns come out and lay him out. It's cheap but probably would have got Reigns a nice pop and some semblance of momentum however momentary it might be. A lot of people were expecting that to happen. Instead reigns comes out and thanks Heyman for blowing him and his family.


People see through that shit nowadays. The Rumble crowd cheered a Russian communist sympathizer over him.

Granted, last night may not have been quite as smarky of a crowd, but he still received plenty of boos and "Daniel Bryan" chants. Those people would not have popped for him no matter what.


----------



## kendoo

It doesn't matter who is on the show, what really matters is the booking and we all know the booking is what draws. Ratings will be shite until the creative team of 20 odd writers can start producing a good show. I don't think the wrestlers can take the blame this time round.


----------



## Wynter

BigData said:


> People on this forum, and some of the hardcore fans in attendance, may have known about Sting, but the vast majority who watch on TV did not. It was announced just hours before the event and most casuals don't frequent wrestling forums.
> 
> The night after Sting's first WWE appearance at Survivor Series the first hour drew 4.7 million when people were expecting him. So his drawing power is not in question.
> 
> What I would like to know is where are all those new viewers Roman Reigns was suppose to bring in with his massive "mainstream appeal?" We were told by Reigns marks that because of his look, marketability, social media followers, he was suppose to bring in new viewers to the product. If that was the case, that should have offset losing some of the more hardcore fans. But clearly it hasn't.
> 
> This RTWM has been a massive disaster.


Yeah, blame the man who gets some of the least TV time and can't build an angle because his opponent is hardly there :drake1

Meanwhile Seth/authority/Randy get most of the tv time, focus and big angles. You wanna do the dumbass blame game, blame the guy who is actually FEATURED. 


Simply putting Roman in the main event of Mania won't draw shit. Actually putting in WORK and COMPETENT storylines for him would do something. Who the fuck cares if Roman will get booed in a face off with Brock? You knew he was gonna be shat on the moment he won the Rumble and went over Bryan. Stop trying to hide the boy because all it is doing is wasting time that could have been used to build him. 

If Roman was getting the same dedication, TV time and writing as Seth and still ain't draw shit?? Sure, you can have that. But for fucks sake, they bring in Jon Stewart and has Sting mixed up in a match that isn't even in the top 3 at Mania. Seth vs Randy has for sure gotten the premium booking and feels like the main event for mania. 

Seth vs Brock got more focus and better segments than Brock vs Roman. So please stop the bullshit. For fucks sake, Roman and Brock will be meeting for the SECOND time since the Rumble. What kind of hype can you put into that fuckery?? 

Either way, creative is ALL to blame. The level of incompetence shown this year is a new low for WWE in recent times. They're playing hot potato with the IC belt. Who gives a fuck about the damn tag titles. The divas belt isn't even being put on the card. Jobber Fucking Royale. Sandow vs Miz aren't even getting a singles match despite MONTHS of build up and great heat. They seemed to have broken up on Raw in the shittiest and lackluster way. 

Meanwhile Cena has already bitched out his Mania opponent. Randy has already beat the brakes off his. Bray is babbling like a fool all the way to his loss at Mania. 

THIS IS A CREATIVE ISSUE . THIS MANIA STINKS OF AN OLD MAN WHO CAN'T EVEN STICK WITH WHAT HE WANT FOR BREAKFAST, LET ALONE WHAT THE HELL HE WANTS TO DO WITH HIS PRODUCT. 


Don't even reply, cause I don't even care. Your replies are getting more and more asinine and your bias is clouding any logic you may have.


----------



## BigData

kendoo said:


> It doesn't matter who is on the show, what really matters is the booking and we all know the booking is what draws. Ratings will be shite until the creative team of 20 odd writers can start producing a good show. I don't think the wrestlers can take the blame this time round.


You can't produce a good show when you push guys who lack entertainment value. The booking is partially to blame, but so are those wrestlers who are being pushed and are failing to draw.

The likes of Orton, Reigns, Rollins, will never, under ANY circumstance, be any kind of substantial draws. Regardless of how good the storylines are.


----------



## The True Believer

Good. Fuck 'em.


----------



## McCringleberry

Wynter said:


> Yeah, blame the man who gets some of the least TV time and can't build an angle because his opponent is hardly there :drake1


Well both Brock and Reigns will be there next week and their "confrontation" has been promoted a week in advance. If the ratings shit the bed again then there can be no more excuses. Correct?


----------



## RatedR10

Taking a quick look back, this is the worst RTWM (ratings-wise) in *18 fucking years.* 

But no, let old man Vince continue his "people will still watch" bullshit.


----------



## BigData

Wynter said:


> Yeah, blame the man who gets some of the least TV time and can't build an angle because his opponent is hardly there :drake1
> 
> Meanwhile Seth/authority/Randy get most of the tv time, focus and big angles. You wanna do the dumbass blame game, blame the guy who is actually FEATURED.
> 
> 
> Simply putting Roman in the main event of Mania won't draw shit. Actually putting in WORK and COMPETENT storylines for him would do something. Who the fuck cares if Roman will get booed in a face off with Brock? You knew he was gonna be shat on the moment he won the Rumble and went over Bryan. Stop trying to hide the boy because all it is doing is wasting time that could have been used to build him.
> 
> If Roman was getting the same dedication, TV time and writing as Seth and still ain't draw shit?? Sure, you can have that. But for fucks sake, they bring in Jon Stewart and has Sting mixed up in a match that isn't even in the top 3 at Mania. Seth vs Randy has for sure gotten the premium booking and feels like the main event for mania.
> 
> Seth vs Brock got more focus and better segments than Brock vs Roman. So please stop the bullshit. For fucks sake, Roman and Brock will be meeting for the SECOND time since the Rumble. What kind of hype can you put into that fuckery??
> 
> Either way, creative is ALL to blame. The level of incompetence shown this year is a new low for WWE in recent times. They're playing hot potato with the IC belt. Who gives a fuck about the damn tag titles. The divas belt isn't even being put on the card. Jobber Fucking Royale. Sandow vs Miz aren't even getting a singles match despite MONTHS of build up and great heat. They seemed to have broken up on Raw in the shittiest and lackluster way.
> 
> Meanwhile Cena has already bitched out his Mania opponent. Randy has already beat the brakes off his. Bray is babbling like a fool all the way to his loss at Mania.
> 
> THIS IS A CREATIVE ISSUE . THIS MANIA STINKS OF AN OLD MAN WHO CAN'T EVEN STICK WITH WHAT HE WANT FOR BREAKFAST, LET ALONE WHAT THE HELL HE WANTS TO DO WITH HIS PRODUCT.
> 
> 
> Don't even reply, cause I don't even care. Your replies are getting more and more asinine and your bias is clouding any logic you may have.


Stop being a thin skinned little bitch. If you can't take criticism of your talentless boy, then get the fuck off these forums, because that is ALL you will see as long as he is booked as the top guy. This will NEVER change. Deal with it or get out.

And I do blame Rollins and Orton as well. Neither of them are draws. Which is why it is absurd to have them, along with Reigns, as the top 3 full-time guys.

You can't book entertaining storylines when your top 3 guys are fucking shit.


----------



## The True Believer

RatedR10 said:


> Taking a quick look back, this is the worst RTWM (ratings-wise) in *18 fucking years.*
> 
> But no, let old man Vince continue his "people will still watch" bullshit.


And on top of that, the worst RTWM _creatively_ in 18 years, too, and I say that without the clearest of recollection on everything prior to this. Absolute garbage all around. If they even manage to screw up the RAW after WM, they deserve to get horrible ratings like this. I want this Titanic to turn away from the iceberg but I won't weep if it doesn't because they brought it upon themselves.


----------



## kendoo

BigData said:


> You can't produce a good show when you push guys who lack entertainment value. The booking is partially to blame, but so are those wrestlers who are being pushed and are failing to draw.
> 
> The likes of Orton, Reigns, Rollins, will never, under ANY circumstance, be any kind of substantial draws. Regardless of how good the storylines are.


Let's be honest but no one is getting to be entertaining so no one is going to show any great value in this current time, that's not the wrestlers fault it's entirely down to creative . The thing with Reigns is we all hate him but had the Booking been different for him then it would be a whole different story.


----------



## BigData

kendoo said:


> Let's be honest but no one is getting to be entertaining so no one is going to show any great value in this current time, that's not the wrestlers fault it's entirely down to creative . The thing with Reigns is we all hate him but had the Booking been different for him then it would be a whole different story.


No, it wouldn't be a different story. His lack of talent limits creative in what they can do. They can't do anything interesting with him because he has no depth, there is nothing compelling about him, and even if they did come up with something mildly entertaining for him to do, it would be very poorly executed just like everything else he does.

Start pushing guys who are talented and entertaining, and creative will have much more flexibility to come up with intriguing and captivating storylines. 

Get Reigns, Orton, Big Show, Kane, and Rollins the FUCK out of the upper card/main event. IMMEDIATELY.


----------



## XxAttitudeEraxX

Losing viewers can be extremely damaging to a product like the WWE, because it can be very difficult to get them back, especially without a top guy who is mainstream and over the top in how entertaining they are, like an Austin or a Rock. The WWE doesn't have this to lure people back, so if they lose people, and lose them long enough for them to find other things to do with their Mondays, they can very well lose them for good.

It can take a long time to build an audience, because people who are detached from a product won't know that it's getting good again, if it ever does.

The WWF in late 1997 and 1998 was a much better show then then WCW's Nitro even though Nitro was still winning the ratings war, because a better quality product doesn't instantaneously manifest itself into ratings success. It has to be prolonged enough for word to spread about how good it is before people start tuning in.

Speaking for myself, I tuned out a bit after the WCW invasion angle and never looked back. Now even when I try to give it a chance, once every blue moon, the fact that I am emotionally invested in no one makes it hard (aside from the fact that it's terrible). All I see is a bunch of random guys that aren't very entertaining, and that really is the danger for WWE in bleeding people.

Once they're gone, they're gone.


----------



## kendoo

BigData said:


> No, it wouldn't be a different story. His lack of talent limits creative in what they can do. They can't do anything interesting with him because he has no depth, there is nothing compelling about him, and even if they did come up with something mildly entertaining for him to do, it would be very poorly executed just like everything else he does.
> 
> Start pushing guys who are talented and entertaining, and creative will have much more flexibility to come up with intriguing and captivating storylines.
> 
> Get Reigns, Orton, Big Show, Kane, and Rollins the FUCK out of the upper card/main event. IMMEDIATELY.


An intriguing storyline for these writers is turning Cody Rhodes into stardust. See if a tv soap show is doing bad with ratings they don't get rid of all the main cast you generally find a few writers will get sacked and new ones brought in.


----------



## Dell

RatedR10 said:


> Taking a quick look back, this is the worst RTWM (ratings-wise) in *18 fucking years.*


Is there a list somewhere of all the RTWM ratings from those years in order?


----------



## BigData

kendoo said:


> An intriguing storyline for these writers is turning Cody Rhodes into stardust. See if a tv soap show is doing bad with ratings they don't get rid of all the main cast you generally find a few writers will get sacked and new ones brought in.


No one is saying to get rid of them entirely. But if you've got Brad Pitt and you're using him sparingly in a secondary storyline and you've got Kathy Griffin and using her as your main character, there's something wrong. The talent/starpower isn't being utilized correctly. 

Wrestling has always been at its most successful when the most entertaining guys have been at the very top. Of course booking is an integral component - but choosing which guys to push to the top is a big part of that. Storyline development is another. Both equally important.


----------



## Wynter

McCringleberry said:


> Well both Brock and Reigns will be there next week and their "confrontation" has been promoted a week in advance. If the ratings shit the bed again then there can be no more excuses. Correct?


Yeah, feud with no heat because there hasn't been any worthwhile build up is SUDDENLY gonna draw like a hot fued. 

Like I said, if Roman vs Brock got all this TV time like Seth has gotten? You have a case. Fact is, this feud is ice cold because you can't do shit when one of the opponents is barely here. If Seth vs Randy can't draw over a 4, with all this TV time and them being superior talents, the hell a Roman who is on TV for five minutes out of 3 hours gonna do?? :lol 

And please, if ratings go up, yall just gonna say it's because it's the go home show.

THE WHOLE CARD HAS BEEN BUILT WITH FUCKERY OUTSIDE RANDY VS SETH. The show is suffering from a lazy ass mania build. Simple as that. Ratings reflect a poor ass build.


----------



## MaybeLock

Awful ratings again. I don't remember the last time a Road to Wrestlemania was so uninspiring. Props to Wyatt and Heyman, because IMO they're the only ones keeping the show away from being an absolute shit.


----------



## Marv95

McCringleberry said:


> Wynter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, blame the man who gets some of the least TV time and can't build an angle because his opponent is hardly there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well both Brock and Reigns will be there next week and their "confrontation" has been promoted a week in advance. If the ratings shit the bed again then there can be no more excuses. Correct?
Click to expand...

If the show revolves around those 2 like it has for Rollins and Orton since the last ppv then feel free, and even then...

Gotten to the point where you can't blame the talent no matter how much you hate them. When Rock was around they were still in the 2s.


----------



## Empress

MaybeLock said:


> Awful ratings again. I don't remember the last time a Road to Wrestlemania was so uninspiring. Props to Wyatt and Heyman, because IMO they're the only ones keeping the show away from being an absolute shit.


Heyman is next to Godliness on the mic. Sometimes, I wish the crowd would react more to his recent promo's. 

I think the Orton/Rollins feud has picked up steam. It's sad that I can only point to this feud as being closest to a developed one.

I really do believe that the WWE is focused more on WM 32 at the AT&T Center and WM 31 is a throwaway. I don't get how creative didn't utilize a year to get their booking in order. 

I'll be convinced that Vince has sold what's left of his soul if he stops WM 31 from being a letdown.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Nina said:


> Heyman is next to Godliness on the mic. Sometimes, I wish the crowd would react more to his recent promo's.
> 
> I think the Orton/Rollins feud has picked up steam. It's sad that I can only point to this feud as being closest to a developed one.
> 
> I really do believe that the WWE is focused more on WM 32 at the AT&T Center and WM 31 is a throwaway. I don't get how creative didn't utilize a year to get their booking in order.
> 
> I'll be convinced that *Vince has sold what's left of his soul if he stops WM 31 from being a letdown*.


Vince sold it for $9.99 or maybe those numbers are inverted.


----------



## Armani

What did you guys expect? Look at the Mainevent scene, bunch of guys that can't talk for shit and should be in the IC title scene instead. The only guy I have faith in is Bray Wyatt, he should be a WWE champ already, it's a shame they are jobbing him to an old broken Taker. Guys like Reigns, Orton, Seth, etc. are the reason why this product will never improve, they are not larger than life, they are fuckin boring, they could barley talk/entertain. Come at me marks, its the truth. I can't stand anyone on the roster except for 2 or 3 guys, and even then they are nowhere near relevancy. So I just quit watching and thats what is happening to the ratings, people just move on.


----------



## MaybeLock

Nina said:


> Heyman is next to Godliness on the mic. Sometimes, I wish the crowd would react more to his recent promo's.
> 
> I think the Orton/Rollins feud has picked up steam. It's sad that I can only point to this feud as being closest to a developed one.
> 
> I really do believe that the WWE is focused more on WM 32 at the AT&T Center and WM 31 is a throwaway. I don't get how creative didn't utilize a year to get their booking in order.
> 
> I'll be convinced that Vince has sold what's left of his soul if he stops WM 31 from being a letdown.


I can't even be interested on Rollins vs Orton right now. It's a shame because I was looking forward to it even before Orton came back, but I just can't deal with this horrible booking. Everything that happens makes no sense. They're booking Orton and Rollins like 5 year olds trying to trick each other with innocent tactics. 

I think after Mania I'm gonna need to stay away from the product a few months in order disintoxicate from WWE bullshit. It's not that I watch too much nowadays, since I skip most of Raw, but the show keeps reaching new lows. If they can't get me interested in WM, how in the world are they going to make me interested in Payback or Battleground?


----------



## Reaper

Basically, the WWE shat on themselves and the fanbase one too many times with the "they'll keep watching" bullshit and it's now starting to manifest itself in the ratings. 

I don't think Vince and the company will change anything after mania .. Actually, I think they don't have anything left. The thing is that at least up until now there was enough variety to keep most of the hardcore base interest and they had been loyal. Now they're slowly tuning out because Vince has deliberately sabotaged his product.

Here's why I think they've got nothing left for post WM:

1. None of the part timers are left (at most there's The Rock, but his stock is dropping as well)
2. Declining ratings = less buys for the Network = Less PPV revenues = Worse product quality = Declining ratings ... rinse and repeat (till they do something major to win the fans back
3. They've got 10 PPV's to do between this WM and the next and they will have killed off the momentum of every single fresh heel and face at the current mania. No momentum = no worthy challenger = worse feuds = worse product quality. 

They're fucked till someone gets hot again. WM32 is not going to be magically good when no one is going to be looking good right after WM31.


----------



## JY57

it won't matter how low the viewership as long WWE keeps being top program on Cable (like they are on Monday Nights). USA Network are not anything doing about it or complain to Vince about it. So why should he care?

As much as Vince sucks, USA are letting him do whatever he wants. They have the power to force the issue, but they are not.


----------



## Chrome

JY57 said:


> it won't matter how low the viewership as long WWE keeps being top program on Cable (like they are on Monday Nights). USA Network are not anything doing about it or complain to Vince about it. So why should he care?
> 
> As much as Vince sucks, USA are letting him do whatever he wants. They have the power to force the issue, but they are not.


Who knows, maybe they've said something behind closed doors? If I was a USA executive, I'd definitely be a little worried right now.


----------



## Empress

Chrome said:


> Who knows, maybe they've said something behind closed doors? If I was a USA executive, I'd definitely be a little worried right now.


I think USA may be part of the problem. I thought the WWE wanted to switch back to two hours but USA wanted it to stay at three. I think we can all agree that two hours would cut back on filler and force creative's hand a bit.


----------



## Chrome

Nina said:


> I think USA may be part of the problem. I thought the WWE wanted to switch back to two hours but USA wanted it to stay at three. I think we can all agree that two hours would cut back on filler and force creative's hand a bit.


You might be right, I remember Triple H saying on Austin's podcast that he'd like to go back to 2 hours but they couldn't. Whatever it is, it's pretty clear the current formula isn't working and has created one of the most lackluster Roads to Wrestlemania ever.


----------



## Reaper

JY57 said:


> it won't matter how low the viewership as long WWE keeps being top program on Cable (like they are on Monday Nights). USA Network are not anything doing about it or complain to Vince about it. So why should he care?
> 
> As much as Vince sucks, USA are letting him do whatever he wants. They have the power to force the issue, but they are not.


USA may not care. But low ratings will mean less network buys. And with their PPV business dead in the water, USA and now the Network is largely the only source to get eyeballs on the product. 

The thing is that significant viewer losses will have a slow impact on their overall business even if the cable provider doesn't care. The cable provider will however start caring if the advertiser has a lower limit on viewership. I can't speculate on what that might be, but every advertiser has a lower limit that they don't like being crossed.


----------



## JY57

> WrestleMania Season TV Ratings
> 
> - Feb. 16 pre-Fast Lane: 2.91 rating
> - Feb. 23 post-Fast Lane: 2.97 rating
> - Mar. 2: 2.82 rating
> - Mar. 9: 2.85 rating
> - Mar. 16: 2.73 rating
> 
> Raw last reached the 3.0 level on February 2.


here are the final ratings so far for Mania season (via James Caldwell of PWTorch)


----------



## LilOlMe

Sting was not advertised. Don't see how on Earth he could get blamed. I'm a hardcore fan, and even I didn't know he'd be there. I'd heard the bit about him working only two more dates + WM, so I had assumed those dates would be the Go Home Raw & the night after Mania. 

There's no way casuals could have known or thought that Sting would be there. The crowd chanting for him seconds before he came out is irrelevant. That makes no difference as far as viewers actually knowing to tune in to see him.

I like surprises, so I'm kind of glad that they don't advertise these appearances. It especially works for a character like Sting. However, from a business standpoint, it might be smarter to advertise, but everyone complained about them ruining the surprise when they did that for Batista.

Either way, you can hardly blame Sting for the ratings.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

One would hope the Road to Mania would gain viewers and not be starting to crater. The ship is starting to take on water.


----------



## Fabregas

They should consider themselves lucky to get over 3 million. How many other TV shows get away with repetitive, lacklustre, intelligence-insulting bullshit, year after year, and still manage to retain 90% of their viewers? Maybe watching RAW is just part of so many weekly routines that people just don't know how to stop.


----------



## Louaja89

I have already said it and I will say it again: the only one to blame for the ratings is Vince not even Roman or Sting or whoever the fuck just Vince.


----------



## MaybeLock

Remember those awful shows were the main feud was Big Show vs Randy Orton back in Nov 2013? Well, those shows were getting a 2.73 rating. Now we're getting that in the Road to Wrestlemania :duck


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MaybeLock said:


> Remember those awful shows were the main feud was Big Show vs Randy Orton back in Nov 2013? *Well, those shows were getting a 2.73 rating. Now we're getting that in the Road to Wrestlemania *:duck



That post paints quite the picture. And it's not a pretty one. It truly illustrates where WWE stands right now.

:jay


----------



## StraightYesSociety

The real reason Roman isn't getting over is because he took Daniel Bryan's job and we know how rasslin fans feel about job stealing.






I haven't been watching but the whole Brock might not follow the script thing sounds silly (hoping it was presented better). Fans know that if Brock is to leave he won't shoot on Reigns, it also takes them out of the suspense of disbelief state. OMG Goldberg is not following the script. 

Sting is over but he's also old and a part timer. I was talking to a family friend who hasn't watched since the 2001 (he was a WCW mark) and his whole thing was Vince would just fuck it up like he did with the other WCW guys. So the whole fucking shit up has been going on since 2001 when he alienated most of the WCW fans. It's also 2015 and most people forgot about WCW which is apparently the reason HHH hates him...

Although Randy sounds to be over his feud is too much of a clusterfuck. 

Most of the fan favorites are in a meaningless feud where none of them could afford a lost but most of them will lose. 

So yeah the ratings will suffer because there are no real compelling storytelling going on. Except maybe Cena-Rusev but I suspect that's more enjoyable live than on TV.


----------



## Reaper

StraightYesSociety said:


> So yeah the ratings will suffer because there are no real compelling storytelling going on. Except maybe Cena-Rusev but I suspect that's more enjoyable live than on TV.


Which they've also shown fans that they're willing to fuck up by removing Lana this week for whatever reason. Even if they're trying to sell a rift between Rusev and Lana, then why is it off the air and not on TV? No reason. Absolutely no reason. 

Fans are at this point in the mode of: Can this get worse? ... Whereas they used to be thinking "Ok, how can WWE make it better?" And The WWE has pretty much gotten worse with each passing week closer to mania. 

The past few years have been characterized by WWE fucking up and then correcting themselves before things got out of hand. 

This year has been characterised by a kind of bullheadedness that has left even most hardcore fan in a state of utter confusion. The WWE has usually managed to put out one or two programs that interested the majority of fans even outside of the main event program. But this year they have supposedly 5 main events but all of them have been characterised by complete fuck ups. 

With the ratings dropping also, it doesn't even matter whether they're putting on a good product or not too .. They've hit that point again where they could probably put on the best fucking show on earth but they've lost fan trust where most fans will look at a good show and go "Nah, this is an anomaly, it'll suck again next week".


----------



## Empress

Reptar said:


> *Which they've also shown fans that they're willing to fuck up by removing Lana this week for whatever reason. Even if they're trying to sell a rift between Rusev and Lana, then why is it off the air and not on TV? No reason. Absolutely no reason. *
> 
> Fans are at this point in the mode of: Can this get worse? ... Whereas they used to be thinking "Ok, how can WWE make it better?" And The WWE has pretty much gotten worse with each passing week closer to mania.
> 
> The past few years have been characterized by WWE fucking up and then correcting themselves before things got out of hand.
> 
> This year has been characterised by a kind of bullheadedness that has left even most hardcore fan in a state of utter confusion. The WWE has usually managed to put out one or two programs that interested the majority of fans even outside of the main event program. But this year they have supposedly 5 main events but all of them have been characterised by complete fuck ups.
> 
> With the ratings dropping also, it doesn't even matter whether they're putting on a good product or not too .. They've hit that point again where they could probably put on the best fucking show on earth but they've lost fan trust where most fans will look at a good show and go "Nah, this is an anomaly, it'll suck again next week".


To be fair, Rusev was mad at Lana last week for agreeing to the match with Cena and she's off filming a movie in real life. 

But I agree for the most part with your other points. I think competition could motivate the WWE but I don't see another wrestling promotion rising to the occasion in terms of global recognition, resources, etc. Maybe once Punk starts fighting with the UFC and is a possible draw there. That could get Vince's attention.


----------



## Chrome

ShowStopper said:


> That post paints quite the picture. And it's not a pretty one. It truly illustrates where WWE stands right now.
> 
> :jay


Just wait until the Reigns/Show feud for the WWE title kicks off post-Mania. The "face of the company" nobody wants vs the old past his prime guy that should've retired 7 years ago. The numbers will be hilarious. :jordan4


----------



## McCringleberry

Reptar said:


> With the ratings dropping also, it doesn't even matter whether they're putting on a good product or not too .. They've hit that point again where they could probably put on the best fucking show on earth but they've lost fan trust where most fans will look at a good show and go "Nah, this is an anomaly, it'll suck again next week".


Man that pretty much says it all right there. I couldn't agree more. WWE has put itself in a DEEP hole. Digging back out is gonna be hard work and we all know for a fact their current creative team isn't up to the challenge.


----------



## JamesK

And that's what you get when you start a war with your fanbase..

And guess what.. Wrestlemania season is over so say bye bye to those casuals who are tuning in because it is Mania...

So expect a big drop after Mania(not the day after though)..


----------



## Choke2Death

As much as I enjoyed the ending, they deserve this for such a lackluster road to WM. I can't blame Reigns or anyone else because the build-up has been pure shit. One or two good segments cannot save 3 hours that consists of mostly garbage.


----------



## Reaper

Nina said:


> To be fair, Rusev was mad at Lana last week for agreeing to the match with Cena and she's off filming a movie in real life.
> 
> But I agree for the most part with your other points. I think competition could motivate the WWE but I don't see another wrestling promotion rising to the occasion in terms of global recognition, resources, etc. Maybe once Punk starts fighting with the UFC and is a possible draw there. That could get Vince's attention.


Makes it even worse that she's been scheduled to film a movie when her boy is involved in a mania match....


----------



## RatedR10

Dell said:


> Is there a list somewhere of all the RTWM ratings from those years in order?


I used gerweck for ratings up to 1998 and then just did a "1997 Raw rating" search and it gave me a site that showed ratings from late 95-1997.



Nina said:


> To be fair, Rusev was mad at Lana last week for agreeing to the match with Cena and she's off filming a movie in real life.
> 
> But I agree for the most part with your other points. I think competition could motivate the WWE but I don't see another wrestling promotion rising to the occasion in terms of global recognition, resources, etc. Maybe once Punk starts fighting with the UFC and is a possible draw there. That could get Vince's attention.


It won't happen. Vince, HHH, etc., they'll tell anyone who'll listen "oh, UFC isn't our competition, all of entertainment is our competition blah blah blah" because the old out of touch guy is too ashamed to be associated with pro wrestling which is exactly what this is. So, what would a logical, rational person do? They'd cater their product to the large niche crowd that follows pro wrestling rather than trying to fit everyone under the sun into their demographic when it just doesn't work. 

For this reason, they'll never (openly) admit to UFC being competition because they don't want to associate with that sort of stuff.

As for pro wrestling, it's not going to get better. The best we can hope for is that promotions like NJPW, GFW, ROH, TNA, etc. can compete for who's #2 in wrestling, but no one will ever compete with WWE, and now with NXT touring, WWE is pretty much 1-2. They own the market.

This shit is never going to get better, at least not as long as Vince McMahon is still alive and Kevin Dunn still has a job, and even then, I don't have that much faith in Triple H, either. He's still the guy who wanted Roman Reigns vs. Brock Lesnar while Vince wanted The Rock vs. Brock Lesnar. Roman Reigns is Triple H's guy just as much as he is Vince McMahon's guy and I have no reason to believe that just because Vince dies and HHH takes over that guys like Bryan, Ziggler, Ambrose, etc. will actually be taken seriously.

I rambled there, but fuck it. This company is just a fucking mess.


----------



## DanielBlitzkrieg

Fabregas said:


> They should consider themselves lucky to get over 3 million. How many other TV shows get away with repetitive, lacklustre, intelligence-insulting bullshit, year after year, and still manage to retain 90% of their viewers?


Many do these days.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

2.7 :lmao

Reigns, Rollins and Orton are the most to blame as far as talents go for the poor rating. Sting is obviously a draw(look at post Survivor Series Rating). 

Cena/Rusev is the hottest feud in the company going by ratings, they've pulled the highest hour every week.

Next week should do 4.3 million easy, if it does any lower than that, the Wrestlemania Main Event is DEAD. A first time ever confrontation(Snow show doesn't count since it was a pretape), and if it still can't pull a good number? That's a problem.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> Just wait until the Reigns/Show feud for the WWE title kicks off post-Mania. The "face of the company" nobody wants vs the old past his prime guy that should've retired 7 years ago. The numbers will be hilarious. :jordan4


With the way WWE needlessly treats their fans (for example, the fans who had the nerve to dress up like wrestlers last night), I'm starting to look forward to these awful ratings. Karma's a bitch.


----------



## JamesK

ShowStopper said:


> With the way WWE needlessly treats their fans (*for example, the fans who had the nerve to dress up like wrestlers last night*), I'm starting to look forward to these awful ratings. Karma's a bitch.


In other words not only you will suffer through the show change your damn clothes too dammit... Here take an uso shirt and shut the fuck up when Roman is cutting a promo


----------



## LKRocks

2.7 during Wrestlemania season. Holy fucking shit.

I'm not, and have never been a ratings mark, but Punk was getting shat on for pulling 2.7's during the slowest time of the year. This is a 2.7 during Mania season. MANIA SEASON. 

2.7 TWO WEEKS BEFORE WRESTLEMANIA.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

LMAO ITS NOT EVEN FOOTBALL SEASON


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

LKRocks said:


> 2.7 during Wrestlemania season. Holy fucking shit.
> 
> I'm not, and have never been a ratings mark, but Punk was getting shat on for pulling 2.7's during the slowest time of the year. This is a 2.7 during Mania season. MANIA SEASON.
> 
> 2.7 TWO WEEKS BEFORE WRESTLEMANIA.


Punk was being damn near crucified in his mid card title reign for pulling 2.9-3.1's.

And this is MANIA season and they can't even get that :lmao


----------



## LilOlMe

Chrome said:


> Just wait until the Reigns/Show feud for the WWE title kicks off post-Mania. The "face of the company" nobody wants vs the old past his prime guy that should've retired 7 years ago. The numbers will be hilarious. :jordan4


The funniest part is that not long ago, Reigns said "don't nobody want to see" Show against someone. Can't remember who. It made everyone LOL, because it was a real comment.

Yet WWE is dumb enough to potentially book Show against him in a long feud? Even though they KNOW no one wants to see that shit?

I don't think that they'll do it. They know that Reigns needs far more than Show to work.


----------



## Chrome

LilOlMe said:


> The funniest part is that not long ago, Reigns said "don't nobody want to see" Show against someone. Can't remember who. It made everyone LOL, because it was a real comment.
> 
> Yet WWE is dumb enough to potentially book Show against him in a long feud? Even though they KNOW no one wants to see that shit?
> 
> I don't think that they'll do it. They know that Reigns needs far more than Show to work.


It's pretty much inevitable that it's happening. WWE's definitely dumb enough to book something like that. They love booking Big Show in main event angles even though people grew tired of his act YEARS ago.


----------



## Necramonium

Vince must be like:
:Cry

when he saw the ratings.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

I would say it's sad, but I am too busy laughing at how far the mighty have fallen.


----------



## Blade Runner

I usually don't put much stock in the weekly ratings, but GODDAMN that's bad.


----------



## Darkod

RAW viewership average, 3/17/*2014* - *4,075,000*m viewers
RAW viewership average, 3/16/*2015* - *3,919,000*m viewers


Oh my god! Reigns can't draw! WWE is doomed. Vince Mcmahon should kill himself. :shrug

Now on to next week for repeat process...:bored:bored


----------



## Darkod

DAMN SKIPPY said:


> I usually don't put much stock in the weekly ratings


That's probably because you don't even understand it, much like most pretend ratings' experts posting in this thread.


----------



## Batz

> http://prowrestlingvortex.com/2015/...s-31615-almost-the-lowest-rating-of-the-year/


One of the lowest ratings of the year thus far, but the go home show for Mania is next week, lets see how that does.


----------



## #Mark

JY57 said:


> here are the final ratings so far for Mania season (via James Caldwell of PWTorch)



Here are the respective numbers for September 2013 and September 2014:

September 2013:

Sept. 2: 2.85	
Sept. 9: 2.9	
Sept. 16: 2.96	
Sept. 23: 2.81

September 2014: 

August 25: 2.88	
September 1: 2.81	
September 8: 2.87	
September 15: 2.79	


Yes, this year's RTWM is doing numbers comparable to the fall.


----------



## Chrome

Batz said:


> One of the lowest ratings of the year thus far, but the go home show for Mania is next week, lets see how that does.


I feel like I'm looking at the ratings for Nitro in 2000 or something. :drake1

Seems like the fuckery of the Rumble caused a spike in interest, but after that, everyone started tuning out and haven't tuned back in even though this is the RTWM. But hey, they'll watch no matter what right Vince? :vince6


----------



## RLStern

*A 2.7 rating for Raw two weeks before Wrestlemania 31...*

:nowords


----------



## LilOlMe

Chrome said:


> I feel like I'm looking at the ratings for Nitro in 2000 or something. :drake1
> 
> *Seems like the fuckery of the Rumble caused a spike in interest*, but after that, everyone started tuning out and haven't tuned back in even though this is the RTWM. But hey, they'll watch no matter what right Vince? :vince6


Those morons attributed it to people being (positively) interested in Reigns.

The show after WM will have the same increase, for the same reason. People like watching car wrecks. The WWE will take it, but marks shouldn't pretend that it's anything other than what it is. Of course fuckery will spark interest, but for all the wrong reasons.


----------



## Reaper

Darkod said:


> RAW viewership average, 3/17/*2014* - *4,075,000*m viewers
> RAW viewership average, 3/16/*2015* - *3,919,000*m viewers
> 
> 
> Oh my god! Reigns can't draw! WWE is doomed. Vince Mcmahon should kill himself. :shrug
> 
> Now on to next week for repeat process...:bored:bored


Do you know what intellectual dishonesty is? It's cherry-picking data and trying to use the outlier to prove a point that doesn't fit the actual trend line in the rest of the sample. 

Here's a larger sample because large samples are what matter when analysing data, not single data points: 

Mar 11 2014: 4,369,667 viewers
Mar 09 2015: 3,858,667 viewers

Mar 04 2014: 4,576,667 viewers
Mar 02 2015: 3,825,000 viewers

Feb 25 2014: 4,661,000 viewers
Feb 23 2015: 4,122,333 vewiers

Feb 19 2014: 4,364,000 viewers
Feb 16 2015: 3,997,333 viewers

Feb 11 2014: 4,329,000 (They were also competing with the Olympics at the time) 
Feb 09 2015: 3,658,000 viewers

Feb 04 2014: 4,207,333 viewers
Feb 2, 2015: 4,289,000 viewers

Jan 28 2014: 4,718,667 viewers (Rumble fall out)
Jan 26, 2015: 4,420,000 viewers (Rumble fall out) 

2014 average: 4,461,000 viewers
2015 average: 4,033,000 viewers. 

That's a decline of about 10%. 

In any case, stop indulging in intellectual dishonesty because the only one that looks like a fool when you do that is you.


----------



## Chrome

Oh dear, guess we'll have to ban Darkod now for being dishonest. What a loss that'll be to this fine forum.


----------



## joeycalz

Necramonium said:


> Vince must be like:
> :Cry
> 
> when he saw the ratings.


THE HIGHEST RATED RAW ON THE RTWM WAS A RAW THAT WASN'T EVEN A REAL MONDAY NIGHT RAW!!!!!!!!!!

:ex:


----------



## Saber Rider ^-^

Ratings are terrible because the show is terrible, the creative is terrible, the presentation is terrible, the commentary is terrible, the look and feel of the product is terrible, the current public perception of WWE is terrible etc. etc. everything is damn terrible.

How is anyone going to become a star or a draw in this era when they aren't presented like stars, when commentary presents them as jokes, when creative scripts promos for them that make them look like jokes, when matches are overbooked and watered down and don't play into anyone's strengths, when Stephanie cuts their dicks off every week or when they're given segments with the sole purpose being for the juvenile personal amusement of one man. Why would I want to tune in to watch a bunch of clowns, geeks and pretenders compete against other clowns, geeks and pretenders. The guys who aren't clowns aren't actually on the show most weeks and when they are on the show they get brought down to the same shitty level as everyone else.

And when someone does get over to a decent level where it looks like they might be someone, BULLSHIT politics and the owners own bias get in the way and that person gets their legs cut out from under them.

Fuck them for making me apathetic to this years RTWM, a time of year I actually remember enjoying. 

They get what you deserve and you deserve what you work for and they thoroughly deserve these numbers and horrible fan sentiment at the moment. The worst thing is I actually really love the current roster, there's so much talent there with so much potential to be something more, but for reasons only known to a few people that might never happen.


----------



## MaybeLock

Reptar said:


> Do you know what intellectual dishonesty is? It's cherry-picking data and trying to use the outlier to prove a point that doesn't fit the actual trend line in the rest of the sample.
> 
> Here's a larger sample because large samples are what matter when analysing data, not single data points:
> 
> Mar 11 2014: 4,369,667 viewers
> Mar 09 2015: 3,858,667 viewers
> 
> Mar 04 2014: 4,576,667 viewers
> Mar 02 2015: 3,825,000 viewers
> 
> Feb 25 2014: 4,661,000 viewers
> Feb 23 2015: 4,122,333 vewiers
> 
> Feb 19 2014: 4,364,000 viewers
> Feb 16 2015: 3,997,333 viewers
> 
> Feb 11 2014: 4,329,000 (They were also competing with the Olympics at the time)
> Feb 09 2015: 3,658,000 viewers
> 
> Feb 04 2014: 4,207,333 viewers
> Feb 2, 2015: 4,289,000 viewers
> 
> Jan 28 2014: 4,718,667 viewers (Rumble fall out)
> Jan 26, 2015: 4,420,000 viewers (Rumble fall out)
> 
> 2014 average: 4,461,000 viewers
> 2015 average: 4,033,000 viewers.
> 
> That's a decline of about 10%.
> 
> In any case, stop indulging in intellectual dishonesty because the only one that looks like a fool when you do that is you.


This. And also, the 2014 show Darktroll is mentioning had a 2.98 rating, instead of 2.73


----------



## JamesK

Saber Rider ^-^ said:


> Ratings are terrible because the show is terrible, the creative is terrible, the presentation is terrible, the commentary is terrible, the look and feel of the product is terrible, the current public perception of WWE is terrible etc. etc. everything is damn terrible.
> 
> How is anyone going to become a star or a draw in this era when they aren't presented like stars, when commentary presents them as jokes, when creative scripts promos for them that make them look like jokes, when matches are overbooked and watered down and don't play into anyone's strengths, when Stephanie cuts their dicks off every week or when they're given segments with the sole purpose being for the juvenile personal amusement of one man. Why would I want to tune in to watch a bunch of clowns, geeks and pretenders compete against other clowns, geeks and pretenders. The guys who aren't clowns aren't actually on the show most weeks and when they are on the show they get brought down to the same shitty level as everyone else.
> 
> And when someone does get over to a decent level where it looks like they might be someone, BULLSHIT politics and the owners own bias get in the way and that person gets their legs cut out from under them.
> 
> Fuck them for making me apathetic to this years RTWM, a time of year I actually remember enjoying.
> 
> They get what you deserve and you deserve what you work for and they thoroughly deserve these numbers and horrible fan sentiment at the moment. The worst thing is I actually really love the current roster, there's so much talent there with so much potential to be something more, but for reasons only known to a few people that might never happen.


Exactly this.. So much talent gets wasted because a few people can't figure out what the fuck their fanbase wants from them..

Seriously i really want to meet a guy who expects from the WRESTLING program to see the grumpy cat or Snoop Dog or Wiz Khalifa...

And no i don't think it's only Vince's fault.. All the people in the back,i don't talk about the wrestlers, that they can talk to Vince(Triple H,Pat Patterson,Arn Anderson and others) about how shitty the program is and probably not only they don't they probably agree with him and praise him are guilty too in my book..


----------



## K4L318

JamesK said:


> *And no i don't think it's only Vince's fault.. All the people in the back,i don't talk about the wrestlers, that they can talk to Vince(Triple H,Pat Patterson,Arn Anderson and others)* about how shitty the program is and probably not only they don't they probably agree with him and praise him are guilty too in my book..


They do. He cuts them off. It usually goes like this

PL: dad this shit doesn't make sense

VM: Paul I'm the president of this company, we're going to make it make sense god dammit! 

PL: dad the ratings are falling, they aren't responding to

VM: dammit did you hear what I said

SM: dad, Paul is trying to tell you it's not working what part of that don't you get

VM: dammit Stephanie! SOMETIMES DECISION HAVE TO BE MADE THAT ARE HARSH, LEAVE ME THE HELL ALONE!

SM: daddy! 

PL: no honey, let him walk it off

VM: [walks away]

AA: Vince again?

PL: yep, stupid old man

SM: he doesn't listen Arn, he just doesn't listen


later that day

VM: hey Kevin, I just spoke w/ my son in law and daughter, they tell me I'm screwing up, what do you think?

Kevin Dunn: listen Vince they don't know the business like you and I, they are new to this business. One day they'll realize you were right and they were wrong. It's called growing pains. Besides he runs NXT a minor league small market show, our product is worldwide, we draw an audience over 3 million every Monday, he's got a small show that is only alive because you gave him that goddamit. I mean you're Vince McMahon, who do they think they are?

VM: Yeh, yeah! I'M VINCE MCMAHON GODDAMIT! GODDAMIT I MADE THIS BUSINESS! Thank you Kevin

Kevin Dunn: No problem boss. Hey about that FloRida skit, I hear we can get Barney the dinosaur next month, it's risky but if we put him with Axel or Slater and sell the kid appeal with them. I think we can get new viewers with it:grin2:

VM: That's the type thinking I need. GODDAMIT KEVIN YOU'RE GOING PLACES! 

VM: I thought it over Paul. Steph, we'll talk about this at home, by the way...let the creative team know Barney the dinosaur is guest staring next month. Cook something up for those new viewers. 

PL:


----------



## LKRocks

We could be on a Road to Wrestlemania FILLED with new Superstars. But Vince made sure to cool EVERYONE off so they didn't get in the way of Reigns. 

Cesaro was hot after last year's Mania. Was paired with Heyman and turned into a jobber and a living prop to let Heyman talk about Lesnar for 6 months.

Ambrose was hot as shit. Was turned into a loser and fell down the card like a rock. Roman beat Rollins clean in his first try, something Ambrose tried to do for months and was never allowed to.

Ziggler was over as fuck. Was kayfabe fired, and kept off TV for 3 weeks, came back and was punished for booking a comedy gig, and had to job to BnB.

Bryan came back as if he never left. Crowd loved him. Was eliminated from the Rumble like a jobber, with no storyline involved, had to put Roman over clean, and now barely gets 10 minutes of TV time on RAW.

How in the hell do they want people to see their guys as "Superstars", if every guy that gets over is screwed, and the one guy they want to get over never did anything to deserve it? The Reings booking is cancerous and absurd. They crippled the entired roster just to keep Roman Reigns over.

It's like when Cena was starting to get over, and Vince did everything he could to bury Christian, but this time, he's doing it to EVERYONE.

Seriously, back during the Attitude, we talked about how stacked the Main Event scene was. It's an exaggeration, but people talked about how everyone was a main eventer.

Nowadays, it looks like everyone is a midcarder. There are no Stars anymore.


----------



## Stinger Fan

LKRocks said:


> How in the hell do they want people to see their guys as "Superstars", if every guy that gets over is screwed, and the one guy they want to get over never did anything to deserve it? The Reings booking is cancerous and absurd. They crippled the entired roster just to keep Roman Reigns over.


They don't. They just want you to view 1 guy as the "definitive" star while the rest are there to be fed to him. We got nearly 10 years of it from Cena, how long will Roman really last in that spot just to spite the fans?


----------



## JY57

When your US Title program is your highest rated feud of Mania each week (they were in the highest rated hour each week of RWTM) over whatever is opening & main eventing RAW (Reigns, Authority, & Orton) and the top 3 matches of Mania you got some serious problems.


----------



## Fighter Daron

JY57 said:


> When your US Title program is your highest rated feud of Mania each week (they were in the highest rated hour each week of RWTM) over whatever is opening & main eventing RAW (Reigns, Authority, & Orton) and the top 3 matches of Mania you got some serious problems.


Or else you're doing a great job with US championship program.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wow, looking at that chart, looks like it's getting to the point where even the RTWM can't bring the ratings up above 3.0 outside of around Rumble time (and struggles to keep things around that 4 million viewer mark). Maybe the next couple of weeks, being the go-home and fallout show, they will get above that elusive 3.0 but if things continue as they have I wonder how low Fall/Football season will be for them?


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Fighter Daron said:


> Or else you're doing a great job with US championship program.


They are, at least compared to other feuds. I don't think it's a coincidence that both Cena and Rusev are regular WWE talent that are around every week to build the feud and interact with one another.


----------



## JY57

Fighter Daron said:


> Or else you're doing a great job with US championship program.


from stuff I check on hulu and youtube think its good and casuals are very into it. It being a continuation feud also helps a lot (Rollins/Orton had a 4 month break)


----------



## brxd

And the fact Cena is the GOAT


----------



## LKRocks

What I find the most hilarious, is how Stephanie had that absurd segment about how John Cena isn't above WWE and doesn't define WWE, and how they don't need Cena and etc, while Cena is the only thing saving their asses Ratings wise. 

The US feud is the only thing that's not a disaster. Bryan was cooled off and barely does anything on RAW, whule Reings isn't loved or hated, he's just *there*.

WWE right now, desperately needs Cena, much more than he needs WWE.


----------



## Kabraxal

LKRocks said:


> What I find the most hilarious, is how Stephanie had that absurd segment about how John Cena isn't above WWE and doesn't define WWE, and how they don't need Cena and etc, while Cena is the only thing saving their asses Ratings wise.
> 
> The US feud is the only thing that's not a disaster. Bryan was cooled off and barely does anything on RAW, whule Reings isn't loved or hated, he's just *there*.
> 
> WWE right now, desperately needs Cena, much more than he needs WWE.


It's the only 1 v 1 feud with any actual build between both wrestlers. The rest of the card is either multi person matches or two clusterfucks that are consolation prizes for those involved and to the fans. Even though monday's segment sucked, at least it was still both men at the same time building to the match instead of relying mostly on one guy to sell the whole feud.


----------



## JY57

The last 3 Road to SummerSlam builds had better ratings than this RTWM.

If not mistaken I believe they pretty much doing similar to Survivor Series last few years: Ryback vs Cena vs Punk (November 2012), Randy Orton vs Big Show (November 2013), & Team Cena vs Team Authority (November 2014) type of ratings.


----------



## Reaper

^^And for once there is no outside influencing factor either ... It's all on them and their booking. Usually fall ratings are worse because of the NFL .. I would love to hear their excuse for losing 10% of their WM audience from last year.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Who wants to place bets on Ratings post Mania and going into the Summer and Fall?

I'll say night after Mania is big, 4.6 million. After that, they fall back into the 3.8-4.0 million range for the ER and Payback buildup. Summer I see them falling to 3.5 million, and for football season I see 3.2 million as their normal rating.

Just for comparisons sake, the Survivor Series go home show in 2012 did 4.2 million viewers, that was a time where people were calling CM Punk the worst WWE champion of all time, and the worst draw of all time. The go home show for a jobber PPV is doing significantly higher than the BUILD UP FOR WRESTLEMANIA.


----------



## The Tempest

A 2.7 rating on the Road to WrestleMania? Are you fucking kidding me? :lmao And there's no real competition atm, like NFL or something :lmao

The whole product sucks really bad, every single aspect of it. If you're doing these bad numbers during WrestleMania season, what will you do after WM? 1.0?

This is seriously embarassing :LOL


----------



## Choke2Death

To be fair, the low ratings during Punk's reign was the start of 2's becoming the norm. Obviously it's gonna look good compared to now just like ratings in 2003 look good compared to now even though back then fans who followed that talked about how badly business is falling.

Standards keep getting lower and soon they'll be struggling to pull 3 millions for average the more they continue in this direction. I almost want Reigns to get a long reign just to see the ratings continue to fall.


----------



## DoubtGin

Smackdown had 2595000 viewers, up from last week's 2573000.


----------



## tbp82

DoubtGin said:


> Smackdown had 2595000 viewers, up from last week's 2573000.


Against the NCAA Tournament I'm a little surprised


----------



## #Mark

Choke2Death said:


> To be fair, the low ratings during Punk's reign was the start of 2's becoming the norm. Obviously it's gonna look good compared to now just like ratings in 2003 look good compared to now even though back then fans who followed that talked about how badly business is falling.
> 
> Standards keep getting lower and soon they'll be struggling to pull 3 millions for average the more they continue in this direction. I almost want Reigns to get a long reign just to see the ratings continue to fall.


To be fair, that was when the program first became three hours. Those ratings were a result of viewer fatigue. Some people were just not going to watch all three hours.

Now, nearly three years later the fall in ratings can only be attributed to bad booking.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This is the chart for Smackdown if anyone is interested.










Gauntlet match was the highlight for me.


----------



## Reaper

The Inbred Goatman said:


> I'll say night after Mania is big, 4.6 million. After that, they fall back into the 3.8-4.0 million range for the ER and Payback buildup. Summer I see them falling to 3.5 million, and for football season I see 3.2 million as their normal rating.


I think you might be over-estimating the night after mania a little bit. 

There are only 4 possible outcomes for the main event at mania

1) Brock re-signs and retains
2) Reigns wins and becomes new champion
3) Seth successfully cashes in
4) Seth fails to cash in

None of the 4 results are so extraordinary that they will pull back viewers immediately. 

Other matches on the card:

1) HHH wins - No buys and no impact on product
2) HHH loses - No buys and no impact on product
3) Bryan wins IC - No buys and no impact on product
4) Rollins wins - No impact on product
5) Orton wins - No impact on product
6) Cena becomes US champion - No buys
7) Rusev retains streak - No significant impact
8) Wyatt wins - No significant impact
9) Taker wins - No significant impact
10) Divas - Irrelevant and non-draws

Essentially, my point is that this mania is so poorly booked that not a single outcome will immediately bring viewers back to the WWE. I think there is always a certain amount of finality in a fan's decision to quit watching. WWE isn't like other shows where you know that if they have a run of bad episodes that it won't get better ever until and unless it's significantly consistently bad. 

The ONLY thing that people might anticipate is an NXT debut. No other result at mania has any kind of an impact on drawing the viewer in. In any case, I expect the post mania Raw to do no better or no worse than what it is already doing.


----------



## Marrakesh

Reptar said:


> I think you might be over-estimating the night after mania a little bit.
> 
> There are only 4 possible outcomes for the main event at mania
> 
> 1) Brock re-signs and retains
> 2) Reigns wins and becomes new champion
> 3) Seth successfully cashes in
> 4) Seth fails to cash in
> 
> None of the 4 results are so extraordinary that they will pull back viewers immediately.
> 
> Other matches on the card:
> 
> 1) HHH wins - No buys and no impact on product
> 2) HHH loses - No buys and no impact on product
> 3) Bryan wins IC - No buys and no impact on product
> 4) Rollins wins - No impact on product
> 5) Orton wins - No impact on product
> 6) Cena becomes US champion - No buys
> 7) Rusev retains streak - No significant impact
> 8) Wyatt wins - No significant impact
> 9) Taker wins - No significant impact
> 10) Divas - Irrelevant and non-draws
> 
> Essentially, my point is that this mania is so poorly booked that not a single outcome will immediately bring viewers back to the WWE. I think there is always a certain amount of finality in a fan's decision to quit watching. WWE isn't like other shows where you know that if they have a run of bad episodes that it won't get better ever until and unless it's significantly consistently bad.
> 
> The ONLY thing that people might anticipate is an NXT debut. No other result at mania has any kind of an impact on drawing the viewer in. In any case, I expect the post mania Raw to do no better or no worse than what it is already doing.


Whilst i agree with nearly everything you've said I think you're giving NXT too much credit. Why would someone debuting from NXT increase viewership?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Even if WWE gets a decent rating post Mania, the next week is against the NCAA final which could drag them back down to earth very quickly.


----------



## murder

I expect huge ratings because besides Mania hype and fallout interest, I can certainly see them starting Rock/Lesnar as well as Sting/Taker for 32. So 5 million, maybe?


----------



## Marrakesh

murder said:


> I expect huge ratings because besides Mania hype and fallout interest, I can certainly see them starting Rock/Lesnar as well as Sting/Taker for 32. So 5 million, maybe?


:ti Look back through this thread. They didn't break 4 million last week. There isn't a chance in hell of them reaching 5 million next week.


----------



## Chrome

IDONTSHIV said:


> Even if WWE gets a decent rating post Mania, the next week is against the NCAA final which could drag them back down to earth very quickly.


Yeah, it's all downhill from here. They're getting ratings now that they usually get during football season. Just wait until the football season actually gets here.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Chrome said:


> Yeah, it's all downhill from here. They're getting ratings now that they usually get during football season. Just wait until the football season actually gets here.


You would hope they would have a base audience that would keep them at a certain level. Thing is I was part of their base and I have been alienated. If there are others like me, when football ramps up the bottom may fall out and the ratings sink to heretofore unprecedented ratings for the three hour show. A part of me would lament it, the other part would say they richly deserve it for their poor shows and general disdain for their own viewing audience.


----------



## #Mark

Marrakesh said:


> :ti Look back through this thread. They didn't break 4 million last week. There isn't a chance in hell of them reaching 5 million next week.


Meh, I think people will watch. I haven't watched RAW live during the entire RTWM and I will watch live next week. Last year they had the benefit of the streak ending and Bryan finally winning the title to entice people to watch RAW but I think whatever shenanigans happens at the end of the Brock/Reigns should be enough to help them get a monster rating.


----------



## murder

Marrakesh said:


> Look back through this thread. They didn't break 4 million last week. There isn't a chance in hell of them reaching 5 million next week.


That was without Rock, Lesnar, Undertaker and Sting, who only showed up for the final minutes, thus having no influence on the rating. And of course no biggest PPV of the year fallout. Wait and see


----------



## SnapOrTap

O lord.

Hoping they don't break 4 million again.

CROSSES FINGERS.

:harper:flair4:buried:yes:Westbrookhh


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Roman Reigns is killing it...as in killing the ratings.


----------



## Batz

I really doubt they don't hit 4mil for tonight.


Anyone post the numbers for previous go-home WM RAWs?


----------



## Wynter

I hope the show tanks :homer2


----------



## Reaper

Batz said:


> I really doubt they don't hit 4mil for tonight.
> 
> 
> Anyone post the numbers for previous go-home WM RAWs?


http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/465039-3-31-wwe-raw-rating



> The go-home episode of Monday Night Raw prior to this weekend's WrestleMania XXX pay-per-view brought in an average of 4.39 million viewers across three hours, with individual hours scoring 4.231, 4.603 and 4.338 million viewers, respectively.
> 
> The final rating was a 3.14. This week's WWE Raw was up from last week's 3.07 rating with an average viewership of 4.231 million fans. Interestingly enough, this year's WrestleMania go-home show did about the same as last year's, which ended the wrestling calendar with a firm 3.1. The year before Raw only did a 3.06 just a week before WrestleMania, so the lower numbers heading into the biggest PPV of the year aren't all that much of a shock, with this year's show actually doing the best rating in three years.


With Sting and Lesnar both advertised as well as a surprise appearance from Hogan (and rumours that Rock might be on the show), I would be very, very surprised if it doesn't break 4 million at least last night.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Reptar said:


> http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/465039-3-31-wwe-raw-rating
> 
> 
> 
> With Sting and Lesnar both advertised as well as a surprise appearance from Hogan (and rumours that Rock might be on the show), I would be very, very surprised if it doesn't break 4 million at least last night.


It's crazy, Daniel Bryan was in the focal point of Mania 30, while in the prior years the focal point was THE ROCK. You'd think ratings would've dropped, but they didn't.


----------



## Reaper

The Inbred Goatman said:


> It's crazy, Daniel Bryan was in the focal point of Mania 30, while in the prior years the focal point was THE ROCK. You'd think ratings would've dropped, but they didn't.


Bryan's WMXXX run was one of the greatest in WWE's history from a storyline point of view ... 

The ratings and buyrates may not have ushered in an _immediate _boom, but neither did Austin when he was being pushed in 97. It took time for the entire AE to pick up steam altogther with Austin at the helm ... but Bryan on his own did more than he's given credit for in terms of sustaining and even upping the ratings .. especially considering that the ENTIRE build of Mania 30 was around Bryan and other than The Shield, no one was significantly hot at the time. 

Bryan was money and they threw it away because of personal vindictiveness.


----------



## validreasoning

8PM = 4.178
9PM = 4.342
10PM = 4.043
*Average = 4.19*

Last few years final raw before mania:

2012 (2 hour show) = 4.44 million average
2013 = 4.3 million average
2014 = 4.39 million average


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Bad Rating, but not terrible.

Next week should be pretty high.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Over 4 million has to be a good thing, relatively speaking.

Without quarter hours, it's hard to tell, but it doesn't look like people stuck around for Lesnar/Reigns.

I'm guessing Snoop, Hogan and Cena/Rusev were in Hour 2, but Raw is always a blur to me.


----------



## Chrome

The Inbred Goatman said:


> Bad Rating, but not terrible.
> 
> Next week should be pretty high.


And then it goes waaaaaaaay down after that.


----------



## TheGmGoken

Damn. No one cares for Lesnar vs Reigns


----------



## A-C-P

Hey at least they got over 4 mil :draper2


----------



## Reaper

They're exactly about as much as I was expecting them to be ... The entire RTWM made one thing clear though .. the 10% drop off has been pretty consistent ... meaning they lost a chunk of dedicated viewership that may not be coming back.


----------



## Kabraxal

Terrible rating... and just imagine the impact that final segment had on those that saw it. The next few weeks of fuckery are going to be a glorious fiery spiral for the WWE.


----------



## Blade Runner

I think this is one of those rare occations when a bad rating would actually be a benefit to the WWE...


----------



## JY57

Final Rating - 3.03


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Next week won't get 5 mil.....maybe not even 4.5. It's funny how the WWE will continue to not care.


----------



## Marrakesh

WesternFilmGuy said:


> Next week won't get 5 mil.....maybe not even 4.5. It's funny how the WWE will continue to not care.


Lesnar is staying. WWE just got handed a major lifeline here. Have Reigns lose in a valiant effort. 

Reboot him after Mania and let Lesnar remain their undisputed champion while elevating the midcard titles on Cena and Bryan who can main ppv's in his absence.

Seriously sort your fucking show out WWE. This is a huge opportunity to do that now and reset this disaster.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Marrakesh said:


> Lesnar is staying. WWE just got handed a major lifeline here. Have Reigns lose in a valiant effort.
> 
> Reboot him after Mania and let Lesnar remain their undisputed champion while elevating the midcard titles on Cena and Bryan who can main ppv's in his absence.
> 
> Seriously sort your fucking show out WWE. This is a huge opportunity to do that now and reset this disaster.


Time to hit the reset button for the show and the eject button for Reigns. He needs more time to become ready. He just does, Here's the chart if anyone cares to see it:


----------



## Kabraxal

Now my fiery spiral sputtered out already....... but fucking good. If this forces a good BOOKING decision then GOOD!

I can't believe I'm happy Lesnar resigned... hopefully more of a full time TV deal (don't care if he does house shows to be honest) so the title is around more... but fuck, that is how bad this feud has been and how Reigns has not looked like a legitimate threat to Lesnar.

Hopefully it's a retention... then the fantasy booking starts. Do we get Orton/Lesnar? Bryan/Lesnar? Do they bring Owens up quicker to go monster/monster? I think at this point though, use Lesnar to build a wrestler that hasn't quite made it to the top tier.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Kabraxal said:


> Now my fiery spiral sputtered out already....... but fucking good. If this forces a good BOOKING decision then GOOD!
> 
> I can't believe I'm happy Lesnar resigned... hopefully more of a full time TV deal (don't care if he does house shows to be honest) so the title is around more... but fuck, that is how bad this feud has been and how Reigns has not looked like a legitimate threat to Lesnar.
> 
> Hopefully it's a retention... then the fantasy booking starts. Do we get Orton/Lesnar? Bryan/Lesnar? Do they bring Owens up quicker to go monster/monster? I think at this point though, use Lesnar to build a wrestler that hasn't quite made it to the top tier.


Nope. USA network already signed the TV deal. Doesn't really matter anymore.


----------



## Batz

Decent rating actually. Not good, but okay.


Lesnar is not on full time TV schedule. It's pretty clear from him ESPN interview he chose WWE mainly because they are offering a ton of money and not a ton of miles.

But regardless, it is what's best for the product right now.


----------



## Watertaco

Marrakesh said:


> Lesnar is staying. WWE just got handed a major lifeline here. Have Reigns lose in a valiant effort.
> 
> Reboot him after Mania and let Lesnar remain their undisputed champion while elevating the midcard titles on Cena and Bryan who can main ppv's in his absence.
> 
> Seriously sort your fucking show out WWE. This is a huge opportunity to do that now and reset this disaster.


NO. No more Bryan.

I don't want him on my TV screen, the guy has to be one of the most mediocre talents I have ever seen.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Last year's go home show to WM got a higher rating than this year's. Interesting.

:bryan


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> Last year's go home show to WM got a higher rating than this year's. Interesting.
> 
> :bryan


To be fair, it deserved it. We got Bryan attacking HHH from behind and HHH bumping his ass off as the crowd was going berserk. This year we got the two main eventers pulling on the title belt and being poorly received by the crowd. The booking of that belt tug of war is just so damn questionable.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

IDONTSHIV said:


> To be fair, it deserve it. We got Bryan attacking HHH from behind and HHH bumping his ass off as the crowd was going berserk. This year we got the two main eventers pulling on the title belt and being poorly received by the crowd. The booking of that belt tug of war is just so damn questionable.


Last year's RTWM was just much better booked and actually had a story built around a star that people actually liked, too, though. This year, not so much. And on this year's show they had Hogan, Snoop, and Bill Simmons and still couldn't outdo last year's rating.

:lol

Damn that had to piss Vince off.


----------



## Marrakesh

IDONTSHIV said:


> To be fair, it deserve it. We got Bryan attacking HHH from behind and HHH bumping his ass off as the crowd was going berserk. This year we got the two main eventers pulling on the title belt and being poorly received by the crowd. The booking of that belt tug of war is just so damn questionable.


Brock shit his pants when he looked at The Big Dog face to face. He was supposed to F-5 him but he lost his bottle. 

Brock better hope Reigns doesn't shoot on him this Sunday.


----------



## DoubtGin

2 506 000 viewers for Smackdown. Down from last week's 2 595 000


----------



## ImGoingOver

Post-Mania viewership boost tonight, followed by very poor numbers every week afterwards. Rollins won't draw as champ.

They changed their plans from a guy who can't draw (Reigns) to another guy who can't draw. At least they prevented a riot at the end of WM though.


----------



## D.M.N.

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-3-30-2015.html

Hour 1 - 5.227m
* last year - 5.313m
Hour 2 - 5.597m
* last year - 5.094m
* highest hour of WWE programming since July 2012
Hour 3 - 5.267m
* last year - 5.032m

Highest since Raw 1000!    And higher than last year when the streak ended! *WHAT ON EARTH?* Where did that come from?


----------



## validreasoning

no ncaa basketball championship game head to head this year though compared to the previous couple of post manias raws.

still though to average nearly 5.4 million for 3 hours+ on cable is a great feat these days


----------



## krai999

D.M.N. said:


> http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-25-monday-cable-originals-3-30-2015.html
> 
> Hour 1 - 5.227m
> * last year - 5.313m
> Hour 2 - 5.597m
> * last year - 5.094m
> * highest hour of WWE programming since July 2012
> Hour 3 - 5.267m
> * last year - 5.032m
> 
> Highest since Raw 1000!    And higher than last year when the streak ended! *WHAT ON EARTH?* Where did that come from?


people wanted to see brock wrestle. Brock= ratings


----------



## Swissblade

:rollins
:brock


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This is the chart. Great uptick. Show was well received and the first two hours of RAW were damn good. Alas, the show will crater next week against the NCAA finals. Still, enjoy this week for what it is.


----------



## Fissiks

ROLLINSDRAWSLOL

Oh but Brock's suspension as well as that main-event probably killed any chance those new viewers staying.


----------



## A-C-P

:brock4 on TV = Best For Business


----------



## Chrome

Ratings gonna go down next week when







isn't on and they have to compete with the NCAA championship game. Good rating nonetheless though.


----------



## NEP4XSBC

As expected there was a post Mania boost. Was higher than expected due to no NCAA and due to the fact that they gave Brock more than 1 segment and teased him challenging for the world title. 

I think it's safe to say that, despite all of the WWE's mistakes and poor booking, they've done a nice job of making Brock feel like a special attraction again and may have revitalized his drawing power.

Ratings will steadily decline from here on out though, because Brock won't be appearing for a while.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Brock's Rampage must have drawn big. Well, maybe his suspension will be shortened. Problem is, his contract doesnt provide for him to appear that often. *The Rollins=Ratings Era* has begun :mark:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

3.68 rating per Keller.

:rollins :brock


----------



## Wonderllama

Hmmm. The RAW after Edge cashed in his first MITB did pretty high. Now this after Seth Rollins cashes in...

He really IS the new Edge!


----------



## MaybeLock

SETH DRAWINS :bryan2

:rollins


----------



## Mifune Jackson

ShowStopper said:


> 3.68 rating per Keller.
> 
> :rollins :brock


Bodes well for that being our SummerSlam main event.


----------



## M_D_Q_

If the rating is 3,68... 0,01 down compared to last year post WM show.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Holy shit at those numbers, wow. Lesnar drawing massively, MASSIVELY. I can't even explain it. Raw after the streak ending and Bryan's title win last year didn't do this well (it was fairly close but not this much), this year had a Brock Lesnar match tease and Rollins winning the title, which doesn't quite measure up to last year (although a Lesnar match on TV is huge), but yet beat it out. And this was after many many weeks of struggling to even get 4 million viewers. 

I wonder just how much the opener and then the beginning of the 2nd hour did? Especially the latter because that hour had an average 5.6 million! Hell, that was even higher than the first hour of the Raw 1000 episode. Even though the 3 hour thing and 8PM start was new at that time, that's still damn impressive. I'd imagine the teased Lesnar/Rollins match drew over 6 million. Even then, it's impressive they managed to maintain over 5 million for the majority of the show. The second hour did also have most of Cena/Ambrose if I'm not mistaken and outside of that the only thing I remember is Sandow vs. Cody, which came right after the Brock segment and no doubt lost a bunch of viewers, but then maybe most of them came back for Cena/Ambrose.

Then the third hour... again, can't really recall what happened in it outside of the main event. The only thing I could think of is maybe people thought Brock might still appear to create more carnage and destroy The Authority at the end of the show? Otherwise it's gotta just be that Rollins as champ draws.

Well, will be interesting to see the drop next week. Will they maintain some of these viewers and stay at least in the low-mid 4 million range, or will they drop back down to under 4 million? Probably the latter since it's now clear Brock won't be coming back.


----------



## NEP4XSBC

Mifune Jackson said:


> Bodes well for that being our SummerSlam main event.


Brock Lesnar was the draw. It was a Brock Lesnar show, and anyone with a brain knows this. That second hour was kicked off by Lesnar being a wrecking ball and pulling off Austin type anti-authority antics that drew well during the AE. 

I think Brock can draw well against just about anybody at this point. They've rejuvenated his appeal and drawing power. So yes, this main event may be a possibility. But is it the biggest match they could do at SummerSlam? Probably not.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Mifune Jackson said:


> Bodes well for that being our SummerSlam main event.


Can't wait. Going to be an awesome match.


----------



## NEP4XSBC

M_D_Q_ said:


> If the rating is 3,68... 0,01 down compared to last year post WM show.


Is this true? Anyone have a link?

If so, then that makes the average viewership number a bit less impressive.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It's the viewers that matter nowadays, not so much the actual rating. Besides, 3.68 and 3.69 is virtutally the same thing.


----------



## TLGOAT

People attributing Raw's ratings to Seth Rollins :no: He's absolute trash. Brock's the draw. Brock's a beast!!

Seth marks is fucken retards, man.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I've always taken viewership over the ratings, although there's value in looking at the latter if there's a massive difference or if viewership is almost exactly the same. In this case, this year's show definitely performed better than last year's, and last year's did better than both 2013 and 2012. It's going in the right direction at least.


----------



## Marrakesh

Wow. Big numbers. 

The first hour was exceptional though and with the Brock/Rollins match tease and then the fantastic rampage and suspension angle i suppose it's not surprising they hooked the viewers. 

It's unfortunate the last two hours were flat because nothing could top Brock but they kept a ton of viewers regardless.


----------



## Starbuck

Brock Lesnar is white hot right now. WWE have handled him, his contract situation and now his new face booking to perfection. The truth is, this Wrestlemania got a TON of mainstream media coverage with Lesnar, Rollins cash in and especially Rock/Rousey all over the place. It was even on ESPN and drew a lot of headlines. Any lapsed fan who saw that likely tuned in and stuck around for Bork wrecking shit but it's a shame that he won't be around next week and WWE made that very clear. With it looking like Rollins/Orton is set to be the 'big' post Mania program, I can't see things staying like this for obvious reasons. 

I do find it pretty hilarious though. The sheer number of THE SKY IS FALLING WORST MANIA EVER posts in here and on the internet in general and WWE goes and breaks attendance records, gets legit mainstream media for what appears to be a casually accepted great Wrestlemania and then pulls over 5 million viewers for 3 hours of Raw. 

:vince$ :vince$ :vince$ :vince$


----------



## M_D_Q_

NEP4XSBC said:


> Is this true? Anyone have a link?
> 
> If so, then that makes the average viewership number a bit less impressive.


About the rating this year:
Wade Keller ‏@thewadekeller 20 minHá 20 minutos
3.68 Raw rating!

About the rating last year
http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2014-ratings/


----------



## NEP4XSBC

ShowStopper said:


> It's the viewers that matter nowadays, not so much the actual rating. Besides, 3.68 and 3.69 is virtutally the same thing.


No, it's really not. Like it or not TV ratings are far more important than viewership. The main reason is that TV ratings are what determine advertising prices. Higher rating = higher advertising prices. And advertising is obviously a large part of how networks make money.

Additionally, the viewership numbers also need to be considered in context. No NCAA this year as opposed to last year. That's why the viewership is higher but rating is lower.


----------



## NEP4XSBC

#BadNewsSanta said:


> I've always taken viewership over the ratings, although there's value in looking at the latter if there's a massive difference or if viewership is almost exactly the same. In this case, this year's show definitely performed better than last year's, and last year's did better than both 2013 and 2012. It's going in the right direction at least.


Well, _you_ can take viewership over ratings all you want, but the networks care about ratings above all else. It's what determines ad prices.


----------



## MaybeLock

#BadNewsSanta said:


> I've always taken viewership over the ratings, although there's value in looking at the latter if there's a massive difference or if viewership is almost exactly the same. In this case, this year's show definitely performed better than last year's, and last year's did better than both 2013 and 2012. It's going in the right direction at least.


Vanilla midgets draw. :drose


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NEP4XSBC said:


> No, it's really not. Like it or not TV ratings are far more important than viewership. The main reason is that TV ratings are what determine advertising prices. Higher rating = higher advertising prices. And advertising is obviously a large part of how networks make money.
> 
> Additionally, the viewership numbers also need to be considered in context. No NCAA this year as opposed to last year. That's why the viewership is higher but rating is lower.


It really is, though. Viewership measures the actual amount of people who watched. If sponsors want to know how many people are actually watching the shows that they are considering running a commercial during, that is the number they would want to know.


----------



## NEP4XSBC

TLGOAT said:


> People attributing Raw's ratings to Seth Rollins :no: He's absolute trash. Brock's the draw. Brock's a beast!!
> 
> Seth marks is fucken retards, man.


This is what Reigns marks used to do. Excuse the poor numbers and try to attribute the good numbers to their guy.

It's very transparent.

This was a Brock show, and if anyone gets credit it's him.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Daniel Bryan is the reason for this HUGE rating!

*I think this shows that last year's post WM 30 RAW rating was because of Brock ending the streak -- it had very little to do with Bryan's championship win.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NEP4XSBC said:


> This is what Reigns marks used to do. Excuse the poor numbers and try to attribute the good numbers to their guy.
> 
> It's very transparent.
> 
> This was a Brock show, and if anyone gets credit it's him.


Thank you for ruling on who gets credit and who doesn't. Shut the thread down now, guys. It's all been cleared up for us by some newbie.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Let's give Rollins some credit. The cash in probably had a lot to do with the high rating.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Boy Wonder said:


> Daniel Bryan is the reason for this HUGE rating!
> 
> *I think this shows that last year's post WM 30 RAW rating was because of Brock ending the streak -- it had very little to do with Bryan's championship win.*


Your obsession with Bryan is beyond troublesome.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

ShowStopper said:


> Your obsession with Bryan is beyond troublesome.


I'm obsessed with facts when it comes to Daniel Bryan. Remember last year when people were claiming he was the reason for the high rating? Two years in a row it's a huge RAW rating -- it's because of Brock Lesnar.


----------



## MaybeLock

The Boy Wonder said:


> Daniel Bryan is the reason for this HUGE rating!
> 
> *I think this shows that last year's post WM 30 RAW rating was because of Brock ending the streak -- it had very little to do with Bryan's championship win.*


It shows that smarks are the key demographic for good ratings :bryan :rollins

Get that audience losing samoan outta here! ut


----------



## NEP4XSBC

ShowStopper said:


> It really is, though. Viewership measures the actual amount of people who watched. If sponsors want to know how many people are actually watching the shows that they are considering running a commercial during, that is the number they would want to know.


That isn't the number they look at. You really should educate yourself. 

They look at the rating, not the actual viewership number. This is very well known. You can argue about whether or not one is a more accurate estimate than the other, but the fact is that they use the rating to determine advertising prices. 

And viewership doesn't measure the actual number people watched. The sample size is much smaller. I want to say about 20,000 or so. They select people at random and give them a Nielson box and then extrapolate based on that info using statistical methods.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

MaybeLock said:


> It shows that smarks are the key demographic for good ratings :bryan :rollins
> 
> Get that audience losing samoan outta here! ut


It shows Brock Lesnar is a huge draw.


----------



## NEP4XSBC

ShowStopper said:


> Thank you for ruling on who gets credit and who doesn't. Shut the thread down now, guys. It's all been cleared up for us by some newbie.


No, you're right. Lesnar shouldn't have these numbers attributed to him, even though he was the star of the show.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Well two years in a row the WWE shocked fans at WM going into those respective RAW shows

WM 30: Brock ends the streak
WM 31: Rollins cashes in

Shock booking works when you do it at the right time and don't overuse it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NEP4XSBC said:


> That isn't the number they look at. You really should educate yourself.
> 
> They look at the rating, not the actual viewership number. This is very well known. You can argue about whether or not one is a more accurate estimate than the other, but the fact is that they use the rating to determine advertising prices.
> 
> And viewership doesn't measure the actual number people watched. The sample size is much smaller. I want to say about 20,000 or so. They select people at random and give them a Nielson box and then extrapolate based on that info using statistical methods.


Yeah, I'm sure they disregard the actual number of viewers these shows have when trying to determine whether or not they want to run ads during a particular show. Especially when a 3.68 isn't what a 3.68 (or any rating number) isn't the same as it was back in the 90s. Viewership matters.


----------



## BeastIncarnate

*Seth Rollins as the WWE World Hvt. Champ does highest Wrestlemania fallout ratings in years*

Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with the fallout from WrestleMania 31, drew 5.364 million viewers, up from last week's 4.188 million viewers.

For this week's show, the first hour drew* 5.227 million viewers*, the second hour drew *5.597 million viewers* and the final hour drew *5.267 million viewers.*


----------



## Wynter

It was a great Mania, raw deserved the viewership and ratings it received. 

It was a collective effort. Seth having that amazing cash in. Brock being red fucking hot. Mania matches delivering. Excitement being put back into the product and the mainstream attention. 

I'd be shocked if Raw didn't draw this well. Majority of us were on such a high after Sunday and we had places like ESPN giving exposure and hyping it up. 

Well deserved even if the last hour was uninspired. Talents and creative delivered on Sunday and people were excited to see what happened next. 

The first two hours were damn good with an amazing Brock segment to boot. 

Why does everything have to be a mark war lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NEP4XSBC said:


> No, you're right. Lesnar shouldn't have these numbers attributed to him, even though he was the star of the show.


No one said he shouldn't get most of the credit. But to imply he gets it all and and no one else gets any is ridiculous. But not surprising coming from a re-joiner.


----------



## Godway

*Re: Seth Rollins as the WWE World Hvt. Champ does highest Wrestlemania fallout ratings in years*

Hope they enjoy it while they can, because the dead crowds and lack of Brock Lesnar from here on out is going to cause a pitfall.


----------



## JeffreyHardy

*Re: Seth Rollins as the WWE World Hvt. Champ does highest Wrestlemania fallout ratings in years*

RAW after mania does higher ratings that RAW before? Shocker.


----------



## JeffreyHardy

*Re: Seth Rollins as the WWE World Hvt. Champ does highest Wrestlemania fallout ratings in years*



Godway said:


> Hope they enjoy it while they can, because the dead crowds and lack of Brock Lesnar from here on out is going to cause a pitfall.


The ratings will pick up because the WWE champ is on RAW every week. That being said it wont be because of Rollins but in spite of him. Rollins is basically Chris Jericho in 2001 after the UT victory.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Seth Rollins as the WWE World Hvt. Champ does highest Wrestlemania fallout ratings in years*

The Ratings Thread is your friend. (Y)

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/wwe-raw-smackdown/1234473-all-tv-ratings-buys-draw-talk-here.html


----------



## DemBoy

*Re: Seth Rollins as the WWE World Hvt. Champ does highest Wrestlemania fallout ratings in years*

More casuals watch the Raw after Mania because of the hype, so that explains the bigger ratings. 

Anyways, next week when we see a drop in ratings, Rollins haters would come out and say that he doesn't draw.


----------



## Cliffy

eh, a lot of people may have tuned in thinking they were getting reigns as champ


next weeks rating is more important


----------



## MaybeLock

The Boy Wonder said:


> It shows Brock Lesnar is a huge draw.


Night of Champions 2014 buyrate ----> 48,000 buys (ME: Lesnar/Cena)
HiaC 2014 buyrate ----> 83,000 buys (ME: Ambrose/Rollins)

Thank god we have smarks to dictate the right way unk2


----------



## KKF fan

ShowStopper said:


> No one said he shouldn't get most of the credit. But to imply he gets it all and and no one else gets any is ridiculous. But not surprising coming from a re-joiner.


You have no proof of him/her being a re-joiner. Stop making accusations.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KKF fan said:


> You have no proof of him/her being a re-joiner. Stop making accusations.


Yes sir!


----------



## ChrisPinwah!

*Re: Seth Rollins as the WWE World Hvt. Champ does highest Wrestlemania fallout ratings in years*



JeffreyHardy said:


> RAW after mania does higher ratings that RAW before? Shocker.


The shocker here is your intelligence and consequent capacity of interpretation. "(...)highest Wrestlemania fallout ratings in years"- higher ratings from the RAW after 'Mania than other years' RAW's after 'Mania.

People like you increase my self-esteem. Thanks.


----------



## MaybeLock

KKF fan said:


> You have no proof of him/her being a re-joiner. Stop making accusations.


DAT alt account out of NOWHERE :YES


----------



## 2Pieced

The Boy Wonder said:


> I'm obsessed with facts when it comes to Daniel Bryan. Remember last year when people were claiming he was the reason for the high rating? Two years in a row it's a huge RAW rating -- it's because of Brock Lesnar.


Bryan living rent free in your head mate.

Sad.


----------



## KKF fan

MaybeLock said:


> Night of Champions 2014 buyrate ----> 48,000 buys (ME: Lesnar/Cena)
> HiaC 2014 buyrate ----> 83,000 buys (ME: Ambrose/Rollins)
> 
> Thank god we have smarks to dictate the right way unk2


That proves that Ambrose draws, not Rollins. Ambrose has charisma, Rollins doesn't.


----------



## Londrick

MaybeLock said:


> Vanilla midgets draw. :drose


Bryan last year, Seth this year, Hideo next year.

What a great time for being a fan of talented wrestlers that draw


----------



## JeffreyHardy

*Re: Seth Rollins as the WWE World Hvt. Champ does highest Wrestlemania fallout ratings in years*



ChrisPinwah! said:


> The shocker here is your intelligence and consequent capacity of interpretation. "(...)highest Wrestlemania fallout ratings in years"- higher ratings from the RAW after 'Mania than other years' RAW's after 'Mania.
> 
> People like you increase my self-esteem. Thanks.


Dude your title doesnt match your actual topic. You say this is the highest WM fallout 'in years", which is extremely vague, and yet the first sentence you have is on comparison with the RAW before. That is why the posters above and I are mocking you.


----------



## JeffreyHardy

KKF fan said:


> That proves that Ambrose draws, not Rollins. Ambrose has charisma, Rollins doesn't.


Ambrose also sold the most merch in December.


----------



## MaybeLock

Londrick said:


> Bryan last year, Seth this year, Hideo next year.
> 
> What a great time for being a fan of talented wrestlers that draw


Bryan vs Rollins vs Hideo at WM 32 :done

That's how you break the attendance record :vince


----------



## NEP4XSBC

MaybeLock said:


> Night of Champions 2014 buyrate ----> 48,000 buys (ME: Lesnar/Cena)
> HiaC 2014 buyrate ----> 83,000 buys (ME: Ambrose/Rollins)
> 
> Thank god we have smarks to dictate the right way unk2


To be fair, Ambrose has shown much more drawing potential than Rollins. Those buys could very well be mostly due to Ambrose's appeal. Plus, HIAC usually has higher buys anyways.

We've had numerous shows centered around Rollins and they've done horrendous numbers. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that he is a draw.

They've built Lesnar up to feel like a special attraction again. Now everyone knows he re-signed as well. He drew very good numbers in his first 2 PPVs after his return when he felt like a big deal, and he has started to feel that way again.


----------



## ChrisPinwah!

*Re: Seth Rollins as the WWE World Hvt. Champ does highest Wrestlemania fallout ratings in years*



JeffreyHardy said:


> Dude your title doesnt match your actual topic. You say this is the highest WM fallout 'in years", which is extremely vague, and yet the first sentence you have is on comparison with the RAW before. That is why the posters above and I are mocking you.


Uh? I wasn't the one who started the thread. I just commented on your reply. That was the only thing I posted. Once again, you just showed your lightweight intelligence. 


...But people like you don't only make me happy: you also mak me sad. Am I fulfilling my potential? Because I'm clearly more intelligent than many...


----------



## The Boy Wonder

2Pieced said:


> Bryan living rent free in your head mate.
> 
> Sad.


Just as free as Reigns is living in the heads of smarks.


----------



## RatedR10

dat hour 2 number with the Brock/Rollins lead in :dead

Fucking love it. :mark: When Brock vs. Seth happens, it's going to be MONEY.


----------



## NEP4XSBC

ShowStopper said:


> Yeah, I'm sure they disregard the actual number of viewers these shows have when trying to determine whether or not they want to run ads during a particular show. Especially when a 3.68 isn't what a 3.68 (or any rating number) isn't the same as it was back in the 90s. Viewership matters.


Again, you're stuck on this "actual number of viewers" nonsense. What's reported as the average viewership is an estimate based on a sample. They don't track the viewing habits of every single person in the nation. Only those with Nielson boxes. So the viewership is an estimate just as the rating is an estimate. They both attempt to measure the audience size.

Nevertheless, you've been told numerous times that ad rates are determined based on ratings, not the viewership numbers. This is a fact.


----------



## 2Pieced

The Boy Wonder said:


> Just as free as Reigns is living in the heads of smarks.


Nah not really.


----------



## MaybeLock

NEP4XSBC said:


> To be fair, Ambrose has shown much more drawing potential than Rollins. Those buys could very well be mostly due to Ambrose's appeal. Plus, HIAC usually has higher buys anyways.
> 
> We've had numerous shows centered around Rollins and they've done horrendous numbers. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that he is a draw.
> 
> They've built Lesnar up to feel like a special attraction again. Now everyone knows he re-signed as well. He drew very good numbers in his first 2 PPVs after his return when he felt like a big deal, and he has started to feel that way again.


I do agree that Ambrose has a lot of potential to be huge, but tbh almost every show centered around Rollins was also centered around Ambrose. They were together in the Shield and then they had a long ass feud.

I still have my doubts about Lesnar. He was HUGE the first 2 PPVs. Then his drawing power started to slowly go away, but he seems to have recovered. He ain't helping the weekly product when he's at home anyway.


----------



## Londrick

MaybeLock said:


> Bryan vs Rollins vs Hideo at WM 32 :done
> 
> That's how you break the attendance record :vince


Agree. Fuck the Shield triple threat do this one instead.



RatedR10 said:


> dat hour 2 number with the Brock/Rollins lead in :dead
> 
> Fucking love it. :mark: When Brock vs. Seth happens, it's going to be MONEY.


Don't know if they can stretch out the excitement long enough but if they can Rollins vs Brock at Summerslam this year would be huge.


----------



## The.Great.One




----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NEP4XSBC said:


> Again, you're stuck on this "actual number of viewers" nonsense. What's reported as the average viewership is an estimate based on a sample. They don't track the viewing habits of every single person in the nation. Only those with Nielson boxes. So the viewership is an estimate just as the rating is an estimate. They both attempt to measure the audience size.
> 
> Nevertheless, you've been told numerous times that ad rates are determined based on ratings, not the viewership numbers. This is a fact.


Obviously, you need a Nielsen's box to be accounted for when it comes to ratings and viewership. This is what sponsors use. Yes, it is a sample. But it is the only thing sponsors and WWE themselves has to measure how their shows are doing.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Good thing that the fans were trying to get themselves over, because for four straight years, they've proved that they're the biggest draws in the WWE. Shame that :vince doesn't reward them enough.


----------



## NEP4XSBC

KKF fan said:


> That proves that Ambrose draws, not Rollins. Ambrose has charisma, Rollins doesn't.


This right here is true.

The last ratings breakdown we had was back in October. Ambrose had 3 segments during that RAW and all gained viewers. Rollins lost viewers with Cena (a well established draw) in the same match. That match gained viewers only after Ambrose interfered.

Plus, his return after the movie shoot did good numbers compared to prior weeks.


----------



## Londrick

The.Great.One said:


>


People marking for this corny ass shit. :lmao


----------



## Rodzilla nWo4lyfe

MaybeLock said:


> Night of Champions 2014 buyrate ----> 48,000 buys (ME: Lesnar/Cena)
> HiaC 2014 buyrate ----> 83,000 buys (ME: Ambrose/Rollins)
> 
> Thank god we have smarks to dictate the right way unk2


People knew Cena was going over at NOC. Brock is more over with the fans now than he was then.

Last night was both Rollins and Brock drawing. Those two are always great together. Brock did big numbers in the opening segment but not as much as he did in the 2nd hour with Rollins. Seth did big numbers in the main event but not as much as he did in the 2nd hour with Brock.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MaybeLock said:


> I do agree that Ambrose has a lot of potential to be huge, but tbh almost every show centered around Rollins was also centered around Ambrose. They were together in the Shield and then they had a long ass feud.
> 
> I still have my doubts about Lesnar. He was HUGE the first 2 PPVs. Then his drawing power started to slowly go away, but he seems to have recovered. He ain't helping the weekly product when he's at home anyway.


Not to mention, Ambrose is a face and Rollins as a heel. And before Rollins successfully cashed in, he was being jobbed on Smackdown in tag matches for no good reason. Not exactly the best sample to judge his drawing ability on, especially since he's a heel. And fans clearly want to cheer him, btw. Just look at the responses he got at WM and Raw last night. When he turns face, and expands his moveset even more, he will be very popular.


----------



## NEP4XSBC

ShowStopper said:


> Obviously, you need a Nielsen's box to be accounted for when it comes to ratings and viewership. This is what sponsors use. Yes, it is a sample. But it is the only thing sponsors and WWE themselves has to measure how their shows are doing.


Right, and the number they use is the rating.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

So will next week stay above 5 million you guys think? I don't know what the 2nd show after Wrestlemania would do.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NEP4XSBC said:


> Right, and the number they use is the rating.


And viewership.


----------



## Starbuck

This thread finally has A RATINGS WAR going on.

:vince2


----------



## NEP4XSBC

MaybeLock said:


> I do agree that Ambrose has a lot of potential to be huge, but tbh almost every show centered around Rollins was also centered around Ambrose. They were together in the Shield and then they had a long ass feud.
> 
> I still have my doubts about Lesnar. He was HUGE the first 2 PPVs. Then his drawing power started to slowly go away, but he seems to have recovered. He ain't helping the weekly product when he's at home anyway.


No, I'm referring to the shows after his feud with Ambrose concluded. Hell, even when he was feuding with Ambrose, he wasn't drawing as well. As I mentioned, the last breakdown we had showed Cena/Rollins in the main event losing viewers. It wasn't until Ambrose interfered that the numbers improved.


----------



## NastyYaffa

The Boy Wonder said:


> Daniel Bryan is the reason for this HUGE rating!
> 
> *I think this shows that last year's post WM 30 RAW rating was because of Brock ending the streak -- it had very little to do with Bryan's championship win.*


Another Bryan post!

He sure always draws you in. :bryan


----------



## The.Great.One

Londrick said:


> People marking for this corny ass shit. :lmao


_Oompa Loompa doom-pa-dee-ding
He still looks like a troll from lord of the rings_

Man don't be salty, it's just a bit of fun :flip


----------



## MaybeLock

The.Great.One said:


>


Raw ratings after Rock wins in the ME of Wrestlemania 28: 3.42 overall

Hour 1: 4.95 million
Hour 2: 5.07 million 

Raw ratings after Bryan wins in the ME of Wrestlemania 30: 3.7 overall

Hour 1: 5.31 million viewers
Hour 2: 5.09 million viewers
Hour 3: 5.03 million viewers










:bryan


----------



## The.Great.One

MaybeLock said:


> Raw ratings after Rock wins in the ME of Wrestlemania 28: 3.42 overall
> 
> Hour 1: 4.95 million
> Hour 2: 5.07 million
> 
> Raw ratings after Bryan wins in the ME of Wrestlemania 30: 3.7 overall
> 
> Hour 1: 5.31 million viewers
> Hour 2: 5.09 million viewers
> Hour 3: 5.03 million viewers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :bryan


Rock didn't win the WWE title at WM28, it's a big difference whether you wanna admit it or not


----------



## JY57

great for one night before inevitable drop off next week against Championship game.

I know some people say its all Brock & Rollins. But really the two blockbuster draws Rhonda & Dwayne deserve a lot of credit (I am sure tons of casuals were interested what would happen next with them & Hunter/Stephanie)


----------



## Louaja89

TLGOAT said:


> People attributing Raw's ratings to Seth Rollins :no: He's absolute trash. Brock's the draw. Brock's a beast!!
> 
> Seth marks is fucken retards, man.


Did he fuck your girlfriend too ?


----------



## NEP4XSBC

ShowStopper said:


> And viewership.





> *The Nielsen ratings gauge the number of people who are watching television programs and the characteristics of those audiences, which in turn is used by both advertisers and television programmers. Nielsen ratings are used as currency in the market of advertiser-paid television.* When advertisers want to reach certain audiences, they place ads on television shows whose viewers display the characteristics of their target market. The larger the audience of a particular show, the more money the station can charge the advertisers – advertising rates are based on per thousand viewers. Hence, the networks have a serious interest in increasing their Nielsen share to generate a greater revenue stream from advertising.


http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~jsimonof/classes/1305/projdoc/nielsen.doc

Sorry, but you're wrong.


----------



## MaybeLock

The.Great.One said:


> Rock didn't win the WWE title at WM28, it's a big difference whether you wanna admit it or not


It was supposed to be one of the biggest matches ever. Also it was a only 2 hours show, instead of 3.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NEP4XSBC said:


> http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~jsimonof/classes/1305/projdoc/nielsen.doc
> 
> Sorry, but you're wrong.


Yes. I'm sure sponsors don't bother to look at the actual viewership number when it is right there for them and something that is actually measured. It's just there for the hell of it, I'm sure.


----------



## The.Great.One

MaybeLock said:


> It was supposed to be one of the biggest matches ever. Also it was a only 2 hours show, instead of 3.


So?


----------



## NEP4XSBC

ShowStopper said:


> Yes. I'm sure sponsors don't bother to look at the actual viewership number when it is right there for them and something that is actually measured. It's just there for the hell of it, I'm sure.


Who cares what they look at? I'm just telling you that ratings are what matter to the bottom line. Ratings are what determine ad rates. Ad revenue is a big part of how networks make money.

It's really very simple.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NEP4XSBC said:


> Who cares what they look at? I'm just telling you that ratings are what matter to the bottom line. Ratings are what determine ad rates. Ad revenue is a big part of how networks make money.
> 
> It's really very simple.


Who cares what they look at? Pretty sure they do, which is what I've been saying. Sponsors absolutely care just how many people (with Nielsen's boxes) are going to see their ad. Viewership measures that number.


----------



## BeastIncarnate

The Rollins hater/Ambrose troll with multiple alt. accounts @NEP4XSBC is going crazy in here. :lol 

How many times have you been banned? 5? 10? Do you do anything other than create alt. accounts on this forum? :bigdave


----------



## Chrome

NastyYaffa said:


> Another Bryan post!
> 
> He sure always draws you in. :bryan


Yeah why is Boy Wonder still here when he's doing the exact same shit that got him banned in the first place? :aries2


----------



## MaybeLock

Chrome said:


> Yeah why is Boy Wonder still here when he's doing the exact same shit that got him banned in the first place? :aries2


The Boy Wonder's stay in WF won't be over until he convinces someone to join his crusade against Daniel Bryan and smarks.


----------



## Chrome

MaybeLock said:


> The Boy Wonder's stay in WF won't be over until he convinces someone to join his crusade against Daniel Bryan and smarks.


Eh, there's plenty of people who do nothing but bitch about Bryan marks and/or smarks, so he's got plenty of options.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

Wait, so this year's show had a lower rating in spite of Rousey/Rock bringing in casuals, Brock and the show in general getting promotion on ESPN, Roman (pretty boy brings in the casuals) Reigns in the main event and having the added benefit of not having to run against the NCAA Tournament National Championship game?

They are going to get absolutely slaughtered next week.


----------



## NEP4XSBC

ShowStopper said:


> Who cares what they look at? Pretty sure they do, which is what I've been saying. Sponsors absolutely care just how many people (with Nielsen's boxes) are going to see their ad. Viewership measures that number.


Are you being purposely obtuse or are you just naturally slow? I showed you a link outlining what they care about. Nielson ratings are what determine ad rates. Please provide some evidence to support your claim like I have. HINT: you won't, because no such evidence exists.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BeastIncarnate said:


> The Rollins hater/Ambrose troll with multiple alt. accounts @NEP4XSBC is going crazy in here. :lol
> 
> How many times have you been banned? 5? 10? Do you do anything other than create alt. accounts on this forum? :bigdave


Not even worth the time.


----------



## MaybeLock

Chrome said:


> Eh, there's plenty of people who do nothing but bitch about Bryan marks and/or smarks, so he's got plenty of options.


Well, there are indeed many accounts that do that, but how many people are behind those accounts? :fuckedup


----------



## Chrome

MaybeLock said:


> Well, there are indeed many accounts that do that, but how many people are behind those accounts? :fuckedup


You might be on to something there. :wee-bey


----------



## brxd

Imagine what the rating would have been if they had booked a strong main-event instead of the meaningless six-man tag including Big Show & Kane we saw. Something like Rollins vs. Reigns or even Ryback would have done much bigger numbers.


----------



## Londrick

People haven't realized that The Boy Wonder is a huge Bryan fan and just likes being sarcastic and trolling with his posts?


----------



## Londrick

brxd said:


> Imagine what the rating would have been if they had booked a strong main-event instead of the meaningless six-man tag including Big Show & Kane we saw. Something like Rollins vs. Reigns or even Ryback would have done much bigger numbers.


Bryan the IC champ vs Seth Rollins the WWE champ would've done a huge number.


----------



## DanielBlitzkrieg

WrestleMania 31 was progress compared to last year's WrestleMania, but they still don't deserve nearly that many viewers. Oh well - at least wrestling is still popular, statistically. But it still won't matter, culturally, until they really change things, which they didn't do at WM31. The quality of the show and the intelligence of the fans is gloriously lifted whenever Lesnar is around, which is all that matters.


----------



## brxd

Londrick said:


> Bryan the IC champ vs Seth Rollins the WWE champ would've done a huge number.


Yes, and Rollins vs. Cena would have been bigger.


----------



## Londrick

Imagine the numbers they'll get with a face Seth Rollins. He's getting these types of numbers and mainstream media attention as a heel, he'll only do better as a face.



brxd said:


> Yes, and Rollins vs. Cena would have been bigger.


Triple threat between the three. :banderas

Could be the main event for night of champions this year.


----------



## chronoxiong

Brock Lesnar almost wrestling a RAW match = ratings!!!! :brock


----------



## Londrick

Starbuck said:


> This thread finally has A RATINGS WAR going on.
> 
> :vince2


Seth is the new CM Punk











































except ratings go up when he's champion. :rollins


----------



## Starbuck

Londrick said:


> Seth is the new CM Punk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> except ratings go up when he's champion. :rollins


:trips5

Seth is the new CM Punk...except he actually main events Wrestlemanias. :rollins


----------



## Batz

> *RAW DOES ITS LARGEST AUDIENCE IN ALMOST THREE YEARS, GAINS OVER A MILLION VIEWERS FROM LAST WEEK*
> 
> The 3/30 post-Wrestlemania edition of Raw did a *massive 5,364,000* for last night’s raw, up over a million viewers from last week’s 4,188,000. Obviously that is a great number and the show deserved it, it was that good.
> 
> Raw opened with *5,227,000 viewers in hour one*, did *5,597,000 in hour two* and *5,267,000 in hour three*. It is the *largest number WWE has done since the first three hour Raw on July 23, 2012.*


http://www.pwinsider.com/article/92...ver-a-million-viewers-from-last-week.html?p=1


blow it up.


----------



## MaybeLock

Batz said:


> http://www.pwinsider.com/article/92...ver-a-million-viewers-from-last-week.html?p=1
> 
> 
> blow it up.


Now seriously. I think people here are forgetting about the man that actually deserves all the credit: 










The biggest drawing champion of all time brought the viewers back for his HoF induction and WM appearance.


----------



## WhyMe123

Brock fucking shut up = ratingz


----------



## Kabraxal

Decent post Mania bump. But that third hour drop is telling. They built from hour 1 to hour 2 as people were genuinely excited over the show... then it started going down yet again. The main event is a huge part, but I think a lot of people started clocking out when it was back to "normal". 

Never seen a show like that: "This is awesome. Holy shit! YESSSS! Marking out!...... wha... um, okay.... uh, why are you putting Cena over again? wait, that is our main event? Really? Fuck... back to this shit already? We didn't even get one week of greatness? Fuck you Vince *changes channel*".


----------



## Chrome

Kabraxal said:


> Decent post Mania bump. But that third hour drop is telling. They built from hour 1 to hour 2 as people were genuinely excited over the show... then it started going down yet again. The main event is a huge part, but I think a lot of people started clocking out when it was back to "normal".
> 
> Never seen a show like that: "This is awesome. Holy shit! YESSSS! Marking out!...... wha... um, okay.... uh, why are you putting Cena over again? wait, that is our main event? Really? Fuck... back to this shit already? We didn't even get one week of greatness? Fuck you Vince *changes channel*".


Almost felt like 2 different shows.


----------



## Undertakerowns

The funny thing is that they didn't plan shit for next week to try maintain the spike in viewers. Nothing to look forward to next Raw. So give and take WWE has about 1-1.5 million casuals. 

I see WWE is going to switch to a more TV-14 product heading to Wrestlemania to try to sell it out and get casuals back into the product. The blade job with Lesnar, the cursing, Lesnar killing people, Rounda's involvement with the product, and other MMA guys talking about coming to WWE are some of the signs I see. We have Lesnar to thank for all of this. WWE realized that if they are going to get the most money out of their investment, Lesnar can't bogged down by PG. Lesnar is the going be casual catcher and brings legitimacy in WWE.


----------



## #Mark

:jordan4

Vince has his biggest audience of the year and he books a six man tag with Big Show and Kane in the main event. The drop off is already going to be huge because Brock is off TV but that shitty main event will definitely contribute.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

People are forgetting the fact that Rock and Ronda Rousey (god I hate that lady) made it seem as though they started a program with HHH and Steph. Add Sting and Taker (WWE fans Google WWE News and what sites does that lead to?) was rumored. Then ADD Brock going insane and you have a recipe for success. Can't give the credit to one person (I give it to Bryan though just like last Year).


----------



## validreasoning

Undertakerowns said:


> I see WWE is going to switch to a more TV-14 product heading to Wrestlemania to try to sell it out and get casuals back into the product. The blade job with Lesnar, the cursing, Lesnar killing people, Rounda's involvement with the product, and other MMA guys talking about coming to WWE are some of the signs I see. We have Lesnar to thank for all of this. WWE realized that if they are going to get the most money out of their investment, Lesnar can't bogged down by PG. Lesnar is the going be casual catcher and brings legitimacy in WWE.


The problem with your theory is that nobody knew rousey was going to be at mania or lesnar was going to bleed..and it clearly wasn't a blade job when he cut at top of scalp.

Lesnar did nothing non PG in the lead into mania. Steph and brie and the brie vs nikki last august-september build was far more non PG than anything this mania season


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Boy Wonder said:


> Daniel Bryan is the reason for this HUGE rating!
> 
> *I think this shows that last year's post WM 30 RAW rating was because of Brock ending the streak -- it had very little to do with Bryan's championship win.*


Bryan wins a title at Mania and ratings spike. Once is an anomayly, two is a trend. Bryan to win the World title at 32? :mark: :mark: :mark:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Yeah, the 'feel good' quality that this show had for an hour and a half or so took a massive hit when Cena pinned Ambrose clean. That was the first negative feeling that the show produced and it was felt by the fans in attendance. You could just feel the feel of the show start to drain after he pinned Dean.

Then, Kane and Show were announced to be in the main event and that was the knockout blow. The first half of the show completely down the drain, sadly.


----------



## LordKain

Yeah we'll see how it is next week cause I get a feeling that it's not going to last.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

LordKain said:


> Yeah we'll see how it is next week cause I don't think it'll last.


Next week is against the ratings monster that is the NCAA Men's Basketball Championship. It is a colossus. I'll be watching that . It's nice to be on the West Coast because the game will be over with still over 2 hours of Raw to go.


----------



## LOL-ins

LordKain said:


> Yeah we'll see how it is next week cause I get a feeling that it's not going to last.


I honestly won't surprised if it dropped back to 3 million per hour again. Fans can only take Big Show/Kane/Authority shit for a while before they all leave again. Trust me the extra million fans or so they got will be gone next week because of that awful last hour.


----------



## Undertakerowns

validreasoning said:


> The problem with your theory is that nobody knew rousey was going to be at mania or lesnar was going to bleed..and it clearly wasn't a blade job when he cut at top of scalp.
> 
> Lesnar did nothing non PG in the lead into mania. Steph and brie and the brie vs nikki last august-september build was far more non PG than anything this mania season


Lesnar didn't doing anything non PG heading into Wrestlemania because he barely did anything but stand there. I am saying they are going a more TV-14 route going towards the next Mania in Dallas not this past one. Lesnar definitely bladed because there is a gif of the referee handing Reigns the razor to give to Brock.And shortly after you can see Brock place the blade in the corner of the ring next to the post. WWE had to know Ronda was going to be at Mania because Rock,HHH, and Ronda had to practice the segment-duh.


----------



## Joshi Judas

Viewership dropped off after Brock got suspended but over 5 million still stuck around, likely waiting for Taker/Sting.

The drop in viewership next week will be huge. Stupid of WWE to put a regular 6 man tag featuring Kane and Show in the main event in the biggest Raw of the year.


----------



## wonder goat

I think the bigger ratings is probably because of Rollins cashing in successfully the night before, and people wanting to see the fallout of it.


----------



## Cobalt

Raylan Givens said:


> Viewership dropped off after Brock got suspended but over 5 million still stuck around, likely waiting for Taker/Sting.
> 
> The drop in viewership next week will be huge. Stupid of WWE to put a regular 6 man tag featuring Kane and Show in the main event in the biggest Raw of the year.


That mainevent deserves nothing but criticism, what a horrible way to close the biggest Raw of the year.


----------



## Chrome

Cobalt said:


> That mainevent deserves nothing but criticism, what a horrible way to close the biggest Raw of the year.


Felt like one of those throwaway main events you see on Raw in June. Bad match.


----------



## Cobalt

Chrome said:


> Felt like one of those throwaway main events you see on Raw in June. Bad match.


Summed up perfectly.

That is exactly what it felt like and it was so anti-climatic, that is the last thing you expect on the post Mania Raw.


----------



## joeycalz

Two things:

1. In the corporate world, the actual rating matters. To everybody else, Viewership matters. Rating is determined by essentially what percentage of television viewers your pulling in.. in comparison to everybody watching TV during that particular night. You could have a lower viewership, but a higher rating and vice versa. At the end of the day, sometimes the rating number will lie and the viewership rating will lie. 

In this case: the rating number lied because it was evident that with the extra mainstream coverage due to Brock re-signing, Rock/Ronda, Rollins' cash-in, there was definitely more "mainstream" buzz/excitement surrounding this RAW than last year's, hence the "Viewership" number was bigger as opposed to the actual rating. I put mainstream in quotes because I know people will argue Bryan/Taker's streak were serious focal points of last year, and they're obviously not wrong.

2. Brock draws (duh), but, more importantly, the BRAND DRAWS. The Monday Night RAW following Wrestlemania is ALWAYS the highest-rated RAW as is the RAW after Summerslam -- the two RAWs after the two biggest shows of the year. Should that be a surprise to anybody? Those two shows are always the most well-constructed... top to bottom.

Ignoring the main event, this show had:
- Brock/Heyman going apesh*t.
- The Bryan/Ziggler match EVERYBODY wanted at Mania.
- Sheamus return and heel turn.
- Lucha Dragons debut (surprisingly well timed and well thought out)
- The Brock/Rollins title match tease and Brock ACTUALLY GOING APESH*T. It legitimately may have been the best RAW segment in YEARS.
- Following that was Miz/Sandow, which has been hot for months.
- Neville's debut, which caters to this forum.
- Cena/Ambrose -- one of the company's biggest full-time draws against the superstar who probably has the most drawing potential outside of Brock/Cena.

So, those first two hours paint a great picture. Construct a great show, and people will continue to tune in.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Most Watched Episodes of WWE Raw since 2010*
01 - 6.02 million - 23/07/2012 - Raw 1000
02 - 5.86 million - 21/02/2011
03 - 5.84 million - 28/03/2011
04 - 5.79 million - 07/03/2011
05 - 5.65 million - 14/03/2011
06 - 5.61 million - 04/01/2010
07 - 5.60 million - 28/02/2011
08 - 5.60 million - 04/04/2011
09 - 5.60 million - 15/03/2010
10 - 5.51 million - 22/02/2010
11 - 5.50 million - 29/03/2010
12 - 5.45 million - 11/04/2011
13 - 5.45 million - 11/01/2010
14 - 5.42 million - 23/05/2011
*15 - 5.36 million - 30/03/2015 - Night after WrestleMania 31*
16 - 5.34 million - 08/02/2010
17 - 5.32 million - 01/03/2010
18 - 5.29 million - 18/01/2010
19 - 5.28 million - 01/02/2010
20 - 5.28 million - 31/01/2011

So, excluding Raw 1000, it was Raw's most watched episode in almost four years.


----------



## julesocean

joeycalz said:


> Two things:
> 
> 1. In the corporate world, the actual rating matters. To everybody else, Viewership matters. Rating is determined by essentially what percentage of television viewers your pulling in.. in comparison to everybody watching TV during that particular night. You could have a lower viewership, but a higher rating and vice versa. At the end of the day, sometimes the rating number will lie and the viewership rating will lie.
> 
> In this case: the rating number lied because it was evident that with the extra mainstream coverage due to Brock re-signing, Rock/Ronda, Rollins' cash-in, there was definitely more "mainstream" buzz/excitement surrounding this RAW than last year's, hence the "Viewership" number was bigger as opposed to the actual rating. I put mainstream in quotes because I know people will argue Bryan/Taker's streak were serious focal points of last year, and they're obviously not wrong.


Not exactly, the rating is the percentage of all surveyed households tuned into that program. This means that even surveyed households with their TVs off count in the total amount.

Viewership share is all surveyed TVs currently on, tuned to that program.

Sometimes a different amount of people watch TV, even when it's the same time, and same day of week. Rating is useful to see how much of a die-hard following you have (You can compare it to viewership to see your loyal fans that don't normally watch TV that night, specifically come to the couch just to watch you. This is more useful towards smaller niche shows, IE: Impact Wrestling, where building a strong core base is your priority.

Viewership is definitely the numbers WWE execs look at, which is more indicative of mainstream trend. If past Raw's viewer share was larger than normal compared to the rating, this means a larger amount of active TV watchers chose to migrate from their usual program or station on that day. Often times for Raw, the viewership will go down heading towards the third hour, as the theme and main event are revealed, and some of the original audience from hour 1 switches channels. The rating will also fluctuate, but not as drastic, as the core fanbase will usually endure the whole show from beginning to end.


----------



## Undertakerowns

D.M.N. said:


> *Most Watched Episodes of WWE Raw since 2010*
> 01 - 6.02 million - 23/07/2012 - Raw 1000
> 02 - 5.86 million - 21/02/2011
> 03 - 5.84 million - 28/03/2011
> 04 - 5.79 million - 07/03/2011
> 05 - 5.65 million - 14/03/2011
> 06 - 5.61 million - 04/01/2010
> 07 - 5.60 million - 28/02/2011
> 08 - 5.60 million - 04/04/2011
> 09 - 5.60 million - 15/03/2010
> 10 - 5.51 million - 22/02/2010
> 11 - 5.50 million - 29/03/2010
> 12 - 5.45 million - 11/04/2011
> 13 - 5.45 million - 11/01/2010
> 14 - 5.42 million - 23/05/2011
> *15 - 5.36 million - 30/03/2015 - Night after WrestleMania 31*
> 16 - 5.34 million - 08/02/2010
> 17 - 5.32 million - 01/03/2010
> 18 - 5.29 million - 18/01/2010
> 19 - 5.28 million - 01/02/2010
> 20 - 5.28 million - 31/01/2011
> 
> So, excluding Raw 1000, it was Raw's most watched episode in almost four years.


What the fuck was happening in 2010? I remember 2010 Raw being quite shitty until the Nexus angle in the summer.


----------



## JY57

Undertakerowns said:


> What the fuck was happening in 2010? I remember 2010 Raw being quite shitty until the Nexus angle in the summer.


since most of that is during RWTM and only talking about RAW (since branding was still a thing):

HBK's last hurrah, return of Bret, Hollywood Dave Bautista vs John Cena, & Hunter vs Sheamus


----------



## D.M.N.

Press Release - http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...acts-largest-audience-since-july-2012/383107/



> *USA NETWORK’S WWE ‘MONDAY NIGHT RAW’ ATTRACTS LARGEST AUDIENCE IN NEARLY THREE YEARS*
> 
> *5.4 Million Total Viewers Tuned-In to See Their Favorite WWE Superstars Live,
> Following a Record-Breaking WrestleMania*
> 
> NEW YORK, NY – April 1, 2015 – Following *WRESTLEMANIA 31*, where Seth Rollins won his first WWE World Heavyweight Championship, this week’s *WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW* delivered 2.4 million adults 18-49, 2.4 million adults 25-54 and 5.4 million total viewers from 8-11 p.m. (live +same). This is the highest total viewership for *RAW* in nearly three years, since July 23, 2012, the night of the *RAW 1000* special.
> 
> Monday’s RAW was televised live from the SAP Center in San Jose, CA, and was highlighted by Brock Lesnar challenging Rollins, the new WWE World Heavyweight Champion, to a rematch; United States Champion John Cena defending his title against Dean Ambrose; and Intercontinental Champion Daniel Bryan defeating Dolph Ziggler.
> 
> Monday’s *RAW* was up vs. last week’s telecast by 27% in adults 18-49, 24% in adults 25-54 and 28% in total viewers 2+. USA was the #1 network Monday night in primetime in adults 18-34 as well as men 18-34 and 18-49 for all of television -- including the broadcast networks.
> 
> RAW was also the #2 most social show of the day with 400,000 tweets, reaching a unique audience of 3.6 million people and generating 27 million impressions.


----------



## Reaper

WM was a great success and the fans rewarded the WWE with coming back. Now it's up to the WWE to keep rewarding the fans with good story-telling ... (the potential is all there) in order to keep them. 

At this point with Cena legitimately out of the WWEWHC picture and the main title picture starting to look like it has at least 6 legitimate stars (Reigns, Lesnar, Rollins, Bryan and maybe even Ziggler and Ambrose) vying for it eventually, it would take a _miracle_ for WWE to fuck it up completely.

And yes, I admit. Reigns vs Lesnar did the trick that Bryan and Punk couldn't do. It was partly because of the amazing match Reigns and Brock put on as well as the fact that WM ended with an actual cliffhanger which they continued the next day. 

Brock vs Authority and Reigns and Bryan's combined quest to retain the WWE championship could legitimately be written into one of WWE's best programs in decades. I just hope they don't fuck it up. There's so much, so much potential here right now.


----------



## RLStern

ShowStopper said:


> 3.68 rating per Keller.
> 
> :rollins :brock


*
2nd Hour usually draws based on what happens in first hour(ie, Someone calls their friends and tells them to tune in for whatever happened in the first hour and they tune in during the second hour or someone comes home at 9pm),

Daniel Bryan was in the first hour, and Daniel Bryan is a bigger draw than Seth Rollins and Brock Lesnar.

I wouldn't attribute that rating to Brock Lesnar, though he is the biggest MMA draw in history, he isn't a huge draw in Sports Entertainment/WWE/Professional Wrestling. 

That rating is clearly from Seth Rollins who won the WWE World Heavyweight Championship(Seth Rollins is a bigger draw than Brock Lesnar in Sports Entertainment/Professional Wrestling) and Daniel Bryan(WWE's Biggest draw)*


----------



## Marrakesh

Reptar said:


> WM was a great success and the fans rewarded the WWE with coming back. Now it's up to the WWE to keep rewarding the fans with good story-telling ... (the potential is all there) in order to keep them.
> 
> At this point with Cena legitimately out of the WWEWHC picture and the main title picture starting to look like it has at least 6 legitimate stars (Reigns, Lesnar, Rollins, Bryan and maybe even Ziggler and Ambrose) vying for it eventually, it would take a _miracle_ for WWE to fuck it up completely.


Remove Ziggler and Reigns(For now) and replace with Ryback and Orton and I'm in agreement with you. 

Fan of Zigg but he's tailor made for a midcard scene were the belts matter and Reigns is in desperate need of reinventing himself away from the WWE title scene before they place him back into it. 

I actually think Ambrose/Reigns can become top stars by feuding with each other over the next few months culminating in a Summerslam match if it were to be booked well. 

Eg.They team up for the next month or two while they've got nothing going on and win the Tag titles for a few weeks until Reigns turns on him out of jealousy at the crowd reactions to set up a bigger story leading into the MITB ladder match and beyond to Summerslam. 

Think it could be the feud of the summer if they start planning it now. If they want to keep up this babyface Reigns schtick for the next few months then they better have an end goal in mind and a heel turn and feud with Ambrose makes the most sense to me. 

Anyways, rambling as it's a ratings thread :lol


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

things will be falling back down to earth within the next month


----------



## Marrakesh

RLStern said:


> *
> 2nd Hour usually draws based on what happens in first hour(ie, Someone calls their friends and tells them to tune in for whatever happened in the first hour and they tune in during the second hour or someone comes home at 9pm),
> 
> Daniel Bryan was in the first hour, and Daniel Bryan is a bigger draw than Seth Rollins and Brock Lesnar.
> 
> I wouldn't attribute that rating to Brock Lesnar, though he is the biggest MMA draw in history, he isn't a huge draw in Sports Entertainment/WWE/Professional Wrestling.
> 
> That rating is clearly from Seth Rollins who won the WWE World Heavyweight Championship(Seth Rollins is a bigger draw than Brock Lesnar in Sports Entertainment/Professional Wrestling) and Daniel Bryan(WWE's Biggest draw)*


:ha Man you are a fucking nutcase or a committed troll.


----------



## RLStern

Marrakesh said:


> :ha Man you are a fucking nutcase or a committed troll.


*So anyone who disgarees with you and post facts is either a "nutcase" or a "troll"

ut

Brock Lesnar has not drawn like that recently, obviously drawn by 3 factors, 

1, Post Wrestlemania

2, Seth Rollins as new WWE World Heavyweight Champion

3, Daniel Bryan(WWE's Biggest draw)

Brock Lesnar is the biggest draw in MMA/UFC, yet he isn't a huge draw in WWE/Sports Entertainment/Professional Wrestling, and that's a fact.

Deal with it.*


----------



## brxd

RLStern said:


> *
> 2nd Hour usually draws based on what happens in first hour(ie, Someone calls their friends and tells them to tune in for whatever happened in the first hour and they tune in during the second hour or someone comes home at 9pm),
> 
> Daniel Bryan was in the first hour, and Daniel Bryan is a bigger draw than Seth Rollins and Brock Lesnar.
> 
> I wouldn't attribute that rating to Brock Lesnar, though he is the biggest MMA draw in history, he isn't a huge draw in Sports Entertainment/WWE/Professional Wrestling.
> 
> That rating is clearly from Seth Rollins who won the WWE World Heavyweight Championship(Seth Rollins is a bigger draw than Brock Lesnar in Sports Entertainment/Professional Wrestling) and Daniel Bryan(WWE's Biggest draw)*


Dude, you are deluded. :lol :lol

Bryan had his match in segments 2 & 3 in the first hour. After that, it was obvious we weren't going to see him again. He had a nice match but to claim he is responsible for the rating is embarrassing.


----------



## Marrakesh

RLStern said:


> *So anyone who disgarees with you and post facts is either a "nutcase" or a "troll"
> 
> ut
> 
> Brock Lesnar has not drawn like that recently, obviously drawn by 3 factors,
> 
> 1, Post Wrestlemania
> 
> 2, Seth Rollins as new WWE World Heavyweight Champion
> 
> 3, Daniel Bryan(WWE's Biggest draw)
> 
> Brock Lesnar is the biggest draw in MMA/UFC, yet he isn't a huge draw in WWE/Sports Entertainment/Professional Wrestling, and that's a fact.
> 
> Deal with it.*


fpalm Daniel Bryan is not WWE's biggest draw. 

He draws well for them but he had no impact last night in adding viewers to the show. 

It was all about the WM angle with Lesnar and Rollins which teased the prospect of Brock actually wrestling on Raw. 

Actually i don't know why I'm saying this to you as I've just realized you are the ''Austin didn't draw guy''. :ha 

You are dead set on giving Bryan credit for drawing 5m+ viewers in an Intercontinental title match which we all seen twice in the past two weeks already. 

I don't know what to say to you. You're a special kind of delusional.


----------



## RLStern

brxd said:


> Dude, you are deluded.


kay

*Incorrect, it is you who is deluded, whenever someone appears in the first hour people tend to hear about it and tune it, by the time they tune in it could be later in the night where they tune in, whether they expected to see Bryan or missed him, he drew in the viewers, along with Rollins.*



Marrakesh said:


> Daniel Bryan is not WWE's biggest draw.


*:LOL Incorrect, Daniel Bryan is WWE's biggest draw, you have destroyed your credibility.

He draws well for them but he had no impact last night in adding viewers to the show. *



Marrakesh said:


> It was all about the WM angle with Lesnar and Rollins which teased the prospect of Brock actually wrestling on Raw.


*Incorrect, Daniel Bryan and Seth Rollins in first hour translated to the 2nd hour, typical rating fact is when you have a huge draw in the first hour not only will people stick around for the 2nd, they'll get more viewers.*



Marrakesh said:


> Actually i don't know why I'm saying this to you as I've just realized you are the ''Austin didn't draw guy''. :ha


*Austin was indeed not a draw, this was a proven fact and in which Austin marks(such as yourself) got extremely pissy with me for proving, even if it wasn't you commit the Genetic Fallacy, which is desperate.

Now take your desperation and delusions and get the steppin ut

You have been refuted. Brock Lesnar is not a huge draw in WWE(He is the biggest draw in MMA though), Seth Rollins and Daniel Bryan(WWE's biggest draw) drew the rating.*

*Deal with it.*


----------



## JY57

> - The USA Network issued the following today:
> 
> USA NETWORK’S WWE ‘MONDAY NIGHT RAW’ ATTRACTS LARGEST AUDIENCE IN NEARLY THREE YEARS
> 
> 5.4 Million Total Viewers Tuned-In to See Their Favorite WWE Superstars Live, Following a Record-Breaking WrestleMania
> 
> NEW YORK, NY – April 1, 2015 – Following WRESTLEMANIA 31, where Seth Rollins won his first WWE World Heavyweight Championship, this week’s WWE MONDAY NIGHT RAW delivered 2.4 million adults 18-49, 2.4 million adults 25-54 and 5.4 million total viewers from 8-11 p.m. (live +same). This is the highest total viewership for RAW in nearly three years, since July 23, 2012, the night of the RAW 1000 special.
> 
> Monday’s RAW was televised live from the SAP Center in San Jose, CA, and was highlighted by Brock Lesnar challenging Rollins, the new WWE World Heavyweight Champion, to a rematch; United States Champion John Cena defending his title against Dean Ambrose; and Intercontinental Champion Daniel Bryan defeating Dolph Ziggler.
> 
> Monday’s RAW was up vs. last week’s telecast by 27% in adults 18-49, 24% in adults 25-54 and 28% in total viewers 2+. USA was the #1 network Monday night in primetime in adults 18-34 as well as men 18-34 and 18-49 for all of television -- including the broadcast networks.
> 
> RAW was also the #2 most social show of the day with 400,000 tweets, reaching a unique audience of 3.6 million people and generating 27 million impressions.


-


----------



## Darkod

D.M.N. said:


> *Most Watched Episodes of WWE Raw since 2010*
> 01 - 6.02 million - 23/07/2012 - Raw 1000
> 02 - 5.86 million - 21/02/2011
> 03 - 5.84 million - 28/03/2011
> 04 - 5.79 million - 07/03/2011
> 05 - 5.65 million - 14/03/2011
> 06 - 5.61 million - 04/01/2010
> 07 - 5.60 million - 28/02/2011
> 08 - 5.60 million - 04/04/2011
> 09 - 5.60 million - 15/03/2010
> 10 - 5.51 million - 22/02/2010
> 11 - 5.50 million - 29/03/2010
> 12 - 5.45 million - 11/04/2011
> 13 - 5.45 million - 11/01/2010
> 14 - 5.42 million - 23/05/2011
> *15 - 5.36 million - 30/03/2015 - Night after WrestleMania 31*
> 16 - 5.34 million - 08/02/2010
> 17 - 5.32 million - 01/03/2010
> 18 - 5.29 million - 18/01/2010
> 19 - 5.28 million - 01/02/2010
> 20 - 5.28 million - 31/01/2011
> 
> So, excluding Raw 1000, it was Raw's most watched episode in almost four years.



Daniel Bryan Fail!! So much for this overrated fuck being "mainstream" and the "YES Movement!". A wrestlemania with the shittiest RTWM build outdraws Bryan at his hottest, this clearly shows his true worth to WWE. Now you know why Vince chose a new guy over this hack.

Bryan overness is like the reverse of "X-pac heat". X-pac heat represents *false heel overness*, while Bryan's overness represents *false face overness* with the crowds.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Darkod said:


> Daniel Bryan Fail!! So much for this overrated fuck being "mainstream" and the "YES Movement!". A wrestlemania with the shittiest RTWM build outdraws Bryan at his hottest, this clearly shows his true worth to WWE. Now you know why Vince chose a new guy over this hack.
> 
> Bryan overness is like the reverse of "X-pac heat". X-pac heat represents *false heel overness*, while Bryan's overness represents *false face overness* with the crowds.


You are a poor troll. What part about last year's show being on against the NCAA Tournament finale, dont you understand?

These numbers arent much different, and last year beat this year's in the demo. The demo is the only metric advertisers care about. Consider yourself educated!

WWE Entertainment USA 8:00 PM 5313 1.9
WWE Entertainment USA 10:00 PM 5032 1.9
WWE Entertainment USA 9:00 PM 5094 1.8


----------



## FiniteDifference

Daniel Bryan is not WWE's biggest draw. Dumb statement. Cena is by far their #1 draw. Bryan is likely their #2 draw. A distant #2 , mostly because they haven't invested much into him after his short title reign, but a distant #2 nevertheless.


----------



## DoubtGin

false overness :jordan4


----------



## StraightYesSociety

So weird seeing two extremes on the same page. That has to be Kane?


----------



## Darkod

:lmao Yes, now suddenly demo rating is the only thing that matters even though this entire thread is nothing but "experts" fighting over weekly Viewership rating. If this year's viewership was lower, you'd be singing a different tune right now. How desperate are you folks? really? 

I like how you Bryan marks sit around, like each other comments and pretend that he's some huge irreplaceable draw for the company and that all his crowds reactions mean $$$. Face it, this era is overrun by smarks, which is why the most "over" wrestlers all happen to be smark favourites. Which is also the reason why none of these "over" hacks are capable of drawing money. Bryan is worthless, and its not just the ratings. Stop pretending like pathetic fools, if he was capable of drawing as headliner, Vince would've never even considered a new guy for his spot at Mania against Brock. The fact that Vince did and the fact that Bryan went from main eventing last year to curtain-jerkin wrestlemania in a useless mid-card ladder match this year, shows how worthless the guy really is. BTW, Last year wasn't the first time post Mania RAW was up against NCAA tournament and the demo rating this year did outdraw last year's, 10:00 drew a solid 2.0 rating indicating this year's Mania(again, with the shittiest RTWM build ever) meant more to the 18-34 demo viewers.

As I said, its false overness. Its like the reverse X-pac heat. Vince sees it.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

"Monday's RAW was televised live from the SAP Center in San Jose, CA, and was highlighted by Brock Lesnar challenging Rollins, the new WWE World Heavyweight Champion, to a rematch; United States Champion John Cena defending his title against Dean Ambrose; and Intercontinental Champion Daniel Bryan defeating Dolph Ziggler."

From the USA press release which means those were the highest drawing people.


----------



## The Absolute

Don't know if this has been posted yet, but...

http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/usas-wwe-raw-hits-nearly-3-year-ratings-high-on-monday-1201464374/

I know the Raw after Wrestlemania always gets a huge ratings bump, but this is impressive. Wonder how much of a decrease in the numbers we're going to see next week.


----------



## Fissiks

Darkod said:


> Daniel Bryan Fail!! So much for this overrated fuck being "mainstream" and the "YES Movement!". A wrestlemania with the shittiest RTWM build outdraws Bryan at his hottest, this clearly shows his true worth to WWE. Now you know why Vince chose a new guy over this hack.
> 
> Bryan overness is like the reverse of "X-pac heat". X-pac heat represents *false heel overness*, while Bryan's overness represents *false face overness* with the crowds.


pity post.


----------



## Fissiks

GOD said:


> things will be falling back down to earth within the next month


next month? try next week now that people know Lesnar is gone and Bryan and Cena are in the mid-card.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

Fissiks said:


> next month? try next week now that people know Lesnar is gone and Bryan and Cena are in the mid-card.


You don't know how right you are. You know that little college basketball game that peaked at *24 million viewers* and depressed the post-Mania Raw rating in 2014?

Yeah. That game is happening *this monday*. Not to mention, it's opening day for most Major League Baseball teams.

Not even Brock would save this show... and he's likely gone for several months. Frak, You could have Daniel Bryan wrestling Rollins for the WWE Championship and I wouldn't watch it live. At best, it's #4 on my must see list that night.


----------



## Darkod

BeastIncarnate said:


> http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe/WWE_Announces_More_Records_Broken_by_WrestleMania_31.html
> 
> 
> 
> WWE's pop-culture extravaganza was watched by more than 1.3 million global households on WWE Network alone.
> 
> Most-watched WrestleMania in history, with pay-per-view data still forthcoming.
> 
> The night after WrestleMania 31, Monday Night Raw was the most-watched episode in nearly three years delivering 5.4 million viewers.
> 
> Raw's top telecast since WWE celebrated Raw 1000 on July 23, 2012.
> 
> Raw was Monday night's most-watched program on all of cable television for the 11th week in a row.
> 
> WrestleMania 31 broke the attendance record for Levi's Stadium as 76,976 fans from all 50 states and 40 countries converged on the home of the San Francisco 49ers. The previous attendance record for Levi's Stadium was 70,799.
> 
> *WrestleMania 31 became the highest-grossing live event in WWE history, grossing $12.6 million and breaking the previous record of $12.3 million that was held by WrestleMania 29 at MetLife Stadium in 2013.*
> 
> 
> 
> WrestleMania 31 was the most social event in WWE history.
> 
> A record 142 worldwide Twitter trends (up +106 percent vs. last year), including 10 No. 1 worldwide trends, which was more than any broadcast or cable show that night.
> 
> WWE-related content saw more than 60 million video views across all platforms on the day of WrestleMania.
> 
> WWE trended on Facebook with exclusive content featuring WWE Superstar ring entrances, match clips, interviews, locker room commentary and training videos.
> 
> WrestleMania 31 garnered a record 165 million impressions on Facebook and 92 million impressions on Twitter, an increase of 62 percent and 23 percent year-over-year, respectively.
> 
> During WrestleMania, the WWE flagship App saw its most usage since launch in 2012, while reaching nearly 18 million downloads during WrestleMania.
> 
> The WrestleMania 31 App had four times as many downloads as last year's WrestleMania 30 App.
> 
> 
> WWE generated $3.3 million in WrestleMania merchandise revenue (up +27 percent vs. last year), eclipsing the previous record of $2.7 million from WrestleMania 29.
> 
> :vince$


Waiting for more excuses on why Bryan couldn't draw last year!!


----------



## tailhook

*Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Source: https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/usa-wwe-raw-hits-nearly-3-ratings-high-192200915.html


----------



## gamegenie

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

April Fools :brock


----------



## Kaze Ni Nare

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*


----------



## Łegend Ќiller

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

:maury


----------



## The People's H2O

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*


----------



## CJ

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*










:rollins


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Seth Rollins is here to save the ratings :rollins


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



CJ said:


> :rollins












:rollins


----------



## L.I.O.

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Not good enough. Give the belt to Reigns.

:vince2


----------



## IT'S PRO WRESTLING

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

The future is now, bitches.


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*


----------



## Arcturus

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

..I love Seth but no....this was for the Brocktober massacre.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

It's also because they teased the *rematch*...and did a great job of that.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



ShowStopper said:


> :rollins


I loved that so much. Got in his face to rub it in, then pussied out of the match and fucked right on off.

Absolutely brilliant heel work.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

And not because all the mainstream attention, excellent PPV and BROCK SMASH! too huh? :lol


----------



## Marv95

Yeah, Brock wrestling for the first time on TV in over a decade had nothing to do with it. Let's find out if they're nearly the same for the weeks ahead.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

In before next week's show gets crushed by the national championship. :rollins


----------



## Wynter

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

But still :rollins


:banderas Fuck anyone who says this dude don't deserve that belt and praise :


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

*Acting like they weren't gonna watch the RAW after that epic Mania regardless :Jordan.*


----------



## The Ice King

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

The second the ratings go against someone who is champ everyone screams that it's all the champs fault for the ratings. The second the ratings are good suddenly people put everything into perspective. Hilarious. 

I'm not saying it's cause of Rollins. I've always been one to believe that there's more factors that go into the ratings other than who is the champ, which is the dumbest way to think about it (i.e. when people freak out about ratings during Punks reign). But it's absolutely hilarious to see everyone react to positive ratings compared to negative ratings.


----------



## Rookie of the Year

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Nah, Brock as ex-champ ready to kill everyone drew the best rating since Raw 1000.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Kinda makes you wonder, with all the eyeballs on the product that night, would they have been better off giving us a little taste of the matchup? Just enough to show off a bit of Seth's skillset to those tuning in for the occasion.


----------



## DudeLove669

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



RenegadeTG07 said:


> Kinda makes you wonder, with all the eyeballs on the product that night, would they have been better of giving us a little taste of the matchup? Just enough to show off a bit of Seth's skillset to those tuning in for the occasion.


Rollins countering the german suplex and kicking Brock square in the head was a pretty good taste.


----------



## true rebel

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Bryan didn't draw that after the 30th Anniversary of WM when the streak had just ended. Cena didn't draw that after going clean over the Rock the previous year either.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



DudeLove669 said:


> Rollins countering the german suplex and kicking Brock square in the head was a pretty good taste.


I suppose you're correct. Guess I'm just being greedy.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



RenegadeTG07 said:


> Kinda makes you wonder, with all the eyeballs on the product that night, would they have been better off giving us a little taste of the matchup? Just enough to show off a bit of Seth's skillset to those tuning in for the occasion.


He backflipped/landed on his feet out of a sauerkraut suplex by Lesnar only to follow it up with an enzuigiri.

An ineffective enzuigiri, but he still hit one and knocked Lesnar down to a knee.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Darkod said:


> Waiting for more excuses on why Bryan couldn't draw last year!!


Bryan drew double that, it just happens Vince wants to bury him.


----------



## glenwo2

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*


----------



## Chloe

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Haha, eat a dick haters. :rollins


----------



## Nine99

I have a very hard time believing they would have gotten as good ratings with Reigns or Lesnar going over.

Congratulations to Rollins, the future is here.


----------



## RLStern

Soul Man Danny B said:


> You don't know how right you are. You know that little college basketball game that peaked at *24 million viewers* and depressed the post-Mania Raw rating in 2014?
> 
> Yeah. That game is happening *this monday*. Not to mention, it's opening day for most Major League Baseball teams.
> 
> Not even Brock would save this show... and he's likely gone for several months. Frak, You could have Daniel Bryan wrestling Rollins for the WWE Championship and I wouldn't watch it live. At best, it's #4 on my must see list that night.


:applause



Darkod said:


> Waiting for more excuses on why Bryan couldn't draw last year!!


*I remember you, I believe you're that troll that argued "Austin is a draw" when facts proved Austin is not a draw.

Time to refute you again:

Wrestlemania 29 held at Metlife Stadium, Capacity = 82,566, People Attended = Sold Out Crowd of 80,676, Live Gate = 12.3 Million

Wrestlemania 30 held at the Mercedes-Benz Superdome, Capacity = approx, 75,000, People Attended = Sold Out Crowd of 75,167 Live Gate = 10.9 Million

Wrestlemania 31 held at Levi's Stadium, Capacity = approx 75,000, People Attended = Sold Out Crowd of 76,976 Live Gate = 12.6 Million

So Wrestlemania 31 got in more money from Live Gate (Also more seats available) likely due to price, because Wrestlemania 31 has a higher live gate than Wrestlemania 29, which had more seating.

So Daniel Bryan is indeed a huge draw with Wrestlemania 30 and Wrestlemania 31's live gate is due to price increase, as there's no way it could have gotten a bigger Live Gate revenue than Wrestlemania 29 without price increase, since Wrestlemania 29 had more seats and more people attended.

Your argument is refuted.
*


----------



## MaybeLock

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



RenegadeTG07 said:


> Kinda makes you wonder, with all the eyeballs on the product that night, would they have been better off giving us a little taste of the matchup? Just enough to show off a bit of Seth's skillset to those tuning in for the occasion.


With all the eyeballs on the product, it was the perfect time for Kane and Big Show to main event in a tag team match. 

I'm sure that will keep those people watching. :vince5


----------



## glenwo2

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



LPPrince said:


> He backflipped/landed on his feet out of a *sauerkraut suplex* by Lesnar only to follow it up with an enzuigiri.
> 
> An ineffective enzuigiri, but he still hit one and knocked Lesnar down to a knee.


Have anything against calling it "German"? :lol


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



glenwo2 said:


> Have anything against calling it "German"? :lol


Nah, just thought I'd try to be clever. hahaha


----------



## glenwo2

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



Nine99 said:


> I have a very hard time believing they would have gotten as good ratings with Reigns or Lesnar going over.
> 
> Congratulations to Rollins, the future is here.


It was actually a combination of factors :


1.) Reigns NOT winning and being the Champ

2.) Rollins being the Champ after pinning Roman Reigns, NOT Brock.

3.) Brock wrecking shit like he always does and basically killing the Commentary team and a "cameraman"(who is actually a former NXT wrestler).


----------



## Marrakesh

RLStern said:


> :applause
> 
> 
> 
> *I remember you, I believe you're that troll that argued "Austin is a draw" when facts proved Austin is not a draw.
> 
> Time to refute you again:
> 
> Wrestlemania 29 held at Metlife Stadium, Capacity = 82,566, People Attended = Sold Out Crowd of 80,676, Live Gate = 12.3 Million
> 
> Wrestlemania 30 held at the Mercedes-Benz Superdome, Capacity = approx, 75,000, People Attended = Sold Out Crowd of 75,167 Live Gate = 10.9 Million
> 
> Wrestlemania 31 held at Levi's Stadium, Capacity = approx 75,000, People Attended = Sold Out Crowd of 76,976 Live Gate = 12.6 Million
> 
> So Wrestlemania 31 got in more money from Live Gate (Also more seats available) likely due to price, because Wrestlemania 31 has a higher live gate than Wrestlemania 29, which had more seating.
> 
> So Daniel Bryan is indeed a huge draw with Wrestlemania 30 and Wrestlemania 31's live gate is due to price increase, as there's no way it could have gotten a bigger Live Gate revenue than Wrestlemania 29 without price increase, since Wrestlemania 29 had more seats and more people attended.
> 
> Your argument is refuted.
> *


You are aware that ''Austin wasn't a draw'' in all of the ''evidence'' and numbers you use because you never attribute any of the high numbers he's involved in to him?

You give him zero credit for anything which just makes you look like an absolute buffoon. 

Are you aware of the record breaking merch sales he achieved? The house show attendances when he was on top? 

Does any of this compute with you at all or do you just always have to try and justify your misguided opinion that he didn't draw by giving your biased opinions on the TV ratings as facts? 

Is there a brain in there somewhere?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



true rebel said:


> Bryan didn't draw that after the 30th Anniversary of WM when the streak had just ended. Cena didn't draw that after going clean over the Rock the previous year either.


That's because nobody wanted Cena to go over.


----------



## Cliffy

Worked attendance numbers itt


----------



## Thanks12

Or maybe Brock was the reason?!?!?


----------



## Jonasolsson96

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Rollins is the greatest wrestler of all time. 


Fuck Hogan,Austin,Rock,Savage,Taker,Bret,Flair,Bruno


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



LPPrince said:


> He backflipped/landed on his feet out of a sauerkraut suplex by Lesnar only to follow it up with an enzuigiri.
> 
> An ineffective enzuigiri, but he still hit one and knocked Lesnar down to a knee.


I agree there. Guess I just wanted more.



MaybeLock said:


> With all the eyeballs on the product, it was the perfect time for Kane and Big Show to main event in a tag team match.
> 
> I'm sure that will keep those people watching. :vince5


No question. No bigger draws in the federation than those two!

:vince


----------



## yeahbaby!

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Calling it now Rollins a bigger star then Rock, Hogan and Austin.


----------



## RLStern

Marrakesh said:


> You are aware that ''Austin wasn't a draw'' in all of the ''evidence'' and numbers you use because you never attribute any of the high numbers he's involved in to him?


*
That's because the evidence shows he never drew those high numbers.*



Marrakesh said:


> You give him zero credit for anything which just makes you look like an absolute buffoon.


*
You don't give credit to someone who didn't draw the rating, if I did that then I would look like a buffoon, Austin didn't draw those ratings so I'm not going to attribute them to him.

Austin was simply not a draw, being a fan of his doesn't change the fact.

Now go troll elsewhere*


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Rollins is so over that Bastian Schweinsteiger is going to personally ask Lesnar to stop using German Suplexes as he brought shame to the nation by not landing it on Monday.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Soul Man Danny B said:


> You don't know how right you are. You know that little college basketball game that peaked at *24 million viewers* and depressed the post-Mania Raw rating in 2014?
> 
> Yeah. That game is happening *this monday*. Not to mention, it's opening day for most Major League Baseball teams.
> 
> Not even Brock would save this show... and he's likely gone for several months. Frak, You could have Daniel Bryan wrestling Rollins for the WWE Championship and I wouldn't watch it live. At best, it's #4 on my must see list that night.


You wont be seeing a WWE press release talking about the sharp decline in ratings vs last year. It's going to be a precipitous drop from this week as well as last year. I hope they do as well as possible, but I am watching that basketball game and maybe some MLB too.


----------



## funnyfaces1

:lmao As if this thread isn't already filled with fools this week. Now we get the guy that thinks Austin wasn't a draw!


----------



## The5150

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Love Rollins. He is now the Face of WWE. As a great man once said "Deal With It"


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

it's funny lesnar had the title for 7-8 months and not once during that period did raw ratings come close to monday night...in fact viewership FELL the night after summerslam when lesnar destroyed cena.

raw viewership was already above 5 million when the show started so what happened the previous night was the reason so many had already their tvs turned to usa at 7.59pm et. pinning viewership on one person is rather silly.


----------



## NoLeafClover

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

I love Rollins, but no. Just no. It was not _*just*_ him. It was the overall hype coming out of Wrestlemania. Teasing the rematch to kick off the show didn't hurt as well. We'll see if they can keep it up...doubt it though. The 3 hour format even dragged last night with a jam packed, post-Mania show. The final hour was unfortunately probably an ease down back to reality.


----------



## VIPER

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

The future is here :mj2


----------



## Solf

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

He's probably a factor, but wrestlemania 31 being really good and all the questions left unanswered after the main event were probably the main deal with those ratings (especially with Brock losing his shit).

They're going to fall as usual.


----------



## Addychu

*Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

:yes but obviously wasn't just him, people tuned in to watch Wrestlemania.


----------



## Viperdk

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Seth Rollins should have held something else before being given the WWE title. IMO he's not ready. They should have left the title on Lesnar. This run could end badly for him. Hopefully for him, he can ditch his lacky's and The Authority and do it on his own. Right now, I'm not so sure considering he's always needing help to win his matches.


----------



## Bad For Business

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

As much as i mark for Rollins, it was clearly because they got WM31 right. Next week ratings will be back down in the dumps, because they got the ending to Raw so badly wrong.


----------



## World's Best

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



The5150 said:


> Love Rollins. He is now the Face of WWE. As a great man once said "Deal With It"


:bigdave


----------



## Shadowcran

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Guys, ratings are an iffy way to judge but all of you claiming it was for Brock wrestling and wrecking the set....They didn't KNOW he was going to do that. Hell, if you had told me he was going to wrestle an hour before the show began, I'd have claimed bullshit!. I'd have even said the same if you told me he was going to wreck the set. We/I haven't seen him do anything on Raw for a long time to expect him to do anything but stand there and let Heyman talk.

All they knew was that he might make an appearance, and that Seth WOULD make an appearance. They might have even tuned in to see Reigns and Cena get booed senseless. We just don't know. Could have been Ziggler/Bryan. 

What I do know:
1. They didn't tune in to see New Day
2. They didn't tune in to see Big Slow
3. They didn't tune in to see Korne
4. They didn't tune in to hear Stephanie Screech
5. They didn't tune in to see the Divas
6. They didn't tune in to see Neville(although if they had seen more of him beforehand..they might have)
7. They didn't tune in to see the Lucha Dragons(same as Neville)
8. They didn't tune in to see the Ascension
9. They didn't tune in to see Tyson Kidd/Cesaro
10. THey didn't tune in to hear the announce team


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



Bad For Business said:


> As much as i mark for Rollins, it was clearly because they got WM31 right. Next week ratings will be back down in the dumps, because they got the ending to Raw so badly wrong.


didn't matter what wwe did viewership was always going to fall next week.

in 2012 the night after mania 28 raw drew 5 million viewers and they had that show close with lesnars return to wwe after 8 years...next week a full 20% of viewers didn't bother checking back in despite lesnar opening the show..


----------



## Ratedr4life

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Edge drew really good ratings after he cashed in on Cena at NYR 06.

I think it's more the fallout from WM then it was Rollins, and I'm a Rollins mark. Everyone wanted to see what the fuck Brock would do (i.e. destroy all living things)

We'll have to see over the next few weeks if they can sustain similar numbers without Brock.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Seth Draw-lins, it seems.


I kid, but you gotta admit, it rolls off the tongue.


----------



## Godway

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Fans were tuning in to see Brock Lesnar murder-death-kill everyone in sight until he got his title back. And it was a fine sight to see.


----------



## Thanks12

yeahbaby! said:


> Calling it now Rollins a bigger star then Rock, Hogan and Austin.


Haha no he's not. Higan, Rock, and Hogan drew bugger numbers and bugger crowds!!!


----------



## NapperX

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

So all those people finally got to see fans chant "Please Retire" in reference to Big Show?. I msgd a few people saying Cole is off the air, and they suddenly tuned in lol.


----------



## Krispenwah

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

:reigns2 :brock :rollins


----------



## Joshi Judas

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Lol I know you don't really think that OP, it was a bunch of factors that led to it- the way Mania 31 ended, Brock wrecking shit and the possibility of him wrestling his first match on Raw in over a decade, and people hoping for a Sting/Taker face off.

Still, if it did poor, we'd get multiple threads blaming Seth so I'm happy you made a thread like this anyway :rollins


----------



## FiniteDifference

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



tailhook said:


> Source: https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/usa-wwe-raw-hits-nearly-3-ratings-high-192200915.html


Actually, WM fallout, lack of NCAA, Brock teasing a match on RAW and wrecking everyone drew the highest RAW rating since RAW 1000.

Nice try though, Rollins mark.


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Of course he did.


----------



## I Ship Sixon

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Seth may do so in the future but....








:sip


----------



## World's Best

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



Thanks12 said:


> Haha no he's not. *Higan*, Rock, and Hogan drew bugger numbers and bugger crowds!!!


While I would agree with you that Hick Higan drew bugger numbers and bugger crowds, it's just a known fact Seth Rollins already drew _bigger_ numbers and _bigger_ crowds than this indy darling Higan ever did, as evidenced by Raw on Monday. So he's clearly above Higan, but not quite to the level of Rock or Hogan yet.


----------



## BLRNerd

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

I'm waiting to see how well ratings do next week before Rollins is big money. 

Could've easily been people tuning in to see Lesnar. 

Although Rollins is popular right now


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Wrestlemania and Raw numbers be like


----------



## Wilder

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Rollins GOATing


----------



## FiniteDifference

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



Shadowcran said:


> Guys, ratings are an iffy way to judge but all of you claiming it was for Brock wrestling and wrecking the set....They didn't KNOW he was going to do that. Hell, if you had told me he was going to wrestle an hour before the show began, I'd have claimed bullshit!. I'd have even said the same if you told me he was going to wreck the set. We/I haven't seen him do anything on Raw for a long time to expect him to do anything but stand there and let Heyman talk.
> 
> All they knew was that he might make an appearance, and that Seth WOULD make an appearance. They might have even tuned in to see Reigns and Cena get booed senseless. We just don't know. Could have been Ziggler/Bryan.
> 
> What I do know:
> 1. They didn't tune in to see New Day
> 2. They didn't tune in to see Big Slow
> 3. They didn't tune in to see Korne
> 4. They didn't tune in to hear Stephanie Screech
> 5. They didn't tune in to see the Divas
> 6. They didn't tune in to see Neville(although if they had seen more of him beforehand..they might have)
> 7. They didn't tune in to see the Lucha Dragons(same as Neville)
> 8. They didn't tune in to see the Ascension
> 9. They didn't tune in to see Tyson Kidd/Cesaro
> 10. THey didn't tune in to hear the announce team


They didn't tune in to see Rollins either. Rollins has had numerous shows that have revolved around him in the last year where he's had multiple segments + a main event match. Those shows did awful numbers. 

There was no NCAA this past Monday, which really was the biggest factor. The actual rating for this RAW was lower than last year's post Mania.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

3 years earlier...


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/186716461987938304


----------



## Shadowcran

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



FiniteDifference said:


> They didn't tune in to see Rollins either. Rollins has had numerous shows that have revolved around him in the last year where he's had multiple segments + a main event match. Those shows did awful numbers.
> 
> There was no NCAA this past Monday, which really was the biggest factor. The actual rating for this RAW was lower than last year's post Mania.


and again, the ratings make things iffy as that can't be blamed on Rollins.

The show itself has sucked for almost 2 years with no end in sight. Plus the 3 hours tests any casual fans patience. After seeing crap after crap scenario, you get to the point you don't care one whit about a Main Event or anything. The crowds are even played out by that point.

Although there are still some fans of them, Korne, Big Slow, the Divas, etc. suck the air out of the building and honestly make people sleepy. They always kill whatever momentum the show has gained.


----------



## Vintage KKF

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

I think the rating are because of Brock, Seth, and Sting.


----------



## RVP_The_Gunner

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*



ShowStopper said:


> :rollins


That moment was amazing. Just like before the Rumble i love seeing Rollins getting up in Brock's face. The balls on that guy.

As for the ratings even though i'd love to we can't give Rollins all the credit although it certainly won't have hindered him in anyway with the WWE hierarchy which is an added bonus.


----------



## DeeGirl

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

Make this guy the face of the company now dammit! :rollins

Our WWE champion is bringing in them ratings! :clap

Okay being serious, I'm sure there were many factors involved in Raw getting such good ratings, people interested in seeing the smarky crowd, seeing Brock's reaction, seeing who gets called up from NXT but of course many were indeed watching to see Seth Rollins with the WWE championship rightfully around his waist.


----------



## Rap God

*Re: Seth Rollins as Champ draws highest ratings since RAW 1000*

nvm


----------



## Rap God

RLStern said:


> *
> 2nd Hour usually draws based on what happens in first hour(ie, Someone calls their friends and tells them to tune in for whatever happened in the first hour and they tune in during the second hour or someone comes home at 9pm),
> 
> Daniel Bryan was in the first hour, and Daniel Bryan is a bigger draw than Seth Rollins and Brock Lesnar.
> 
> I wouldn't attribute that rating to Brock Lesnar
> 
> That rating is clearly from Seth Rollins who won the WWE World Heavyweight Championship(Seth Rollins is a bigger draw than Brock Lesnar in Sports Entertainment/Professional Wrestling) and Daniel Bryan(WWE's Biggest draw)*


:maury. The first hour was built around Brock. The opening segment was Brock/Heyman/Authority. Heyman even teased that Brock was gonna wrestle on raw. Just because Bryan had 1 match doesn't mean he was the draw. You are delusional.This RAW drawed so much because of Brock and Rollins


----------



## RLStern

Jarsy1 said:


> :maury. The first hour was built around Brock. The opening segment was Brock/Heyman/Authority. Heyman even teased that Brock was gonna wrestle on raw. Just because B*ryan had 1 match doesn't mean he was the draw. *You are delusional.This RAW drawed so much because of Brock and Rollins


*
Backwards, you're being delusional here, or you're being dishonest.*


----------



## funnyfaces1

You're calling him delusional? Aren't you the same guy that thought Vince Russo winning the WCW World Heavyweight Championship didn't hurt the prestige of the belt?


----------



## Batz

Viewership boost can never be because of more than one guy. Now that'd be just ridiculous.


----------



## FireCena555

*Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday do to the Men's NCAA basketball championship game? I really think they will.


----------



## Frost99

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Is the Sky Blue?


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

They will be losing a lot in the ratings due to now being AFTER Mania to start with, and the NCAA Title game will make it even worse.


----------



## The Tempest

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Yep, welcome back to the WWE.


----------



## chargebeam

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Why should WE care about ratings? Never understood the fascination.


----------



## amhlilhaus

Gotta make Roman look strong


----------



## Rusty Shackleford

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Of course they will. I can only imagine the ratings if Kentucky plays Duke :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*



Frost99 said:


> Is the Sky Blue?


Are Roman's eyes blue? 


Seriously,OP they will drop a lot from this week because this week was post Maia and perfored very well. Look to the ratings in subsequent weeks to properly gauge if there is movement in either direction.


----------



## Karma101

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

WWE always suffer in the ratings.


----------



## Horsetooth Jackass

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*



FireCena555 said:


> Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday do to the Men's NCAA basketball championship game? I really think they will.


It's hurt them in the ratings in the past. So of course this year will be no different. 

Same things happens when its football season and Monday Night Football starts.


----------



## CJ

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Yeah, their ratings will suffer.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

After this weeks RAW main event, they deserve a ratings drop


----------



## Shenroe

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Well, with a username like yours there's big chance it will suffer :lana


----------



## wonder goat

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Yes, and not just because of NCAA Basketball, but also because I don't think they really gave much reason for casual fans to tune in after the Raw this past Monday.


----------



## Sweettre15

*- Last night's episode of WWE SmackDown, with the WrestleMania 31 fallout, drew 2.74 million viewers, up from last week's 2.506 million viewers.*

I find it interesting that the ratings go up when the "midcarders" are the main event on SD.

Make this show the permanent IC title focused show while still letting them be prominent on Raw and I think SD's ratings will continue to go up.


----------



## ka4life1

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Certainly going to be interesting.


----------



## DeeGirl

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Yes, probably shouldn't of suspended Brock last week. They should of advertised Lesnar/Rollins for next weeks episode in hope of earning those extra ratings.


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Bad last hour of Raw... huge game against it... Vince still in charge... yeah, it will drop.

I was pretty much a "meh, dvr it" already but now with AJ retiring I am sticking to NXT at best. I just can't justify sitting through 3 hours of shit anymore.


----------



## Arkham258

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Ratings will just go back to the usual "nobody cares about wrestling" levels 

The post Mania Raw rating was due to all the casuals tuning in because of Mania, or maybe cause they heard about Rousey and The Rock. And WWE didn't do a damn thing to give those people a reason to believe that wrestling doesn't suck anymore or that it's as cool as it was in the Attitude Era. So they won't come back next week.


----------



## Fighter Daron

Sweettre15 said:


> *- Last night's episode of WWE SmackDown, with the WrestleMania 31 fallout, drew 2.74 million viewers, up from last week's 2.506 million viewers.*
> 
> I find it interesting that the ratings go up when the "midcarders" are the main event on SD.
> 
> Make this show the permanent IC title focused show while still letting them be prominent on Raw and I think SD's ratings will continue to go up.


They advertised Cena, Rollins and Orton on Smack Down! this week. I thought they say this Smack Down! would be star packed or something like that.


----------



## Lucifer The Dark

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Nope not at all, the Bakkaball fans don't generally watch wrestling anyway, too high brow for them


----------



## Yato

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*



chargebeam said:


> Why should WE care about ratings? Never understood the fascination.


I never understood it either. Unless someone works for WWE or owns a significant amount of stock ratings are pretty much irrelevant to fans.


----------



## deanambroselover

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Vince will do all in his power to get high ratings


----------



## xagon

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

I definitely hope so.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

*Not if they continue last week's trend of booking.*


----------



## LadPro

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

Yes. Probably.


----------



## Still_down

Arkham258 said:


> Ratings will just go back to the usual "nobody cares about wrestling" levels
> 
> The post Mania Raw rating was due to all the casuals tuning in because of Mania, or maybe cause they heard about Rousey and The Rock. And WWE didn't do a damn thing to give those people a reason to believe that wrestling doesn't suck anymore or that it's as cool as it was in the Attitude Era. So they won't come back next week.


This is dead on. Vince has a chance to draw old fans in after a record breaking mania and he takes a big shit on them after the first hour.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

The post WM bump will be gone but with Rollins as the center of the show it won't decrease that match. Maybe by an average of 100k viewers.


----------



## The.Great.One

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*

If they advertise another Bryan vs Ziggler they will lose ratings yes, especially if they tease the retarded headbashing spot again :gun:


----------



## Shenroe

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*



Londrick said:


> The post WM bump will be gone *but with Rollins* as the center of the show it won't decrease that match. Maybe by an average of 100k viewers.


_And_ the championship. Because Rollins as the center of the show we already know that rating wise.


----------



## Fissiks

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*



Londrick said:


> The post WM bump will be gone but with Rollins as the center of the show it won't decrease that match. Maybe by an average of 100k viewers.


is Rollins a draw? i know the belt is back but considering the main-event no longer has Cena and Bryan i get the feeling they will be getting similar numbers to what they got during the RTWM maybe even less.


----------



## The Bloodline

*Re: Will Raw suffer in the ratings this Monday?*



Londrick said:


> The post WM bump will be gone but with* Rollins as the center of the show it won't decrease that match.* Maybe by an average of 100k viewers.


he's been the center of the show for months. Even the weeks leading into Mania. The difference is he has the belt now so maybe him as champ will create a difference. I hope so, cause we haven't had the champ on the show weekly in a long time and Seth naturally falls into place


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The chart for Thursday's Cable Ratings


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

They are going to lose the 'WM bump' in the ratings, for sure. It happens every year. Doesn't matter who's champion and who isn't, or what storylines they have going. Just doesn't matter. It's going to happen. I'm sure WWE has accepted it as well. This Monday they stand no chance with NCAA championship running against Raw head to head. 

They're not going to get ratings like that consistently until they build a bunch of new stars who get red hot and consistently have good storylines to go along with them. So, basically never :lol Or at least not for a very long time.


----------



## Chrome

What sucks is this Monday will probably just be a throwaway episode where they do the bare minimum. Usually when they know they're gonna get killed in the ratings they just mail it in and we're stuck with a mediocre to straight up bad episode.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

IDONTSHIV said:


> The chart for Thursday's Cable Ratings


The American Ratings Bryan Danielson


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Almost on Pawn Stars levels with the M50+ crowd. Crazy how much WWE appeals to every fanbase.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Chrome said:


> What sucks is this Monday will probably just be a throwaway episode where they do the bare minimum. Usually when they know they're gonna get killed in the ratings they just mail it in and we're stuck with a mediocre to straight up bad episode.


:clap You should have included a spoiler alert. This episode will just be a way to tread water until the competition is less the following Monday.


----------



## Cobalt

Chrome said:


> What sucks is this Monday will probably just be a throwaway episode where they do the bare minimum. Usually when they know they're gonna get killed in the ratings they just mail it in and we're stuck with a mediocre to straight up bad episode.


Pretty spot on.

Ah well, we should have enjoyed the Mania weekend while it was here cause I sense we won't get intense television like that for a fair few months now.


----------



## RKO 4life

Rollins a draw? You guys already giving up on it? 

Lets see the numbers today before we give up on him. Give him a few weeks lets see where this is going. 5M last week was like the good ole days ratings. If he gets past 3.5 ratings then he's a big draw IMO.

Now WWE shop sell some more new shirts of his.


----------



## dan the marino

I'm expecting a huge drop. No Lesnar, no possibility of Sting or Taker or Rock, no post-Wrestlemania buzz, no Bryan or Ambrose or Ziggler, and not much interesting happening. Add that to the NCAA championship and I can't see them getting anywhere near 5M again this week.


----------



## McCringleberry

BEST FOR BUSINESS said:


> I'm expecting a huge drop. No Lesnar, no possibility of Sting or Taker or Rock, no post-Wrestlemania buzz, no Bryan or Ambrose or Ziggler, and not much interesting happening. Add that to the NCAA championship and I can't see them getting anywhere near 5M again this week.


:lmao 5 million? They'll be damned lucky if they kept 4 million and that's being extremely generous. They weren't even getting that for the majority of the RTWM.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Don't forget Opening Night in MLB guys. WWE has a large audience above the age of 50, and sports like Golf, Nascar, and Baseball are what they enjoy. Maybe doesn't make a difference the rest of the year, but opening day is big.


----------



## DoubtGin

> Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with Ryback vs. Roman Reigns vs. Randy Orton in the main event, drew 3.964 million viewers. This is down from last week's 5.364 million viewers for the post-WrestleMania 31 episode.
> 
> For this week's show, the first hour drew 4.300 million viewers, the second hour drew 4.039 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.552 million viewers.


Lost 1.4 million viewers when compared to last week.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Went from a 1.5 in the first hour to a 1.1 by the final hour. I blame Roman Reigns.


----------



## 2Pieced

They were lucky they got those ratings with how bad that show was.


----------



## richyque

The ratings went down cuz its was opening day in baseball and the ncaa championship, nothing to do with who is not drawing.


----------



## Wynter

So we had NCAA finals, MLB and was Better Call Saul having a finale??

Shiiiit, they lucky they received even those views with that boring ass show they put on.

The main event was predictable as fuck and because of the little time the match received, it was a clusterfuck with no real pacing. Big Show interfering to cost Roman the match was painfully obvious and of course Ryback was there to eat the pin. All while it was 3 guys we've already seen earlier in the night in a match.

Yup.


----------



## RatedR10

No one should be surprised that they lost nearly 1.5 million viewers from last week's show. For a lot of casuals, they'll only watch when it matters. Rumble, Wrestlemania and Summerslam and the surrounding shows.

Roman Reigns drawing them big 3rd hour numbers tho. (I'm just kidding, Reigns' fans, don't hurt me. I know the competition was stiff in the 3rd hour.).


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Lost 3/4 of a million viewers over the whole show. If people don't care about who the number one contender is for the top title, then WWE is in really bad shape.

Competition certainly didn't help matters, but when did the competition really start flaring up? If it was in the mid-3 million range throughout all the hours I don't think it would be so bad for the main event, but in this case most likely at least 4.3 million viewers were, and since that's the average probably more, were watching the opening segment and the announcement of the triple threat. The average for the final hour and overrun being 3.5 million, and while the main event certainly was on the better side of the average, it'd probably have to gain well over a million viewers to have that audience that saw the opening return, which would actually be astronomical and impressive, and paint a completely different picture from what these hourly numbers do. All the more reasons we need breakdowns.

Actually you know what? lol, :reigns can't draw. Belee dat.

Edit: Oh, and don't feel left out :rko2 and :ryback (fuckin' no smilies for The Big Guy?  ) marks. They can't draw either.


----------



## The True Believer

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Lost 3/4 of a million viewers over the whole show. If people don't care about who the number one contender is for the top title, then WWE is in really bad shape.
> 
> Competition certainly didn't help matters, but when did the competition really start flaring up? If it was in the mid-3 million range throughout all the hours I don't think it would be so bad for the main event, but in this case most likely at least 4.3 million viewers were, and since that's the average probably more, were watching the opening segment and the announcement of the triple threat. The average for the final hour and overrun being 3.5 million, and while the main event certainly was on the better side of the average, it'd probably have to gain well over a million viewers to have that audience that saw the opening return, which would actually be astronomical and impressive, and paint a completely different picture from what these hourly numbers do. All the more reasons we need breakdowns.
> 
> Actually you know what? lol, :reigns can't draw. Belee dat.


At least someone's on the right track. :clap:

But seriously, what a boring show. I figured it'd be hard to watch to but how about starting off the show with a bang? And no, I don't mean fireworks. I mean starting off the show with anything but the Authority rehashing their promos from 4 months ago and delivering them in the same, boring fashion for 15 minutes. 

How about you give it a shot? :thumbsup


----------



## Reaper

It's those damn vanilla midget indy fan geekboys that dont watch hunky, beefy, meatheads that are really to blame


----------



## MaybeLock

That 1st hour is actually good. Guess who was all over the first hour? :rollins


----------



## The_It_Factor

The show was absolutely awful and could have been easily interchangeable with a Smackdown episode. I'm surprised they got 4 million viewers..


----------



## Punkholic

richyque said:


> The ratings went down cuz its was opening day in baseball and the ncaa championship, nothing to do with who is not drawing.



This is in part true, but it also went down because of the show's poor quality. Those who tuned in last week tuned back in (as shown by the first hour doing 4.5M) giving WWE a chance, but WWE obviously didn't capitalise and keep them and therefore the 1M drop from the first to the third hour.

As to seeing who draws or not, it's very hard to tell nowadays with no quarterly breakdown.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Brodus Clay

Not surprise all the RAW was build to make Orton the next challenger, fucking Randy Orton, he needs to be midcarded like Cena.


----------



## Kabraxal

Terrible numbers. A million people tuned out between the second hour last week and the first hour this week. Then it plummeted almost another million by the last hour. WWE's booking is absolutely going to kill them and soon. I only heard the show was horseshit, saw a grand total of like.. 15 minutes of it probably... but if what I hear of it is any indication, we get too many more of those soon and Raw will be flirting with 2.5 million. 

It wasn't just the competition... it's the fact that people actually tune in after WM or at the beginning of a show because they are wrestling fans that want a wrestling show but Raw doesn't offer that. So those people leave and find something else to watch. The WWE has a massive audience out there to grab but they just don't want to appeal to them. Instead they'd like to play as some marketing corporation that just happens to have a little bit of "wrestling" interrupt their actual revenue streams.


----------



## Punkholic

MaybeLock said:


> That 1st hour is actually good. Guess who was all over the first hour? :rollins


Probably many casuals who tuned in last week tuned back in to see what would happen and then left because the show's quality fucking sucked.

The NCAA Basketball Championship game starting at 9:18 PM also helped.


----------



## Wynter

Raw fucking sucked


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MaybeLock said:


> That 1st hour is actually good. Guess who was all over the first hour? :rollins


:rollins FTW.


----------



## LOL-ins

I wonder if WWE could ever get to the point where they get an hour under 3 million. I don't think that has happened since the infamous "Punk 2.2 rating" in 2012.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

So fans leave the Arena and change the channel when American Ratings Daniel Bryan is nowhere in sight... They were obviously expecting him then realized he wasn't coming and left (http://wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/201...-after-last-night-wwe-raw-with-the-authority/)/changed the channel.


----------



## Batz

> It was also noted that many people in the crowd left before the #1 contenders Triple Threat main event began on TV.


Good. What a terrible match.


----------



## Stone Hot

richyque said:


> The ratings went down cuz its was opening day in baseball and the ncaa championship, nothing to do with who is not drawing.


This^^^^


----------



## Sweettre15

Expect the ratings to go down when you make the same 3 people wrestle twice in the same night especially on a night with Sports competition


----------



## Fighter Daron

WWE hadn't had no draws since AE, maybe Cena & Batista drew a little bit in their beginnings, but right now the only draws are the part-timers(Rock, Brock). 

Stop that Rollins draw, Reigns don't, Bryan draw, Orton don't. No one draws. 3.5 is their usual viewership, so we're back to normal.


----------



## THANOS

Fighter Daron said:


> WWE hadn't had no draws since AE, maybe Cena & Batista drew a little bit in their beginnings, but right now the only draws are the part-timers(Rock, Brock).
> 
> Stop that Rollins draw, Reigns don't, Bryan draw, Orton don't. No one draws. 3.5 is their usual viewership, so we're back to normal.


Except we used to have something called "breakdowns" which actually did show what or who drew in each show. And if the same people draw the highest ratings/most viewers/largest gains consistently than it certainly DOES prove that they draw as individuals.

What you should have focused on, is that no one person can single-handedly raise the overall ratings consistently without a complete effort from top to bottom. Austin certainly couldn't, and didn't raise overall ratings until the entire program and direction changed to reflect his character (The Attitude Era).


----------



## Fighter Daron

THANOS said:


> Except we used to have something called "breakdowns" which actually did show what or who drew in each show. And if the same people draw the highest ratings/most viewers/largest gains consistently than it certainly DOES prove that they draw as individuals.
> 
> What you should have focused on, is that no one person can single-handedly raise the overall ratings consistently without a complete effort from top to bottom. Austin certainly couldn't, and didn't raise overall ratings until the entire program and direction changed to reflect his character (The Attitude Era).


Well, if this is a perfect science like you picture it, then please tell me who draws and who doesn't based on the breakdowns.


----------



## THANOS

Fighter Daron said:


> Well, if this is a perfect science like you picture it, then please tell me who draws and who doesn't based on the breakdowns.


Since the last time we were privy to breakdowns, Cena, Bryan, HHH, Henry, and Lesnar were the only consistently drawing individuals. It would be interesting to see who's stepped up since then, but since we don't have breakdowns anymore, it's all just speculation on the rest.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Here is the chart if anyone is interested:


----------



## brxd

Brutal drop, but last week's rating was always going to be a one-off.


----------



## Fighter Daron

Mark Henry huh? Interesting...


----------



## Londrick

Bryan and Brock weren't there so that only left Cena and Rollins as any of their money makers. Cena got stuck with some irrelevant match with Cody while Rollins hour did the best.


----------



## FITZ

In fairness I didn't watch any of Raw after the first hour. I was at a bar watching the NCAA Championship game. 

Also the Raw 8 days after Wrestlemania is the most depressing Raw of the year. You get all excited after Mania that things are going to change and that WWE is going to be great. Then we get the same old shit we've been seeing forever and have those hopes and dreams crushed.

I'm also starting to think that Part Time Superstars lead to Part Time Fans.


----------



## Randy Lahey

So WWE managed one good rating after Wrestlemania, and it only took 1 week for everyone to go back to not giving a shit. Makes sense.

They'll be in the 2s for the rest of the year.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ratings for Smackdown. It lost about 100,000 viewers from the previous week but increased .05 in the demo.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Smackdown viewership goes DOWN.



> - Thursday night’s episode of WWE SmackDown, with Sheamus, Bad News Barrett and Big Show vs. roman Reigns, Daniel Bryan and Dolph Ziggler in the main event, drew 2.631 million viewers. This is down from last week’s 2.731 million viewers.


Down 100,000 viewers.

EDIT: Ninaj'd. Realized I posted this on the wrong thread before. fpalm


----------



## LaMelo

That was surprising.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Roman Reigns needs to get the belt. The women just don't see Seth as their guy after seeing his other features. Time to move on.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

WesternFilmGuy said:


> Roman Reigns needs to get the belt. The women just don't see Seth as their guy after seeing his other features. Time to move on.


LOL


----------



## The Renegade

Kabraxal said:


> Terrible numbers. A million people tuned out between the second hour last week and the first hour this week. Then it plummeted almost another million by the last hour. WWE's booking is absolutely going to kill them and soon. I only heard the show was horseshit, saw a grand total of like.. 15 minutes of it probably... but if what I hear of it is any indication, we get too many more of those soon and Raw will be flirting with 2.5 million.
> 
> It wasn't just the competition... it's the fact that people actually tune in after WM or at the beginning of a show because they are wrestling fans that want a wrestling show but Raw doesn't offer that. So those people leave and find something else to watch. The WWE has a massive audience out there to grab but they just don't want to appeal to them. Instead they'd like to play as some marketing corporation that just happens to have a little bit of "wrestling" interrupt their actual revenue streams.


I think this week will be a better chance to see how things go. The National Championship Game drew 28 million viewers. That's a huge number. My guess is that the numbers this week fall in the middle of the last 2 week's average. 

They'll also put on a better show tonight, because, well, you can't get worse than last week. #silverlining


----------



## StraightYesSociety

I'm predicting 8.2 Million viewers.


----------



## The Renegade

StraightYesSociety said:


> I'm predicting 8.2 Million viewers.


And that's being modest.


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 3.686 million
Hour 2 - 3.786 million
Hour 3 - 3.525 million

Piss poor numbers, some numbers last fall against the football were better than that.


----------



## 2Pieced

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 3.686 million
> Hour 2 - 3.786 million
> Hour 3 - 3.525 million
> 
> Piss poor numbers, some numbers last fall against the football were better than that.


Those are not good, should have had Bryan on the show.


----------



## dan the marino

Well there was interest in WWE for about a week. It took them a night to kill off all those post-Wrestlemania viewers.


----------



## MMOQ

Rollins once again featured prominently. Gee, who could have possibly predicted that this charisma vacuum can't draw?

He's getting into Reigns territory as far as how big of a flop he is.


----------



## Srdjan99

The show was taped, a lot of people just read the spoilers and didn't watch the show, just like they do with SD


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Thisnis the New Normal. No Brock, No Bryan no dice:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Man, these are around or maybe even lower than Football season numbers. Wonder how low they'll go this year (assuming Brock doesn't have a big change of heart and decide to go full-time, and that there's no other part-timer available to help things... not that any one of them except Rock could probably increase anything anyway).


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW needs more Mark Henry! :mark:


----------



## Empress

What happened in the second hour of RAW to possibly spike viewership? I didn't watch RAW last night. I'm only getting around to it now.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Empress said:


> What happened in the second hour of RAW to possibly spike viewership? I didn't watch RAW last night. I'm only getting around to it now.


Second hour had the most substance/star power so it makes sense. It had Reigns/Show, Orton's match, and Rollins vs. Kane with the Kane turn tease. First hour I think only had Cena/Barrett and last hour just had Orton/Rollins in the ending segment, and Ziggler if you count him as one of their top stars and that is it.


----------



## Empress

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Second hour had the most substance/star power so it makes sense. It had Reigns/Show, Orton's match, and Rollins vs. Kane with the Kane turn tease. First hour I think only had Cena/Barrett and last hour just had Orton/Rollins in the ending segment, and Ziggler if you count him as one of their top stars and that is it.


Thank you.

Outside of Brock going into Beast mode, I'm not sure who can push the ratings at this point. If Vince had serious competition, he'd finally be committed to building new stars and not just relying on part timers. He has the talent that could help bring more viewers in. But that Mania bump went away quick.


----------



## A-C-P

No Bryan or Mark "Ratings" Henry :draper2

So the WWE manged to maintain that Mania "bump" for a whole HALF an episode of Raw :ha


----------



## 2Pieced

Empress said:


> Thank you.
> 
> Outside of Brock going into Beast mode, I'm not sure who can push the ratings at this point. If Vince had serious competition, he'd finally be committed to building new stars and not just relying on part timers. He has the talent that could help bring more viewers in. But that Mania bump went away quick.


The result of killing the momentum of guys to clear the path for Reigns going into the rumble and mania.


----------



## TurnHeel

Rollins once again featured prominently throughout the show. Gee, who could have predicted that this charisma vacuum couldn't draw?

He's in Roman Reigns territory in terms of how big of a flop he is.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

under 3.00 million viewers during NFL at least once. HAHA


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MMOQ said:


> Rollins once again featured prominently. Gee, who could have possibly predicted that this charisma vacuum can't draw?
> 
> He's getting into Reigns territory as far as how big of a flop he is.





TurnHeel said:


> Rollins once again featured prominently throughout the show. Gee, who could have predicted that this charisma vacuum couldn't draw?
> 
> He's in Roman Reigns territory in terms of how big of a flop he is.


The same exact post word for word from two different newbies. Looks like we've found yet another troll. It saddens me that people don't have anything else better to do with their lives. That's why we don't take these posts seriously.


----------



## Empress

2Pieced said:


> The result of killing the momentum of guys to clear the path for Reigns going into the rumble and mania.


This is not a Roman Reigns issue where he is to blame by default for everything. The entire roster looks weak, including the WWE Champ who can't pick up a clean win by himself and even Roman himself who is trying to regain his momentum with the crowd as a face. Vince and the WWE just have no desire or reason to change what they're doing if they can still hit the target of bare minimum of viewers/profit.


----------



## TurnHeel

ShowStopper said:


> The same exact post word for word from two different newbies. Looks like we've found yet another troll. It saddens me that people don't have anything else better to do with their lives. That's why we don't take these posts seriously.


Way to deflect from the fact that your boy is as big of a flop as Roman Reigns.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TurnHeel said:


> Way to deflect from the fact that your boy is as big of a flop as Roman Reigns.


Way to start multiple accounts to obsess over wrestling. No one is as big as a flop as Reigns. Sorry, bro. Even Vince himself decided to go in another direction at WM.


----------



## 2Pieced

Empress said:


> This is not a Roman Reigns issue where he is to blame by default for everything. The entire roster looks weak, including the WWE Champ who can't pick up a clean win by himself and even Roman himself who is trying to regain his momentum with the crowd as a face. Vince and the WWE just have no desire or reason to change what they're doing if they can still hit the target of bare minimum of viewers/profit.


He's not to blame for everything it's not his fault but the way they booked the show to try and put him over hurt alot of guys. Just have to look how they booked the rumble match to see the clear intention they had.

Overall booking is piss poor for sure.


----------



## A-C-P

Empress said:


> This is not a Roman Reigns issue where he is to blame by default for everything. The entire roster looks weak, including the WWE Champ who can't pick up a clean win by himself and even Roman himself who is trying to regain his momentum with the crowd as a face. Vince and the WWE just have no desire or reason to change what they're doing if they can still hit the target of bare minimum of viewers/profit.


I think another thing all this really shows, is how (not sure the exact word I am looking for here) unprepared the WWE was for anything going forward after Mania (outside of continuing Cena/Rusev) As we get further away from WM I believe more and more the Rollins' cash-in finish at WM was an audible called LATE in the RTWM, like called when Brock re-signed late, and any plans the WWE had post WM all got blown up with that, and we are right back to VINTAGE WWE booking and writing shows right up to when the show goes live.

Just look at the 3 Raws since Mania, the biggest thing that happened that would cause people to want to keep tuning in was Brock going nuts, and most fans know Brock will not be back for a couple months at least...


----------



## Empress

ShowStopper said:


> Way to start multiple accounts to obsess over wrestling. No one is as big as a flop as Reigns. Sorry, bro. Even Vince himself decided to go in another direction at WM.


So, no one is as big as a flop as Reigns but yet ratings are still going down under the Rollins era? The one who was supposed to save the WWE from Roman and his dreaded reign which necessitated changing WM 31? Interesting how that works. It's okay that Rollins isn't able to draw an interest beyond the WWE audience as of yet, but Reigns is a "flop" for not doing the same when he's been featured.


----------



## KastellsPT

TurnHeel said:


> Way to deflect from the fact that your boy is as big of a flop as Roman Reigns.


You want to talk about draw failures when Reigns drawed the lowest ratings in the last 20 years in WrestleMania season?


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Empress said:


> What happened in the second hour of RAW to possibly spike viewership? I didn't watch RAW last night. I'm only getting around to it now.






 At around 3:18


----------



## TurnHeel

ShowStopper said:


> Way to start multiple accounts to obsess over wrestling. No one is as big as a flop as Reigns. Sorry, bro. Even Vince himself decided to go in another direction at WM.


Rollins is.

Vince went in a different direction because he backed himself into a corner. He went all the way with Reigns to WM. Once he flopped and he decided he had to go in a different direction, Rollins was the only option. They weren't going to keep it on Brock and have it off of TV until SummerSlam.

Rollins hasn't done anything with his opportunity since The Shield split. Very underwhelming business wise (just like Reigns.)

Both massive flops.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Empress said:


> So, no one is as big as a flop as Reigns but yet ratings are still going down under the Rollins era? The one who was supposed to save the WWE from Roman and his dreaded reign? Interesting how that works.


At least Rollins is getting the chance to run as Champion. Reigns isn't even getting that chance and it's pretty obvious why.


----------



## TurnHeel

KastellsPT said:


> You want to talk about draw failures when Reigns drawed the lowest ratings in the last 20 years in WrestleMania season?


Reigns and Rollins are BOTH failures. I have always disliked them both because they are charisma vacuums. The viewing audience seems to agree.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TurnHeel said:


> Rollins is.
> 
> Vince went in a different direction because he backed himself into a corner. He went all the way with Reigns to WM. Once he flopped and he decided he had to go in a different direction, Rollins was the only option. They weren't going to keep it on Brock and have it off of TV until SummerSlam.
> 
> Rollins hasn't done anything with his opportunity since The Shield split. Very underwhelming business wise (just like Reigns.)
> 
> Both massive flops.


It's been 2 weeks and last night's Raw was taped. fpalm


----------



## Wynter

Tbf, Raw is dominantly centered around Seth(like it has been for over 9 months) and he can't pop a rating or viewership to save his life. Shouldn't be that hard to accept lol Seth had just a big a push as Roman(bigger in certain aspects) and is a better talent, but still can't move a rating and loses views :shrug he's champ and no one cares because this is normal Raw viewership. 

You praised Seth for the first hour viewership I believe last week(could be wrong). Should be no problem sayig your boy has lost viewership in majority of the segments he's been featured in :shrug


----------



## TurnHeel

ShowStopper said:


> At least Rollins is getting the chance to run as Champion. Reigns isn't even getting that chance and it's pretty obvious why.


I'm glad Reigns didn't get the title. Rollins was somewhat the lesser of two evils. But that's a pretty dumb argument you just made. Rollins has gotten the chance to run as champion and has disappointed immensely so far. He literally hasn't done any better than Reigns in terms of viewership.


----------



## LilOlMe

Vince should throw money at Brock to work more.

It's the same philosophy as always. When you take people off tv when they're super hot, you drive down all of the momentum.

I feel very confident that if Brock was around for the aftermath of two weeks ago, ratings would be higher.

I know he was "suspended", but he could crash the show or something.

Last report was that Brock was open to working more, if Vince paid him for each appearance.


----------



## TurnHeel

ShowStopper said:


> It's been 2 weeks and last night's Raw was taped. fpalm


It hasn't been two weeks. It's been ever since The Shield split. All Rollins centric shows have bombed.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

If you want a champ certain to be the biggest flop, put the title on Show. 

I blame this on no one in particular. The show has sucked for so long they cant fight inertia. The fruits of the inept booking is being reaped right now and it is a bitter fruit, indeed.


----------



## Empress

A-C-P said:


> I think another thing all this really shows, is how (not sure the exact word I am looking for here) unprepared the WWE was for anything going forward after Mania (outside of continuing Cena/Rusev) As we get further away from WM I believe more and more the Rollins' cash-in finish at WM was an audible called LATE in the RTWM, like called when Brock re-signed late, and any plans the WWE had post WM all got blown up with that, and we are right back to VINTAGE WWE booking and writing shows right up to when the show goes live.
> 
> Just look at the 3 Raws since Mania, the biggest thing that happened that would cause people to want to keep tuning in was Brock going nuts, and most fans know Brock will not be back for a couple months at least...



I agree with you. The WWE barely had a creative plan in place for the RTW and the lack of a blueprint exists at the moment. Rollins winning the belt was definitely an audible. But the company should be better at adapting to changing circumstances. I'll cut creative a break for April, but May and going forward, they should get a better handle on the situation. 



ShowStopper said:


> At least Rollins is getting the chance to run as Champion. Reigns isn't even getting that chance and it's pretty obvious why.


The ratings are still down with Rollins as champ and haven't spiked. And do you honestly believe that Reigns is never going to get the chance and the belt despite anything "obvious"?


----------



## KastellsPT

TurnHeel said:


> Reigns and Rollins are BOTH failures. I have always disliked them both because they are charisma vacuums. The viewing audience seems to agree.


Time will tell. As for now, it's only been 2 weeks and it's wrong stating that Rollins is a carisma vacuum.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> Tbf, Raw is dominantly centered around Seth(like it has been for over 9 months) and he can't pop a rating or viewership to save his life. Shouldn't be that hard to accept lol Seth had just a big a push as Roman(bigger in certain aspects) and is a better talent, but still can't move a rating and loses views :shrug he's champ and no one cares because this is normal Raw viewership.
> 
> You praised Seth for the first hour viewership I believe last week(could be wrong). Should be no emblem saying your boy has lost viewership in majority of the segments he's been featured in :shrug


Similar push? Like someone else said, Roman somehow won the Rumble and pretty much shit on the entire roster the entire RTWM. Yeah, Rollins got interview segments. Last time I checked, winning the Rumble and beating the most popular guy in the company clean at the Febuary PPV is a hell of alot of a bigger push than anything Rollins has received except for actually winning the title at WM. 

Rollins also lost multiple matches to guys like Ryback, Ziggler, and others multiple times on Raw and SD. Mutliple times each. Maybe he should've beaten more guys during the RTWM if the plan all along was to eventually put the title on him. I know Rollins isn't a draw, but neither is anyother full timer on the roster.


----------



## Wynter

KastellsPT said:


> You want to talk about draw failures when Reigns drawed the lowest ratings in the last 20 years in WrestleMania season?


You mean the dude who had only like five minute segments while guys like Kane, Show and Seth were all over Raw?? :drake1 are we going to act like the show wasn't dominated by authority, Seth and Randy?? Please stop :lol


----------



## TurnHeel

LilOlMe said:


> Vince should throw money at Brock to work more.
> 
> It's the same philosophy as always. When you take people off tv when they're super hot, you drive down all of the momentum.
> 
> I feel very confident that if Brock was around for the aftermath of two weeks ago, ratings would be higher.
> 
> I know he was "suspended", but he could crash the show or something.
> 
> Last report was that Brock was open to working more, if Vince paid him for each appearance.


Or he could, you know,_ push young guys that can actually talk and are charismatic_. That formula has worked for decades. I'm fairly certain it would continue to work today.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Empress said:


> I agree with you. The WWE barely had a creative plan in place for the RTW and the lack of a blueprint exists at the moment. Rollins winning the belt was definitely an audible. But the company should be better at adapting to changing circumstances. I'll cut creative a break for April, but May and going forward, they should get a better handle on the situation.
> 
> 
> 
> The ratings are still down with Rollins as champ and haven't spiked. And do you honestly believe that Reigns is never going to get the chance and the belt despite anything "obvious"?


The ratings are stagnant like they've always been unless you expect them to retain the WM bump, which never happens. Reigns will get a chance and the ratings will also stay stagnant. The difference is Rollins never got to look as strong as win the Rumble and beat Bryan clean at Fastlane.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

That's enough for me. Winning the RR and beating Bryan clean at Fastlane isn't getting booked strong apparently. :drake1 Adios.


----------



## Dell

Seth Rollins shirts were sold out everywhere last night, how is he a failure. 

+ all the hottest chicks were wearing Rollins shirts, nuff said.


----------



## TurnHeel

This Reigns vs Rollins mark battle is hilarious.

It's like fans of two 0-16 NFL teams arguing which one is better.


----------



## The True Believer

No breakdowns = no reason to decide who draws viewers and who doesn't. Move on, please.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Rollins' certainly isn't moving mountains, but neither is anybody else. The only two guys who had a true positive impact on the ratings in the last several years were Rock and Bryan. Maybe Brock as well with this year's post Mania show and last year's as well. Everyone else, Cena, Orton, Taker, Triple H, CM Punk, so on and so fourth just can't consistently move things in an upward direction. Bryan was able to do this to an extent, although the only evidence we have are Torch breakdowns when Bryan was consistently pulling in strong numbers in the main event that you just don't see with the five I mentioned above, or anyone else for that matters. Every week he was doing well and his segments were usually a good deal above everything else on the show that he had to of had some impact on keeping things from going down.

Then again looking at total viewership numbers, the Fall of 2013 wasn't exactly much/any better than 2012 or 2014, so maybe I'm exaggerating Bryan's impact a bit. However, there's a clear difference between him and everyone else not named Rock in the ratings department. The guys above can hold things afloat, where a guy like Bryan you could argue was bringing things upwards.


----------



## Louaja89

No one is a fucking draw nowadays !!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## KastellsPT

Wynter said:


> You mean the dude who had only like five minute segments while guys like Kane, Show and Seth were all over Raw?? :drake1 are we going to act like the show wasn't dominated by authority, Seth and Randy?? Please stop :lol


Rollins had the spotlight in the last 2 or 3 weeks to build his feud with Orton. If I remember correctly, Reigns had a top feud with Bryan, won the Rumble match and was the number onde contender. But I'm no saying that Reigns was the one to blame, the roster as booked poorly since the beggining.


----------



## Empress

ShowStopper said:


> That's enough for me. Winning the RR and beating Bryan clean at Fastlane isn't getting booked strong apparently. :drake1 Adios.


You're conflating two issues, IMO. You wanted to call Reigns out for being a flop, but Rollins hasn't moved the ratings needle either significantly as of yet. 

As for being booked strong, Rollins is very much a golden boy with a rocket strapped to him with appearances on Jon Stewart to his resume. Unless that's not strong enough. RAW may as well be called Monday Night Seth for as much screen time he gets. His wins, even when not clean, are still more than most on the roster. He's far from getting scraps from creative. Reigns is getting a big push, but so is Seth. And now he's the champ and under the microscope.

I'm not going to blame one talent in particular for the ratings being bad when this situation would likely exist regardless of who the champion is.


----------



## Wynter

ShowStopper said:


> Similar push? Like someone else said, Roman somehow won the Rumble and pretty much shit on the entire roster the entire RTWM. Yeah, Rollins got interview segments. Last time I checked, winning the Rumble and beating the most popular guy in the company clean at the Febuary PPV is a hell of alot of a bigger push than anything Rollins has received except for actually winning the title at WM.
> 
> Rollins also lost multiple matches to guys like Ryback, Ziggler, and others multiple times on Raw and SD. Mutliple times each. Maybe he should've beaten more guys during the RTWM if the plan all along was to eventually put the title on him. I know Rollins isn't a draw, but neither is anyother full timer on the roster.


You do realize Seth winning MITB meant he didn't have to win the Rumble right??? :lol 

Are you still trying to deny Seth being one of the chosen ones. Seth has been the most featured dude since the Shield split. He receives more TV time than anyone on the roster. He's constantly in top storylines, all over Raw and has been the only heel pushed to the top except for Lesnar and Rusev.

Fucking hell, Dean Ambrose was built up just to feed Seth on his way to the main event scene. Stop acting like Seth gets nothing from WWE and rose from the ashes and shit. The moment they broke up the Shield, he's been one of the heaviest pushed and exposed guys. 

I don't even know how you refute that. 

:lol And you calling Roman a flop as if his push is done. They rightfully stalled putting the title on him because it wasn't the right time. Let's not act like Roman's road to Mania was booking perfection and he simply didn't get over under great booking. "but he won a lot!" so what? Seth may lose more than you had liked, but he always received storylines that were mostly booked with sense, got hella TV time and massive character development. 


Even with all that, he can't draw shit. Does that make him a flop? No, because I that would be stupid to say. Same way you calling someone a flop because he simply didn't get the title YET lol. 

Either way, no one is a draw like you said. But you sure would have no problem gloating if Roman was losing viewership the way many of Seth's segments had :shrug


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Louaja89 said:


> No one is a fucking draw nowadays !!!!!!!!!!!!!










Appears 20 seconds has the biggest hour.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Empress said:


> You're conflating two issues, IMO. You wanted to call Reigns out for being a flop, but Rollins hasn't moved the ratings needle either significantly as of yet.
> 
> As for being booked strong, Rollins is very much a golden boy with a rocket strapped to him. RAW may as well be called Monday Night Seth for as much screen time he gets. His wins, even when not clean, are still more than most on the roster. He's far from getting scraps from creative.


No one is a draw on today's roster, atm. I know that. And he does get good TV time. But he doesn't get booked strong. From an entertainment standpoint, that doesn't bother me, because I enjoy heels like him personally. But talking from a booked strongly stadnpoint, Seth has never looked as strong as Roman, not even close. You are one of the ones that say Seth never wins clean. Meanwhile, Roman has won the Rumble and beat the most popular guy clean on PPV main event. Give me one Rollins win that is anywhere near as impressive as either of those two feats.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Yes, this thread is alive again! :mark:


----------



## StraightYesSociety

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Yes, this thread is alive again! :mark:


It's honestly my favorite thread. It will never reach the heights it once had (I call it the Attitude Era of the Ratings Thread) but it's fun as hell.


----------



## A-C-P

Empress said:


> You're conflating two issues, IMO. *You wanted to call Reigns out for being a flop, but Rollins hasn't moved the ratings needle either significantly as of yet. *
> 
> As for being booked strong, Rollins is very much a golden boy with a rocket strapped to him with appearances on Jon Stewart to his resume. Unless that's not strong enough. RAW may as well be called Monday Night Seth for as much screen time he gets. His wins, even when not clean, are still more than most on the roster. He's far from getting scraps from creative. Reigns is getting a big push, but so is Seth. And now he's the champ and under the microscope.
> 
> I'm not going to blame one talent in particular for the ratings being bad when this situation would likely exist regardless of who the champion is.


Obviously the WWE chose wrong twice in choosing former Shield Members, and should have strapped the rocket right to:








:ambrose4


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

A-C-P said:


> Obviously the WWE chose wrong twice in choosing former Shield Members, and should have strapped the rocket right to:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :ambrose4


Finally, someone gets it.

You get my own personal thumbs up!


----------



## StraightYesSociety

A-C-P said:


> Obviously the WWE chose wrong twice in choosing former Shield Members, and should have strapped the rocket right to:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :ambrose4


Ambrose is awesome but he's really bad with the media. I think that was the reason they passed on him.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> You do realize Seth winning MITB meant he didn't have to win the Rumble right??? :lol
> 
> Are you still trying to deny Seth being one of the chosen ones. Seth has been the most featured dude since the Shield split. He receives more TV time than anyone on the roster. He's constantly in top storylines, all over Raw and has been the only heel pushed to the top except for Lesnar and Rusev.
> 
> Fucking hell, Dean Ambrose was built up just to feed Seth on his way to the main event scene. Stop acting like Seth gets nothing from WWE and rose from the ashes and shit. The moment they broke up the Shield, he's been one of the heaviest pushed and exposed guys.
> 
> I don't even know how you refute that.
> 
> :lol And you calling Roman a flop as if his push is done. They rightfully stalled putting the title on him because it wasn't the right time. Let's not act like Roman's road to Mania was booking perfection and he simply didn't get over under great booking. "but he won a lot!" so what? Seth may lose more than you had liked, but he always received storylines that were mostly booked with sense, got hella TV time and massive character development.
> 
> 
> Even with all that, he can't draw shit. Does that make him a flop? No, because I that would be stupid to say. Same way you calling someone a flop because he simply didn't get the title YET lol.
> 
> Either way, no one is a draw like you said. But you sure would have no problem gloating if Roman was losing viewership the way many of Seth's segments had :shrug



Yep, Seth won the briefcase, but as others have said many times, the briefcase is a 'blessing' and a curse at the same time. Even when he won that, he won it with help from Kane. :lol How that is anywhere near as strong booking as winning the Rumble, I just don't see it. The Rumble has been one of the company's calling cards for the last 30 years or so and only big names really win that.

It's not even that Rollins "lost more than I would have like to seen." From an entertainment standpoint, I am okay with losses for my favorite. But if you are trying to build that guy to look good, then I realize that losing to Ryback and Ziggler multiple times on both shows probably isn't a good idea. I realize that Reigns' booking wasn't 100% perfect on the RTWM, but winning the Rumble and beating Bryan clean at FL is a hell of alot better than jobbing to mid carders multiple times and winning with constant interference (again, not a problem with me from an entertainment standpoint, but not the best way to make someone a draw, two different things).


----------



## SóniaPortugal

A-C-P said:


> Obviously the WWE chose wrong twice in choosing former Shield Members, and should have strapped the rocket right to:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :ambrose4


You can be joking, but Ambrose (except his match with Seth) always had good ratings in his segments :grin2:


----------



## Empress

ShowStopper said:


> No one is a draw on today's roster, atm. I know that. And he does get good TV time. But he doesn't get booked strong. From an entertainment standpoint, that doesn't bother me, because I enjoy heels like him personally. But talking from a booked strongly stadnpoint, Seth has never looked as strong as Roman, not even close. You are one of the ones that say Seth never wins clean. Meanwhile, Roman has won the Rumble and beat the most popular guy clean on PPV main event. Give me one Rollins win that is anywhere near as impressive as either of those two feats.


I would love it if Seth won a match clean. For all of the issues I have with Roman's booking, at least he can win a match clean. But unless I'm mistaken, you've stated that a manner of winning doesn't matter all that much since other the heels have won in similar fashion. 

I think all the guys on the roster could benefit from better booking, but Roman and Seth have it better than Ziggler/Bray/Dean/Sandow. Seth is not fighting for a chance. 

But back to the ratings, I only took exception to your previous comment because it inferred that Reigns is a ratings flop while Rollins isn't. For the record, I don't think either man is inherently to blame and shouldn't shoulder creative's mistakes.



A-C-P said:


> Obviously the WWE chose wrong twice in choosing former Shield Members, and should have strapped the rocket right to:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :ambrose4



Ambrose didn't set the ratings on fire when he was given his brief chance last fall. I think there was a period when the ratings dipped really bad. Honestly, I believe the ratings would still be crap even if Dean were the champ. It's not him, but creative. There's only so much a performer can do.


----------



## Wynter

Lord, apparently Seth hasn't been receiving a big ass push since the split :ha

I bet Ziggler wishes he had such an "average" push :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Empress said:


> I would love it if Seth won a match clean. For all of the issues I have with Roman's booking, at least he can win a match clean. But unless I'm mistaken, you've stated that a manner of winning doesn't matter all that much since other the heels have won in similar fashion.
> 
> I think all the guys on the roster could benefit from better booking, but Roman and Seth have it better than Ziggler/Bray/Dean/Sandow. Seth is not fighting for a chance.
> 
> But back to the ratings, I only took exception to your previous comment because it inferred that Reigns is a ratings flop while Rollins isn't. For the record, I don't think either man is inherently to blame and shouldn't shoulder creative's mistakes.


Yes, I have stated that, and I mean it. But I mean it from an entertainment standpoint for me personally, I'm fine Rollins not winning clean all of the time because I get a kick out of his sniveling character. But from a ratings standpoint, it probably isn't the best way *if* they are trying to make someone a draw. I got a bit overzealous with the Reigns comment, I can admit.


----------



## A-C-P

Empress said:


> Ambrose didn't set the ratings on fire when he was given his brief chance last fall. I think there was a period when the ratings dipped. Honestly, I believe the ratings would still be crap even if Dean were the champ. It's not him, but creative. There's only so much a performer can do.


Oh I completely agree I was posting that in gest mostly, and was looking for an excuse to post the gif :lol

Even though for me personally I would love to see Dean featured more, overall if the booking/writing was the same so would the ratings with Dean on top to.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> Lord, apparently Seth hasn't been receiving a big ass push since the split :ha
> 
> I bet Ziggler wishes he had such an "average" push :lol


List some wins that compare to winning the Rumble and beating the most popular guy in the company clean at a PPV Main Event and pretty much steamrolling through the entire roster in the RTWM minus one or two nights. And....go!


----------



## SóniaPortugal

StraightYesSociety said:


> Ambrose is awesome but he's really bad with the media. I think that was the reason they passed on him.


What?
He's funny and spontaneous in interviews and he is excellent promoting what he will do
You are in an Era, that the more relaxed and spontaneous you are in the interviews, the better
Jennifer Lawrence is example of that


----------



## TurnHeel

This "no one is a draw" argument is another stupid one.

Cena is a draw. He's currently stuck in the mid card while they're pushing two young (and very undeserving) guys. They're trying to make two stars but both are failing miserably. Of course Cena won't have as much of an effect on ratings when he isn't involved in the main event. Casuals don't care to see him fighting mid card geeks - they want to see him in the main storyline. Still, he's usually in the most watched hour consistently, even as a mid carder. 

Bryan has shown that he can do fairly well.

Lesnar can be a draw when booked properly, but he's a special case. His drawing power is more sporadic.

Ambrose did well moving viewership upon his return from filming that movie. Increased viewership from the previous two weeks and his return hour popped 4+ million while competing with MNF. These two fuckers (Rollins and Reigns) are having trouble reaching 4 million consistently despite being given multiple chances to do so, gigantic pushes, and no NFL competition.

Give this motherfucker a chance.


----------



## Bad For Business

Ratings won't increase until Zayn, Owens and Balor are on the main roster. You can build a new era around those 3 guys.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TurnHeel said:


> This "no one is a draw" argument is another stupid one.
> 
> Cena is a draw. He's currently stuck in the mid card while they're pushing two young (and very undeserving) guys. They're trying to make two stars but both are failing miserably. Of course Cena won't have as much of an effect on ratings when he isn't involved in the main event. Casuals don't care to see him fighting mid card geeks - they want to see him in the main storyline. Still, he's usually in the most watched hour consistently, even as a mid carder.
> 
> Bryan has shown that he can do fairly well.
> 
> Lesnar can be a draw when booked properly, but he's a special case. His drawing power is more sporadic.
> 
> Ambrose did well moving viewership upon his return from filming that movie. Increased viewership from the previous two weeks and his return popped 4+ million while competing with MNF. These two fuckers are having trouble reaching 4 million despite being given multiple chances to do so and gigantic pushes.
> 
> Give this motherfucker a chance.


Wrong again. Raw's ratings have been stagnant as fuck for years now, even with Cena on top. None of those guys draw except maybe Brock.


----------



## Chrome

A-C-P said:


> Obviously the WWE chose wrong twice in choosing former Shield Members, and should have strapped the rocket right to:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :ambrose4


Damn straight. :cudi

His time will come, right?


----------



## Empress

For the record, I'm a huge Rollins fan. He's my favorite on the roster and I would love it if the ratings improved under him. He's arguably one of the best performers the roster and carried the WWE for months, but he may be another HBK (ratings wise) at the moment. Vince and creative need to start booking all their talents better which in turn makes them better draws.

Unless Brock is in beast mode for every RAW, the ratings would be the same regardless who is champ right now.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

SóniaPortugal said:


> What?
> He's funny and spontaneous in interviews and he is excellent promoting what he will do
> You are in an Era, that the more relaxed and spontaneous you are in the interviews, the better
> Jennifer Lawrence is example of that


He's not, he has a lot of awkward interactions with the media and comes off as disinterested. Look at how Cena does interviews, that's a great media presence.


----------



## Louaja89

Empress said:


> For the record, I'm a huge Rollins fan. He's my favorite on the roster and I would love it if the ratings improved under him. He's arguably one of the best performers the roster and carried the WWE for months, but he may be another HBK (ratings wise) at the moment. Vince and creative need to start booking all their talents better which in turn makes them better draws.
> 
> Unless Brock is in beast mode for every RAW, the ratings would be the same regardless who is champ right now.


Exactly finally someone gets it !!


----------



## A-C-P

Empress said:


> For the record, I'm a huge Rollins fan. He's my favorite on the roster and I would love it if the ratings improved under him. He's arguably one of the best performers the roster and carried the WWE for months, but he may be another HBK (ratings wise) at the moment. Vince and creative need to start booking all their talents better which in turn makes them better draws.
> 
> *Unless Brock is in beast mode for every RAW, the ratings would be the same regardless who is champ right now.*


You know maybe Brock was onto something back in 2012 when he suggest it be Monday Night Raw, starring Brock Lesnar :jericho2


----------



## Bad For Business

There's too much deadweight on the roster and the booking is too inconsistent to draw in casual viewers. Make the show 2 hours, book it like NXT and actually have logical storylines and character progression, and maybe Joe Q Public will be interested again?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Bad For Business said:


> There's too much deadweight on the roster and the booking is too inconsistent to draw in casual viewers. Make the show 2 hours, book it like NXT and actually have logical storylines and character progression, and maybe Joe Q Public will be interested again?


Also, don't tape the show so the spoilers are online all day long. fpalm


----------



## TurnHeel

ShowStopper said:


> Wrong again. Raw's ratings have been stagnant as fuck for years now, even with Cena on top. None of those guys draw except maybe Brock.


You might wanna rethink that, kiddo. Cena has been on top for so long that it would be foolish to expect him to move ratings week in and week out. Still, the numbers with him in the main event are much better than with him out of it. And he can still draw well in marquee matches on PPV events.

This won't change until the WWE pushes guys that have the tools (promo skills and charisma) to take his spot.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Honestly looking at the roster I just don't see anyone with a star quality that would make them an international and mainstream draw. I love guys like Bryan, Seth, Ziggler, Ambrose and them but I don't see them as stars. Only probably R-Truth has the potential but Vince would never push him.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

StraightYesSociety said:


> He's not, he has a lot of awkward interactions with the media and comes off as disinterested. Look at how Cena does interviews, that's a great media presence.


I've seen many interviews of the two, because they are both my favorites
Cena and Ambrose are my TOP 2, and they both have things in common in the interviews, they are super charismatic and make of their interviews interesting to hear


----------



## Wynter

ShowStopper said:


> List some wins that compare to winning the Rumble and beating the most popular guy in the company clean at a PPV Main Event and pretty much steamrolling through the entire roster in the RTWM minus one or two nights. And....go!


Seth has MITB, he had no reason to win the Rumble... 

He feasted on Dean Ambrose and beat him in the main event of hell in a cell when Dean was arguably the most over guy on the roster. You can nitpick all you want on how Seth won, doesn't negate he did a clean sweep on Dean and didn't eat one loss in that feud. 

He's constantly featured, alllllll over god damn Raw, has had the most character development, always has the top storylines that are given the most TV time and are generally booked with thought. 

Wait, why am I even doing this. In your mind, Roman winning a few big times among shitty and asinine booking decisions that were detrimental to him is >>>>>> Seth's overall great booking. You can hate how much he loses, but you seriously can't deny how much this man is pushed. He's one of the Golden boys, get over it lol Stop acting like Seth was being treated like a jobber who had to get by with two minute segments and no progression. 

So many Raws has revolved around this boy, it's crazy. Hell, they dedicated a whole episode to Seth vs Stewart which drew jack shit in the end. 

They give to Seth in different ways than they give to Roman. Roman may get wins, but they lacked substance without good booking to back it up. 

Compare how they book Seth feuds and then compare it to how they book Romans feuds outside of his one with Bryan. Randy Orton vs Roman was some of the laziest pieces of shit booking. He's feuding with Big Show, enough said. Roman vs Brock was horrid and they had a fucking tug of war. 

Hell, Seth vs Dean alone has probably received more creative and well thought out segments than any Roman fued lol 

You want to believe your boy rose from the ashes, go on ahead. But like Lance Storm said, Seth has been receiving a huge push along with Roman since the split :shrug


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TurnHeel said:


> You might wanna rethink that, kiddo. Cena has been on top for so long that it would be foolish to expect him to move ratings week in and week out. Still, the numbers with him in the main event are much better than with him out of it. And he can still draw well in marquee matches on PPV events.
> 
> This won't change until the WWE pushes guys that have the tools (promo skills and charisma) to take his spot.


The past number of years with Cena in the main event the viewership has been in the same bracket. Hasn't increased or decreased from where it's been. Probably part of the reason these past 2 years they've felt comfortable moving him in and out of the main event. No one on the full time roster is a significant or consistent draw for ratings, nor have they been in awhile.


----------



## Empress

A-C-P said:


> You know maybe Brock was onto something back in 2012 when he suggest it be Monday Night Raw, starring Brock Lesnar :jericho2


I love Brock in beast mode, but would you watch him week after week destroy someone? I think he works best as a special attraction. When Brock is just there, the ratings haven't moved that much.

RAW should be two hours. It would cut down on filler but that's not changing anytime soon. Since it's not, creative should spread out the TV time. Give the talents time to cut promo's. Cody and Dean had some great promos on the app which should've been featured on RAW. There's no reason for endless Steph/Seth/Authority segments. I like each, but less is often more.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

SóniaPortugal said:


> I've seen many interviews of the two, because they are both my favorites
> Cena and Ambrose are my TOP 2, and they both have things in common in the interviews, they are super charismatic and make of their interviews interesting to hear


Agree to disagree then.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Maybe Reigns just sucks so much the creative team don't want to give him any of the interesting angles. :rollins


----------



## SóniaPortugal

And WWE ratings returned to normal, did not last long 
:y2j

When do you guys think that below 3 million will be normal for RAW ratigns?


PS: I think I'll come here every week, I no longer have Glee to laugh of their ratings always going down >


----------



## SóniaPortugal

StraightYesSociety said:


> Agree to disagree then.


Ok :smile2:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> Seth has MITB, he had no reason to win the Rumble...
> 
> He feasted on Dean Ambrose and beat him in the main event of hell in a cell when Dean was arguably the most over guy on the roster. You can nitpick all you want on how Seth won, doesn't negate he did a clean sweep on Dean and didn't eat one loss in that feud.
> 
> He's constantly featured, alllllll over god damn Raw, has had the most character development, always has the top storylines that are given the most TV time and are generally booked with thought.
> 
> Wait, why am I even doing this. In your mind, Roman winning a few times among shitty and asinine booking decisions that were detrimental to him is >>>>>> Seth's overall great booking. You can hate how much he loses, but you seriously can't deny how much this man is pushed. He's one of the Golden boys, get over it lol Stop acting like Seth was being treated like a jobber who had to get by with two minute segments and no progression.
> 
> So many Raws has revolved around this boy, it's crazy. Hell, they dedicated a whole episode to Seth vs Stewart which drew jack shit in the end.
> 
> They give to Seth in different ways than they give to Roman. Roman may get wins, but they lacked substance without good booking to back it up.
> 
> Compare how they book Seth feuds and then compare it to him they book Romans feuds outside of his one with Bryan. Randy Orton vs Roman was some of the laziest pieces of shit booking. He's feuding with Big Show, enough said. Roman vs Brock was horrid and they had a fucking tug of war.
> 
> Hell, Seth vs Dean alone has probably received more creative and well thought out segments than any Roman fued lol
> 
> You want to believe your boy rose from the ashes, go on ahead. But like Lance Storm said, Seth has been receiving a huge push along with Roman since the split :shrug


I have always agreed with you that Seth gets more than his fair share of air time. That's not what I'm arguing, though. Just look at the majority of this forum. Everyone always points out how weak Seth is booked from a win/loss standpoint, not TV time standpoint. Yes, he beat Dean multiple times, but even none of those wins were clean. The Rollins/Orton booking going into WM made no sense whatsoever with Orton pretending to be in the Authority for a few weeks. Losing to midcarders multiple times. Only good thing kayfabe wise Seth has done is cash in and win at WM. Other than that, pretty much every win is 'tainted' (again from a kayfabe aspect). If I had a choice between winning the Rumble or MITB, I'd take the Rumble every time. And I would take beating Bryan clean at a PPV main event over any of Rollins' wins. 

Not doubting Rollins is one of the few golden boys. Maybe that's why he gets so much TV time, to make up for his losses and non-clean wins. :shrug


----------



## Empress

StraightYesSociety said:


> Agree to disagree then.


I actually agree with you. Seth and Roman are more eager to go through the grind of media appearances, etc. Dean is so laid back, but this is a hustle. Anyone who is coming after Cena needs to do what John has done and take it up a notch. Seth gained even more of my respect after WM 31. Flying back and forth across coasts and still be engaging on The today Show and RAW. He has the drive. Both he and Roman do good outside the WWE. 

I think the WWE could easily make stars out of a handful of performers on their roster. They're just content with Cena, grooming Roman and Seth and ignoring Daniel Bryan who broke through the ranks all on his own and Punk before him. Bryan is a wasted media opportunity in my professional opinion and as a fan.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

ShowStopper said:


> No one on the full time roster is a significant or consistent draw for ratings, nor have they been in awhile.


Brock is. Bryan certainly was on the RTWM until he got hurt in May. Ambrose was starting to get over until they cut him off at the knees and destroyed his credibility. Cena is a draw as champion. HHH and Stephanie belong in this group as well.

Seth is a heel champion and he's been booked to have very little credibility. You can't really expect him to be a big draw in that role. Reigns isn't over to the level of his push. He's positioned at the level of a top babyface, but nobody really cares about him.


----------



## Chrome

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Maybe Reigns just sucks so much the creative team don't want to give him any of the interesting angles. :rollins


They probably consider pairing Reigns with Big Show an "interesting" angle. :jordan4

Might explain why they keep saddling Reigns with him.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Soul Man Danny B said:


> Brock is. Bryan certainly was on the RTWM until he got hurt in May. Ambrose was starting to get over until they cut him off at the knees and destroyed his credibility. Cena is a draw as champion. HHH and Stephanie belong in this group as well.
> 
> Seth is a heel champion and he's been booked to have very little credibility. You can't really expect him to be a big draw in that role. Reigns isn't over to the level of his push. He's positioned at a level of a top babyface, but nobody really cares about him.


Brock is, but is a part timer at best. Ratings with everyone else are pretty much exactly the same outside of a very small tick here and there, including Cena's more recent years when he was champion.


----------



## Wynter

ShowStopper said:


> I have always agreed with you that Seth gets more than his fair share of air time. That's not what I'm arguing, though. Just look at the majority of this forum. Everyone always points out how weak Seth is booked from a win/loss standpoint, not TV time standpoint. Yes, he beat Dean multiple times, but even none of those wins were clean. The Rollins/Orton booking going into WM made no sense whatsoever with Orton pretending to be in the Authority for a few weeks. Losing to midcarders multiple times. Only good thing kayfabe wise Seth has done is cash in and win at WM. Other than that, pretty much every win is 'tainted' (again from a kayfabe aspect). If I had a choice between winning the Rumble or MITB, I'd take the Rumble every time. And I would take beating Bryan clean at a PPV main event over any of Rollins' wins.
> 
> Not doubting Rollins is one of the few golden boys. Maybe that's why he gets so much TV time, to make up for his losses and non-clean wins. :shrug


I guess because Seth is a heel and they book him in enough great and entertaining segments, I don't mind his losses much. Because his promo like last night makes me not give a damn because golden shit like that matters in the end. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I've already forgot the losses. I know there are a group of people who want to call Seth a Loser or hate his type of heel, but I think his booking has been great as far as character development, segments and most of his storylines . Hell, he did what Roman didn't even do for most of his feud with Brock; stood up to Brock and Heyman like a G lol 

That's the shit that is ultimately remembered. Even the Kane stuff was entertaining as hell last night. People might want to bitch because Seth didn't win clean. But the storyline made the win appropriate and furthered tension between Kane and Seth :shrug


----------



## Bad For Business

3 under-appreciated guys i think who could be good for media promotion and appeal to casuals:

Titus O'Neil - Charismatic as fuck, likable and a good talker, average wrestler though

Fandango - Guy has a great look, can talk, give him a better gimmick and a proper push

Big E - Funny as fuck (check his twitter), charismatic, has presence, needs the old 5 count gimmick that he used in NXT. Could be a sleeper hit.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

ShowStopper said:


> Brock is, but is a part timer at best. Ratings with everyone else are pretty much exactly the same outside of a very small tick here and there, including Cena's more recent years when he was champion.


Right now, this is pretty close to the truth. They've booked most guys into oblivion.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> I guess because Seth is a heel and they book him in enough great and entertaining segments, I don't mind his losses much. Because his promo like last night makes me not give a damn because golden shit like that matters in the end. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I've already forgot the losses. I know there are a group of people who want to call Seth a Loser or hate his type of heel, but I think his booking has been great as far as character development, segments and most of his storylines . Hell, he did what Roman didn't even do for most of his feud with Brock; stood up to Brock and Heyman like a G lol
> 
> That's the shit that is ultimately remembered. Even the Kane stuff was entertaining as hell last night. People might want to bitch because Seth didn't win clean. But the storyline made the win appropriate and furthered tension between Kane and Seth :shrug


I feel the same way. As @Empress can confirm, I've been saying on multiple threads that I enjoy sniveling, irritating heels like Seth that cheat to win and all of that. But unfortunately, fans like us are in the minority, I guess. As boring as Kane is on his own these days, there's no denying that segment last night with Seth had the fans in attendance attention and they were all into it. They probably should start moving Kane and Show out of the main event and storylines with the champion, though.

Anyway, if people want to blame Rollins, go ahead. I really don't care about ratings, but sometimes I let myself get caught up in it, like tonight. Just another thing he can have in common with :hbk1 But I can't blame people for not watching this product as there really isn't much great about it and it's been that way for awhile now.


----------



## Bad For Business

ShowStopper said:


> I feel the same way. As @Empress can confirm, I've been saying on multiple threads that I enjoy sniveling, irritating heels like Seth that cheat to win and all of that. But unfortunately, fans like us are in the minority, I guess. As boring as Kane is on his own these days, there's no denying that segment last night with Seth had the fans in attendance attention and they were all into it. They probably should start moving Kane and Show out of the main event and storylines with the champion, though.
> 
> Anyway, if people want to blame Rollins, go ahead. I really don't care about ratings, but sometimes I let myself get caught up in it, like tonight. Just another thing he can have in common with :hbk1 But I can't blame people for not watching this product as there really isn't much great about it and it's been that way for awhile now.


Interesting the parallels that Rollins is having with 90's HBK (great heel, best performer on roster, yet oddly not a draw, issues with his personal life etc). I know he said HBK's his favourite wrestler, but come on. When's he gonna lose his smile too?


----------



## NastyYaffa

StraightYesSociety said:


> At around 3:18


What a surprise. 

Let's stop with this Rollins/Reigns/Ambrose nonsense, we all know who should be pushed. It's the man who made The Shield suffer their first loss. :bryan


----------



## Vyer

Meh, taped show


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Bad For Business said:


> Interesting the parallels that Rollins is having with 90's HBK (great heel, best performer on roster, yet oddly not a draw, issues with his personal life etc). I know he said HBK's his favourite wrestler, but come on. When's he gonna lose his smile too?


They really do have some similarities. It's kind of weird. They also have another one: They were both big names during shitty eras that didn't help their drawing (granted, Rollins time is far from over).


----------



## Bad For Business

ShowStopper said:


> They really do have some similarities. It's kind of weird. They also have another one: They were both big names during shitty eras that didn't help their drawing (granted, Rollins time is far from over).


Suppose that's fitting, seeing as Reigns is clearly Diesel and Bryan is obviously Bret.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Bad For Business said:


> Suppose that's fitting, seeing as Reigns is clearly Diesel and Bryan is obviously Bret.


:lol Holy shit! Never thought of it like that. You just blew my mind, bro.


----------



## Fighter Daron

Roman Reigns can move and he has already had better matches in his 3 year career than Nash in 20 years. So cut that shit.


----------



## Bad For Business

Fighter Daron said:


> Roman Reigns can move and he has already had better matches in his 3 year career than Nash in 20 years. So cut that shit.


Because getting your ass kicked by Orton, Bryan and Brock is a good match? He got carried to 3 decent matches, Nash sucked in the ring but he has charisma by the bucketload, and i say that as someone who hates the guy.


----------



## Empress

I no longer take the Roman Reigns/Diesel comparisons as an insult. Nash changed the business and just got into the Hall of Fame. Just sayin. Roman is doing just fine. I'm not writing him off. 

But the parallels between the older wrestlers and new ones are striking. It's like history repeating itself.


----------



## Bad For Business

Empress said:


> I no longer take the Roman Reigns/Diesel comparisons as an insult. Nash changed the business and just got into the Hall of Fame. Just sayin. Roman is doing just fine. I'm not writing him off.
> 
> But the parallels between the older wrestlers and new ones are striking. It's like history repeating itself.


So by that logic, Dean Ambrose (blue collar hero) and Big E (charismatic black guy) are gonna save the business in a couple of years, and Seth Rollins is going awol for 4 years, Whilst doing a lot of coke and then finding god.

Reigns will jump ship to TNA and have a creative control clause in his contract. Because thats where the big boys play and look at the adjective play.


----------



## Chrome

Just wait until Stone Cold Dean Ambrose revolutionizes the business in a few years. :austin :ambrose


----------



## Empress

Bad For Business said:


> So by that logic, Dean Ambrose (blue collar hero) and Big E (charismatic black guy) are gonna save the business in a couple of years, and Seth Rollins is going awol for 4 years, Whilst doing a lot of coke and then finding god.
> 
> Reigns will jump ship to TNA and have a creative control clause in his contract. Because thats where the big boys play and look at the adjective play.


:lol

Last summer, I really thought Ambrose was really going to follow after Stone Cold. He just had that energy about him. Maybe he's just in his Ringmaster phase at the moment. Jake Roberts needs to show up on RAW for an old school special and let Dean recite a verse to him.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

I still think if they give R-Truth a Kanye West gimmick he would be the biggest star in the world.


----------



## Bad For Business

Bad For Business said:


> So by that logic, Dean Ambrose (blue collar hero) and Big E (charismatic black guy) are gonna save the business in a couple of years, and Seth Rollins is going awol for 4 years, Whilst doing a lot of coke and then finding god.
> 
> Reigns will jump ship to TNA and have a creative control clause in his contract. Because thats where the big boys play and look at the adjective play.


I know it's bad to quote your own post but it just dawned on me, as @Empress said, Ambrose is basically in his ringmaster phase, whilst Big E is in a heel black power stable. 

So Vince really is just rehashing the build up to the Attitude era, and WWE's gonna catch fire again 2 years from now.


----------



## Bad For Business

Empress said:


> :lol
> 
> Last summer, I really thought Ambrose was really going to follow after Stone Cold. He just had that energy about him. Maybe he's just in his Ringmaster phase at the moment. Jake Roberts needs to show up on RAW for an old school special and let Dean recite a verse to him.


"Talk about your psalms, talk about John 3:16, well Ambrose 3:16 says i just got beaten by a fucking TV monitor"


----------



## Fighter Daron

Bad For Business said:


> Because getting your ass kicked by Orton, Bryan and Brock is a good match? He got carried to 3 decent matches, Nash sucked in the ring but he has charisma by the bucketload, and i say that as someone who hates the guy.


I haven't said he was the one to blame for the greatness, but sure as hell none could carry that Nash boy.


----------



## Empress

Bad For Business said:


> I know it's bad to quote your own post but it just dawned on me, as @Empress said, Ambrose is basically in his ringmaster phase, whilst Big E is in a heel black power stable.
> 
> So Vince really is just rehashing the build up to the Attitude era, and WWE's gonna catch fire again 2 years from now.


What angers me is that the WWE could be on fire right now. Is Vince going to wait until the ratings are at 2 million to finally do something? 

But in two years, Jeff Jarrett's wrestling company may finally be off the ground to give the WWE some competition. So, we may have to wait until then.



StraightYesSociety said:


> I still think if they give R-Truth a Kanye West gimmick he would be the biggest star in the world.


I think this could've worked maybe 5 years ago but Truth is getting older. Maybe Xavier Woods could get this gimmick.


----------



## Chrome

Empress said:


> What angers me is that the WWE could be on fire right now. Is Vince going to wait until the ratings are at 2 million to finally do something?
> 
> But in two years, Jeff Jarrett's wrestling company may finally be off the ground to give the WWE some competition. So, we may have to wait until then.


I'm starting to think no one will rise to challenge WWE, instead WWE will just sink to everyone else's level.


----------



## Bad For Business

Chrome said:


> I'm starting to think no one will rise to challenge WWE, instead WWE will just sink to everyone else's level.


The problem is that WWE's biggest realistic challenger is NXT*, aka WWE. If NXT gets too over, Vince can pull the plug on it any time he wants. 


*NJPW fans, i get it's huge in Japan, but the problem is that it's hard for a non-Japanese speaking audience to get into. If they maybe added more English-friendly features, it could pose a legit threat for a Western audience.


----------



## NastyYaffa

Fighter Daron said:


> I haven't said he was the one to blame for the greatness, but sure as hell none could carry that Nash boy.


Nash had some great matches vs. Bret Hart & Shawn Michaels, though.


----------



## Shenroe

:ti this thread is hilarious. Keep going people, keep it cumming :maury


----------



## #Mark

Fighter Daron said:


> Roman Reigns can move and he has already had better matches in his 3 year career than Nash in 20 years. So cut that shit.


The Reigns hate is nothing but IWC groupthink at this point.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NastyYaffa said:


> Nash had some great matches vs. Bret Hart & Shawn Michaels, though.


Truth. Now those were some good matches.


----------



## joeycalz

Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins are not the problem.

The problem is: Big Show, Kane and no Daniel Bryan. People are that sick of Show and Kane where it's actually hurting viewership.

Ignore a majority of Cena/Orton fans because they attract the most casual/general people. Mostly everybody else wants to see Rollins, Reigns, Ambrose, Ziggler, Bryan, Barrett, Ryback and Wyatt... Feuding with each other, though. Nobody wants to see Roman Reigns vs. Big Show, but they would probably really like to see Reigns vs. Rollins.

Mark wars solve nothing. The brand draws. It's astounding how people don't understand that concept.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*No surprise that the same people attributing the RAW after Mania spike to Seth are avoiding giving him blame for taking up 40 minutes of TV time to look like a helpless idiot yet again. His booking is worse than Kane's now. If some still can't see how this is a problem, then nothing will open their eyes. You can't have a champion this weak and expect good results, chicken shit or not. Yes, the whole product sucks, but Seth's obnoxious amounts of screen time and constant failure cannot be ignored.*


----------



## K4L318

joeycalz said:


> Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins are not the problem.
> 
> The problem is: Big Show, Kane and no Daniel Bryan. People are that sick of Show and Kane where it's actually hurting viewership.
> 
> Ignore a majority of Cena/Orton fans because they attract the most casual/general people. Mostly everybody else wants to see Rollins, Reigns, Ambrose, Ziggler, Bryan, Barrett, Ryback and Wyatt... Feuding with each other, though. Nobody wants to see Roman Reigns vs. Big Show, but they would probably really like to see Reigns vs. Rollins.
> 
> Mark wars solve nothing. The brand draws. It's astounding how people don't understand that concept.


I think you're 1/2 right. 

I don't think Reigns or Rollins is the problem 

The problem right now is the fans are partly programmed to not care. Randy Orton is in this feud with Rollins for the WWE title why? 

Now people are going to hate what I say about him. I respect Orton. I don't like his placement in this title picture. I don't think the fans do either. 

Take last week's RAW. Hour 1 was good, Hour 2 was decent, then by hour 3 you programmed fans w/ that commentary and delivery and Show and Kane and Orton to not care. 

You come into RAW this week, it's not live, people are on twitter getting updates. Cena is opening, ok they tuned in. 3.7 tuned in to see open challenge. He draws. Divas Battle Royal was followed ok, sure, Kane backstage, a little interest. 

Here's where you're programmed not to care. 

Randy Orton vs Cesaro, which then turns into Kidd and Cesaro which turns into quick squash match for Randy. 

You then have Ambrose vs Rose, does anyone care? Why is it that Dean Ambrose still forgets that Seth Rollins smashed his head w/ blocks of cement? 

Hour 3 opens w/ Kane vs Rollins in an angle to poke fun at WCW. It's funny the dialogue from Bryan was you're going to do the same thing that winded up destroying the WCW. And Kane did it. It's funny b/c the WWE is going the same route wit this. 

Ziggler vs Neville was actually great but by hour 3, you're programmed not to care. 

And then Orton returns and it's him and Rollins. And the fans didn't care. And the viewers are wondering why is this program happening , what's the catch? 

I've looked at Randy Orton thinking why isn't this guy exciting me? RKO and all, because he's become predictable. And they take too long cutting to what he should do to someone and wear you down. 

So by next week, Why am I going to watch RAW?

HHH opens
Cena open challenge
Divas Division title developing feud 
Neville
Ziggler vs Sheamus
Is Bryan going to wrestle

That's the good.


Here's the bad

Rollins vs Orton not being exciting, more to do w/ Orton losing his appeal

Cesaro and Kidd not utilized in tag team promos, not in any real feud

Miz and Mizdow not getting the build it did post WrestleMania and pre-WrestleMania

Reigns is getting stalked by the kill joy in Big Show

Kane doesn't stay out of the ring

New Day still does not turn fully heel

Where's Finn Balor? 

Where's Brock?

Is Dean Ambrose going to remember Rollins nearly killed him last year?

Why are Luke Harper and Bray Wyatt not together?

When does Stardust turn into Cody, because Stardust sucks

Notice IDK what to say about Ryback and he's actually OVER!

See they are programming peeps to not give a fuck.


Remember back in the day the WCW had a title. It was an interesting beginners title. I believe they called it the build up title. The Television Title. How interesting wouldn't that be for say

Tyson Kidd
Sin Cara
Adam Rose
Adrian Neville
Cesaro
Dean Ambrose 
Kofi Kingston
Xavier Woods
Fandango who can get over just as easy as Disco Inferno
Zack Ryder

How interesting would that starter division be, and watch feuds from that start your show at the back end of hour 1.

But we're programmed to not care. And they have an ROH writer. But he can't escape McMahon and Kevin Dunn.


----------



## Bad For Business

Legit BOSS said:


> *No surprise that the same people attributing the RAW after Mania spike to Seth are avoiding giving him blame for taking up 40 minutes of TV time to look like a helpless idiot yet again. His booking is worse than Kane's now. If some still can't see how this is a problem, then nothing will open their eyes. You can't have a champion this weak and expect good results, chicken shit or not. Yes, the whole product sucks, but Seth's obnoxious amounts of screen time and constant failure cannot be ignored.*


Your argument was good until this point. He's been given a role to do, and he's doing it well. He can hardly book his own matches, so i fail to see how that's his fault. Any heel champion gets booked like this (except Brock, but he's a special case), Orton in the Authority was a complete pussy too, he jobbed to pretty much everyone in the build up to Elimination Chamber. 

Put simply, the guy isn't the problem, the booking is.

EDIT: Can you stop bolding your posts, it makes it hard to highlight what part to reply to.


----------



## Redwood

#Mark said:


> The Reigns hate is nothing but IWC groupthink at this point.


Maybe so, but others have a legitimate argument as to why Reigns is not as good as others make him out to be.

The pedestal has to be knocked off.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Rollins & Reigns failed to attract viewers
And I Love Rollins, but this is the reality :frown2:

Funny that when John Cena was the main focus, the fault was his alone, supposedly people were sick of him
Now the main focus is Rollins and Reigns and the ratings are worse, but the fault is everyone except them
:cena2


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Bad For Business said:


> Your argument was good until this point. He's been given a role to do, and he's doing it well. He can hardly book his own matches, so i fail to see how that's his fault. Any heel champion gets booked like this (except Brock, but he's a special case), Orton in the Authority was a complete pussy too, he jobbed to pretty much everyone in the build up to Elimination Chamber.
> 
> Put simply, the guy isn't the problem, the booking is.


*Everyone knows by now I'm referring to his booking. I've been talking about what a problem this is since Reigns pinned him clean before NOC. He went on a downward spiral after that and began losing to midcarders like Ziggler and Ryback and he was never the same again. Rollins is a great performer, but he's overexposed and too pussified to be considered a credible champion. Also, Orton wasn't a pussy, he was just a loser for all of 2014. I complained about that too. I don't discriminate.*



> EDIT: Can you stop bolding your posts, it makes it hard to highlight what part to reply to.


----------



## Redwood

SóniaPortugal said:


> Rollins & Reigns failed to attract viewers
> And I Love Rollins, but this is the reality :frown2:
> 
> Funny that when John Cena was the main focus, the fault was his alone, supposedly people were sick of him
> Now the main focus is Rollins and Reigns and the ratings are worse, but the fault is everyone except them
> :cena2


People despise anything that's been overexposed and anything that is too common. That's how Cena got hate.


----------



## Kabraxal

There is one guy to pin these ratings on... Vincent Kennedy McMahon. It doesn't matter if Rollins or Ambrose or Ziggler or Bryan have that big title... the booking is so horrible throughout the show and the writing too focused on making it feel like a cartoon instead of a sport, that people just aren't going to tune in regardless of the champion. 

The show needs a complete overhaul at this point... scrap the writing team, change the ring, change the stage, change up how commentary works, more vignettes/locker room segments instead of the same backstage interview.... basically, stop doing what you are doing Vince and go in a new direction. The path you are on now will never do anything but drive Raw/SD to dumpster rating levels.


----------



## murder

K4L318 said:


> But we're programmed to not care.


That's the perfect way to put it. They have told us year after year after year after year that anything between the post mania Raw and the build to Summerslam doesn't matter. Then again from Summerslam until the Rumble. 

Before that, there used to be a time when ratings didn't fall after Mania, but actually went up. See 97-2000.


----------



## Dark_Raiden

ShowStopper said:


> List some wins that compare to winning the Rumble and beating the most popular guy in the company clean at a PPV Main Event and pretty much steamrolling through the entire roster in the RTWM minus one or two nights. And....go!


Winning the title.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Dark_Raiden said:


> Winning the title.


*During the RTWM.


----------



## Punkholic

> - WWE RAW averaged a 2.92 rating with 4.01 million viewers for February 2015. This is down from an average 3.17 rating and 4.51 million viewers in February 2014. February 2013 numbers were a 3.34 average with 4.60 million viewers.
> 
> - SmackDown averaged a 1.83 rating with 2.52 million viewers in February 2015. This is down from a 2.05 rating and 2.89 million viewers in February 2014. The numbers for February 2013 were a 2.05 average rating and 2.92 million viewers.


*Source:* http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0415/592482/tamina-snuka-update/


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## 2Pieced

Punkholic said:


> - WWE RAW averaged a 2.92 rating with 4.01 million viewers for February 2015. This is down from an average 3.17 rating and 4.51 million viewers in February 2014. February 2013 numbers were a 3.34 average with 4.60 million viewers.
> 
> - SmackDown averaged a 1.83 rating with 2.52 million viewers in February 2015. This is down from a 2.05 rating and 2.89 million viewers in February 2014. The numbers for February 2013 were a 2.05 average rating and 2.92 million viewers.
> 
> *Source:* http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0415/592482/tamina-snuka-update/
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Daniel Bryan can't draw doe.

:bryan


----------



## numeno

Punkholic said:


> *Source:* http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0415/592482/tamina-snuka-update/
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


"fuck your criticisms,you will continue to watch anyway !!!"

:lel


----------



## Bad For Business

Kabraxal said:


> There is one guy to pin these ratings on... Vincent Kennedy McMahon. It doesn't matter if Rollins or Ambrose or Ziggler or Bryan have that big title... the booking is so horrible throughout the show and the writing too focused on making it feel like a cartoon instead of a sport, that people just aren't going to tune in regardless of the champion.
> 
> The show needs a complete overhaul at this point... scrap the writing team, change the ring, change the stage, change up how commentary works, more vignettes/locker room segments instead of the same backstage interview.... basically, stop doing what you are doing Vince and go in a new direction. The path you are on now will never do anything but drive Raw/SD to dumpster rating levels.


Basically, they should rip off Lucha Underground, whilst it's still niche enough that the casual audience won't know of it's existence. Much like Vince ripped off ECW in the '90s and got richer because of it.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Punkholic said:


> *Source:* http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0415/592482/tamina-snuka-update/
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


Many people (WWE and people in this forum) still do not understand that we are in a new era of viewers who basically stops watch what they do not like.

Also there is much more competition on TV and on Internet

If WWE do nothing this will be worse.
It is better start paying attention to what the people really and stop living in the past


----------



## StraightYesSociety




----------



## Kabraxal

Bad For Business said:


> Basically, they should rip off Lucha Underground, whilst it's still niche enough that the casual audience won't know of it's existence. Much like Vince ripped off ECW in the '90s and got richer because of it.


It is quite telling that Vince's boom periods came off poaching talent and ideas from other territories.... hell, why not just steal NXT's ideas. It's technically WWE and people will forgive you for poaching the idea if it actually means Raw is anything like NXT. As in actually watchable.


----------



## Chrome

Kabraxal said:


> It is quite telling that Vince's boom periods came off poaching talent and ideas from other territories.... hell, why not just steal NXT's ideas. It's technically WWE and people will forgive you for poaching the idea if it actually means Raw is anything like NXT. As in actually watchable.


He can poach his ideas from a backyard wrestling federation for all I care as long as the main show finally improves.


----------



## Kabraxal

Chrome said:


> He can poach his ideas from a backyard wrestling federation for all I care as long as the main show finally improves.


Instead, he's poaching ideas from the Kardashian's and Saturday Night Live more than any wrestling show....


----------



## Chrome

Kabraxal said:


> Instead, he's poaching ideas from the Kardashian's and Saturday Night Live more than any wrestling show....


I don't know, Raw's arguably worse than those 2 shows too. :lol


----------



## Dark_Raiden

ShowStopper said:


> *During the RTWM.


Main Eventing every Raw, retiring Orton, getting the best of Cena to get the Authority back, and finally winning the title at WM. Cause that matters more than any silly push that doesn't end in a title.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Dark_Raiden said:


> Main Eventing every Raw, retiring Orton, getting the best of Cena to get the Authority back, and finally winning the title at WM. Cause that matters more than any silly push that doesn't end in a title.


So does losing multiple times to guys like Dolph, Ryback, and others of that ilk without many cleans win at all. Alot of TV time is just that, alot of tv time. Doesn't matter much if you're losing to guys on the bottom part of the roster and never winning clean. Winning the Rumble and beating Bryan clean in the main event of a PPV is much more effective. It's just not as much air time.


----------



## Londrick

This is what happens when you put your two top draws in the midcard cena3 :bryan).


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Kabraxal said:


> Instead, he's poaching ideas from the Kardashian's and Saturday Night Live more than any wrestling show....


*
Russo booking based on either of those shows or any stupid television show would be greater than the main product at this point. At least we'd have stories instead of "they're both tag teams, they're both mid carders, they're both Divas, so they're wrestling, deal with it."*


----------



## Bad For Business

Legit BOSS said:


> *
> Russo booking based on either of those shows or any stupid television show would be greater than the main product at this point. At least we'd have stories instead of "they're both tag teams, they're both mid carders, they're both Divas, so they're wrestling, deal with it."*


The problem is that because it's Russo, there may be stories, but they'd be utter bullshit. I'm still not over Judy Bagwell on a pole, David Arquette, everyone joining the NWO etc. I get you idolise the guy, but his shlock and awe style just doesn't work without a filter


----------



## Empress

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/588871842498224128
*Average WWE TV Ratings*

- WWE RAW averaged a 2.92 rating with 4.01 million viewers for February 2015. This is down from an average 3.17 rating and 4.51 million viewers in February 2014. February 2013 numbers were a 3.34 average with 4.60 million viewers.

- SmackDown averaged a 1.83 rating with 2.52 million viewers in February 2015. This is down from a 2.05 rating and 2.89 million viewers in February 2014. The numbers for February 2013 were a 2.05 average rating and 2.92 million viewers.
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news.../?hootPostID=f846ce31caec1be07a1839cb611eb22a


----------



## SPCDRI

Yikes. Losing 600,000 viewers that they had in 2013 and 2014. 

"Whatever, you'll just watch anyway."

:trips2 

{600,000 people stop watching}

:vince6


----------



## Empress

*Another Record Set For WrestleMania 31, SmackDown Viewership, Ex-WCW Champion Gets Married
*

– Thursday’s episode of SmackDown drew 2.45 million viewers, which is down from the previous week’s 2.63 million viewers. This is the lowest SmackDown rating since the February 19th episode, which only drew 2.40 million viewers.

Read more: http://www.pwmania.com/another-reco...ip-ex-wcw-champion-gets-married#ixzz3XcEn0zlh


*Thursday Cable Ratings: 'Lip Sync Battle' Wins Night, 'Vikings', 'WWE Smackdown', 'Impractical Jokers', 'Ridiculousness' & More*
Lip Sync Battle was Thursday's highest rated cable original with a 0.8, down from last week's 1.0 adults 18-49 rating. Vikings and WWE Smackdown tied for second with a 0.7 adults 18-49 rating., down from last week's 0.8 adults 18-49 rating for both shows.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...wwe-smackdown-impractical-jokers-more/390465/


----------



## validreasoning

8pm = 4.105 million
9pm = 4.136 million
10pm = 3.873 million

decent showing up against the nhl and nba playoffs. the 8pm nba game drew 3.2 million and the 10.30pm game (which would have been head to head with the west coast raw airing) drew 4.07 million

one thing i noticed last night was the extremely low online viewing across the web be it here, twitter or on disquis and still raw draws a decent viewership...really does tell us the iwc is still a tiny portion of the real audience.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Here's the chart, submitted for your perusal:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Well, that's a lot better. Maybe the show being taped last week had more of an impact than I thought.


----------



## Chrome

If I recall, didn't they struggle to get 4 million quite a bit during the RTWM? How did they get it here? Fwiw, I only watched about 5 minutes of Raw last night, had other things to watch... :rose :butler :noah2 au


----------



## StraightYesSociety

validreasoning said:


> 8pm = 4.105 million
> 9pm = 4.136 million
> 10pm = 3.873 million
> 
> decent showing up against the nhl and nba playoffs. the 8pm nba game drew 3.2 million and the 10.30pm game (which would have been head to head with the west coast raw airing) drew 4.07 million
> 
> one thing i noticed last night was the extremely low online viewing across the web be it here, twitter or on disquis and still raw draws a decent viewership...really does tell us the iwc is still a tiny portion of the real audience.


Ratings don't work like that. They're an estimate based on people who have Nielsen boxes. So even if they lost most of their audience but kept the guys with the boxes they would get the same rating. Also people that write in their viewing habits can lie. It's an outdated concept. 

However, it's fun to see people on this thread take them seriously specially when WWE doesn't.


----------



## Reaper

validreasoning said:


> 8pm = 4.105 million
> 9pm = 4.136 million
> 10pm = 3.873 million
> 
> decent showing up against the nhl and nba playoffs. the 8pm nba game drew 3.2 million and the 10.30pm game (which would have been head to head with the west coast raw airing) drew 4.07 million
> 
> one thing i noticed last night was the extremely low online viewing across the web be it here, twitter or on disquis and still raw draws a decent viewership...really does tell us the iwc is still a tiny portion of the real audience.


It's relatively less than last year (but not much). The noteworthy thing here the downward trend line. Pretty much losing some viewers every year.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

And everyone was FREAKING the fuck out last week and shitting on Rollins and whoever else. :lmao

unkout


----------



## PunchWalk

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Well, that's a lot better. Maybe the show being taped last week had more of an impact than I thought.


A lot better than the disaster that was last week but still worse than last year. And it's not like last year had impressive numbers either.


----------



## PunchWalk

ShowStopper said:


> And everyone was FREAKING the fuck out last week and shitting on Rollins and whoever else. :lmao
> 
> unkout


What are you talking about? These numbers are awful. 

Rollins has pulled in weak numbers every time he has had multiple segments in a RAW (with the exception being when Lesnar was there to save him and no NCAA.)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

PunchWalk said:


> What are you talking about? These numbers are awful.
> 
> Rollins has pulled in weak numbers every time he has had multiple segments in a RAW (with the exception being when Lesnar was there to save him and no NCAA.)


What am I talking about? Go back and search this thread last week and the comments you made under the name you had last week, and other commenters as well. That's what I'm talking about. These numbers against the NBA and NHL playoffs are more than this shitty product should even get.


----------



## PunchWalk

ShowStopper said:


> What am I talking about? Go back and search this thread last week and the comments you made under the name you had last week, and other commenters as well. That's what I'm talking about. These numbers against the NBA and NHL playoffs are more than this shitty product should even get.


NBA and NHL don't draw high numbers anyways. 

This is not a good number, in case you didn't know.


----------



## Louaja89

They are lucky to get that much viewers , they don't deserve it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

PunchWalk said:


> NBA and NHL don't draw high numbers anyways.
> 
> This is not a good number, in case you didn't know.


Sporting events, especially the 4 major sports in America, share fans with the WWE, especially that 18 and up male demo. WWE hasn't done good numbers in ages. That isn't news to anyone. But to anyone who thought they were going to do the numbers they did LAST week consistently, they were very, very wrong.


----------



## Louaja89

ShowStopper said:


> Sporting events, especially the 4 major sports in America, share fans with the WWE, especially that 18 and up male demo. WWE hasn't done good numbers in ages. That isn't news to anyone. But to anyone who thought they were going to do the numbers they did LAST week consistently, they were very, very wrong.


Come on man don't argue with the man of 1004 names.


----------



## PunchWalk

ShowStopper said:


> Sporting events, especially the 4 major sports in America, share fans with the WWE, especially that 18 and up male demo. WWE hasn't done good numbers in ages. That isn't news to anyone. But to anyone who thought they were going to do the numbers they did LAST week consistently, they were very, very wrong.


Who cares if they share a demo when their product isn't drawing well. NBA had disappointing ratings all season long, and NHL never draws well in the US. It's not like they were going up against the NFL.

No one said they would do the same numbers they did last week. Just that they would continue to do poor numbers going forward. So far, that has been the case.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

PunchWalk said:


> Who cares if they share a demo when their product isn't drawing well. NBA had disappointing ratings all season long, and NHL never draws well in the US. It's not like they were going up against the NFL.
> 
> No one said they would do the same numbers they did last week. Just that they would continue to do poor numbers going forward. So far, that has been the case.


Whether the NBA or NHL does good ratings or not, either way they share an audience demo with WWE. The fact that WWE got over 4 million viewers for 2 of their 3 hour show is something they will take and be happy about. The over-reaction to a taped episode of Raw last week is just the cherry on top. So over the top ridiculous. :lmao

You sure do know alot about what was said last week for someone who joined yesterday.


----------



## PunchWalk

ShowStopper said:


> Whether the NBA or NHL does good ratings or not, either way they share an audience demo with WWE. The fact that WWE got over 4 million viewers for 2 of their 3 hour show is something they will take and be happy about. The over-reaction to a taped episode of Raw last week is just the cherry on top. So over the top ridiculous. :lmao
> 
> You sure do know alot about what was said last week for someone who joined yesterday.


Why would they be happy with a poor number?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

PunchWalk said:


> Why would they be happy with a poor number?


I'm talking about in comparison to last week and having two major sports leagues postseason games on last night against Raw. fpalm


----------



## PunchWalk

BTW, last year (on 4/21) they went up against NBA and NHL playoffs and averaged 4.139. The year before 4.4 million - almost 400K better than this year. Going up against the NBA and NHL (these two don't draw well at all) isn't an excuse.

http://www.pwinsider.com/article/92038/raw-audience-sees-large-drop.html?p=1


----------



## Fighter Daron

Bad For Business said:


> Ratings don't work like that. They're an estimate based on people who have Nielsen boxes. So even if they lost most of their audience but kept the guys with the boxes they would get the same rating. Also people that write in their viewing habits can lie. It's an outdated concept.
> 
> However, it's fun to see people on this thread take them seriously specially when WWE doesn't.


Then, which is the proper way to evaluate if you're being viewed or not?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

From The Wrestling Observer:



> Tuesday, 21 April 2015 15:54
> 
> 
> *It does appear now that live vs. tape makes a difference with Raw, given last week's unusually low number and this week being back to normal levels,* as Raw did 4.03 million viewers.
> 
> *It beat the NBA playoff game head-to-head that did 3.22 million viewers, but was second for the night behind the late game that did 4.07 million viewers.*
> 
> There was a third hour drop, but that isn't unusual either.
> 
> 8 p.m. 4.11 million viewers
> 
> 9 p.m. 4.14 million viewers
> 
> 10 p.m. 3.87 million viewers


Beat the first NBA playoff game head to head. Not bad. And taped apparently does make a big difference.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Fighter Daron said:


> Then, which is the proper way to evaluate if you're being viewed or not?


Why did you quote me as Bad for Business? Also there is no proper way at the moment. However, places like Netflix and Amazon have a better system because they can count views in real time similar to YouTube. That's not possible with TV.


----------



## validreasoning

9-10pm hour of raw last week was second most watched thing on cable


----------



## Goldusto

what caused the bump ? show was paants i see no compelling reason to tune in, is the hype real for extreme rules ?


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

ShowStopper said:


> Sporting events, especially the 4 major sports in America, share fans with the WWE, especially that 18 and up male demo. WWE hasn't done good numbers in ages. That isn't news to anyone. But to anyone who thought they were going to do the numbers they did LAST week consistently, they were very, very wrong.


No they don't. I will give you baseball, basketball, and football. But NHL is a damn dud in the USA. Besides Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Boston the ratings are shit. The games last week averaged less than 500,000 viewers nationally. They don't share many fans with the WWE.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

WesternFilmGuy said:


> No they don't. I will give you baseball, basketball, and football. But NHL is a damn dud in the USA. Besides Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Boston the ratings are shit. The games last week averaged less than 500,000 viewers nationally. They don't share many fans with the WWE.


NHL doesn't do huge ratings, I'm not even a hockey fan myself. But the NHL playoffs are very popular in the US. There are definitely some hockey fans and wrestling fans who enjoy both, hell I know some myself. How many exactly, I don't know. I was talking more about the NBA. This is far from my point anyway. My point is that some people really made a huge deal over NOTHING last week; to be exact, a TAPED edition of Raw in a foreign country.


----------



## Fighter Daron

StraightYesSociety said:


> Why did you quote me as Bad for Business? Also there is no proper way at the moment. However, places like Netflix and Amazon have a better system because they can count views in real time similar to YouTube. That's not possible with TV.


Sorry, I fucked it up with the quote :lol


----------



## LOL-ins

2.84 is now a good number lol. I remember the not so long ago days when a 3.2/3 was laughed at (CM Punk's 2011 run)


----------



## tnraw

I always thought Raw had a lot of competition on Monday nights but from looking at the ratings of other shows there doesn't seem to be much on. The only real competition is sports and this love and hip hop show. The rest of the shows are mostly just cartoons. If Raw was competing against shows like game of thrones or even some good action movies then the ratings would probably go way lower.


----------



## K4L318

9 p.m. *4.14* million viewers

10 p.m. *3.87* million viewers

Mizdow is getting released.



ShowStopper said:


> And everyone was FREAKING the fuck out last week and shitting on Rollins and whoever else. :lmao
> 
> unkout


Rollins is the main reason those ratings are up. People forgot how Roman and Randy sunk them to 3's. 

Rollins is young, is hip, is fresh, is a great worker. And once he turns face, I wouldn't be shocked to see 4.5-5's opening RAW. He doesn't have to be funny, he can be serious and fans stick with him.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

WWE popularity is falling
So people are happy with these numbers
WWE needs to find a person(Men) who attracts people who are not WWE fans, attracting new fans
Currently the Divas have such power because of Total Divas, but they are badly treated by WWE


----------



## Starbuck

Advertised Triple H return. Ratings increase. All of you fools too butthurt to admit it. 

:trips4


----------



## The Tempest

This week *SmackDown*'s viewership is: 2,642,000

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...kings-lip-sync-battle-pawn-stars-more/393671/


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Up against NBA playoffs again. Maybe 3.9 mil average?


----------



## Shenroe

WesternFilmGuy said:


> Up against NBA playoffs again. Maybe 3.9 mil average?


:ti 2.7 mil tops :Jordan


----------



## RatingsMatter

showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-100-monday-cable-originals-4-27-2015[dot]html

(can't post links due to low post count)

8PM 3.823
9PM 3.855
10PM 3.590

Fucking atrocious.

As bad as Rollins has done in terms of viewership, Reigns is just on another level of bad. You can't even just say that he doesn't draw anymore. He's a legitimate ratings killer.

Ratings decrease every time Reigns is in the main event picture.

Sure looks like all those casuals think he has "improved" and that he's "super over" now. LOL @ Reigns marks


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Smackdown is going to catch up! And it's not because they are increasing, but RAW will decrease to it!


----------



## Chrome

Another 3rd hour drop. Guess the people didn't want to stick around for that MAIN EVENT TAG TEAM MATCH PLAYAS.


----------



## Wynter

I'm sick and tired of main event tag matches on Smackdown and Raw. There is nothing creative about that shit. 

And the 3rd hour always drops. At this point, people should expect it except on the rare occasion where it it's basically the same as the second hour or rises. 

But in general, 3rd hour away falls. 

I see Brownian still juggling the balls of Seth and Roman in his mouth.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Here's the chart:


----------



## Wynter

Guess no one gave any fucks for ER, not even the first hour broke 4.0.

Something needs to change up.


----------



## Louaja89

Wynter said:


> I'm sick and tired of main event tag matches on Smackdown and Raw. There is nothing creative about that shit.
> 
> And the 3rd hour always drops. At this point, people should expect it except on the rare occasion where it it's basically the same as the second hour or rises.
> 
> But in general, 3rd hour away falls.
> 
> I see Brownian still juggling the balls of Seth and Roman in his mouth.


I think the only reason that he hates them so much is because they gangbanged his girlfriend.


----------



## A-C-P

Wynter said:


> Guess no one gave any fucks for ER, not even the first hour broke 4.0.
> 
> Something needs to change up.


"Oh those people will all watch anyways, right?" :vince7


----------



## RatingsMatter

Wynter said:


> I'm sick and tired of main event tag matches on Smackdown and Raw. There is nothing creative about that shit.
> 
> And the 3rd hour always drops. At this point, people should expect it except on the rare occasion where it it's basically the same as the second hour or rises.
> 
> But in general, 3rd hour away falls.
> 
> I see Brownian still juggling the balls of Seth and Roman in his mouth.


"He's so popular now"

"He is on the right trajectory"

Clearly this guy is just poised to be a cash cow for the company. He has "mega star" written all over him.


----------



## yanus

I think someone said it in the "Rise and Fall of WWE dvd trailer" thread : threw 6000 superman punches, never drew a dime. 

:vince7:mj2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

People don't care about Reigns. They don't care about Rollins. They don't care about The Authority. They don't care about Orton. They don't care about Sandow returning or his mimicking gimmick continuing. They don't care about King of the Ring or any of the competitors in it. They don't care about who Wyatt's going to be facing. They don't care about this being the fallout to Extreme Rules. They don't care about care about anything except the man of the hour in the second hour, :cena3


----------



## Wynter

Louaja89 said:


> I think the only reason that he hates them so much is because they gangbanged his girlfriend.


:lol you would think. I came in expecting raw to had been at a very low viewership like 3.1 or something :lol 3rd hour always drops by 100,000-300,000. Hell, it did last week and they got some really good viewership. Shit just always happen by that time. 3 hours can be a drag unless the show is really hot. 

But, considering Brownian is on his 40th account, talking about Roman and Seth means the world to him. At least me being a mega mark is a reason why I talk about the two a lot :lol



A-C-P said:


> "Oh those people will all watch anyways, right?" :vince7


Vince won't budge until the shit hits twos. Sad thing is, he'd legit probably watch the shit drag down to the 2 millions and stubbornly say nothing is wrong the whole time :no:

The main event scene is stale as fuck. Keep Roman in the midcard(though, I think he's going back after Payback). Give Seth a new damn person to feud with. Stop treating Seth like a little bitch. He plays the role very well, but it does nothing to bring in new eyes. Build up other stories that's not named Authority. Show needs to be collectively good. Not only the Authority/Seth/Kane storyline.


----------



## foleyaustin

Geekboy Rollins continues to be a ratings killer. Can't wait for showstopper to stop sucking on his nuts long enough to come and defend this. What a bust.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

You take Roman out of the main event and things crater. Now he's back, can they rebound? 

Seriously, I don't blame any one performer. WWE has built up such negative momentum that it will take weeks, if not months of damn good shows, to staunch the bleeding and right the ship, so to speak. The Baltimore riots surely didn't help matters last night either, coupled with the sporting events. I skipped the main event,mostly, because the images on tv of the riot were more compelling than the RAW stream on my computer.


----------



## A-C-P

Wynter said:


> :lol you would think. I came in expecting raw to had been at a very low viewership like 3.1 or something :lol 3rd hour always drops by 100,000-300,000. Hell, it did last week and they got some really good viewership. Shit just always happen by that time. 3 hours can be a drag unless the show is really hot.
> 
> But, considering Brownian is on his 40th account, talking about Roman and Seth means the world to him. At least me being a mega mark is a reason why I talk about the two a lot :lol
> 
> 
> 
> Vince won't budge until the shit hits twos. Sad thing is, he'd legit probably watch the shit drag down to the 2 millions and stubbornly say nothing is wrong the whole time :no:
> 
> The main event scene is stale as fuck. Keep Roman in the midcard(though, I think he's going back after Payback). Give Seth a new damn person to feud with. Stop treating Seth like a little bitch. He plays the role very well, but it does nothing to bring in new eyes. *Build up other stories that's not named Authority.* Show needs to be collectively good. Not only the Authority/Seth/Kane storyline.


This is one of the big things the WWE is missing on (and has been missing on for a good long while now) when the WWE was at its peak the entire show was made up of a # of different stories involving people from EVERY level of the card. Shows now are based around 2 MAYBE 3 stories and the rest is treated as "filler" that doesn't matter.


----------



## RatingsMatter

foleyaustin said:


> Geekboy Rollins continues to be a ratings killer. Can't wait for showstopper to stop sucking on his nuts long enough to come and defend this. What a bust.


Rollins has drawn some shit numbers, but Reigns is beyond anything we've seen recently. The guy is a legitimate ratings killer.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

WWE couldn't even get the Mizdow vs. Miz feud right once they split. They had it on a silver platter and all they had to do was not fuck it up, and they still fucked it up.

We can't expect them to write a storyline from scratch that's engaging if they can't make an organically made storyline engaging. The Authority and main event is the only thing they know how to write for. Vince needs to fire whoever's responsible for how the Mizdow/Miz feud turned out and if it's Vince himself, he needs to do what's "best for business" and retire.

Yeah, I'm still mad about the Mizdow/Miz feud. Still in shock they fucked that up. 

/endrant


----------



## Empress

#BadNewsSanta said:


> WWE couldn't even get the Mizdow vs. Miz feud right once they split. They had it on a silver platter and all they had to do was not fuck it up, and they still fucked it up.
> 
> We can't expect them to write a storyline from scratch that's engaging if they can't make an organically made storyline engaging. The Authority and main event is the only thing they know how to write for. Vince needs to fire whoever's responsible for how the Mizdow/Miz feud turned out and if it's Vince himself, he needs to do what's "best for business" and retire.
> 
> Yeah, I'm still mad about the Mizdow/Miz feud. Still in shock they fucked that up.
> 
> /endrant


:clap

Miz/Mizdow wrote itself. All they had to do was make it a Mania match and have Sandow go over. He gets the momentum and that push into the upper mid card. 

At this point, I don't even think the WWE is sabotaging their stars. It's just scary how they think what they're doing helps. 

Also, I'm not looking forward to next week. I think Stephanie returns. She's going to take up even more screen time. I like her, but this Authority nonsense should've ended at Survivor Series.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

#BadNewsSanta said:


> WWE couldn't even get the Mizdow vs. Miz feud right once they split. They had it on a silver platter and all they had to do was not fuck it up, and they still fucked it up.
> 
> We can't expect them to write a storyline from scratch that's engaging if they can't make an organically made storyline engaging. The Authority and main event is the only thing they know how to write for. Vince needs to fire whoever's responsible for how the Mizdow/Miz feud turned out and if it's Vince himself, he needs to do what's "best for business" and retire.
> 
> Yeah, I'm still mad about the Mizdow/Miz feud. Still in shock they fucked that up.
> 
> /endrant


*PREACH* :clap

You are absolutely 100% correct. If they can't do Miz/izdow properly when that story writes itself, the woe unto the fans. This is truly the darkest timeline right now.


----------



## Wynter

#BadNewsSanta said:


> WWE couldn't even get the Mizdow vs. Miz feud right once they split. They had it on a silver platter and all they had to do was not fuck it up, and they still fucked it up.
> 
> We can't expect them to write a storyline from scratch that's engaging if they can't make an organically made storyline engaging. The Authority and main event is the only thing they know how to write for. Vince needs to fire whoever's responsible for how the Mizdow/Miz feud turned out and if it's Vince himself, he needs to do what's "best for business" and retire.
> 
> Yeah, I'm still mad about the Mizdow/Miz feud. Still in shock they fucked that up.
> 
> /endrant


Don't get me fucking started on Miz vs Sandow. They did shit all for Sandow. OK, you didn't want them to have a singles match at Mania? Cool. I can deal. But not even letting Sandow win the battle Royale by eliminating Miz for the win??? Jesus, how did you fuck that up? And of course they manage to run their singles match up to the ground in a matter of two weeks. 

And then they had Sandow lose in the end anyway and Miz takes the girl and goes off to do his movie :drake1


Lets be honest, the Authority is the main event scene. If it wasn't for Roman and Randy, not one person in the main event picture would be a non-authority member fpalm 

Fucking hell, they can use 3 hours to have Seth "trick" Randy, but Dean can't get a promo on TV to save his life. It's ridiculous.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

When I think of the Mizdow/Miz feud, it's like WWE had two options and they picked the wrong thing at every turn. There were several points where they could've salvaged it but they didn't.

At the Royal Rumble:
Option 1: Have Mizdow turn on Miz and build to a Mania match
Option 2: Don't have Mizdow turn on Miz

They went with option 2 which still could've worked:
Option 1: Have one of the two turn on the other at Fastlane and build to a match at Mania
Option 2: Don't have them split, don't give them a one on one match at Mania and just throw them in the Andre The Giant Memorial Battle Royal, which we'll put on the show until the very last second and then move it to the pre-show

Again, option 2, but that's all good because they can still make it work by choosing option 1 here:
Option 1: Have Mizdow win the battle royal, eliminating Miz in the process (preferably last with them having a 2-3 minute match of Sandow dominating and throwing Miz over), and then Mizdow reverts to Sandow and they build the storyline of Miz becoming jealous of the man who was his stunt double succeeding in the battle royal and they can do the classic storyline of Miz destroying the trophy (which would be a bit redundant as Swagger/Cesaro did that last year) or maybe Miz tries to claim ownership of it. It's not the best storyline, but it's the best they can do at this point.

OR

Option 2: Have Mizdow eliminate Miz quickly, and then have him lose the battle royal anyway making him look like a chump.

... and this is where it would seem they crossed the point of no return. However, Extreme Rules was coming up and they could still salvage this in some way...

Option 1: Have them build to a match at Extreme Rules, where Sandow finally goes back to being the "intellectual savior" and give them a relatively intense feud which culminates in a No DQ match at Extreme Rules, where Sandow defeats Miz in a brutal match which writes Miz off of television and still gives Sandow some rub.

...

Option 2: Have Sandow keep being Mizdow, facing Miz on Raw three weeks in a row in 2-5 minute matches with only one segment between them and the only semblance of story being Sandow starting a relationship with Miz's co-star Summer Rae, showing that he's "a better Miz than Miz." Then have him lose the final match, have Miz go to Hollywood and Sandow just come out the next week, moving on from his feud with Miz completely, thereby ending it.

And they go with option 2.

Oh wait, sorry. This is the ratings thread, not the #badnewssantarantaboutmizdowandmizfeud thread. 

Edit: @Wynter put it a lot simpler than I did.


----------



## RatingsMatter

What needs to change is pretty evident to anyone with a brain who has been watching long enough: put more fucking charismatic guys in the main event scene. It's really very simple. This is what they've done whenever they've had success. It doesn't matter if the 'technical wrestling' marks like or dislike their in ring work. That's irrelevant. Let charismatic individuals with interesting characters cut promos and have matches where they display their ring psychology and storytelling ability.

Creative would have a lot more flexibility if that was the case.

We don't need charisma vacuums like Reigns, Rollins, and Orton occupying the main event. No one is going to watch these clowns.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

It really isn't surprising the ratings are down, every single star on that main roster has been booked really bad, Seth Rollins, arguably WWE's biggest b*tch right now, Daniel Bryan isn't there, they've tried to build stars by having them feud with Big Show and Kane who haven't been relevant in years, Dolph Ziggler, a guy that had huge momentum after Survivor Series, just got shoved up Sheamus' ass, don't even get me started on Bray Wyatt, Dean Ambrose and Cesaro, it's getting really hard to become invested in these characters because whenever they have something good for them, creative just messes it up, then we have Roman Reigns, a guy I hate but how the hell they not turn him heel after Mania and why is he going back into the main event, the guy could be super over in the mid card that would eventually lead into people actually wanting him to become World Champion one day, also 3 hours of RAW is way too much especially when half your matches get less than 5 minutes and the rest is filled with commercials and talking, viewership is going down, and it'll continue to go down until WWE changes things around.


----------



## Necramonium

Yikes:










keep it up vince, you delusional geriatric fool! Hunter is laughing his ass off with him bring NXT from its ruined state to the better product it is right now!


----------



## RatedR10

the product is fucking terrible right now, that's why viewership is dropping. I don't know how long it's been since I've watched a full episode of Raw, and I don't even watch Smackdown. Hell, I didn't even watch the PPV in full this past Sunday. The entire product is just ridiculously dull, and the good things they had going for them is a mid-card nothing (Ambrose) and is a bigger bitch than... well... I can't even find anyone to compare Rollins to. I understand he's a sneaky heel and whatnot and won't win legitimately, but he's booked like such a bitch.

Bray Wyatt has been absolutely ruined by two big Wrestlemania losses. He's all talk, no substance. And then there's others who I don't even care to mention because of how dull everything is. It's just really fucking bad. There's no reason to watch the show unless Lesnar is going to be there. 

I wonder how long it'll be until the viewership numbers drop below 3.5 million. How long is it until an hour sees below 3 million viewers? It's inevitable at this point.


----------



## Chrome

Necramonium said:


> Yikes:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: big pic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> keep it up vince, you delusional geriatric fool! Hunter is laughing his ass off with him bring NXT from its ruined state to the better product it is right now!


That drop off after the post-Mania Raw. :whoo


----------



## Blade Runner

I feel guilty about watching RAW every week. I don't enjoy 95% of the program and skip about half of it. I can't even imagine those with a lower tolerance for wrestling trying to tune into these stale storylines and matches they've seen 10 000 times already. The ratings are reflective of this and the post-WM down period to one of the most underwhelming WM builds in history.


----------



## RatedR10

Necramonium said:


> Yikes:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> keep it up vince, you delusional geriatric fool! Hunter is laughing his ass off with him bring NXT from its ruined state to the better product it is right now!


"people will keep watching" they (the company) said.

Yeah... well they aren't.



Jan 13, 2014: 3.11
Jan 12, 2015: 2.71

Jan 20, 2014: 3.46
Jan 19, 2015: 3.03

Jan 27, 2014: 3.23
Jan 26, 2015: 3.28 (this was the show they pretty much gave away the Rumble for free)

Feb 3, 2014: 3.14
Feb 2, 2015: 3.02

Feb 10, 2014: 3.14
Feb 9, 2015: 2.72

Feb 17, 2014: 3.08
Feb 16, 2015: 2.91

Feb 24, 2014: 3.31
Feb 23, 2015: 2.97

Mar 3, 2014: 3.25
Mar 2, 2015: 2.82

Mar 10, 2014: 3.09
Mar 9, 2015: 2.85

Mar 17, 2014: 2.97
Mar 16, 2015: 2.73

Mar 24, 2014: 3.07
Mar 23, 2015: 3.03

Apr 1, 2014: 3.13
Mar 30, 2015: 3.68

Apr 7, 2014: 3.69
Apr 6, 2015: 2.81

Apr 14, 2014: 3.26
Apr 13, 2015: 2.72

Apr 21, 2014: 2.96
Apr 20, 2015: 2.84

Apr 28, 2014: 3.26
Apr 27, 2015: 2.68


Even last year's post-WM Raw had a better rating than this years.


----------



## BryanMark

Necramonium said:


> Yikes:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> keep it up vince, you delusional geriatric fool! Hunter is laughing his ass off with him bring NXT from its ruined state to the better product it is right now!


LOL if the fucking NXT is the fucking draw then you won't have them shill the network for every 10 seconds.


----------



## dougfisher_05

IDONTSHIV said:


> Here's the chart:


So if I understand this chart correctly *RAW had the most viewers* of _any_ television show on Monday night, according to the column on the far right. It just wasn't in the 18-49 demographic upon which the rating is based on. 

I really wish they'd get rid of this antiquated system. Every cable/satellite system today is digital. There is no reason why they can't have an exact number of viewers in 2015. 

That said. I'm not a WWE apologist. Their viewership is down in the demo that counts, despite the fact that according to the list they far and way had the most total viewers for Monday night.


----------



## SPCDRI

RatedR10 said:


> Jan 13, 2014: 3.11
> Jan 12, 2015: 2.71
> 
> Jan 20, 2014: 3.46
> Jan 19, 2015: 3.03
> 
> Jan 27, 2014: 3.23
> Jan 26, 2015: 3.28 (this was the show they pretty much gave away the Rumble for free)
> 
> Feb 3, 2014: 3.14
> Feb 2, 2015: 3.02
> 
> Feb 10, 2014: 3.14
> Feb 9, 2015: 2.72
> 
> Feb 17, 2014: 3.08
> Feb 16, 2015: 2.91
> 
> Feb 24, 2014: 3.31
> Feb 23, 2015: 2.97
> 
> Mar 3, 2014: 3.25
> Mar 2, 2015: 2.82
> 
> Mar 10, 2014: 3.09
> Mar 9, 2015: 2.85
> 
> Mar 17, 2014: 2.97
> Mar 16, 2015: 2.73
> 
> Mar 24, 2014: 3.07
> Mar 23, 2015: 3.03
> 
> Apr 1, 2014: 3.13
> Mar 30, 2015: 3.68
> 
> Apr 7, 2014: 3.69
> Apr 6, 2015: 2.81
> 
> Apr 14, 2014: 3.26
> Apr 13, 2015: 2.72
> 
> Apr 21, 2014: 2.96
> Apr 20, 2015: 2.84
> 
> Apr 28, 2014: 3.26
> Apr 27, 2015: 2.68
> 
> 
> Even last year's post-WM Raw had a better rating than this years.


The shocking thing is how they're just barely hanging on to 3 ratings by the skin of their teeth and just spent almost a month doing 2.84 or worse. 

I remember people here who wanted to strip Punk of the belt because he wasn't drawing when the shows were doing like, 3.2 or 3.3s. There are now 4, 5, 6 show stretches at a time where they are doing like, 2.8 averaged out.


----------



## A-C-P

RatedR10 said:


> Spoiler: big post
> 
> 
> 
> "people will keep watching" they (the company) said.
> 
> Yeah... well they aren't.
> 
> 
> 
> Jan 13, 2014: 3.11
> Jan 12, 2015: 2.71
> 
> Jan 20, 2014: 3.46
> Jan 19, 2015: 3.03
> 
> Jan 27, 2014: 3.23
> Jan 26, 2015: 3.28 (this was the show they pretty much gave away the Rumble for free)
> 
> Feb 3, 2014: 3.14
> Feb 2, 2015: 3.02
> 
> Feb 10, 2014: 3.14
> Feb 9, 2015: 2.72
> 
> Feb 17, 2014: 3.08
> Feb 16, 2015: 2.91
> 
> Feb 24, 2014: 3.31
> Feb 23, 2015: 2.97
> 
> Mar 3, 2014: 3.25
> Mar 2, 2015: 2.82
> 
> Mar 10, 2014: 3.09
> Mar 9, 2015: 2.85
> 
> Mar 17, 2014: 2.97
> Mar 16, 2015: 2.73
> 
> Mar 24, 2014: 3.07
> Mar 23, 2015: 3.03
> 
> Apr 1, 2014: 3.13
> Mar 30, 2015: 3.68
> 
> Apr 7, 2014: 3.69
> Apr 6, 2015: 2.81
> 
> Apr 14, 2014: 3.26
> Apr 13, 2015: 2.72
> 
> Apr 21, 2014: 2.96
> Apr 20, 2015: 2.84
> 
> Apr 28, 2014: 3.26
> Apr 27, 2015: 2.68
> 
> 
> Even last year's post-WM Raw had a better rating than this years.


Yep, those complainers and contrarians will just keep watching anyways, right Vince? :ha


----------



## RatedR10

SPCDRI said:


> The shocking thing is how they're just barely hanging on to 3 ratings by the skin of their teeth and just spent almost a month doing 2.84 or worse.
> 
> I remember people here who wanted to strip Punk of the belt because he wasn't drawing when the shows were doing like, 3.2 or 3.3s. There are now 4, 5, 6 show stretches at a time where they are doing like, 2.8 averaged out.


It's also shocking how they hit 3's only twice during the RTWM post-Rumble (not including the night after Rumble Raw. That was pretty much giving the Rumble away for free).


----------



## Kabraxal

A-C-P said:


> Yep, those complainers and contrarians will just keep watching anyways, right Vince? :ha


It took a while, but he's lost the wrestling fan it looks like. This is a redux of 95 really... ECW making noise, WCW starting to push ahead, all while Vince blindfolds himself and screams over his detractors until he is kicked in the balls. Just switch out ECW with LU or even NXT and WCW with NJPW and we now have a distinct possibility to finally see the shift away from WWE being the number 1 wrestling company in the world. 

Bischoff said it best... once you lose those fans, it's nearly impossible to get them back. And other companies are making loud noises to capture our attention.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Looks like it truly is an end of an era. First quarter earnings reports displayed that ratings have no correlation with financial performance.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

dougfisher_05 said:


> So if I understand this chart correctly *RAW had the most viewers* of _any_ television show on Monday night, according to the column on the far right. It just wasn't in the 18-49 demographic upon which the rating is based on.
> 
> I really wish they'd get rid of this antiquated system. Every cable/satellite system today is digital. There is no reason why they can't have an exact number of viewers in 2015.
> 
> That said. I'm not a WWE apologist. Their viewership is down in the demo that counts, despite the fact that according to the list they far and way had the most total viewers for Monday night.


Of any cable show for total viewers. the networks stomp the viewership numbers. The Nielsens are what they are. The Networks have decided that 18-49 is the money demo and ignore older people who actually have a lot of purchasing power. CBS skews old, so they highlight total viewership numbers when they tout the strength of their shows ratings, I dont care for the system too much. They have added categories called L+# L+7 and even longer periods of time. That measures people who in the next 3 or 7 days watch it via dvr, on demand or other platforms. I have no idea how Raw does in those ratings.


----------



## DoubtGin

Smackdown did its lowerst number this year.


----------



## Empress

*SmackDown Viewership Suffers Big Drop*

- Last night's episode of WWE SmackDown averaged 2.338 million viewers, down 13% from last week's 2.642 million viewers.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0501/592919/smackdown-viewership-suffers-big-drop/


----------



## Shenroe

NFL.


----------



## AmbroseWyatt

Move over Randy Orton, there's a new ratings killer in town :rollins

I'm talking about Raw by the way. But going by Smackdown's failure to gain ratings, I'm guessing Seth was the focal point of the show 8*D


----------



## LOL-ins

Ratings killer is at it again. They take his move and he takes away the fans. hahahahahaahahaaha


----------



## Shenroe

AmbroseWyatt said:


> Move over Randy Orton, there's a new ratings killer in town :rollins
> 
> I'm talking about Raw by the way. But going by Smackdown's failure to gain ratings, I'm guessing Seth was the focal point of the show 8*D





LOL-ins said:


> Ratings killer is at it again. They take his move and he takes away the fans. hahahahahaahahaaha


NFL draft bros, didn't matter if Cena or Rock were the focus instead, SD would have still hit 2.6/7 mil anyway.


----------



## LaMelo

They should bring the Curb Stomp back.


----------



## A-C-P

Bryan on Smackdown rating increase

Bryan off Smackdown rating decrease

:hmm

:yes


----------



## StraightYesSociety

A-C-P said:


> Bryan on Smackdown rating increase
> 
> Bryan off Smackdown rating decrease
> 
> :hmm
> 
> :yes


The American Ratings Bryan Danielson... OH YEAH!


----------



## RebelArch86

They fucked up and underestimated Bryan so bad. I know everyone knows he was over and that's been done to death, but they lost a permanent 10% of their audience over the rumble bull shit.

People say the crowds are different now, but that's not due to changed opinions, that's due to fans truly just fucking off to other things.

I don't even think they can throw the belt back on him and fix things at this point. They'd have to roll out the red carpet and make 32 about putting him back on top with good faith promises of a sustained push to bring fans back in.


----------



## The Tempest

:hmm
SD viewership decrased, gee, I wonder why? It's because of the NFL :lol or maybe, just maybe, people are starting to realize that the show isn't that important anymore? Bryan wasn't featured on the show, so the ratings flopped, 

I may get hate for this, but I'm glad that it is losing viewership, WWE needs to wake up when it comes to SmackDown, and losing viewers is the only way it can happen.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Empress said:


> *SmackDown Viewership Suffers Big Drop*
> 
> - Last night's episode of WWE SmackDown averaged 2.338 million viewers, down 13% from last week's 2.642 million viewers.
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0501/592919/smackdown-viewership-suffers-big-drop/


Hi, this is the chart for Smackdown










Unfortunately, the Monday cable ratings came out and RAW wasn't listed :hmm


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Finally:










*8:00pm 3.422m 1.03 18-49
9:00pm 3.708m 1.13 demo
1000pm 3.588m 1.15 18-49*


----------



## The Tempest

Last hour drew 3,4 milions? :wow What happened there?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Hours with Reigns' matches did horribly. Hour with Ambrose match did the best.

Ambrose>Reigns confirmed. :ambrose


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Hours with Reigns' matches did horribly. Hour with Ambrose match did the best.
> 
> Ambrose>Reigns confirmed. :ambrose


It was Rollins vs. Ambrose in the highest hour.

:hbk1


----------



## McCringleberry

The Tempest said:


> Last hour drew 3,4 milions? :wow What happened there?












Poor stupid bastard is back chasing the world title for a week and already he's back on the audience's shit list. :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The last hour had the highest demo,barely, Could this be attributed to the keen insight provided by Rollins doing commentary? :rollins


----------



## Louaja89

It's too easy to bash Reigns when we all knew that nothing would happen in that main event.


----------



## Empress

When the ratings are bad and Reigns isn't featured, it's the WWE's fault and not the talent. But when Reigns is featured and the numbers go down, it's automatically his fault again. Interesting how that goes.

I am glad that Ambrose/Rollins seem to have attracted the highest rating. Their match deserved it.


----------



## MinMax

So Ambrose - a guy who's been booked like a jobber and was JUST added to the main event - carries his hour to the best viewership, while the other 3 failures who were prominently featured in the other 2 hours drew atrocious numbers.

Gee, who could have ever predicted that?!


----------



## The Bloodline

Do people go out of their way to be dicks in the ratings thread?

Hopefully this good episode will bring in more viewers next week. Problem is, Its been bad for so long though, it'll be hard to get people to really start to care again.


----------



## MinMax

ShowStopper said:


> It was Rollins vs. Ambrose in the highest hour.
> 
> :hbk1


LOL Rollins has been in the main event for quite a while now and has been in the lowest rated hours on numerous occasions. Ambrose was the only difference. Nice try attempting to give Rollins any considerable credit.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MinMax said:


> LOL Rollins has been in the main event for quite a while now and has been in the lowest rated hours on numerous occasions. Ambrose was the only difference. Nice try attempting to give Rollins any considerable credit.


Oh, look who's back. The same guy who makes an account every Tuesday only to be banned hours later again. Yes, because Ambrose has been a killer draw this entire time too, right? Couldn't be that people saw they were putting on a great match together, right? Can't blame Rollins for the hour 3 fail this week. His match was in Hour 2. See ya next week, pal.


----------



## MinMax

ShowStopper said:


> Oh, look who's back. The same guy who makes an account every Tuesday only to be banned hours later again. Yes, because Ambrose has been a killer draw this entire time too, right? Couldn't be that people saw they were putting on a great match together, right? Can't blame Rollins for the hour 3 fail this week. His match was in Hour 2. See ya next week, pal.


Rollins was on TV during the entire main event match. LOL @you


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MinMax said:


> Rollins was on TV during the entire main event match. LOL @you


On commentary which wasn't advertised beforehand. Not his match, as I said. Learn how to read and comprehend.


----------



## M_D_Q_

Wade Keller said that last RAW made 2,55 rating, down from 2,68 last week.
Damn, when NFL be on the thing will be fucked up


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Cliffy

Should probably take the belt off Seth at Payback


----------



## MinMax

ShowStopper said:


> On commentary which wasn't advertised beforehand. Not his match, as I said. Learn how to read and comprehend.


You said he can't be blamed. You were wrong. He can. For every single hour that he spends speaking with that ****** voice and laughing like a gay version of Elmo.


----------



## MinMax

But a lot of the blame has to go to the ratings killer, Roman Reigns.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MinMax said:


> You said he can't be blamed. You were wrong. He can. For every single hour that he spends speaking with that ****** voice and laughing like a gay version of Elmo.


13 year old insults. Sounds like someone's mad that Rollins' match was in the highest rated hour this week. Come back next week, pal. You might actually have some ammunition next week. Not to be this week.

:rollins


----------



## MinMax

ShowStopper said:


> 13 year old insults. Sounds like someone's mad that Rollins' match was in the highest rated hour this week. Come back next week, pal. You might actually have some ammunition next week. Not to be this week.
> 
> :rollins


I'm glad Rollins was able to ride Ambrose's coattails this week so he could FINALLY be in the highest rated hour.


----------



## Shenroe

Which hour was Cena on?


----------



## Louaja89

ShowStopper said:


> 13 year old insults. Sounds like someone's mad that Rollins' match was in the highest rated hour this week. Come back next week, pal. You might actually have some ammunition next week. Not to be this week.
> 
> :rollins


You've been there longer than me so let me ask you this . Have you ever seen a guy that made that many alt accounts just to bash wrestlers every fucking week ?
It has to be a record or something .


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MinMax said:


> I'm glad Rollins was able to ride Ambrose's coattails this week so he could FINALLY be in the highest rated hour.


You know it. Because Ambrose has been the personification of a draw, as well, right?

:ti

I'm happy that Dean is able to ride Seth's coattails to the main event and his first meaningful match in ages. Beats the hell out of jobbing to a TV or doing a segment with a blowup doll.


----------



## MinMax

Shenroe said:


> Which hour was Cena on?


Beginning of 3rd.


----------



## MinMax

ShowStopper said:


> You know it. Because Ambrose has been the personification of a draw, as well, right?
> 
> :ti
> 
> I'm happy that Dean is able to ride Seth's coattails to the main event and his first meaningful match in ages. Beats the hell out of jobbing to a TV or doing a segment with a blowup doll.


No, he hasn't been a big draw or anything. He's been a fucking jobber. No one with a brain would expect him to be some sort of massive draw given that booking. He HAS been a much better draw than both Rollins and Reigns though.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MinMax said:


> *No, he hasn't been a big draw or anything. He's been a fucking jobber.* No one with a brain would expect him to be some sort of massive draw given that booking. He HAS been a much better draw than both Rollins and Reigns though.


You just said Ambrose is a draw and people are riding his coattails to being a draw. :lmao Those contradictions. At least get your story straight, bro. Otherwise, this is just a gigantic waste of time. I'm trying to help you and your 'argument' out here but you just killed your credibility.


----------



## Vyer

IDONTSHIV said:


> *8:00pm 3.422m 1.03 18-49
> 9:00pm 3.708m 1.13 demo
> 1000pm 3.588m 1.15 18-49*











You can't hang with the NBA, Vince. You just can't....


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

MinMax was such a humble poster that he has been humbled yet again. Oh well.

Show was good, but RAW can't get out of the ditch, especially against live sporting events during their playoffs.


----------



## Chrome

WWE was obviously no match for :rose & :lelbron last night. 

Tony Schiavone is somewhere laughing at these ratings right now.


----------



## Fighter Daron

McCringleberry said:


> *Poor stupid bastard* is back chasing the world title for a week and already he's back on the audience's shit list. :lol


How is this even allowed here?

Bad ratings due to NBA playoffs and the drop in the third hour feels right because the live crowd itself died after the Zayn moment.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The best RAW of the year, arguably, inarguably draws the lowest rating of the year. Hope the quality of the show stays where it is and wouldn't mind seeing the rating uptick, Going to be hard as long as Playoff Basketball presses RAW for viewers.


----------



## Frost99

Fighter Daron said:


> Bad ratings due to NBA playoffs and the drop in the third hour feels right because the *live crowd itself died after the Zayn moment.*


And THEY knew that would happen, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out but there's this company wide idea ala "Make Roman Look Strong" no matter the cost is as if :vince$ would shot himself in the face to spite his nose. 

NBA Playoff's & everything outside the E keep away they can't control that. But, but they like to think they can control the crowd and since this was a CANADIAN crowd they usually pop HUGE for hometown talent so why not have Regin/Randy in the segment BEFORE the main event, hell don't even have them wrestle, have them backstage a fight breaks out and Ambrose comes in and steals the title and drives away.....

Now during the show, you promote Cena's US Title open as the main event, then Bret Hart appears on hour 2 saying he's got John's challenger in the back and he's from around these parts, have a Cena interview backstage keep it short, than after a break because of the backstage fight. Your main event is ready and willing to keep the crowd hot as fuck and keep people tuned in as after they return from break you see Cena in the ring, Bret Hart then comes out and introduces Zayne to a MEGA POP and ding ding the match is on.... 

You have the same great main event, Cena retains, he leaves Sami to his moment in the ring but cameras cut away on the WWE network showing a Reserve/Cena beatdown to finish the show......

This is about making EVERYONE look strong, not just Roman, Rollins, Randy, Ambrose ect. If they want Roman or anyone else involved in the WWE Title match to close out Raw next week than do it, it's the go home show after all but tonight they were in Canada and they SUFFERED for not allowing a Canadian talent close out the show........


----------



## Darkod

I blame the fool who thought a average hack like Seth Rollins could ever draw on top for WWE. Its probably that dumbass Triple H. 

WWE is at its absolute worst right now. I thought Bryan and redundant act was boring but they somehow manage to find a guy who is even more limited and retarded. Let me know when this hack Rollins actually says something different on the mic for once.


----------



## Robbyfude

"That Raw made ratings go down? This is that midget Sami Zayn's fault god damn it!" :vince


----------



## Empress

- Monday's RAW ranked #2 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings, behind Dancing With the Stars. RAW had a unique audience of 1.360 million, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This was down from last week. RAW had total impressions of 9.028 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was up from last week.Just a reminder that the WWE Network is free this month for new subscribers.
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0505/594018/preview-for-renee-young-next-episode/?

---

*WWE RAW Garners Its Lowest Audience Of The Year*

Monday's episode of WWE RAW, featuring Randy Orton vs. Roman Reign in the main event, drew 3.57 million viewers. This is down 5% from last week's 3.76 million viewers and is the lowest viewership for the show since December 29, 2014.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.422 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.709 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.588 million viewers.

RAW was #4 on cable for the night behind the Love & Hip-Hop, Teen Mom and the NBA Playoffs.
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ewership-with-roman-reigns-vs-randy-orton-in/


----------



## ShadowSucks92

IDONTSHIV said:


> The best RAW of the year, arguably, inarguably draws the lowest rating of the year. Hope the quality of the show stays where it is and wouldn't mind seeing the rating uptick, Going to be hard as long as Playoff Basketball presses RAW for viewers.


Well no one really expected this RAW to be any good with how bad RAW is these days which is probably why the first hour is so low


----------



## Shenroe

Robbyfude said:


> "That Raw made ratings go down? This is that midget Sami Zayn's fault god damn it!" :vince


God dammit :ti


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Darkod said:


> I blame the fool who thought a average hack like Seth Rollins could ever draw on top for WWE. Its probably that dumbass Triple H.
> 
> WWE is at its absolute worst right now. I thought Bryan and redundant act was boring but they somehow manage to find a guy who is even more limited and retarded.* Let me know when this hack Rollins actually says something different on the mic for once.*


It'll probably be sooner than when you actually type something different.


----------



## murder

Remember those great Nitros in 99 every once in a while?! Ratings were falling nonetheless. This is kind of how this is. The damage has been done.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

murder said:


> Remember those great Nitros in 99 every once in a while?! Ratings were falling nonetheless. This is kind of how this is. The damage has been done.


That is so true. They are reaping what they have sown. The bad booking has salted the earth.


----------



## LOL-ins

Oh look ratings killer rollins doing what he does best.


----------



## RatedR10

This a long time coming for shitty booking. Even when they have a good show they can't pull in a good number, as evident by the sub-3.5 million viewers in the 1st hour. People just don't care. I anticipate we see lower viewership going into the summer until Brock returns.


----------



## JTB33b

WWE is missing the GOAT. Time to get Bryan back on TV.


----------



## Goldusto

Darkod said:


> I blame the fool who thought a average hack like Seth Rollins could ever draw on top for WWE. Its probably that dumbass Triple H.
> 
> WWE is at its absolute worst right now. I thought Bryan and redundant act was boring but they somehow manage to find a guy who is even more limited and retarded. Let me know when this hack Rollins actually says something different on the mic for once.


*How in the everloving shit is Rollins supposed to look like a threat or be a Draw if he loses matches 6 times a month as WWE Champion and always eats the pins in Tag Teams? In fact the fact he is in tags to begin with. FUCKING US TITLE IS BOOKED WITH MORE CREDIBILITY, *

In fact, Thinking about it, the reason Rollins looks like a bitch is probably due to John Cena. the US TItle = WWE title, it is defended more, the champion is more credible, and the matches are of a better quality.

Cena Once Again, instead of burying the midcard, is in fact burying the Main Event with his Midacrd Run. Goldenboy has to look the best no matter where he is on the pecking order. At least he is putting talent over in the matches.


----------



## SpeedStick

LOL-ins said:


> Oh look ratings killer rollins doing what he does best.


This have nothing to do with Rollins, Lets look at Rollins his the current WWE champion right so why every time I watching him on tv his losing? Why do the people writing this stuff thing is a good idea to have the company world champion lose 90% of the time people are watching him?


----------



## NastyYaffa

JTB33b said:


> WWE is missing the GOAT. Time to get Bryan back on TV.


----------



## AmbroseWyatt

LOL at these mongs attributing the second hour's ratings to Rollins. The ratings were obviously due to Ambrose - he actually has charisma.


----------



## AmbroseWyatt

Brownian Motion is the GOAT. Stop fucking banning him  He's one of the only guys on this forum who actually talks sense.


----------



## Necramonium

I wonder what the ratings will be next week as this was a very entertaining RAW but because they had all these shitty RAW's people were not that excited to watch, and that showed seeing they lost viewers, if RAW loses even more viewers next week, i think we can pretty much say, that the product is going down the sink. Christ, Raw was 4th on cable behind fricking Teen Mom.


----------



## Londrick

Ambrose gets added to the main event and ratings tank?

:lmao

He really was the weak link of the shield.


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

They tease Ambrose winning a spot in a match for the WWE Championship and it draws the biggest hour of the three... :ambrose3


----------



## Morrison17

Time to put that belt back on someone credible. 16 time world champ, woooo.


----------



## Dark_Raiden

This is the result of not letting Reigns win at WM. A star was prepared to be made and then they shot it down. They have no one to blame but themselves.


----------



## A-C-P

The bad rating is due to the crapfest Raw has been since Lesnar killed everyone and left the Raw after Mania. People were not tuned in from the start, and the quality of the show actually led to a small gain up through the 2nd hour, then the normal 3rd hour decrease happened.


----------



## Sassy TOCTB

I find it interesting that the low rating's were the fault of Reigns when he was/is the focal part of the show or a portion of the show. However, when the show is centered around Rollins, it is everyone else's fault but his. Now, I can't tell you who's a draw and who isn't because I haven't watched WWE in years... This was just something I found interesting. Carry on.


----------



## Sweet_Princess

AmbroseWyatt said:


> Brownian Motion is the GOAT. Stop fucking banning him  He's one of the only guys on this forum who actually talks sense.


Seriously. Why the hell does Brownian keep getting banned, anyway? Are the mods butthurt Rollins marks who can't stand that Brownian constantly elucidates Rollins' failures? It's like he's being persecuted for, heaven forbid, actually having standards - not what I'd consider a crime, personally.

I hope he keeps rejoining here for a long time to come. WF needs him!

Anyway. Back to lurking for me


----------



## Silent KEEL

I didn't even turn it on and won't again until DB returns.

You're welcome for the low ratings.


----------



## Blade Runner

JTB33b said:


> WWE is missing the GOAT. Time to get Bryan back on TV.


:mark:


----------



## JTB33b

Even with Bryan not cleared to wrestle they should keep him on TV. I still think they should have done an injury angle with him like they did with Austin. Had him get attacked backstage during extreme rules and have a nice whodunit storyline.


----------



## LilOlMe

From Meltzer's 5/11/15 newsletter:


> Raw on 5/4 did a 2.55 rating and 3.57 million viewers (1.45 viewers per home), setting a new record for both the lowest rating and lowest viewing audience for the show outside of football season or a holiday night since 1997.


This is a result of months of bad television. Shame that last week got better ratings, when this week's show was so much better. That's what happens, though. Maybe if RAW can string together a bunch of good shows, some of the audience will come back.


ETA:


> The three hours were 3.42 million viewers in the first hour, which was the lowest first hour ever with the exception of a Christmas Eve Raw, even lower than any time against the NFL, which speaks for how much interest there was when the show started, and coming off a low Smackdown. However, the show quality helped as the second hour was up to 3.71 million viewers, and the third hour didn’t drop badly, finishing with 3.59 million viewers.


We have only one more RAW until Payback, yet only two matches for that PPV have been announced. It's simple shit like that that the WWE can't even get right, so why would people even want to follow RAW? There's not enough going on to hold interest. No huge build up, no great storylines, etc. This week was the start of something good at least, if the WWE can maintain that quality.


----------



## Randy Lahey

How is WWE still making money when TV Ratings are at all time lows?


----------



## Darkod

JTB33b said:


> Even with Bryan not cleared to wrestle they should keep him on TV. I still think they should have done an injury angle with him like they did with Austin. Had him get attacked backstage during extreme rules and have a nice whodunit storyline.


Bryan is not Austin, he can't draw and WWE knows it. That is why they throw him off tv without even thinking twice when he gets hurt. That is also why he went from main eventing mania one year to a mid-card curtain jerk match the next like a nobody.


----------



## BryanMark

Randy Lahey said:


> How is WWE still making money when TV Ratings are at all time lows?


house shows are biggest money makers for them.


----------



## New Day/3BM

No Bryan = No Ratings :bryan

























:nikkilol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Here is the chart for the ratings for Smackdown. It was up .02 in the demo. Viewers were up from 2.338 million last week.


----------



## Empress

Adam Rose Thanks Fans For Support, WWE SmackDown Viewership Sees Big Increase, More

- Last night's WWE SmackDown, featuring the Payback Fatal 4 Way contract signing in the main event slot, drew 2.575 million viewers. This is up from last week's 2.338 million viewers.
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0508/594105/adam-rose-thanks-fans-for-support/?


----------



## dazzy666

Is anyone afraid they might take the strap of Rollins and give it to orton due to the ratings?

I'm sure it could be going through vince's head but I hope not. 


It's a shame this weeks raw done so bad because it was one of the best they have produced in months. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Sweet_Princess

dazzy666 said:


> *Is anyone afraid they might take the strap of Rollins and give it to orton due to the ratings?*
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


That would be fantastic  I'm not an Orton fan but Rollins is a cancer to this industry. Him winning the big one at 'mania is almost as bad as David Arquette winning the WCW heavyweight belt.

Fuck Orton, though. Give the belt to Ambrose!


----------



## Kenny

Rollins should stay champion, if not I would :mark: so hard to see Ambrose win it. 

They'll give it to Orton or Reigns though.


----------



## Londrick

dazzy666 said:


> Is anyone afraid they might take the strap of Rollins and give it to orton due to the ratings?


If they wanted even lower ratings, they'll do it.


----------



## Sweet_Princess

AACC said:


> Smackdown viewership goes up after Ambrose gets added to the main event. Not surprising at all.
> 
> He's already a bigger draw than both Rollins and Reigns combined. Imagine if they had booked this guy properly right after the split and had him main eventing PPVs and even becoming world champ.


:agree::agree::agree:


Ambrose da GOAT :flabbynsting


Watch Seth kill the ratings once again :rollins


----------



## Empress

*RAW Twitter TV Ratings*

- Monday's RAW ranked #1 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings. RAW had a unique audience of 1.750 million, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This was up from last week's 1.360 million. RAW had total impressions of 8.819 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was down from last week's 9.028 million.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0512/594211/damien-sandow-has-a-message-for-his-critics/?


----------



## FreeBrady

I can't post links due to post count, but Show Buzz Daily released last night's numbers:

Hour 1: 3.824
Hour 2: 3.853
Hour 3: 3.385

First two hours fairly equal. Cena's presence in hour 2 explains the small increase. I know the 3rd hour usually sees a drop, but this is a big one. When was the last time an hour was in the 3.3XX range?

Zero fucks given about that Rollins/Orton main event.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Here's the chart:










Playoff basketball wreaking havoc on the ratings. Perhaps everyone checked out once Bryan made his announcement? :hmm


----------



## Empress

Is that third hour for real? 

The first two hours held up well. The WWE and USA should make RAW a two hour show. But @IDONTSHIV may have a point. Some may have tuned out after Bryan's announcement but the third hour has been suffering for quite some time. If RAW isn't going to be two hours, the third hour should be more loaded.


----------



## Armani

FreeBrady said:


> I can't post links due to post count, but Show Buzz Daily released last night's numbers:
> 
> Hour 1: 3.824
> Hour 2: 3.853
> Hour 3: 3.385
> 
> First two hours fairly equal. Cena's presence in hour 2 explains the small increase. I know the 3rd hour usually sees a drop, but this is a big one. When was the last time an hour was in the 3.3XX range?
> 
> Zero fucks given about that Rollins/Orton main event.


Orton just can't draw for shit. I don't really blame people when they tune out, he's a walking robot in the ring, I feel sorry for the disabled people they can't change the channel once he's on.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Empress said:


> Is that third hour for real?
> 
> The first two hours held up well. The WWE and USA should make RAW a two hour show. But @IDONTSHIV may have a point. Some may have tuned out after Bryan's announcement but the third hour has been suffering for quite some time. If RAW isn't going to be two hours, the third hour should be more loaded.


It's just sheer speculation as to why the exodus occurred, but those viewer numbers for hour 3 are just awful.


----------



## Empress

IDONTSHIV said:


> It's just sheer speculation as to why the exodus occurred, but those viewer numbers for hour 3 are just awful.


It is steep. 

But the third hour has been losing viewers consistently. I'm not going to blame one talent in particular. Although, maybe the WWE should've held off on Bryan's announcement until the final hour. It could've convinced viewers to stay tuned in.


----------



## FreeBrady

Empress said:


> It is steep.
> 
> But the third hour has been losing viewers consistently. I'm not going to blame one talent in particular. Although, maybe the WWE should've held off on Bryan's announcement until the final hour. It could've convinced viewers to stay tuned in.


It WAS in the final hour. And people likely did tune in. Which just speaks to the fact that people did not care for the main event and tuned out in large numbers, which is why the average viewership for that hour was so small.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

That big return really helped things out this week. 

Of course I'm referring to the return of Sandow's full-on copy cat gimmick as Macho Mandow. It was in hour 2 and hour 2 did the highest, so that had to be it. No other explanation. Not only that, but it seems that since he'd already been used, people realized he wouldn't be in the third hour this week, and thus that led to more than the normal tuning out for the third hour and thus the lowest third hour number since... well, I don't know. No one even cared about Bryan's announcement, or the super epic main event of Randy Orton vs. Seth Rollins. Also of course there was going to be Ambrose and Reigns interference in that main event, which people didn't care about either.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, Sandow plus copycat gimmick>:bryan2 :rko2 :rollins2 :reigns :ambrose4


----------



## Chrome

Yeah they really need to go back to 2 hours already. Pretty soon that 3rd hour is gonna start getting under 3 million at this rate.


----------



## Empress

FreeBrady said:


> *It WAS in the final hour.* And people likely did tune in. Which just speaks to the fact that people did not care for the main event and tuned out in large numbers, which is why the average viewership for that hour was so small.


I stand corrected then. I thought Bryan's announcement was in the second hour.



Chrome said:


> Yeah they really need to go back to 2 hours already. Pretty soon that 3rd hour is gonna start getting under 3 million at this rate.


Right.


----------



## Starbuck

*Hour 1* - :trips2
*Hour 2* - :bryan2

*Hour 3* - jobbers

Tut Tut. The GOAT's can't do it all themselves.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Third hour was a wasteland last night. We've seen Rollins/Orton a million times, and ditto for Reigns/Kane. They either need to scrap the third hour altogether, and start booking it like it actually matters for once and throw us a bone and give us a fresh match-up once in awhile. First two hours did fine for this era, though.


----------



## Wynter

Bryan was in hour 3?? I thought he was in 2.

So how do we blame Roman for the 3rd hour drop this week 

Or are we finally going to accept the third house will drop regardless lol but damn, over 500,000. WWE needs to make the main event must see.

Edit: @ShowStopper, I thought Roman was in the second hour? Feel like I'm getting old :lmao


----------



## ShadowSucks92

Empress said:


> I stand corrected then. I thought Bryan's announcement was in the second hour.
> 
> 
> 
> Right.


It was nearing the end of the second hour beginning of the third hour, tuned out as soon as I watched it which was about 3.15am and RAW starts at 1am


----------



## The True Believer

I tuned out when the ME was about to start. I was already late to the party but seeing Seth "Bitchboy" Rollins vs. Randy Orton for the 400,356th time gave me no reason to see it through.


----------



## Starbuck

HOLD UP! Bryan was in hour 3?

*Hour 1* - :trips2

*Hour 2* - :cena4

*Hour 3 *- jobbers

GOAT's can't do it all by themselves


----------



## Wynter

Man, if they counted Bryan as 3rd hour, then fuck, the main event would have had a very large drop to be at that range. 

First and second really held up though. 

Trips and Steph are them draws :rollins


----------



## The True Believer

Ambrose making ratings with two jobbers in suits. Can't get any better than that.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

On a serious note, almost certain Bryan was completely in hour 3. Maybe his entrance was right at the end of hour 2? It's entirely possible his segment drew a relatively big number for the hour and then the Rollins/Orton main event failed to keep interest and ended up drawing very poorly. That's what I think happened, but Bryan alone wasn't enough in that hour to keep it afloat. 

I actually think Cena's open challenge might be helping things in whatever hour he's in and the biggest TV draw WWE has right now. It's a great concept and more often than not it's produced great matches, so it's become a must-see of sorts. That said, I do think the feud with Rusev has hurt it/kept it from it's full potential. If they just keep Cena away from US Title feuds and just have the open challenge, I think they'll attract even more attention as it will really feel like he could lose the title at anytime, wherever right now and since Mania, we know he's going to hold it through to the pay per view. I also think the first hour benefited from the fall-out of last week with Ambrose being announced in the main event.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I think Bryan's speech bordered the 2nd and 3rd hours at best. Don't think it was completely in one particular hour, IIRC.

Anyway, happy to see the first hour/segment did really well.


----------



## Wynter

[USER][/USER]


The True Believer said:


> Ambrose making ratings with two jobbers in suits. Can't get any better than that.


Now, why you acting like the first hour draw wasn't all :trips2


----------



## The True Believer

Wynter said:


> [USER][/USER]
> 
> Now, why you acting like the first hour draw wasn't all :trips2


Cause it _suits_ my need. :troll


----------



## Starbuck

Wynter said:


> Trips and Steph are them draws :rollins


People just don't want to admit that The Authority is truly what's best for business. 

Trips appears for Tough Enough announcement a few weeks ago = ratings up considerably from the week before. 

Trips appears for the 20 minute promo of death = ratings up considerably from the week before.

Face the facts people.


----------



## Wynter

The True Believer said:


> Cause it _suits_ my need. :troll


----------



## FreeBrady

Wynter said:


> [USER][/USER]
> 
> Now, why you acting like the first hour draw wasn't all :trips2


Because Ambrose drew a similar number last week in hour 2 without the help of any star power in the rest of the hour.


----------



## LilOlMe

Anyone with half a brain knew the main event would be bullshit, and they weren't going to give anything away before the PPV. 

Plus, the opening segment made it clear that it would be the Kane show in the main event yet again. Does anyone give a shit? No one wants to see that, and it's a complete lack of creativity. No one thought it'd be anything we haven't seen.

_I_ didn't give a shit when it was announced, and I like both participants.

Shame WWE can't consistently book correctly for the life of them.

Was this week's overall average higher than last week's? On my phone, so hard to look back.


----------



## LilOlMe

Regarding Cena, his hour with the Rusev segments were always the highest ones. So it's not just the U.S. Title segments.


----------



## Srdjan99

That moment when you realize that the World Champion of the company draws the smallest rating of the show


----------



## RatedR10

Wouldn't be surprised if there was a mass tune out after Bryan's segment just out of disappointment alone. Shit like that can just knock you out of the show because it's very real and very sad, especially for someone who was as loved as Bryan.


----------



## Louaja89

When was the last time that a Raw main event mattered in the long run ?
It's becoming a curse to be in that main event , everybody knows that nothing is going to happen .
So I won't blame Orton.


----------



## FreeBrady

Louaja89 said:


> When was the last time that a Raw main event mattered in the long run ?
> It's becoming a curse to be in that main event , everybody knows that nothing is going to happen .


Probably the last time it wasn't infected by charisma vacuums like Reigns, Rollins, and Orton.


----------



## Fighter Daron

Two big third-hour drops in a row? Orton was involved in both? I can't help but understand it, the guy is boring as fuck.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

WWE gets out of RAW what they put in. Right now that's close to nothing.


----------



## LordKain

I don't think the WWE's going to be gaining back any of the viewers they've lost over over years so at this point I think that they should probably focus on trying not to lose anymore of them because things are not looking good for them.


----------



## Empress

#BadNewsSanta said:


> On a serious note, almost certain Bryan was completely in hour 3. Maybe his entrance was right at the end of hour 2? It's entirely possible his segment drew a relatively big number for the hour and then the Rollins/Orton main event failed to keep interest and ended up drawing very poorly. That's what I think happened, but Bryan alone wasn't enough in that hour to keep it afloat.
> 
> I actually think Cena's open challenge might be helping things in whatever hour he's in and the biggest TV draw WWE has right now. It's a great concept and more often than not it's produced great matches, so it's become a must-see of sorts. That said, I do think the feud with Rusev has hurt it/kept it from it's full potential. If they just keep Cena away from US Title feuds and just have the open challenge, I think they'll attract even more attention as it will really feel like he could lose the title at anytime, wherever right now and since Mania, we know he's going to hold it through to the pay per view. I also think the first hour benefited from the fall-out of last week with Ambrose being announced in the main event.


Agree. 

I think the WWE should move Cena and his open challenge to the third hour. He's been putting on great matches. Cena is the most proven draw on the active roster at this point. I know some will complain that he's standing tall each week but he could potentially stabilize the ratings.


----------



## LOL-ins

1. Rollins can't draw flies to shit. Lets get that out of the way first

2. WWE doesn't have cool endings with cliff hangers. It's always Face/Heel stands tall to end the show. No shocks or surprises ever.


----------



## LordKain

Empress said:


> Agree.
> 
> I think the WWE should move Cena and his open challenge to the third hour. He's been putting on great matches. Cena is the most proven draw on the active roster at this point. I know some will complain that he's standing tall each week but he could potentially stabilize the ratings.


I doubt it.

The Rock and Lesnar could both come back tomorrow as full time performers and all it would do is give them a very short term boose in the ratings before they dipped again.

A shit sandwich is still a shit sandwich and that's what everyone sees when they tune in to watch the current WWE product these days.


----------



## Empress

LordKain said:


> I doubt it.
> 
> The Rock and Lesnar could both come back tomorrow as full time performers and all it would do is give them a very short term boose in the ratings before they dip again.
> 
> A shit sandwich is still a shit sandwich and that's what everyone sees when they tune it to watch the current WWE product these days.


That's a valid point. Putting Cena in the third hour would be like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. RAW is still losing viewers overall.


----------



## The Bloodline

Fans are walking away. I don't know if they'll regain that audience or gain new fans with the product they put out right now. It's very loyal fans that are sticking around. Even the road to mania raws were bad & that's usually the time of year we can count on. At this point we haven't had a great strings of raws in perhaps over a year. They need to shake up the product, do something unexpected. Give ambrose the belt at Payback :shrug:, not even saying hes a draw but that would be SOMETHING that actually happens. Force themselves in a new direction. They write shows last minute anyway. What they are doing every damn week isn't working. It's not the whole show, there's a lot of good sprinkled throughout but the main story/format has to be more captivating and they're failing.


----------



## Wildcat410

If they moved Cena to the third hour, imo it would at best garner a slight temporary bump before returning to normal. Three hours is simply too long unless the product you are offering up is scintillating. Which is anything but the case for 90+ percent of the Raws these days.

They have simply lost too many viewers for too long to easily regain momentum now. The seeds of this down period were sown years ago. That the product has pretty much stunk lately, last two weeks notwithstanding, does not help matters either.


----------



## LordKain

Empress said:


> That's a valid point. Putting Cena in the third hour would be like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. RAW is still losing viewers overall.


Exactly.

You could even resurrect the ghost of Andre The Giant and it still wouldn't make a difference.

It'll be a long if ever before the ratings improve again.


----------



## Badbadrobot

*Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

So raw ratings rebounded to a less than healthy 2.67 yesterday

This dismal showing after what was a great raw last week, must be starting to cause vince worries. Last nights raw was very much back to the standard fare with few surprises and the worry has to be ratings will dip again particularly as we know very little in the way of shocking will occur at payback.

So the question is...how does Raw start to pick up viewers again??? Where have all the attitude viewers from 10 years ago gone? What has gone wrong with the product that it finds itself here?

My thoughts

- better story telling that makes sense
- drop the grey unless it's explained
- finish and start stories and turns properly
- care about your product
- care about the mid card
- address the fact your two most over wrestlers are lesnar and Bryan
- move people more up and down the card


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

There's a ratings thread.


----------



## Badbadrobot

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

Oops my apologies


----------



## Badbadrobot

My thoughts they need:

- better story telling that makes sense
- drop the grey unless it's explained
- finish and start stories and turns properly
- care about your product
- care about the mid card
- address the fact your two most over wrestlers are lesnar and Bryan
- move people more up and down the card


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

Here you go,OP

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/wwe-raw-smackdown/1234473-all-tv-ratings-buys-draw-talk-here.html


----------



## DJHJR86

Just catching up on RAW on my DVR and I thought it was a bit disrespectful that they had Sandow do a Macho Man "tribute" character.


----------



## Badbadrobot

In all honesty they've no idea what to do with sandow and this move was mildly amusing at best, at worst down right dumb both for machos memory and for sandows career.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

People just don't give a shit about professional wrestling anymore. The only ones that do are the real wrestling fans, the kids, and those that stick by WWE no matter what the company does. The ratings of old are not coming back unless WWE repackages itself to fit more of a modern day attraction, which it isn't.


----------



## DJHJR86

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*


----------



## KO Bossy

Make. This. Fucking. Show. 2. Hours.

Seriously, if Raw was an hour less, it might be slightly more tolerable. But as it is, 3 hours of pointless matches, bad storylines and LOL worthy booking...I'm surprised people weren't tuning out sooner.


----------



## #Naomi'sButtIsLife

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

Vince needs to go. The wrestlers can get new gimmicks and adjust to modern society. Upper mgmt is the problem.

The fact that there's a guy in the upper midcard who's buff AF, but wears rainbow singlets while screaming "feed me more" just tells you everything you need to know about the state of WWE.

Just go back to TV-14. I want the kids to enjoy it, but WWE needs to do what it needs to do.

Also, instead of upper, middle, & lower cards, WWE needs to rotate their roster weekly so the wrestlers have time to go get mainstream exposure. Imagine the audience flocking to WWE if they saw people like Rollins, Reigns, Cesaro, Paige, Ambrose, the Bellas, Orton, & Cena in mainstream entertainment NOT playing themselves? 

It's honestly so easy to bring ratings back up. 

Do the ratings include watching in the network?


----------



## Yes Era

Rating hasn't been the same since Bryan went down...won't get any better with HHH because HHH isn't a draw. He's 45, doesn't matter, and can't get interest in Tough Enough or Raw.


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

Great thread.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

The ditch that has been dug will be exceedingly hard for WWE to extricate itself.


----------



## Jingoro

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

you could here a pin drop when the main event started. nobody gave a shit. nobody is tuning in to see reigns either. great sign for the future.


----------



## hbgoo1975

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*



LPPrince said:


> People just don't give a shit about professional wrestling anymore. The only ones that do are the real wrestling fans, the kids, and those that stick by WWE no matter what the company does. The ratings of old are not coming back unless WWE repackages itself to fit more of a modern day attraction, which it isn't.


This is why they are stuck in 2009.


----------



## Jingoro

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

it's why i fucking laughed my ass off at the bullshit spin in these forums justifying using divas matches and segments as commercials for the total divas show. saying it's giving the wwe more exposure and creating more female fans. 

BULLSHIT! where are the new fans? the ratings are still shit and have been shit the entire time Total Divas has existed. the only new fans are when the hardcore fans shit out kids and make them watch it.

vince keeps wanting to distance himself from wrestling and being entertainment, but he's not entertaining the masses. only the hardcores are watching. 

he's not making us happy even though we keep watching out of stupid loyalty and he's not drawing in the casuals. he's failing on both ends. retire vince for the love of christ.


----------



## The Bloodline

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*



LPPrince said:


> People just don't give a shit about professional wrestling anymore. *The only ones that do are the real wrestling fans, the kids, and those that stick by WWE no matter what the company does*. The ratings of old are not coming back unless WWE repackages itself to fit more of a modern day attraction, which it isn't.


THAT, nothing they do is gonna bring in new eyes. The product is stale as it is. It would need a big revamping to gain new interest or drag people back that has written it off


----------



## T0M

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

'The Product' is in the toilet and it will likely stay there for a good while. There are no indications that it's going to get better anytime soon.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

ratings will keep sucking as long as RAW is 3 fucking hours. Move it back to 2 already.


----------



## Loader230

Wasn't Bryan's retirement segment in 3rd hour? Surprised! it drew that damn bad.


----------



## bADaSSaTTiTuDE

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

I hope their ratings continue to go down the toilet. Fuck them


----------



## Stadhart

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

RAW is just boring and has been all year. I fast forward most of it apart from the occasional match or segment I feel like watching but normally I do 3 hours in about 15mins

The format probably needs to change as it is always the same with a boring 20min opening chat segment with loads of filler inbetween and then a half hearted main event that is usually the same match for about a month running with maybe an extra person thrown into the mix

the best RAWs this year have been the ones where Brock turns up randomly and F5s everyone or Sting - now I know that they aren't around much but the point was it was unexpected and just awesome to watch with the crowd getting into it for that reason rather than everyone sitting there bored after another 20min monologue with Rollins saying the same thing 4 weeks in a row. 

They need to rip off he Nexus storyline again and have an NXT takeover - them running in everyso often to stop matches and then running off or something....anything to keep it fresh and the feeling the unexpected could happen. Most people on here could write a better show than they currently do


----------



## Sweet_Princess

Seth Rollins doing what he does best flabbynsting #killin 'daratings


----------



## JTB33b

You can only go back to two hours if you split the roster again and make Smackdown a separate brand. The Roster is too big for a 2 hour Raw.


----------



## Sincere

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

The only way the product is going to change for the better is if ratings tank first. Those with an interest in making more money aren't going to fix something that continues to make them a satisfactory amount of money. So I say let the ratings plummet. Maybe they'll finally get their heads out of their asses and get their minds correct.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*



LPPrince said:


> People just don't give a shit about professional wrestling anymore. The only ones that do are the real wrestling fans, the kids, and those that stick by WWE no matter what the company does. *The ratings of old are not coming back unless WWE repackages itself to fit more of a modern day attraction, which it isn't*.


And there's your problem, it's not people not caring about wrestling. People are tired of watching the same god fucking Raw every week, year after year after year. Push new stars.....good ones that can talk and have charisma, not Reigns or Rollins, hire a team of writers that understand modern culture and actually listen to them, pay off your storylines and don't just drop things out of nowhere, and for the love of GOD, give us some feuds we've never seen before. That's what's driving people away.

It's disappointing to hear that the rating was higher than it was last week. They won't learn anything that way.


----------



## WWF/E

Evolution is the solution!


----------



## I Came To Play

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

People actually care about ratings? its not 1999 anymore.


----------



## SonnenChael

Isn't it also, because you can watch RAW and Smackdown, the day after, thanks to the newest hard drive recording technology, which Nielsen etc. don't capture?


----------



## TNA is Here

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

That cannot be, you would think Macho Mandow and Axelmania vs the Road Warriors-lite would have drawn gangbusters and saved the show. This was the best segment in the history of our sport.


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*

Orton and Rollins it's an abomination of feud when I knew they were going to main event my interest dropped big time, if wasn't for the fact that they included Ambrose in the main event I would change channel after Cena's open challenge.


----------



## Brodus Clay

Orton needs to lift the IC belt and stay away of the main event forever.


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

Dean Ambrose drawing dem ratings once again. :ambrose


----------



## Loader230

> the best RAWs this year have been the ones where Brock turns up randomly and F5s everyone or Sting


You know there's a reason for that... Its because they are the only ones with any real credibility, especially Lesnar. Lesnar due to insane dominant booking is pretty much towering above everyone else including Cena, he didn't even lose the title clean. Its so sad its not even funny. Brock is by far WWE's No.1, most relevant and most pushed star and he's no where to be found. Everyone else including Reigns is fighting for the distant no.2 spot. No wonder fans don't feel connected to the product. 

I still think WWE shouldn't have re-signed Brock when his contract ended. As awesome as he is as a character/star, his booking is holding back everyone else and the product.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: Latest Raw ratings - state of the 'product'*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> And there's your problem, it's not people not caring about wrestling. People are tired of watching the same god fucking Raw every week, year after year after year. Push new stars.....good ones that can talk and have charisma, not Reigns or Rollins, hire a team of writers that understand modern culture and actually listen to them, pay off your storylines and don't just drop things out of nowhere, and for the love of GOD, give us some feuds we've never seen before. That's what's driving people away.
> 
> It's disappointing to hear that the rating was higher than it was last week. They won't learn anything that way.


Nah. Not even that will save it. It needs to be retooled completely. Instead of this two-three hour block of television of "a show based on a wrestling show" it needs a rework with a renewed focus.

Less PPV events(less stress for the writing team, less stress for the wrestlers, longer and richer stories told), different style of advertising, different camera work, less hours of shows a week, what you said about following and listening to modern culture, etc etc.

Right now, WWE is a relic trying to fool itself into believing it follows the times.


----------



## A-C-P

At this point to me these are the new "norm" ratings #. The scary thing for the WWE is that it may not be the "casuals" not tuning in anymore that is leading to these lower #s , it may be that the audience that Vince and Co. always take for granted, "the hardcores", the ones they like to say will watch regardless, are now slowly starting NOT to watch regardless, and if the WWE starts/keeps losing THAT audience it could be bad.

Not saying the WWE is going out of business anytime soon or anything b/c they did just sign a new TV deal. BUT that TV deal was not as lucrative as Vince thought it was going to be. Now, if this rughly 5-10% drop in audience keeps happening then their next TV deal could be even less lucrative and the current one they just signed and IF the network doesn't turn into a MAJOR revenue source, the WWE will NOT go out of business but you could see some major changes in their on-air pro-wrestling product.


----------



## Empress

*Most Popular WWE Network Shows From Last Week, What Weekly Show Doesn't Do Good, Other Favorites*

In order, here's the most-watched WWE Network content from last week:

1. WWE 24: Roman Reigns
2. Chris Jericho interviews Stephanie McMahon
3. WWE NXT, May 6th episode
4. Jerry Springer Too Hot for TV: Love Hurts
5. Extreme Rules

The Cinco de Mayo special with Los Matadores didn't do well and Superstars episodes also don't do too well.

The special on Floyd Mayweather vs. Big Show, the previous week's NXT episode, Culture Shock with Corey Graves, Unfiltered with Renee Young, Mick Foley's Cheap Pops, the ECW Uncensored Volume 3 sneak peek, and a second Jerry Springer episode were also popular among viewers, as well as the last season of Tough Enough and 2014 episodes of Total Divas.

http://wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0513/594255/most-popular-wwe-network-shows-from-last-week/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Chart for Smackdown:










Total viewers was down only 50,000 and the demo dropped only .04. Fairly static for this week.


----------



## Empress

I thought the ratings would've suffered more due to the NBA Playoffs and the finales of Scandal and other shows. 

*SmackDown Twitter TV Ratings*

- WWE SmackDown made Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings again this week and ranked #4 among non-sporting events for the night, behind Scandal, The Vampire Diaries and Grey's Anatomy. SmackDown had a unique audience of 873,000, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This is down from 959,000 two weeks ago. SmackDown had total impressions of 2.172 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This is down from 2.594 million two weeks ago.
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0515/594328/wwe-network-show-gets-more-time/?

*Average RAW & SmackDown Ratings For March, WWEShop Orders Increase*

– WWE RAW averaged a 3.02 rating with 4.23 million viewers for the month of March 2015, down 2.6% in ratings and 2.1% in viewership from March 2014.

With the RAW after WrestleMania taking place in March this year instead of April, the data is not exactly apples to apples. Without the final post-WrestleMania edition of RAW included, RAW averaged a 2.86 rating with 3.94 million viewer in March 2015, down 7.7% in ratings and 8.8% in viewers from March 2014.

By comparison, RAW averaged a 3.29 rating and 4.67 million viewers in March 2013.

– SmackDown’s averaged a 1.89 rating with 2.59 million viewers in 2015, down from March 2014’s average of 2.03 rating with 2.88 million viewers. SmackDown averaged a 2.00 rating with 2.78 million viewers in March 2013. The increase in 2015 can partly be attributed to SmackDown now airing on Thursday nights, which traditionally does much better viewership than Fridays.

– WWEShop.com averaged 1,433 orders per day in March 2015, up from 1,161 orders per day in March 2014. Back in March 2013, they averaged 903 orders per day, so things are definitely trending in the right direction there.

(Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter)
http://www.sescoops.com/average-raw-smackdown-ratings-for-march-wweshop-orders-increase/


----------



## Fighter Daron

IDONTSHIV said:


> Chart for Smackdown:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total viewers was down only 50,000 and the demo dropped only .04. Fairly static for this week.


Last Thursday, there wasn't any NBA game to go against, so it should be considered a success this week's rating.


----------



## HoloLens

From Show Buzz Daily:

8 PM: 4.001
9 PM: 4.001
10 PM: 3.955

So Reigns and Orton are completely absent and Ambrose is placed in a main event storyline against the Authority and the overall number goes up considerably, and the 3rd hour stays consistent with the first two.

Who could have possibly guessed that Ambrose is a bigger draw than Reigns and Orton?! Put the title on this guy IMMEDIATELY.


----------



## validreasoning

8pm = 4.001 million
9pm = 4.001 million
10pm = 3.955 million

insanely consistent viewership for a show that spanned 3hr 13 minutes

the nhl eastern conference finals drew 1.858 million for its game (new york vs tampa) head to head 

raw averaged 3.763 million viewers a year ago this week for reference


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Here's the chart:










Incredibly stable rating. Lack of NBA playoff game apparently helped it, mucho.


----------



## HoloLens

IDONTSHIV said:


> Here's the chart:
> 
> Incredibly stable rating. Lack of NBA playoff game apparently helped it, mucho.


NBA has done pretty poor ratings this year though. WWE has done better numbers going up against the NFL ratings monster than they have all of this year so far. I doubt the lack of NBA had much to do with it.


----------



## Peerless

Ratings go up when Ambrose is featured in the main event.

:ambrose


----------



## HoloLens

Peerless said:


> Ratings go up when Ambrose is featured in the main event.
> 
> :ambrose


And when Reigns is completely off of TV.


----------



## Empress

IDONTSHIV said:


> Here's the chart:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Incredibly stable rating. Lack of NBA playoff game apparently helped it, mucho.


That's good. The third hour finally improved as well.


----------



## Shenroe

Look at that! :yoshi


----------



## A-C-P

Raws for the past 3 weeks has been between GREAT - DECENT. Put on a decent show consistently and #s go up, who would've thought :draper2


----------



## HoloLens

A-C-P said:


> Raws for the past 3 weeks has been between GREAT - DECENT. Put on a decent show consistently and go up, who would've thought :draper2


A large part of that is finally having a guy who is charismatic and can talk in the main event.


----------



## Wynter

HoloLens said:


> A large part of that is finally having a guy who is charismatic and can talk in the main event.


I know right? Throw a celebration for Seth and everyone wants to see it :rollins


----------



## A-C-P

Wynter said:


> I know right? Throw a celebration for Seth and everyone wants to see it :rollins


:Cocky + :ambrose4 = RATINGS

Now just imagine if they made it a a fatal fourway with :bryan2 and :henry2 added in = :vince$:vince$:vince$


----------



## HoloLens

Wynter said:


> I know right? Throw a celebration for Seth and everyone wants to see it :rollins


Rollins isn't charismatic. He's been in the main event for months and the numbers have been atrocious.

Put Ambrose in there and the numbers go up dramatically as has been predicted by people who actually know what they're talking about.

Removing ratings killer Reigns from TV also helps.


----------



## Wynter

A-C-P said:


> :Cocky + :ambrose4 = RATINGS
> 
> Now just imagine if they made it a a fatal fourway with :bryan2 and :henry2 added in :vince$


Where did the Mark Henry is a draw thing come from? I've seen that joke everywhere :lol


----------



## A-C-P

Wynter said:


> Where did the Mark Henry is a draw thing come from? I've seen that joke everywhere :lol


I think it started in the Ratings Thread previous to this one. When Henry first started the Hall of Pain thing when he was WHC on SD the SD ratings shot up the first few weeks of his title reign :lol


----------



## Shenroe

Wynter said:


> Where did the Mark Henry is a draw thing come from? I've seen that joke everywhere :lol


SD 2011, the guy was magical, poppin numbers left and right. I hadn't come back from my break yet at that point, but that's what I heard from this forum last year.


----------



## Wynter

A-C-P said:


> I think it started in the Ratings Thread previous to this one. When Henry first started the Hall of Pain thing when he was WHC on SD the SD ratings shot up the first few weeks of his title reign :lol


Ahhhhh ok :lol I was so confused.

Brownian giving Dean credit like everyone wasn't excited for Seth's celebration :rollins


----------



## A-C-P

Wynter said:


> Ahhhhh ok :lol I was so confused.
> 
> Brownian giving Dean credit like everyone wasn't excited for Seth's celebration :rollins


Architect of a Dream of Increased Ratings :trips5


----------



## HoloLens

Wynter said:


> Ahhhhh ok :lol I was so confused.
> 
> Brownian giving Dean credit like everyone wasn't excited for Seth's celebration :rollins


LOL Seth has been drawing 3.5-3.6 million viewers on average. Nice try, kiddo. 

It must eat you up inside that I've been right all along in regards to both Ambrose and Reigns.

Reigns is off of TV and viewership increases considerably. OUCH!!!


----------



## Wynter

A-C-P said:


> Architect of a Dream of Increased Ratings :trips5


No Curb Stomping on those ratings last night, that's for sure :rollins

Nah, if Dean can keep being part of great numbers and ratings, that would be awesome. Because MITB in Dean's hand would be :banderas


----------



## Chrome

To be fair no NBA on last night probably helped a little bit. Still, nice to see ratings do well when :ambrose2 and :rollins are heavily featured.


----------



## Empress

Seth and Dean deserve equal credit for the rise in ratings this week. The show and main event were tailored around them. And the Authority since their segments have held steady even if they are boring at this point. 

I do think the string of good shows are finally showing in the ratings. It was also the post Payback show. Hopefully, this is a sign of things to come. I didn't love this RAW but if they're making traction, it will encourage Vince & the WWE to keep up the effort they've been making.


----------



## Wynter

HoloLens said:


> LOL Seth has been drawing 3.5-3.6 million viewers on average. Nice try, kiddo.
> 
> It must eat you up inside that I've been right all along in regards to both Ambrose and Reigns.
> 
> Reigns is off of TV and viewership increases considerably. OUCH!!!


Gasp, a Raw after a good PPV getting great viewership with a good show keeping viewers?? Holy cow :surprise::surprise::surprise::surprise:

Man, how about those times when some weeks the numbers dropped during Dean's push when Roman was gone. Naaaah, let's forget about that though right?? :

And no, not really. Because I know you've had this problem since the Dean thread, but GASP!!! I like all THREE Shield members. I know right? Shit crazy! It's amazing how a person can be happy for more than one talent










God, I wish I could live your life; just to understand why you need this forum so much and why Seth and Roman tickle your balls :lol


----------



## The True Believer

Empress said:


> *Seth and Dean deserve equal credit for the rise in ratings this week.* The show and main event were tailored around them. And the Authority since their segments have held steady even if they are boring at this point.
> 
> I do think the string of good shows are finally showing in the ratings. It was also the post Payback show. Hopefully, this is a sign of things to come. I didn't love this RAW but if they're making traction, it will encourage Vince & the WWE to keep up the effort they've been making.


Nah, more like :ambrose = 51%, :rollins = 49%. :side:


----------



## HoloLens

Chrome said:


> To be fair no NBA on last night probably helped a little bit. Still, nice to see ratings do well when :ambrose2 and :rollins are heavily featured.


No need to include Rollins there. Rollins has been drawing 3.5-3.6 million viewers when feuding with the likes of Orton and Reigns. It wasn't until Ambrose was put in the main event that viewership starting increasing. They've increased steadily each week since he was added to the fatal 4.


----------



## HoloLens

Wynter said:


> Gasp, a Raw after a good PPV getting great viewership with a good show keeping viewers?? Holy cow :surprise::surprise::surprise::surprise:
> 
> Man, how about those times when some weeks the numbers dropped during Dean's push when Roman was gone. Naaaah, let's forget about that though right?? :
> 
> And no, not really. Because I know you've had this problem since the Dean thread, but GASP!!! I like all THREE Shield members. I know right? Shit crazy! It's amazing how a person can be happy for more than one talent
> 
> God, I wish I could live your life; just to understand why you need this forum so much and why Seth and Roman tickle your balls :lol


Ambrose's return from filming increased viewership from the previous 2 weeks, actually. He was doing similar numbers to this past RAW while going up against MNF. Do you ever know what you're talking about?

RAW after ER had shit viewership, so your point about it being the night after a PPV is a stupid one, as usual.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

No sign of a "Samoan badass" reigns)to bring the ratings down this week. :ambrose and :rollins got this.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Best rating for Raw since March 30, according to Wade Keller.

Really surprised the rating did that well, espeically without Reigns and Orton on the show.

Happy for Seth and Dean-o and everyone else. It was a good show. No doubt about that.


----------



## Chrome

HoloLens said:


> No need to include Rollins there. Rollins has been drawing 3.5-3.6 million viewers when feuding with the likes of Orton and Reigns. It wasn't until Ambrose was put in the main event that viewership starting increasing. They've increased steadily each week since he was added to the fatal 4.


Guess it's becoming a tradition for you now to make a new account every Tuesday when the ratings come out just to shit on Rollins.


----------



## Wynter

Chrome said:


> Guess it's becoming a tradition for you now to make a new account every Tuesday when the ratings come out just to shit on Rollins.


Yeah, his hate for Roman and Seth is obsessive now. He legit comes on here only to post about them. I mean, I'm a Shield mark, so it's normal for me. But to spend so much time on people you detest and creating your 50 account just to do so?

I guess different hobbies for different people :lol

I can't wait until Seth turns face and kicks up some high ass ratings and views. Right, @ShowStopper 

Just to see him rage quit :lol


----------



## HoloLens

Chrome said:


> Guess it's becoming a tradition for you now to make a new account every Tuesday when the ratings come out just to shit on Rollins.


If it makes you feel any better, I shit on Reigns, Rollins, and Orton equally. All overpushed charisma vacuums who need to be in a program with a guy who has been a jobber in order for ratings to increase.

How fucking embarrassing for them.


----------



## HoloLens

Wynter said:


> Yeah, his hate for Roman and Seth is obsessive now. He legit comes on here only to post about them. I mean, I'm a Shield mark, so it's normal for me. But to spend so much time on people you detest and creating your 50 account just to do so?
> 
> I guess different hobbies for different people :lol
> 
> I can't wait until Seth turns face and kicks up some high ass ratings and views. Right, @ShowStopper
> 
> Just to see him rage quit :lol


Jeff Hardy had far more charisma than Rollins, and was a better face than Rollins will ever be - but I don't recall him ever moving ratings much.


----------



## Empress

Why are people continuing to take cheap shots at Roman Reigns and Randy Orton? Have they been predominately featured in every hour of a 3 hour show for the past few weeks where the ratings are solely their fault? If the answer was yes, these "I told you so's" would carry more weight.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> Yeah, his hate for Roman and Seth is obsessive now. He legit comes on here only to post about them. I mean, I'm a Shield mark, so it's normal for me. But to spend so much time on people you detest and creating your 50 account just to do so?
> 
> I guess different hobbies for different people :lol
> 
> I can't wait until Seth turns face and kicks up some high ass ratings and views. Right, @ShowStopper
> 
> Just to see him rage quit :lol


You know it.  

This is what I've been saying for quite awhile, though. The title scene needed some new contenders. Can't just keep giving the same two guys title shots month after month before people get tired of it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Empress said:


> Why are people continuing to take cheap shots at Roman Reigns and Randy Orton? Have they been predominately featured in every hour of a 3 hour show for the past few weeks where the ratings are solely their fault? If the answer was yes, these "I told you so's" would carry more weight.


No one is taking cheap shots at them. But they've both given multiple title shots. It's just time for some new title contenders. I don't see what is so wrong with that.


----------



## Wynter

HoloLens said:


> Ambrose's return from filming increased viewership from the previous 2 weeks, actually. He was doing similar numbers to this past RAW while going up against MNF. Do you ever know what you're talking about?
> 
> RAW after ER had shit viewership, so your point about it being the night after a PPV is a stupid one, as usual.


ER had two good matches on a meh PPV...

Meanwhile, Payback had mostly good matches and a great ass main event.

Good product=positive feedback. Shitty lazy prodcut=negative feedback.

Raw has been good these past few weeks and a PPV that delivered. Honestly, I know you're smart enough to realize that, yeah? It was a good Raw, which is why people stayed interested the entire time.

And, it takes two to tango. Dean and Seth have amazing chemistry and had the hottest feud last year. I doubt people would be clamoring if it was Dean vs Kane. Dude, give Seth some credit here :lol


----------



## Chrome

ShowStopper said:


> No one is taking cheap shots at them. But they've both given multiple title shots. It's just time for some new title contenders. I don't see what is so wrong with that.


Pretty much. Orton's had his time in the sun and Reigns would be better served going after the vacant IC title or something.


----------



## Empress

ShowStopper said:


> No one is taking cheap shots at them. But they've both given multiple title shots. It's just time for some new title contenders. I don't see what is so wrong with that.


I see nothing wrong at all with fresh title defenses. I'm glad that Ambrose is in the main event but it's ridiculous to act like Roman and Randy not being on the show led to this huge ratings increase. That's no better than some people shitting on Seth for the low ratings.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Empress said:


> I see nothing wrong at all with fresh title defenses. I'm glad that Ambrose is in the main event but it's ridiculous to act like Roman and Randy not being on the show led to this huge ratings increase. That's no better than some people shitting on Seth for the low ratings.


Hey, there are some ridiculous opinions on everyone (including Seth) spewed here all of the time.

I don't think them not being on the show led to a ratings increase. If Reigns was the champion and he kept having matches with the same two guys over and over, I'd have the same opinion that the title scene would need a refresher. But I do think fans are probably happy that we're moving on from the post-WM malaise and hopefully getting some different angles going forward.


----------



## HoloLens

Wynter said:


> ER had two good matches on a meh PPV...
> 
> Meanwhile, Payback had mostly good matches and a great ass main event.
> 
> Good product=positive feedback. Shitty lazy prodcut=negative feedback.
> 
> Raw has been good these past few weeks and a PPV that delivered. Honestly, I know you're smart enough to realize that, yeah? It was a good Raw, which is why people stayed interested the entire time.
> 
> And, it takes two to tango. Dean and Seth have amazing chemistry and had the hottest feud last year. I doubt people would be clamoring if it was Dean vs Kane. Dude, give Seth some credit here :lol


That's entirely debatable. The product is still shit for the most part. They are still under utilizing a lot of their most charismatic guys. In fact, once it becomes evident that Ambrose has no shot of winning the title and that he will be thrown back into the midcard, watch the viewership decline again.


----------



## Wynter

ShowStopper said:


> No one is taking cheap shots at them. But they've both given multiple title shots. It's just time for some new title contenders. I don't see what is so wrong with that.


I get what you're saying in that regard. Dean is a breath of fresh air and provides a different dynamic and some fun segments.

And I understand @Empress because Roman really doesn't get much time on the show, so he can't affect much as say, Seth and Randy, who received ample time and build up. Roman didn't/doesn't receive half the time Randy gets and only has been in what, two title shots recently?? One with Brock and logically at Payback? 

But as you said, Randy vs Seth has been done to death. Seth vs Roman has been shot to hell after Roman went over Seth so many damn times. Nothing interesting about that feud. Hell, even I don't want it. All I wanted was for Roman to do payback and then go back to the midcard spot.


It's about time Dean has gotten his shine again. Because as I've always stated, he's a very reliable worker. You push him and the crowd will accept him wholeheartedly. He can go from decent pops to big pops in just a week.


----------



## numeno

more proof that the "ROLLINS IS BOOKED TOO WEAK !!1!1!!!1!" thing is bullshit


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Steady numbers during the three hours

Maybe help not having a Orton-Reigns-Rollins-Kane match on MainEvent, is that in recent times the MainEvent has always been a match with this foursome


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> I get what you're saying in that regard. Dean is a breath of fresh air and provides a different dynamic and some fun segments.
> 
> And I understand @Empress because Roman really doesn't get much time on the show, so he can't affect much as say, Seth and Randy, who received ample time and build up. Roman didn't/doesn't receive half the time Randy gets and only has been in what, two title shots recently?? One with Brock and logically at Payback?
> 
> But as you said, Randy vs Seth has been done to death. Seth vs Roman has been shot to hell after Roman went over Seth so many damn times. Nothing interesting about that feud. Hell, even I don't want it. All I wanted was for Roman to do payback and then go back to the midcard spot.
> 
> 
> It's about time Dean has gotten his shine again. Because as I've always stated, he's a very reliable worker. You push him and the crowd will accept him wholeheartedly. He can go from decent pops to big pops in just a week.


I think all main eventers play a heavy part, tbh. With Cena in the midcard, Reigns has pretty much been pushed as the top face, regularly cleaning up at the end of Raw numerous times. He doesn't get as much time as the World Champion, yes, but for all intents and purposes has been the top face.

Anyway, I agree about Ambrose. Good to see him get sometime in the main again, especially since he still gets good pops even with him being an after thought for all of these months. I just hope him and Seth get 25 minutes or so at EC and get to tear the house down like they did on Raw a few weeks ago. Hopefully, WWE doesn't saddle them down with too many stips.

So, who do you think Reigns will face at EC?


----------



## The True Believer

numeno said:


> more proof that the "ROLLINS IS BOOKED TOO WEAK !!1!1!!!1!" thing is bullshit


Not really. Unless, of course, you want to pin the success of this week's good rating solely on Rollins. If so, then you should have no problem pinning the blame on him when the ratings were less than stellar not too long ago.


----------



## Empress

ShowStopper said:


> So, who do you think Reigns will face at EC?


I think it'll be Randy Orton, possibly to determine who the #1 contender will be for the WWE Title. I hope not though. Maybe Bray Wyatt will randomly attack him. 

Ambrose/Rollins can continue their feud until Brock returns for Sumemrslam. I'd love to see Brock/Rollins for the title with no interference. 

Anyway, I'm glad you understood my earlier point. I think @Wynter went into more depth as to what I wanted to get across.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Reigns will probably face Kane.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Someone (I won't mention a name) did say Raw's rating being bad last week was due to Rollins' booking. So, I wonder how exactly that logic works this week..

Giving credit or blame to any one person for ratings is ridiculous. Just further proof of that..


----------



## LilOlMe

Cena's open challenge was finally placed in the third hour, which I think helped things as well.


----------



## The True Believer

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Reigns will probably face Kane.


Good luck getting MOTN off of that, Reigns! >


----------



## Wynter

ShowStopper said:


> I think all main eventers play a heavy part, tbh. With Cena in the midcard, Reigns has pretty much been pushed as the top face, regularly cleaning up at the end of Raw numerous times. He doesn't get as much time as the World Champion, yes, but for all intents and purposes has been the top face.
> 
> Anyway, I agree about Ambrose. Good to see him get sometime in the main again, especially since he still gets good pops even with him being an after thought for all of these months. I just hope him and Seth get 25 minutes or so at EC and get to tear the house down like they did on Raw a few weeks ago. Hopefully, WWE doesn't saddle them down with too many stips.
> 
> So, who do you think Reigns will face at EC?


Roman didn't really end Raws anymore until he got back into the title scene. He was straddled with Big Show since Mania until now. And from what it seems, he will be doing other things while Dean vs Seth happens. Roman really hasn't been doing much to be considered the top face like he was pre-Mania. Randy has been the top pushed face opposite of Seth. Now that's someone who has ended many Raws lately lol

Yeah, I don't see any reason why Seth vs Dean won't get a lot of time. The EC card isn't packed, so they definitely have the time to fill up 3 hours. Unless I missed something and the show is shorter than the usual??

Probably Kane or Big Show. Because WWE doesn't believe in giving Roman an opponent outside those two -___________- WWE desperate to end Roman's good PPV streak I see.



The True Believer said:


> Good luck getting MOTN off of that, Reigns! >


He somehow did it with Big Show. I believe in miracles after that :lol


----------



## Empress

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Reigns will probably face Kane.


You're right. fpalm 

I forgot about Kane. I guess Randy gets the Big Show who is supposed to come back this week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

LilOlMe said:


> Cena's open challenge was finally placed in the third hour, which I think helped things as well.


Still surprised the 3rd hour did that well when they put the Divas match and the Ryder/Fandango tag match in the 3rd hour. fpalm


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The True Believer said:


> Good luck getting MOTN off of that, Reigns! >


I'm certain they'll go out there, throw some punches, Reigns does his clotheslines and Samoan drop, superman punch, goes for spear, Kane chokeslams him, 1-2-Reigns kicks out, and 20 seconds later Reigns hits the spear or Kane for the win.

And it will be called MOTN by the same ones who call the Big Show one MOTN.

You're welcome.


----------



## Fighter Daron

4 good Raws on a row + Good PPV + No NBA to go against + No Orton(He bores the shit out of everyone) = Ratings increasing.


----------



## Wynter

LilOlMe said:


> Cena's open challenge was finally placed in the third hour, which I think helped things as well.


Yup. Cena has been having some really good matches and has been one of the must sees of the show. Also helps the tease of a potential NXT guy coming up to challenge him. With things like having Sami and Kevin Owens showing up, it makes his open challenges very intriguing.


----------



## The True Believer

Wynter said:


> He somehow did it with Big Show. I believe in miracles after that :lol


That's heavily due to the stipulation they had to work with. Implying that Kane vs. Reigns will be a normal, 1 on 1 match, I don't see that happening, let alone a good match on its own merits. I mean, when was the last time Kane had a good, non-gimmick, 1 on 1 match?


----------



## Empress

LilOlMe said:


> Cena's open challenge was finally placed in the third hour, which I think helped things as well.


I thought the WWE should put Cena's open challenge in the third hour. And the moment with Kevin Owens did create a lot of buzz and possibly a boost.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> Roman didn't really end Raws anymore until he got back into the title scene. He was straddled with Big Show since Mania until now. And from what it seems, he will be doing other things while Dean vs Seth happens. Roman really hasn't been doing much to be considered the top face like he was pre-Mania. Randy has been the top pushed face opposite of Seth. Now that's someone who has ended many Raws lately lol
> 
> Yeah, I don't see any reason why Seth vs Dean won't get a lot of time. The EC card isn't packed, so they definitely have the time to fill up 3 hours. Unless I missed something and the show is shorter than the usual??
> 
> Probably Kane or Big Show. Because WWE doesn't believe in giving Roman an opponent outside those two -___________- WWE desperate to end Roman's good PPV streak I see.
> 
> 
> 
> He somehow did it with Big Show. I believe in miracles after that :lol


I don't agree. Roman has been the top face since Rumble/Fastlane to me. He's been pushed like it and it shows. Orton is in there as well, but no one takes Orton very seriously right now IMO. With Cena as the US Champ, Reigns has been the lead dog in the face department, and there's nothing wrong with that. 

Forgot about Kane and Big Show, especially. Ugh. Not Show, plz.


----------



## Fighter Daron

#BadNewsSanta said:


> I'm certain they'll go out there, throw some punches, Reigns does his clotheslines and Samoan drop, superman punch, goes for spear, Kane chokeslams him, 1-2-Reigns kicks out, and 20 seconds later Reigns hits the spear or Kane for the win.
> 
> And it will be called MOTN by the same ones who call the Big Show one MOTN.
> 
> You're welcome.


First things first, I think Big Show is a better inring performer than Kane. Putting that aside, Roman's match against Show hadn't the structure you mentioned above. But most important, from what I read, I undertand that you said people who liked Show/Reigns doesn't know anything about wrestling and are just Roman's cocksuckers.

Well, I think that turns me into a cocksucker because I fucking loved that match, I'm sorry if the hate made you hate it, it's a shame.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The True Believer said:


> That's heavily due to the stipulation they had to work with. Implying that Kane vs. Reigns will be a normal, 1 on 1 match, I don't see that happening, let alone a good match on its own merits. I mean, when was the last time Kane had a good, non-gimmick, 1 on 1 match?


Not to mention they just had a No DQ and it sucked. They also had a LMS match that bad. Your ordinary match will be even worse.

Then again, the Wyatt/Ambrose gimmick matches suck, but when they have regular one on one matches they're great. Maybe this will apply to Reigns/Kane.


----------



## Wynter

The True Believer said:


> That's heavily due to the stipulation they had to work with. Implying that Kane vs. Reigns will be a normal, 1 on 1 match, I don't see that happening, let alone a good match on its own merits. I mean, when was the last time Kane had a good, non-gimmick, 1 on 1 match?


You know damn well Kane vs Roman wouldn't be a normal match. No one wants to go through that :deandre

It would most likely be a No DQ. As it should since Roman is a good brawler. Roman should never have a normal match with guys like Kane and Show *shudders*

Though, if he did manage to do a good normal match with Kane, do we come to terms that Vince has definitely sacrificed a few virgins to the devil recently?? :lol



EDIT: Badnews is the guy who thought Roman was going to win at Payback because "lol Roman is overpushed!". Don't mind him, he shits on Roman whenever he gets the chance. He's a tamer Brownian lol


----------



## Wynter

ShowStopper said:


> I don't agree. Roman has been the top face since Rumble/Fastlane to me. He's been pushed like it and it shows. Orton is in there as well, but no one takes Orton very seriously right now IMO. With Cena as the US Champ, Reigns has been the lead dog in the face department, and there's nothing wrong with that.
> 
> Forgot about Kane and Big Show, especially. Ugh. Not Show, plz.


Really? You can't honestly say Roman has been pushed over Randy lately? Dude, are you serious? Roman would be lucky to get 5 minutes in the Randy/Seth/Kane show. Anyone without bias and dirstheets would think Randy was the top face watching the show. Come on man :lol Since Mania, Roman has been real low key and as I said, facing with guys like Big Show. Hell, even though he was in the title match for Payback, Roman wasn't all over Raw.

Roman is one of the top faces, but he isn't THE top face on Raw at the moment.

Knowing WWE, it will be Randy and Roman vs Kane and Show.


----------



## HoloLens

Say goodbye to these numbers when Ambrose goes back to jobbing in the midcard after EC.

Imagine if they had built up Ambrose, Wyatt, and Sandow into legitimate main eventers. Three charismatic guys with superb mic skills who could sell anyone on any feud.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Fighter Daron said:


> First things first, I think Big Show is a better inring performer than Kane. Putting that aside, Roman's match against Show hadn't the structure you mentioned above. But most important, from what I read, I undertand that you said people who liked Show/Reigns doesn't know anything about wrestling and are just Roman's cocksuckers.
> 
> Well, I think that turns me into a cocksucker because I fucking loved that match, I'm sorry if the hate made you hate it, it's a shame.


1) I agree, Big Show's in ring work is better than Kane's.

2) I agree, Reigns match with Big Show wasn't structured like that. It was more... they start off punching, Show knocks Reigns down, ref count begins, Reigns gets up, Show knocks him down, ref count begins, rinse and repeat, Reigns pulls out table, Big Show puts it back, Reigns pulls it out again, Big Show breaks it, then we're back to the formula above just with more weapons now. This continues for the entire match, with some big SPOTS towards the end and concludes with Reigns spearing Big Show three times and throwing a table over him.

3) I don't think I ever said people who liked Reigns/Show were only Reigns cocksuckers and know nothing about wrestling... maybe it's one of those things where if I look at the post side-ways, it's written there? Meh, in any case if it's there, my apologies.

4) If you loved the match, more power to you. :thumbsup



> EDIT: Badnews is the guy who thought Roman was going to win at Payback because "lol Roman is overpushed!". Don't mind him, he shits on Roman whenever he gets the chanced. He's a tamer Brownian lol


Yup, I was totally serious about that. Dead serious. So serious that every other post I made on the subject had me calling Reigns winning the match. 

And if Reigns didn't give me so many opportunities to shit on him, I wouldn't.


----------



## Wynter

HoloLens said:


> Say goodbye to these numbers when Ambrose goes back to jobbing in the midcard after EC.
> 
> Imagine if they had built up Ambrose, Wyatt, and Sandow into legitimate main eventers. Three charismatic guys with superb mic skills who could sell anyone on any feud.


Dean is winning MITB. Roman surely isn't because he won't win his first title through cash in. Randy definitely isn't. What plausible face is there??


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> Really? You can't honestly say Roman has been pushed over Randy lately? Dude, are you serious? Roman would be lucky to get 8 minutes in the Randy/Seth/Kane show. Anyone without bias and dirstheets would think Randy was the top face watching the show. Come on man :lol Since Mania, Roman has been real low key and as I said, facing with guys like Big Show. Hell, even though he was in the title match for Payback, Roman wasn't all over Raw.
> 
> Roman is one of the top faces, but he isn't THE top face on Raw at the moment.
> 
> Knowing WWE, it will be Randy and Roman vs Kane and Show.


It definitely didn't show with where each guy was for the Payback PPV with Orton taking on Rollins and Reigns taking on Show. So, I agree with you on there about that PPV placement, which was dumb, IMO. But overall these past 5 months dating back to RR, I'd give the edge to Reigns in terms of who has been the biggest face of the year 2015, thus far. That can still change as there is still alot of 2015 to go, but as of right now, I think Reigns is the one Vince wants the crowd to love more than Orton or anyother face *at the moment.*


----------



## Erik.

Glad the show done good numbers by recent months standards, it was a good show and furthered/started some feuds, which is what you want really.


----------



## HoloLens

Wynter said:


> Dean is winning MITB. Roman surely isn't because he won't win his first title through cash in. Randy definitely isn't. What plausible face is there??


LOL you think Ambrose is winning MITB. That's so cute!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wynter said:


> Dean is winning MITB. Roman surely isn't because he won't win his first title through cash in. Randy definitely isn't. What plausible face is there??


So... if Reigns wins MITB, can we call him over-pushed?


----------



## numeno

The True Believer said:


> Not really. Unless, of course, you want to pin the success of this week's good rating solely on Rollins. If so, then you should have no problem doing so when the ratings were less than stellar.


obviously i don't want to give all the merit to Rollins, but if the ratings didn't decease in the last hour is because the public was interested in his final segment; because they were interested in *him*
at least this is my opinion


----------



## The Bloodline

Who knew a string of good shows and a ppv could bring in raw viewers. And no nba playoffs made it a easy choice for me to watch raw. Midcard has multiple stories going on, both mid card titles too. Tag team titles has importance and promo time. Cena finally leading off the 3rd hour with his challenge which has become a hype part of Raw. A stupid tag main event wasn't annocuced early on. They waited to late in the show to say reigns wasnt showing up. & we have a new number 1 contender. It's definitely a collective effort to draw interest and the last few raws have felt a bit different.


----------



## HoloLens

numeno said:


> obviously i don't want to give all the merit to Rollins, but if the ratings didn't decease in the last hour is because the public was interested in his final segment; because they were interested in *him*
> at least this is my opinion


You realize that Cena - the biggest draw on the roster - was in the 3rd hour, right?

If people wanted to see Rollins, he wouldn't have been drawing 3.5-3.6 million viewers for months as he has been. It also helps that he was put in a program with someone who is actually charismatic.


----------



## Wynter

ShowStopper said:


> It definitely didn't show with where each guy was for the Payback PPV with Orton taking on Rollins and Reigns taking on Show. So, I agree with you on there about that PPV placement, which was dumb, IMO. But overall these past 5 months dating back to RR, I'd give the edge to Reigns in terms of who has been the biggest face of the year 2015, thus far. That can still change as there is still alot of 2015 to go, but as of right now, I think Reigns is the one Vince wants the crowd to love more than Orton or anyother face *at the moment.*


Oh, we talking of the year? lol Im talking about after Mania. Once Roman won Fast Lane, he was definitely top face because he was on his way to Mania.

I meant recently since his loss. WWE stepped back with him. Payback was a given because he was going to go after Rollins at some point. But it seems Kane will be his next feud which, kill me now -___-

Oh, and I agree backstage/Vince views the placement differently, but they smartly know Roman shouldn't be pushed as number one at the moment.

I misunderstood you :lol


----------



## Empress

ShowStopper said:


> It definitely didn't show with where each guy was for the Payback PPV with Orton taking on Rollins and Reigns taking on Show. So, I agree with you on there about that PPV placement, which was dumb, IMO. *But overall these past 5 months dating back to RR, I'd give the edge to Reigns in terms of who has been the biggest face of the year 2015, thus far. * That can still change as there is still alot of 2015 to go, but as of right now, I think Reigns is the one Vince wants the crowd to love more than Orton or anyother face *at the moment.*


How was Roman the biggest face when he was a defacto heel since the Royal Rumble battling boo's and apathy? I'm not sure if I'm reading your comment wrong. I apologize if I am, but I'd argue that Bryan was. Bryan cooled down a lot since last year, but Bryan was more over and followed by a returning Orton, Ambrose, Sandow and then Reigns. 

I do agree that Vince wants Reigns to be the most over face in the company. I'd put him Top 5 at the moment. For a guy that was unmercifully booed at the Rumble and Mania, the turnaround in reactions has come quicker than I thought. I think it's a success to WWE and Reigns that he is accepted as a face given what happened months prior.


----------



## Wynter

HoloLens said:


> LOL you think Ambrose is winning MITB. That's so cute!


Say if he wins, what does WF win?? Your retirement, right?? 








Please
:westbrook4


----------



## HoloLens

Wynter said:


> Say if he wins, what does WF win?? Your retirement, right??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please
> :westbrook4


If Ambrose becomes world champ this year, I will stop posting on WF for good.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> Oh, we talking of the year? lol Im talking about after Mania. Once Roman won Fast Lane, he was definitely top face because he was on his way to Mania.
> 
> I meant recently since his loss. WWE stepped back with him. Payback was a given because he was going to go after Rollins at some point. But it seems Kane will be his next feud which, kill me now -___-
> 
> Oh, and I agree backstage/Vince views the placement differently, but they smartly know Roman shouldn't be pushed as number one at the moment.
> 
> I misunderstood you :lol


I just think Roman is the top face of the company, tbh. He gets more shine moments than Orton and routinely gets made to look strong. Reigns is the top face to me, until further notice. Orton is filler.

@Empress

Reigns was getting heavy boos in that time period, but that wasn't the intention. He was getting pushed as a face. He may not get the huge pops that past top faces have gotten yet, but I think that's what Vince wants out of him.


----------



## Wynter

HoloLens said:


> If Ambrose becomes world champ this year, I will stop posting on WF for good.


Hmmm, this year eh? Nah, I would rather you stay because I want to know what it looks like to see you happy :lmao


----------



## Empress

@ShowStopper

Oh, okay. I thought you meant top face based on how the audience perceived him. But I understand what you meant by your comment. He was pushed by the WWE during RTM as the top face despite not actually being that.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Empress said:


> @ShowStopper
> 
> Oh, okay. I thought you meant top face based on how the audience perceived him. But I understand what you meant by your comment. He was pushed by the WWE during RTM as the top face despite not actually being that.


That's correct. (Y)


----------



## DoubtGin

Last week's Raw was pretty decent and Payback was good as well, so I guess many were interested in how Raw would shape up. And it turned out to be very good so I expect next week to reach similar or even better ratings than now.


----------



## Marv95

Let's find out they do on Mermorial Day.


----------



## bmtrocks

It isn't surprising on the ratings cause Ambrose was drawing pretty well in ratings and merch last Summer and Fall. Then when Reigns got pushed ratings started to go down. The Ambrose vs. Rollins feud was the only thing memorable about post-DB 2014 aside from Lesnar brutalizing Cena and Sting debut.


----------



## Starbuck

The Authority return, with segments to open and close the show, the ratings go up AGAIN and we're giving credit to Dean Ambrose?










As you were ratings thread. As you were. Keep pretending The Authority isn't best for business when you all know it is. 

:rollins


----------



## Dec_619

Really enjoyed this weeks RAW. Good to see the ratings held up through the entire show.


----------



## TheGmGoken

Dean Fucking Ambrose

Dirty Deeds Bitches


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Smackdown ratings chart:










It rose .09 in the demo from a .62 to a .71 and increased from 2.528 million viewers to 2.589m. The ratings were up for both shows so that is decent news.


----------



## LilOlMe

Don't know the cause that RAW falling on Memorial night will have, however, I just read that Stephen Curry just fell on his neck during an NBA playoff game and it looks like a really bad injury, and it happened right around 10:00 pm. He's the MVP of the league, so apparently it's big news. Saw it all over other messageboards.

I don't know what happened at 10, but I wouldn't be surprised if that drives down some of RAW's ratings in that hour. I'd imagine a lot of people tuned into the NBA game after hearing about that, and those that were watching were going to want to stick around to hear updates.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Don't expect the ratings today because of the holiday. Only cable ratings from Friday have been released so far.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ratings are in. Here's the chart:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Dear Roman Reigns,

You come back to Raw, stick your nose in a main event scene you have no business being in or even have a match in, and drive all those viewers away. You suck, go away.

#BadNewsSanta


----------



## StdDev

Reigns returns, is placed in the main event storyline, and ratings decrease significantly.

Ratings killer doing what he always does.


----------



## Chrome

Inb4 "It was Memorial Day and the NBA was on."


----------



## Wynter

StdDev said:


> Reigns returns, is placed in the main event storyline, and ratings decrease significantly.
> 
> Ratings killer doing what he always does.



:ha oh, so we aren't talking about ambrose today? What happened, bro? The whole show was made around Dean and we all knew he was coming back at the end. Remember how he was the huge ratings draw while Seth and Roman were nobodies???


----------



## StdDev

Wynter said:


> :ha oh, so we aren't talking about ambrose today? What happened, bro? The whole show was made around Dean and we all knew he was coming back at the end. Remember how he was the huge ratings draw while Seth and Roman were nobodies???


Ambrose is a draw, absolutely. No one said huge draw. But no one with a brain would expect a jobber to be a huge draw.

Reigns is a ratings killer, as has been shown time and time again. Take him off of TV and ratings increase. Put him back on and ratings decrease.

Sorry that these facts are hitting you so hard, sweetie.


----------



## Wynter

StdDev said:


> He's a draw, absolutely. No one said huge draw.
> 
> Reigns is a ratings killer, as has been shown time and time again. Take him off of TV and ratings increase. Put him back on and ratings decrease.
> 
> Sorry that these facts are hitting you so hard, sweetie.


:lmao uh huh, the whole thing has been built around Dean. Roman does nothing of significance except for on Smackdown. You know, the one where they advertised his return and ratings and viewership went up?? 

Oh... 

Anyway, get over it, no one is a true draw right now. Ratings and viewership yoyo all the time. Even with your boy and Seth in the forefront of things. Dean had several segments on the show and was built up for the big ending with the drive in :shrug 

I love how you consider Dean this draw but then when shit drops when he's the main focus, it's someone else fault :ha


----------



## StdDev

Wynter said:


> :lmao uh huh, the whole thing has been built around Dean. Roman does nothing of significance except for on Smackdown. You know, the one where they advertised his return and ratings and viewership went up??
> 
> Oh...
> 
> Anyway, get over it, no one is a true draw right now. Ratings and viewership yoyo all the time. Even with your boy and Seth in the forefront of things. Dean had several segments on the show and was built up for the big ending with the drive in :shrug
> 
> I love how you consider Dean this draw but then when shit drops when he's the main focus, it's someone else fault :ha


Ambrose has a track record of returning and/or being placed in the main event and having viewership increase as a result. It has happened on at least a couple of occasions now.

Reigns has a track record of driving fans away when he comes back, and even during the RTWM which is suppose to see massive ratings.

I am so sorry that these facts are hitting you so hard, darling.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I think Reigns should be Slater's personal jobber from here on out. Clearly he's got no future in the main event with his anti-drawing ability.


----------



## Wynter

StdDev said:


> Ambrose has a track record of returning and/or being placed in the main event and having viewership increase as a result. It has happened on at least a couple of occasions now.
> 
> Reigns has a track record of driving fans away when he comes back, and even during the RTWM which is suppose to see massive ratings.
> 
> I am so sorry that these facts are hitting you so hard, darling.


Occasionally huh, not consistently like a true ratings draw would :hmm

Shocking :lol Roman was barely on the show, but guess who the whole show was built around :ambrose 

And I'd hope the Raw after a ppv would garner good ratings and Viewership fpalm 

And it's not even a big deal because Dean hasn't been pushed enough to really garner being a draw yet. I just had to bring it up because you swear Dean is on some different stratosphere from Seth and Roman and haunt the ratings thread about it. As I said, Dean was built up for his big comeback at the end and it still lost over a 100,000 viewers :shrug 

Viewership and ratings increased on Smackdown with Roman advertised for his "return" But I'd be a dumbass to call him a draw because of occasional ratings going up :lol 

Roman, Seth and Dean simply can't affect things with the way the current product is as a whole.


----------



## validreasoning

pretty much identical numbers to memorial day last year. that show drew 3.602 million average for 3 hours compared to 3.599 million this year


----------



## StdDev

Wynter said:


> Occasionally huh, not consistently like a true ratings draw would :hmm
> 
> Shocking :lol Roman was barely on the show, but guess who the whole show was built around :ambrose
> 
> And I'd hope the Raw after a ppv would garner good ratings and Viewership fpalm
> 
> And it's not even a big deal because Dean hasn't been pushed enough to really garner being a draw yet. I just had to bring it up because you swear Dean is on some different stratosphere from Seth and Roman and haunt the ratings thread about it. As I said, Dean was built up for his big comeback at the end and it still lost over a 100,000 viewers :shrug
> 
> Viewership and ratings increased on Smackdown with Roman advertised for his "return" But I'd be a dumbass to call him a draw because of occasional ratings going up :lol
> 
> Roman, Seth and Dean simply can't affect things with the way the current product is as a whole.


Of course you'd be a dumbass. A single example is not indicative of past for future performance. And you seem to be confusing "draw" with "huge draw." A guy who is booked like a geek and a jobber will never be a huge draw. The fact that he has a track record of positively affecting ratings is impressive given his shit booking, though.

Reigns "The Ratings Killer" was on the show show as much as the other two main event participants. 

Try again.


----------



## Wynter

StdDev said:


> Of course you'd be a dumbass. A single incident is not indicative of past for future performance. And you seem to be confusing "draw" with "huge draw." A guy who is booked like a geek and a jobber will never be a huge draw. The fact that he has a track record of positively affecting ratings is impressive given his shit booking, though.
> 
> Reigns "The Ratings Killer" was on the show show as much as the other two main event participants.
> 
> Try again.


:lol uh huh. He was in the tag match, disappeared for a while and showed up at the end when many weren't really expecfing him, but ambrose.

You know, the guy who had multiple segments and the biggest angle of the night leading to his goofy ass drive in?? 

Seems like Dean got the most camera time and Seth second as far as the main eventers :hmm:

You were better off blaming Memorial Day and the basketball game. A true draw, whether huge or decent, consistently draws. Not "on some occasions he draws on the Raw after a good PPV" lol


----------



## StdDev

Wynter said:


> :lol uh huh. He was in the tag match, disappear for a while and showed up at the end when many weren't really expecfing him but ambrose.
> 
> You know, the guy who had multiple segments and the biggest angle of the night leading to his goofy ass drive in??
> 
> Seems like Dean got the most camera time and Seth second as far as the main eventers :hmm:
> 
> You were better off blaming Memorial Day and the basketball game. A true draw, whether huge or decent consistently draw. Not "on some occasions he draws on the Raw after a good PPV" lol


Why would I use Memorial Day or basketball as an excuse when we have something that is backed by _loads of empirical evidence_: the fact that Reigns kills ratings whenever he is placed in the main event storyline.

That's really all I need.


----------



## Wynter

StdDev said:


> Why would I use Memorial Day or basketball as an excuse when we have something that is backed by _loads of empirical evidence_: the fact that Reigns kills ratings whenever he is placed in the main event storyline.
> 
> That's really all I need.


Hmm, so when the show is about Seth, you blame him. But when the show is about Dean, you blame the guy who was barely on :hmm: 

No fucks were given about Deans Stone Cold moment other than the usual viewers :shrug:

The go home show where everyone knew it would be all about Dean. But they care about Romans five minutes on TV so much, they didn't watch. 

Uh huh :lol 

Cant wait until you praise Dean for viewership and ratings going up again Monday after another PPV :banderas


----------



## StdDev

Wynter said:


> Hmm, so when the show is about Seth, you blame him. But when the show is about Dean, you blame the guy who was barely on :hmm:
> 
> No fucks were given about Deans Stone Cold moment other than the usual viewers :shrug:
> 
> The go home show where everyone knew it would be all about Dean. But they care about Romans five minutes on TV so much, they didn't watch.
> 
> Uh huh :lol
> 
> Cant wait until you praise Dean for viewership and ratings going up again Monday after another PPV :banderas


Reigns wasn't barely on. He had as much screen time as the other two.

Why must you lie?


----------



## StdDev

What is your reasoning for why viewership always decreases after his return and whenever he is placed in the main event storyline?

Is it just coincidence?


----------



## Wynter

StdDev said:


> Reigns wasn't barely on. He had as much screen time as the other two.
> 
> Why must you lie?


I'm surprised you still answer me when you know I quote you just to argue with you :lol


----------



## Wynter

StdDev said:


> What is your reasoning for why viewership always decreases after his return and whenever he is placed in the main event storyline?
> 
> Is it just coincidence?


Always? :lol yup, Roman has had many returns and has been in and out main event storylines so many times 

:westbrook4 

I love you are still ignoring the reason why viewership and ratings went up last week. No competition and it was the Raw after a really solid ppv. 


Now shit went back to normal. 

Amazing how that happens, right? And if EC is really good and gets a lot of buzz, guess what? Raw is going to increase again!


----------



## StdDev

Wynter said:


> Always? :lol yup, Roman has had many returns and has been in and out main event storylines so many times
> 
> :westbrook4
> 
> I love you are still ignoring the reason why viewership and ratings went up last week. No competition and it was the Raw after a really solid ppv.
> 
> 
> Now shit went back to normal.
> 
> Amazing how that happens, right? And if EC is really good and gets a lot of buzz, guess what? Raw is going to increase again!


You're overrating the post-PPV bump. It's generally only noticeable after WM.


----------



## FITZ

I've been posting here for like 8 years now. Every single year the Memorial Day rating is bad and every single year I see people try to blame someone specific.


----------



## Wynter

FITZ said:


> I've been posting here for like 8 years now. Every single year the Memorial Day rating is bad and every single year I see people try to blame someone specific.


I'm just fucking with him. I don't blame Dean. The product is just stale a bit and wwe hardly capitalizes when they start getting good momentum or a string of good Raws.


----------



## Fighter Daron

Bah, people saying this is because Reigns was in it are just dumbasses. There are three reasons, from most important to the least: 

- Memorial Day, ratings decrease when people are out there in vacations.
- BAD RAW, yes, you hear it, normally when a show is bad, people stop watching.
- They went against an NBA game, Warriors series clincher.

But yeah, it was because of Roman.


----------



## Peerless

Any hourly breakdowns? Would be interesting too see how many people tuned in for Ambrose's comeback late in the show.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Fighter Daron said:


> Bah, people saying this is because Reigns was in it are just dumbasses. There are three reasons, from most important to the least:
> 
> - Memorial Day, ratings decrease when people are out there in vacations.
> - BAD RAW, yes, you hear it, normally when a show is bad, people stop watching.
> - They went against an NBA game, Warriors series clincher.
> 
> But yeah, it was because of Roman.


*
It's just the same old people bitching about Reigns who shouldn't be taken seriously ever since Fast Lane. Nothing to see here.*


----------



## Fighter Daron

Peerless said:


> Any hourly breakdowns? Would be interesting too see how many people tuned in for Ambrose's comeback late in the show.


Hour 1: 3,790
Hour 2: 3,585
Hour 3: 3,423


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The only true constant in WWE's ratings woes? The same people who write this crap. It's sad because RAW had been on a roll until they drove the car into a ditch on Monday.


----------



## Chrome

Product's just boring as fuck right now. It's not any one talent's fault and blaming this poor rating on Memorial Day is silly too when they've been doing similar numbers all year.


----------



## The True Believer

If by "car", you mean a bloody paddy wagon, then yes.


----------



## LordKain

I the feeling that Raw would of got the rating that it go this past monday regardless of the holiday or not.

Nothing's happening and the viewers along with the live audience know it as well and have had enough which is why their slowly tuning out as well as leaving the arenas before the main events happens as well.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw was much better last week. Also got a much better rating. They should stick to last week's formula more often.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Is the 20 minute talking segments at the start of RAW good for ratings or bad for ratings? Anybody with any knowledge know the answer?

I would think people would not be interested in Seth Rollins and Dean Ambrose arguing with words when they can use fisticuffs, but I don't know....


----------



## Silent KEEL

I have purposely not watched since DB is out. That is why the ratings are bad.

Nothing else matters.


----------



## Randy Lahey

IDONTSHIV said:


> The only true constant in WWE's ratings woes? The same people who write this crap. It's sad because RAW had been on a roll until they drove the car into a ditch on Monday.



On a roll? 

The WWE has the lowest ratings they have ever had. You have to go back to mid 1990s to find a smaller audience. Maybe being "on a roll" is all relative, but if the product was hot the ratings would be way better. WWE is dead. Its been steadily eroding viewers and its not coming back unless they change up the format. Its like a sitcom that runs out of ideas after a bunch of seasons. Most sitcoms get cancelled. WWE will still keep going and less and less people will care or watch.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Randy Lahey said:


> On a roll?
> 
> The WWE has the lowest ratings they have ever had. You have to go back to mid 1990s to find a smaller audience. Maybe being "on a roll" is all relative, but if the product was hot the ratings would be way better. WWE is dead. Its been steadily eroding viewers and its not coming back unless they change up the format. Its like a sitcom that runs out of ideas after a bunch of seasons. Most sitcoms get cancelled. WWE will still keep going and less and less people will care or watch.


Not on a ratings roll, more so I thought the shows had been very good which has been a rarity this year. It went back to its normal mediocrity this past Monday.


----------



## Fighter Daron

Randy Lahey said:


> On a roll?
> 
> The WWE has the lowest ratings they have ever had. You have to go back to mid 1990s to find a smaller audience. Maybe being "on a roll" is all relative, but if the product was hot the ratings would be way better. WWE is dead. Its been steadily eroding viewers and its not coming back unless they change up the format. Its like a sitcom that runs out of ideas after a bunch of seasons. Most sitcoms get cancelled. WWE will still keep going and less and less people will care or watch.


They have produced like 4 or 5 Raws very good till this monday, that's what he was referring to.


----------



## Erik.

People care for ratings? I bet the WWE don't.


----------



## umairkhan

Your post very good ,i like it very much


----------



## CharismaMark

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-100-monday-cable-originals-6-1-2015.html

8PM: 3.946
9PM: 4.113
10PM: 3.862

Ambrose stealing the title drew some interest. Imagine if he was actually crowned world champ.

Owens/Cena did well in the 2nd hour as well.


----------



## validreasoning

viewership up over 10% compared to last weeks memorial day episode


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Owens/Cena seemed to do quite a bit for that second hour. First hour is more or less due to the fallout from the PPV and the tease of Ambrose having the belt (now I wonder what would have happened if they ended the PPV with him as champ?), but the second hour was almost certainly the Owens/Cena promo. It was the best thing on the show by far, so good to see it was probably the cause for the higher hour 2. 

As expected though, everything is up on last week. I wonder how next week will do since it's the go-home show to MITB... seems like every Raw is now either a fallout or go-home show nowadays. And doesn't Brock also return in a few weeks? Viewership should start going up at that point, especially once the direct lead in to Summerslam starts.


----------



## CookiePuss

:reigns2


----------



## Shenroe

And the numbers are in :risingangle Good, the show was noticeably better than last week. Las week was lazily booked :jaydamn


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ambrose stealing the belt definitely was a good cliffhanger type move. It paid off.

That 3rd hour drop, though. :ti People just wanted the show to end at that point to see the Austin/Heyman podcast.


----------



## Empress

ShowStopper said:


> Ambrose stealing the belt definitely was a good cliffhanger type move. It paid off.
> 
> That 3rd hour drop, though. :ti People just wanted the show to end at that point to see the Austin/Heyman podcast.


Why does a third hour drop surprise you? That is the norm and that drop was hardly that steep. 

But it would seem as though the ratings held up despite RAW being Roman Reigns centric. They're improved from last week's numbers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Empress said:


> Why does a third hour drop surprise you? That is the norm and that drop was hardly that steep.
> 
> But it would seem as though the ratings held up despite RAW being Roman Reigns centric.


Raw gets a good bump after every PPV. EC ending with a very hot ending in the main event drew them all in that first hour. Owens/Cena was obviously in the 2nd hour. 3rd hour with another significant drop, no matter who they put there for all of the people who usually blame it on one person.


----------



## CharismaMark

3rd hour didn't even drop that much. It's usually around 3.5-3.6 when Reigns and/or Rollins are in it without Ambrose.


----------



## Wynter

Is it fighting time?!!! :mark:

*Hour one: 3.824 million
Hour two: 3.853 million
Hour three: 3.385 million*



COUGH, someone forgot them main event numbers when Randy vs Seth was happening in the main event...


Oh....

May 11th, 2015. Shit happens int the 3rd hour sometimes. Keep throwing shade @Showstopper. Or at least tag my ass in the post so we can have fun with it :

Especially when someone wrestles 3 times in the night :shrug: Only reason I watched the main event was to see Dean come out and give me my Dean and Roman bromance :mark:


EDIT: Awww, Showstopper aint in a fighting mood  Dont' be objective when Im trying to fight with your ass :homer2


----------



## A-C-P

Wynter said:


> Is it fighting time?!!! :mark:
> 
> EDIT: Awww, Showstopper aint in a fighting mood  Dont' be objective when Im trying to fight with your ass :homer2


Don't worry I am sure w/e Brownian's name is now will be here to fight with you any minute now :jericho2

Besides it's obvious people just kept watching b/c the wanted to eventually see Ambrose with the belt :ambrose4


----------



## Empress

ShowStopper said:


> Raw gets a good bump after every PPV. EC ending with a very hot ending in the main event drew them all in that first hour. Owens/Cena was obviously in the 2nd hour. 3rd hour with another significant drop, no matter who they put there for all of the people who usually blame it on one person.


When RAW got a good rating after the Payback, many were quick to attribute it to Ambrose and Seth, not that it was necessarily the fallout show. I had no issue with that and I gave props to both. But when the rating is improved from last week's numbers, it's all about the EC fallout? No, Reigns deserves some credit as well. Not all, but the show was mostly centered around him, Kevin Owens and Cena. I'm just pointing out that Reigns as a focal point didn't bring down the ratings as some are quick to accuse him of. They held up well.


----------



## Wynter

A-C-P said:


> Don't worry I am sure w/e Brownian's name is now will be here to fight with you any minute now :jericho2


:lmao true. Damn, where am I supposed to find my entertainment until Brownian pops up :hmm:

Speaking of entertainment, Im now curious of your unique reps that you won't send me 


Wait, is charismamark another Brownian account


Edit: :homer2 Yall will not credit only Ambrose while my boy was all over that show :homer2 :homer2 :homer2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> Is it fighting time?!!! :mark:
> 
> *Hour one: 3.824 million
> Hour two: 3.853 million
> Hour three: 3.385 million*
> 
> 
> 
> COUGH, someone forgot them main event numbers when Randy vs Seth was happening in the main event...
> 
> 
> Oh....
> 
> May 11th, 2015. Shit happens int the 3rd hour sometimes. Keep throwing shade @Showstopper. Or at least tag my ass in the post so we can have fun with it :
> 
> Especially when someone wrestles 3 times in the night :shrug: Only reason I watched the main event was to see Dean come out and give me my Dean and Roman bromance :mark:
> 
> 
> EDIT: Awww, Showstopper aint in a fighting mood  Dont' be objective when Im trying to fight with your ass :homer2


Come on, now. You HAVE to make it more difficult than this? May 11? A random edition of Raw compared to the night after the first EC event in however long? Too easy. I expect better much time. 

BTW, do you still not think they view Reigns as the top face of the company? :heyman6


----------



## CharismaMark

Wynter said:


> :lmao true. Damn, where am I supposed to find my entertainment until Brownian pops up :hmm:
> 
> Speaking of entertainment, Im now curious of your unique reps that you won't send me
> 
> 
> Wait, is charismamark another Brownian account
> 
> 
> Edit: :homer2 Yall will not credit only Ambrose while my boy was all over that show :homer2 :homer2 :homer2


This draws, just as expected:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Empress said:


> When RAW got a good rating after the Payback, many were quick to attribute it to Ambrose and Seth, not that it was necessarily the fallout show. I had no issue with that and I gave props to both. But when the rating is improved from last week's numbers, it's all about the EC fallout? No, Reigns deserves some credit as well. Not all, but the show was mostly centered around him, Kevin Owens and Cena. I'm just pointing out that Reigns as a focal point didn't bring down the ratings as some are quick to accuse him of. They held up well.


They were almost definitely going to do better than last week's show since last week Raw was on a holiday. :shrug On top of that, EC was the night before. Yeah, they were a shoe-in to improve on a Memorial Day edition of Raw. You can give credit to whoever you want. :shrug


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Owens / Cena making good ratings, you can complain about Cena but he have good ratings

But the fall for the 3rd time is not good, not as happened two weeks ago where the fall was almost zero

PS: I had forgotten that last week was a holiday where the ratings are always bad


----------



## Wynter

ShowStopper said:


> Come on, now. You HAVE to make it more difficult than this? May 11? A random edition of Raw compared to the night after the first EC event in however long? Too easy. I expect better much time.
> 
> BTW, do you still not think they view Reigns as the top face of the company? :heyman6


:homer2 oh, we playing that game










Boy, we had a chamber last year just like every PPV, yearly. Acting like it's been years since a chamber happened :lol

Nah, it's pretty identical to the Raw after Payback. 4 million, 4 million and 3.9 last Raw after PPV 

Listen god damn it, Raw didn't plummet with it being Roman centric, that's all I wanted to make sure...and I also wanted to do my weekly arguing :lol

And of course he's still the face, well chosen face. Though, WWE seems to have finally got their heads out of their asses and going to turn him heel for a while. That leaves Dean to take care of the face front and Im sure Seth will join him some months from now.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Well,all the gauntlet match did was make me miss Bryan's version of running a gauntlet.

Dropping almost half a million viewers for hour 3 is not good. No way to spin it otherwise. Hour two did substantially better in the demo than the first and third hours. Maybe the new catchphrase sweeping the universe should be *DRAW,OWENS, DRAW!!!!!!* :mark:


----------



## Empress

ShowStopper said:


> They were almost definitely going to do better than last week's show since last week Raw was on a holiday. :shrug On top of that, EC was the night before. Yeah, they were a shoe-in to improve on a Memorial Day edition of Raw. You can give credit to whoever you want. :shrug


The ratings didn't circle the drain and I think Reigns deserves some credit. I just fail to see how the third hour did so bad in comparison to previous weeks that it needed to be mocked as though it were a an anomaly. 

Cena is the biggest draw of the show though. Whatever hour he's in does the best rating for the most part.


----------



## Fighter Daron

Come on, people, last week's low rating was because of Roman Reigns and I tried to tell people that it was because of the Memorial Day thing. Now, Raw is clearly a ROMAN REIGNS show and the ratings go up and people say it's because last week was Memorial Day.

You haters need to get the fuck out, quickly.

There are no draws, but stop saying Reigns push people to change the channel and Ambrose is the second fucking coming of Stone Cold. None draws, the show does, if it's good, the ratings go up, if it's bad, the ratings go down.

Stop this stupid discussions.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wynter said:


> Though, WWE seems to have finally got their heads out of their asses and going to turn him heel for a while.



Wait, what? They are?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> :homer2 oh, we playing that game
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boy, we had a chamber last year just like every PPV, yearly. Acting like it's been years since a chamber happened :lol
> 
> Nah, it's pretty identical to the Raw after Payback. 4 million, 4 million and 3.9 last Raw after PPV
> 
> Listen god damn it, Raw didn't plummet with it being Roman centric, that's all I wanted to make sure...and I also wanted to do my weekly arguing :lol
> 
> And of course he's still the face, well chosen face. Though, WWE seems to have finally got their heads out of their asses and going to turn him heel for a while. That leaves Dean to take care of the face front and Im sure Seth will join him some months from now.


Yep. It's definitely comparable to the night after Payback, which is what I'm saying. Night after PPV does pretty well, by today's standards at least.

That's all I wanted to hear you say. Because for months, you wouldn't say that he was the chosen top face. :lmao


----------



## Wynter

CharismaMark said:


> This draws, just as expected:


I can't tell if you're brownian, who told me Raw plummets whenever Roman graces it with his presence. A whole show about him and it didn't crash and burn.

And Roman was blamed for the third hour drop on the previous Raw because he was in the main event scene. Despite the whole night building up to Dean driving in with the police truck.

But now Dean is to be awarded for all 3 hours doing well...

People picking and choosing when people affect ratings :lol

Hell, I'm just happy Raw didn't do shit while Roman was at the forefront. But I won't act like he drawing when it's a damn Raw after PPV lol I expect good numbers from it. The only one who I saw really draw was Cena vs Owens feud :shrug

Not aimed towards you if you're not Brownian.


----------



## Empress

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Wait, what? They are?


Money In the Bank. 

*fingers crossed*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Empress said:


> The ratings didn't circle the drain and I think Reigns deserves some credit. I just fail to see how the third hour did so bad in comparison to previous weeks that it needed to be mocked as though it were a an anomaly.
> 
> Cena is the biggest draw of the show though. Whatever hour he's in does the best rating for the most part.


People mention/laugh at the 3rd hour drop here pretty much every week no matter who's in that third hour. Don't know why it's a problem to mention it this week. 300,000 viewers is pretty significant. I bet WWE feels that way.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Empress said:


> Money In the Bank.
> 
> *fingers crossed*


Oh, thought it was something that's actually going to happen. 

(Not that Reigns isn't winning MITB, but that Ambrose ain't winning the belt for him to cash in).


----------



## Wynter

ShowStopper said:


> Yep. It's definitely comparable to the night after Payback, which is what I'm saying. Night after PPV does pretty well, by today's standards at least.
> 
> That's all I wanted to hear you say. Because for months, you wouldn't say that he was the chosen top face. :lmao



Dude, I never said Roman wasn't one of the golden childs( even if the booking decisions made me side eye WWE). I may have bitched about his booking not reflecting thinking of his best interest, but I knew the machine was behind him.

I never denied he was the chosen top face recently either. I said he wasn't being pushed as one on the show since Mania since they made him low key to deter some of the heat.

We all know he's the preferred choice :lol


----------



## Empress

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Oh, thought it was something that's actually going to happen.
> 
> (Not that Reigns isn't winning MITB, but that Ambrose ain't winning the belt for him to cash in).


This is actually a good thing if the WWE books it right. If Reigns wins MITB, Dean is guaranteed to win the Royal Rumble. Dean is now my favorite to win and he seems Daniel Bryan proof. No shade to Bryan (I do like him) but I don't want another Rumble crapped all over because he's not the winner.


----------



## CharismaMark

Wynter said:


> I can't tell if you're brownian, who told me Raw plummets whenever Roman graces it with his presence. A whole show about him and it didn't crash and burn.
> 
> And Roman was blamed for the third hour drop on the previous Raw because he was in the main event scene. Despite the whole night building up to Dean driving in with the police truck.
> 
> But now Dean is to be awarded for all 3 hours doing well...
> 
> People picking and choosing when people affect ratings :lol
> 
> Hell, I'm just happy Raw didn't do shit while Roman was at the forefront. But I won't act like he drawing when it's a damn Raw after PPV lol I expect good numbers from it. The only one who I saw really draw was Cena vs Owens feud :shrug
> 
> Not aimed towards you if you're not Brownian.


This is how it works:

In order to to determine who moves ratings, you need to either see the difference they make when they return after an absence, or the difference they make when some variable changes.

Both were on RAW last week, so we can't use the first method to determine anything.

In regards to the second method - variable change - what changed in regards to Reigns or his booking? He didn't do much during EC, and he appeared in the ring 3 times this week as opposed to 2 times last week. Not a significant difference.

Whereas Ambrose won the match in a controversial way (won it clean, but then the decision was overturned) and he is walking around with the title. That is currently the biggest angle on the show.

Congrats on Reigns not tanking ratings as he usually does. It looks like this week the positive reaction to Ambrose doing his thing outweighed any negative effect Reigns had on viewership.

Owens/Cena did well too.


----------



## Wynter

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Oh, thought it was something that's actually going to happen.
> 
> (Not that Reigns isn't winning MITB, but that Ambrose ain't winning the belt for him to cash in).


Let's spin it in a way where it's just WWE doing what's best for their golden boy, yeah?

For the past few weeks, WWE has been doing their damndest to make it seem like Roman was going to turn on Dean at EC. A very effective red herring that had people questioning whether Roman was going to screw Dean out of the title at EC.

Didn't happen, but doesn't mean it won't in the future. It's just a swerve leading to the real swerve. EC just wasn't the right place that would garner the most heat for Roman.

Now, fast foward two weeks form now and Roman wins MITB. Later on in the night, main event, Dean vs Seth happens. Whether clean or by the skin of his teeth, Dean goes over Seth. He's celebrating, elated he won the belt, FOR REAL this time.

Roman's music hit and Dean is just so overcome with joy, he thinks his best friend, the dude he's been so buddy buddy with lately, is here to congratulate him. They fought at Payback, but it was friendly. So Roman having the case isn't really all that alarming to him. Because he and Roman respect each other. So he suspects nothing.


Roman cashes it in, wins the belt off of Dean, instant heel heat. Not only did Roman win the mitb over other favorites, but he took the belt from fan favorite Dean. That just puts him up in top heel position.

All of that and Roman stands tall and looks great in the end :shrug their golden boy is good. Albeit in a different role.

Now, this can all still benefit all 3 with having sympathetic face Dean chasing Roman and Seth losing causing more dissension with him and the Authority for a later on face turn.

But that's just my view of what could happen. Nothing says WWE just wont do all of this to make heel Roman look good.


----------



## Empress

*Did WWE Elimination Chamber Fallout & Hype For Money In The Bank Help RAW Viewership?*

- Monday’s episode of WWE RAW, featuring the fallout from Elimination Chamber, drew 3.973 million viewers. This is up from last week’s 3.60 million viewers.

For this week’s show, the first hour drew 3.946 million viewers, the second hour drew 4.113 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.862 million viewers.

RAW was #1 on cable for the night.


Read more: http://www.pwmania.com/did-wwe-elim...in-the-bank-help-raw-viewership#ixzz3bwaq2w2p

*Monday Cable Ratings: 'Monday Night RAW' Tops Night + 'Love & Hip-Hop: Atlanta', 'Street Outlaws', 'TI & Tiny' & More*
Monday Night RAW was Monday's highest rated cable original with a 1.4 adults 18-49 rating, up from last week's 1.3 adults 18-49 rating. Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta came in second with a 1.3 adults 18-49 rating.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ampaign=Feed:+Tvbythenumbers+(TVbytheNumbers)


----------



## M_D_Q_

2,79 rating... the average of 2015 just go down and down.
The only good thing on it for Vince its that they hardly will go below that next year, so the downtrend finally will end.


Think about the average of 2009 being 3,5 with a 4,0 rating and now we dont see any number above 2,9.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

M_D_Q_ said:


> 2,79 rating... the average of 2015 just go down and down.
> The only good thing on it for Vince its that they hardly will go below that next year, so the downtrend finally will end.
> 
> 
> Think about the average of 2009 being 3,5 with a 4,0 rating and now we dont see any number above 2,9.


It's not a good look. None of these guys are a significant draw. None. Not even the part-timers are pulling in huge numbers anymore when they bother to show up. Which makes all of our bitching at eachother so stupid :lol


----------



## Wynter

ShowStopper said:


> It's not a good look. None of these guys are a significant draw. None. Not even the part-timers are pulling in huge numbers anymore when they bother to show up. Which makes all of our bitching at eachother so stupid :lol


:lol I do it because it's entertaining to me to go back and forth. We all snipe at each other and ride hard for our favorites. But I come for you(and certain others) all the time because I know you have no problem coming for me back. I respect your opinions and your dedication to your beliefs. You are hard headed with some things like me :shrug I can dig it.

Even if I want to wring your neck sometimes :lol I'm sure I do the same to you. Board can be quite boring with the same topics over and over. So nitpicking at each other is the only thing you can do sometimes.

We all want a better product and of course with bias, we want our favorites to be leading the pack of new top draws.

We all know at the end of the day, WWE needs to get it together as a whole and do better in general. Talents are not at fault most of the time.

But since we can't punch Vince in the face, we use each other to vent


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wynter said:


> :lol I do it because it's entertaining to me to go back and forth. We all snipe at each other and ride hard for our favorites. But I come for you(and certain others) all the time because I know you have no problem coming for me back. I respect your opinions and your dedication to your beliefs. You are hard headed with some things like me :shrug I can dig it.
> 
> Even if I want to wring your neck sometimes :lol I'm sure I do the same to you. Board can be quite boring with the same topics over and over. So nitpicking at each other is the only thing you can do sometimes.
> 
> We all want a better product and of course with bias, we want our favorites to be leading the pack of new top draws.
> 
> We all know at the end of the day, WWE needs to get it together as a whole and do better in general. Talents are not at fault most of the time.
> 
> But since we can't punch Vince in the face, we use each other to vent


I agree. And As far as drawing goes, that, to me, is literally at the bottom of the list in terms of most important things that I look at in terms of what I base my personal favorites on. What the hell do I care if others like who I like? :drake1 Most of the fans at these shows have the attention span of a gnat, anyway. Rollins by no means has to be the top face of the company type of guy for me. Should he be one of the top guys in the future? I think so. But he doesn't have to be the top guy. I usually don't like those type of guys for one reason or another anyway. They just don't appeal to me and are alittle too something for me that just doesn't do it for me. Just having Rollins as one of the main eventers of the future (which obviously will happen) is perfectly fine by me. Let him have the great matches, be one of the most popular guys in the company, and let whoever they want to be the next Cena type guy, be that guy. I'm not sure who it will be, or if it will be more of a cast of guys, but I'm starting to lean towards the latter on that one.

I just do it for fun. Been that way since the 2012/2013 mark warz in this thread between Punk and Bryan fans. Now, THOSE were something to behold. None of what goes on in this thread today come close to some of the meltdowns that took place in that time period. Some hilarious ass shit from both sides. Every Monday that thread would go nuts and alot of times would carry on until the next week. Which was also hilarious because Bryan and Punk marks have alot in common, as do the two of them. So, it was really stupid. :lol

I don't take any of this personally, and I can tell you don't, either. Which is why, like you said, I guess we feel comfortable going back and forth. There are some that take posts personally in other threads and do get mad, and that was never my intention. :shrug I don't post stuff to get underneath anyone's skin in the other threads. Just posting my opinion, that's all.


----------



## Shenroe

Back then you had full time HHH, Shane, Shawn, prime Cena/Orton. Plus it was 2 hours, and as the years go by tv become more and more useless.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Raw does poorly on a holiday and it's because Reigns was in the ME... Raw does better when Reigns is in 3 different matches, and it's because it's the night after a PPV (something that hardly anyone who doesn't subscribe to the network/watch anyway cares about anymore).

I'm also entertained how people in the Raw Discussion thread like to exclaim how Cena isn't a draw, most of the fans hate him, and (essentially) it's all a conspiracy that he gets pushed.... Then whatever hour he's in consistently does high numbers compared to the other hours (particularly on the RTWM).

With all of that said, who cares about ratings? Personally, I love seeing Raw do a terrible number because MAYBE it will actually light a fire under the company and force them to start caring more about the content that they're giving us.


----------



## Erik.

Would be interesting to see the numbers if the show was 2 hours long instead of 3. 

You'd hope they'd cut out the bullshit. But damn a second and final hour consisting of Ambrose/Rollins/Reigns/Owens/Cena would be brilliant viewing.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Empress said:


> *Did WWE Elimination Chamber Fallout & Hype For Money In The Bank Help RAW Viewership?*
> 
> - Monday’s episode of WWE RAW, featuring the fallout from Elimination Chamber, drew 3.973 million viewers. This is up from last week’s 3.60 million viewers.
> 
> For this week’s show, the first hour drew 3.946 million viewers, the second hour drew 4.113 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.862 million viewers.
> 
> RAW was #1 on cable for the night.
> 
> 
> Read more: http://www.pwmania.com/did-wwe-elim...in-the-bank-help-raw-viewership#ixzz3bwaq2w2p
> 
> *Monday Cable Ratings: 'Monday Night RAW' Tops Night + 'Love & Hip-Hop: Atlanta', 'Street Outlaws', 'TI & Tiny' & More*
> Monday Night RAW was Monday's highest rated cable original with a 1.4 adults 18-49 rating, up from last week's 1.3 adults 18-49 rating. Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta came in second with a 1.3 adults 18-49 rating.
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ampaign=Feed:+Tvbythenumbers+(TVbytheNumbers)



Those numbers aren't too bad, especially for the second hour. Need to see how they do next week when there is no added interest from to see ppv fallout.


----------



## The Renegade

As long as Raw is the number 1 show on cable television, what's the beef? We have to look at the numbers relative to their competition. Comparing viewer amounts to a time before DVRs and Hulu is pretty pointless IMO. The show quality is a far bigger issue.

I dunno, this whole idea that one individual is going to a big enough star to attract in new viewers is a tad bit archiac. I mean, back in the day, you were drawing in people who already watched wrestling, just a different program. Now a days you're expecting a superstar to pull in fans that aren't even invested in the business. Just doesn't make sense to me.


----------



## Fighter Daron

The Renegade said:


> As long as Raw is the number 1 show on cable television, what's the beef? We have to look at the numbers relative to their competition. Comparing viewer amounts to a time before DVRs and Hulu is pretty pointless IMO. The show quality is a far bigger issue.


Truth shall be told.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Reigns took up an hour of screentime and ratings increased. No coincidence. Not that I want the Roman Gauntlet to be a recurring theme or I want him to be overexposed like Rollins, but I was told that he'd cause ratings to drop if he were the main feature. They can chalk up another L. Kevin Owens and Cena had a lot to do with it too.*


----------



## StraightYesSociety

Wynter said:


> :lol I do it because it's entertaining to me to go back and forth. We all snipe at each other and* ride hard for our favorites*. But *I come for you*(and certain others) all the time because *I know you have no problem coming for me back*. I respect your opinions and your dedication to your beliefs. You are hard headed with some things like me :shrug I can dig it.
> 
> Even if I want to *wring your neck* sometimes :lol I'm sure I do the same to you. Board can be quite boring with the same topics over and over. So nitpicking at each other is the only thing you can do sometimes.
> 
> We all want a better product and of course with bias, we want our favorites to be leading the pack of new top draws.
> 
> We all know at the end of the day, WWE needs to get it together as a whole and do better in general. Talents are not at fault most of the time.
> 
> But since we can't punch Vince in the face, we use each other to vent












Gigity


----------



## validreasoning

tvbythnumbers are now reporting cable dvr playback +3

for last weeks memorial day episode, the amount of viewers watching live was
8pm = 3.790 million
9pm = 3,585 million
10pm = 3.423 million
*total = 3.599 million*


Live + Dvr 3 days was
8pm = 4,268 million (+478k or 13%)
9pm = 4,064 million (+479k or 13%)
10pm = 3,991 million (+568k or 17%)
*total = 4,108 million (+509k or 14%)*


----------



## Kabraxal

Ouch... even with the DVR added they are barely breaking 4 million. BUt then, with teh quality of shows they are putting out, they should be sending up praise to whatever gods may exist. This show deserves cancellation based on the quality...


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

So that means people are falling asleep and DVRing the last hour.


----------



## Empress

*Thursday Cable Ratings: 'WWE SmackDown' Tops Night + 'Braxton Family Values', 'Pardon the Interruption', 'The Daily Show' & More*


WWE Smackdown was the Thursday's highest rated original, earning a 0.6, down a tenth from last week's 0.7 adults 18-49 rating. Braxton Family Values came in second with a 0.5 adults 18-49 rating.

The list below is long but you can use your browsers "find on page" feature (usually CTRL+F or CMD+F) to search - that's probably the easiest way to find Thursday night's episode of a specific show

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-the-interruption-the-daily-show-more/412540/


----------



## JTB33b

Legit BOSS said:


> *Reigns took up an hour of screentime and ratings increased. No coincidence. Not that I want the Roman Gauntlet to be a recurring theme or I want him to be overexposed like Rollins, but I was told that he'd cause ratings to drop if he were the main feature. They can chalk up another L. Kevin Owens and Cena had a lot to do with it too.*


It was the 1st raw after a Network exclusive PPV. Raw's always do better numbers following a PPV.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Empress said:


> *Thursday Cable Ratings: 'WWE SmackDown' Tops Night + 'Braxton Family Values', 'Pardon the Interruption', 'The Daily Show' & More*
> 
> 
> WWE Smackdown was the Thursday's highest rated original, earning a 0.6, down a tenth from last week's 0.7 adults 18-49 rating. Braxton Family Values came in second with a 0.5 adults 18-49 rating.
> 
> The list below is long but you can use your browsers "find on page" feature (usually CTRL+F or CMD+F) to search - that's probably the easiest way to find Thursday night's episode of a specific show
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-the-interruption-the-daily-show-more/412540/


Thank you for that. here's the chart. It did pretty well to be up against The NBA Finals game.


----------



## Empress

*WWE Raw Social Media Tracking*

-- June 8: On the day that WWE touted a social media milestone, Monday's Raw fell 15-30 percent in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings on Monday night.

Raw drew a unique Twitter audience of 1.549 million, down 15 percent from last week's audience.

Also, total impressions were 7.127 million, down 30 percent from last week's audience. It was the fewest impressions of the entire year.

Among series & specials, Raw ranked #2 behind "The Bachelorette" on ABC. If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw would have ranked #4 behind the U.S. Women's World Cup game, the Stanley Cup Finals, and College Baseball.

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_85518.shtml#.VXdFBM9Viko


----------



## HorseandCart




----------



## HorseandCart

Another show centered around Rollins and another laughable viewership number. Rollins needs to lose that belt soon.

Also, Reigns was in the hours that were least watched this week (9PM and 10PM.) So much for him being responsible for last week's spike.


----------



## Wynter

The third hour showed an increase instead of dropping, nice. 

First hour didn't even break 4 million on a go home show lol


----------



## LilOlMe

They haven't even made the MITB PPV seem important. Such bad booking.

Bad ratings, especially considering the fact that the NBA finals weren't even on last night.


----------



## Empress

Wynter said:


> *The third hour showed an increase instead of dropping, nice. *
> 
> First hour didn't even break 4 million on a go home show lol


Very good. But I thought a certain someone brought down the ratings.....

Owens and Cena were in the first hour. They usually bring in the viewers. 

I'll wait for @IDONTSHIV to post. He usually has good analysis on these numbers and I trust what he has to say.


----------



## validreasoning

HorseandCart said:


> Another show centered around Rollins and another laughable viewership number. .


an off season raw in mid june drawing just a little less than the stanley cup final head to head isn't laughable

and show wasn't centered around rollins, from memory he had two backstage segments (one where he didn't talk) and a match with j&j at 11pm


----------



## HorseandCart

validreasoning said:


> an off season raw in mid june drawing just a little less than the stanley cup final head to head isn't laughable
> 
> and show wasn't centered around rollins, from memory he had two backstage segments (one where he didn't talk) and a match with j&j at 11pm


Around 500K less than last year and about 300K less than the year before.

The show was centered around Rollins' issues with the Authority.


----------



## Peerless

People tuning in to see Ambrose in the main event :ambrose


----------



## Chrome

validreasoning said:


> an off season raw in mid june drawing just a little less than the stanley cup final head to head isn't laughable
> 
> and show wasn't centered around rollins, from memory he had two backstage segments (one where he didn't talk) and a match with j&j at 11pm


To be fair, the NHL was on NBCSN, not NBC. If they were on NBC, they likely would've gotten a higher rating and it wouldn't have been so close.


----------



## A-C-P

This mini bi-weekly PPV study has now shown us that "fall-out" Raws draw better ratings #s than "go-home" Raws :draper2


----------



## validreasoning

Chrome said:


> To be fair, the NHL was on NBCSN, not NBC. If they were on NBC, they likely would've gotten a higher rating and it wouldn't have been so close.


you could flip that around for raw too though..if raw was on nbc it would get a much higher rating...imagine the number a live mania would do on nbc. both were head to head on cable so its a fair comparison


----------



## Erik.

I don't care much for ratings but how does the show generally do when Ambrose is around? I've browsed the thread a few times and see 'Ambratings' used and it looks like the third hour went up when it was clear Ambrose was going to be on the show due to him making his way back to the arena?


----------



## HorseandCart

Erik. said:


> I don't care much for ratings but how does the show generally do when Ambrose is around? I've browsed the thread a few times and see 'Ambratings' used and it looks like the third hour went up when it was clear Ambrose was going to be on the show due to him making his way back to the arena?


Ratings generally go up when he is inserted into the main event picture. They also went up after he returned from filming back in September. But then they make it obvious that he isn't going to win any important matches and ratings revert back to the same shit as usual.


----------



## Erik.

HorseandCart said:


> Ratings generally go up when he is inserted into the main event picture. They also went up after he returned from filming back in September. But then they make it obvious that he isn't going to win any important matches and ratings revert back to the same shit as usual.


Thanks for clearing it up. I personally don't usually delve into these parts. Ratings in my eyes haven't mattered for years and I don't feel it's an indicator on who draws or not as you usually get inconsistencies to back anything up and it's usually the product itself that draws.


----------



## Shenroe

Stop with this myth that Ambrose is a draw. The last he drew was when he matteerd, which was 9 months ago.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Can't believe the first hour with Owens/Cena didn't get over 4 million. Third hour seeing an increase when the main event was JJ/Rollins is odd.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Of course the two hours that Reigns was in were the two least viewed hours of the show. Thank god Ambrose was there to keep the 3rd hour afloat and actually lead to an increase on the 2nd hour. All praise his monumental unofficial reign as champion!


----------



## HorseandCart

ShowStopper said:


> Can't believe the first hour with Owens/Cena didn't get over 4 million. Third hour seeing an increase when the main event was JJ/Rollins is odd.


It's not odd at all. The 2nd biggest draw of anyone on the full time roster (Dean Ambrose) was in the 3rd hour.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HorseandCart said:


> It's not odd at all. The 2nd biggest draw of anyone on the full time roster (Dean Ambrose) was in the 3rd hour.


Barely. Guy didn't even have a match. Rollins had backstage segments and a match.

:rollins


----------



## StraightYesSociety

HorseandCart said:


> Ratings generally go up when he is inserted into the main event picture. They also went up after he returned from filming back in September. But then they make it obvious that he isn't going to win any important matches and ratings revert back to the same shit as usual.


Brock, Bryan and Ambrose are the biggest TV draws in the company today. I don't care what anyone says. When they appear, ratings go up. They also have nipples, now, I'm not saying that's a factor, but Cesaro has bigger nipples... So yeah. :lenny2ornstache:toastbama3:homer4


----------



## HorseandCart

ShowStopper said:


> Barely. Guy didn't even have a match. Rollins had backstage segments and a match.
> 
> :rollins


Exactly, which is why the overall number is so fucking laughable. Rollins was in all 3 hours.

Tanking ratings as usual (and having to be saved by Ambrose in hour 3.)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HorseandCart said:


> Exactly, which is why the overall number is so fucking laughable. Rollins was in all 3 hours.
> 
> Tanking ratings as usual (and having to be saved by Ambrose in hour 3.)


Do a better spinjob next time. That one didn't even make sense. Thank you, brownian.


----------



## HorseandCart

ShowStopper said:


> Do a better spinjob next time. That one didn't even make sense. Thank you, brownian.


Every show centered around Rollins tanks the ratings. That definitely make sense (and is supported by empirical data.)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HorseandCart said:


> Every show centered around Rollins tanks the ratings. That definitely make sense (and is supported by empirical data.)


That already has been proven false many times on this very thread. But since you're a new poster here, I guess you just haven't read up on this thread yet.

:troll

Pretty amazing how the same person can re-join this board every single week to post in the same thread every week. You'd think his IP would be banned right now to save us from his awful posts.


----------



## HorseandCart

ShowStopper said:


> That already has been proven false many times on this very thread. But since you're a new poster here, I guess you just haven't read up on this thread yet.
> 
> :troll
> 
> Pretty amazing how the same person can re-join this board every single week to post in the same thread every week. You'd think his IP would be banned right now to save us from his awful posts.


That can't be proven false because it isn't.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HorseandCart said:


> That can't be proven false because it isn't.


Weak comeback. Enjoy the rest of your short stay under this name.


----------



## HorseandCart

Rollins is a worse champion than Diesel. Ouch!


----------



## Gretchen

Lmfao @ constantly rejoining with the sole purpose to rag on someone's "drawing power" in this lackluster thread.


----------



## HorseandCart

ShowStopper said:


> Weak comeback. Enjoy the rest of your short stay under this name.


No need to feel bad about Rollins' lack of drawing power. As an HBK fan, you should be used to liking guys who cannot draw.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HorseandCart said:


> No need to feel bad about Rollins' lack of drawing power. As an HBK fan, you should be used to liking guys who cannot draw.


I'd rather like guys that are actually talented than guys who supposedly "draw." Especially since no one today draws, not even your precious favorites. Must cut deep if it makes you want to create a new user name every week to post on this thread.

:ti


----------



## HorseandCart

ShowStopper said:


> I'd rather like guys that are actually talented than guys who supposedly "draw." Especially since no one today draws, not even your precious favorites. Must cut deep if it makes you want to create a new user name every week to post on this thread.
> 
> :ti


Then there's no need to get upset when your boy fails to draw, since you don't care about that sort of thing.


----------



## Empress

*WWE RAW Viewership Drops For Money In The Bank Go-Home Show
*
Monday's episode of WWE RAW, featuring the final hype for Money In the Bank, drew 3.645 million viewers. This is down 8% from last week's 3.973 million viewers.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.678 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.609 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.647 million viewers.

The top shows on cable for the night included Love & Hip-Hop, the NHL Stanley Cup playoffs, FIFA and RAW.
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ership-for-the-final-episode-before-money-in/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HorseandCart said:


> Then there's no need to get upset when your boy fails to draw, since you don't care about that sort of thing.


I'm cool with Rollins or any of my other favorites not being a draw. But no one on this roster is drawing right now, either, and hasn't in along time. That's all I'm saying.


----------



## HorseandCart

ShowStopper said:


> I'm cool with Rollins or any of my other favorites not being a draw. But no one on this roster is drawing right now, either, and hasn't in along time. That's all I'm saying.


No, what you mean is that there is no "mega draw" on the current roster. Which is true. There are, however, individuals who draw much better than others.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HorseandCart said:


> No, what you mean is that there is no "mega draw" on the current roster. Which is true. There are, however, individuals who draw much better than others.


Not really. Ratings have been in the same 3.5-4 million range for quite awhile now and that's where they still are now. There has been no significant increase or decrease in recent years. Even when someone like Brock comes back, the ratings haven't gone up as much as they used to in his most recent appearances, and I'm not blaming him for that. Just the nature of today's TV scene.


----------



## chronoxiong

Seth Rollins vs J & J Company does not equal ratings.


----------



## DoubtGin

Horrible numbers.


----------



## Gretchen

Crazy Eyes said:


> The top shows on cable for the night included Love & Hip-Hop, the NHL Stanley Cup playoffs, FIFA and RAW.


What do they mean by FIFA?


----------



## DoubtGin

CM Pepsi said:


> What do they mean by FIFA?


FIFA Women's World Cup


----------



## LOL-ins

If you defend these ratings you are a moron. Just compare them to last years ratings and you can see the decline comparison. Wait until the Summerslam build does terrible numbers then you'll start to believe the decline in ratings.

I knew WWE was in a bad place when the road to Wrestlemania RAW's were getting 2's.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

So...will Smackdown get 3 million viewers when it moves to USA? I would love for Smackdown to be competitive because most of the time it is the better show. Is that too many viewers to ask for a B show?


----------



## JTB33b

John Cena is the face of the company, this is his era. So he should be blamed the most for the poor ratings. The product is the way it is to suit him and his fanbase. Just like the Rock and Austin were largely responsible for the high ratings in the attitude era.


----------



## LilOlMe

Crazy Eyes said:


> *WWE RAW Viewership Drops For Money In The Bank Go-Home Show
> *
> Monday's episode of WWE RAW, featuring the final hype for Money In the Bank, drew 3.645 million viewers.



This is what it did last year on June 9, 2014:


> WWE Raw on Monday, June 9 scored a 2.93 rating, even with last week's 2.94 rating following the Payback PPV.
> 
> Raw averaged 4.119 million viewers.


So they lost almost 500,000 viewers, even with this being a go home show.

These are never direct comparisons, because you never know what other factors may be at play. But this is not a great sign.

People are right that the RTWM numbers were troubling too.

WWE needs to get it together.

ETA: 
June 10, 2013: 3.04
June 9, 2014: 2.93
June 8, 2015: 2.59


ETAA: Just looked, and the week before June 9, 2014 was the night that Seth turned on the Shield. So I'm sure that's a reason why they retained such comparatively high viewership last year. See what a hot, well-written, storyline does?

So perhaps it's not fair to truly compare, which is why I mentioned that other factors could be at play. Let's just hope that next week's post MITB show doesn't show a similar drop off, though they've done a piss poor job of promoting it and making it interesting, IMO.


----------



## Chrome

2.59 rating. :ugh2


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This may be the new normal for RAW. I want it to be higher, but this isn't going to happen overnight and The NFL looms large in September.


----------



## Gretchen

Not sure why people are so quick to place the blame on individual talent for shitty ratings. Would seem to me like the shitty quality of the show and the lack of anything major going on at some given time would account for the overall bad ratings. But of course people are quick to place the blame on specific talents to suit their agenda.


----------



## sarcasma

ITS OFFICIAL AMBROSE DRAWS....

8 PM: 3.678 million (1.28 demo rating)
9 PM: 3.609 million (1.22 demo rating)
10 PM: 3.647 million (1.22 demo rating)

The last hour almost ALWAYS goes down, RAWS 3rd hour last night went up...all because Ambrose was teased the whole show.


----------



## SnapOrTap

Reigns losing viewers.

Typical.


----------



## Empress

Yes, it's all because of Ambrose and has nothing to do with the other performers. Sure. If that's the case, the up and downs of the ratings should all be attributed to Dean Ambrose. When they'e up, he should get all the credit. An when they're down, it'll be all his fault too.


----------



## RatedR10

Ambrose has been a huge merch seller since The Shield split, and his merch was sold the most on WWEShop for Black Friday and that weekend by a large margin, iirc. Numbers have been great when he's on the show, but we don't get breakdowns, so we can only go by top of the hour numbers. 

But, yeah, of course he's a draw.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

SnapOrTap said:


> Reigns losing viewers.
> 
> Typical.


Unless you've got the ratings breakdown, just shut your mouth. Reigns was featured heavily in the last show and it did better than the show before. Last week's SD also did better ratings without Ambrose with Reigns in the main-event. Reigns' match this week just took place before the main-event, so he was also in the third hour.

What matters is individual segment ratings, which we unfortunately don't have. To draw conclusion based on limited data is sheer conjecture and hatred on behalf of the ARB(anti-Reigns brigade). As they say, "_half knowledge is very dangerous._"


PS: And Reigns merchandise is not selling? LOL. I see people wearing more Reigns' t-shirts in the arenas than Ambrose's. So what's the point? Reigns also has been the top merchandise seller since the Shield split. Fact is none of us have got the raw numbers/data, like we used to get before. So it's hard to determine who is a(bigger) draw and who is not? However, Ambrose is definitely more over/popular/loved by the fans than Reigns at the moment, that is just very obvious. Just don't write Reigns off, that's all.


----------



## 3ku1

Geez ratings has nothing to do with whos on tv. No shows these days gets big numbers other then a few rare shows. So placing blame on select individuals. Its riduclous. Wwe has no draws or stars these days. Landscape has changed.


----------



## Mr.Vegan

Might as well re-name Rollins to Ratings killer! 

SETH ROLLINS - *THE DULLEST WWE CHAMPION IN MODERN HISTORY*


----------



## TheShieldSuck

SnapOrTap said:


> Reigns losing viewers.
> 
> Typical.


This year looks like it could be the worst year for ratings of the century. Worse than CM Punks reign of boredom. 

Well what can be said? Most of the roster are over the hill, passangers like Kofi Kingston and the ones they are pushing just aren't interesting. 

Wrestling is in a bad way and WM 31 I think really put the problems in full view with part timers and over booking.


----------



## A-C-P

Chrome said:


> 2.59 rating. :ugh2


Losing 5-10% of their TV audience consistently every year over the past few years, but we will just keep watching, right? :vince7


----------



## Chrome

A-C-P said:


> Losing 5-10% of their TV audience consistently every years over the past few years, but we will just keep watching, right? :vince7


Only in Vince's dreams.


----------



## Robbyfude

Chrome said:


> 2.59 rating. :ugh2


Who cares? We have HALF A BILLION social media followers goddamit! :vince5


----------



## Undertakerowns

I have been really surprised at how lackster the shows have been because they have to sell out a 100,000 person stadium. I would think they would have like a year build of interesting storylines and character development for potentially the biggest Wrestlemania ever.


----------



## Empress

A-C-P said:


> Losing 5-10% of their TV audience consistently every year over the past few years, but we will just keep watching, right? :vince7


I think the ratings are often misleading since there are vastly different ways to watch WWE programming than there was 5-10 years ago.

If the WWE can reach their core audience of 3.5-4 million viewers each week, they may be satisfied and simply not care enough about expanding their base. 

People may not tune in to watch RAW/Smackdown like they used to, but revenue is up. Folks are still going to the shows, buying merchandise and investing in the Network. Although, I wonder just how healthy the Network is given the bi weekly PPV's and constant free incentives to get new customers.


----------



## A-C-P

Crazy Eyes said:


> I think the ratings are often misleading since there are vastly different ways to watch WWE programming than there was 5-10 years ago.
> 
> If the WWE can reach their core audience of 3.5-4 million viewers each week, they may be satisfied and simply not care enough about expanding their base.
> 
> People may not tune in to watch RAW/Smackdown like they used to, but revenue is up. Folks are still going to the shows, buying merchandise and investing in the Network. Although, *I wonder just how healthy the Network is given the bi weekly PPV's and constant free incentives to get new customers.*


I wonder the same thing, The WWE has put some pretty spin on their financials so far this year, but not sure how "strong" they really are given other things that are going on.

My comment though is whether they are consuming the Raw product in some other way, who knows, but the viewer # (not the rating #) but the # of viewers watching Raw has consistently been 5-10% less. Maybe the WWE isn't concerned about this, and maybe there is no need for them to be, I really can't say for sure, I just hate that at times the attitude from the top in the WWE seems to be, Everyone will just watch anyways.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Seeing as though sub 3.0 is the new norm for WWE, I can't wait to see the ratings once MNF starts back up. 

Raw would be so much better if they'd just say, "you know what, we've lost enough viewers with this new format, let's go back to 2 hours and see what we can salvage."

I'd actually be just as happy with Raw being 1 hour until they get more depth in their roster. A 1 hour Raw and a 1 hour Smackdown each week would be plenty for me.... I'd actually watch Smackdown if that were the case (as I assume many others would).


----------



## funnyfaces1

Undertakerowns said:


> I have been really surprised at how lackster the shows have been because they have to sell out a 100,000 person stadium. I would think they would have like a year build of interesting storylines and character development for potentially the biggest Wrestlemania ever.


If recency is any indication, then ratings do not correlate with Wrestlemania attendance. Even the Rock/Cena feud didn't bump overall RAW ratings that much, and WM 28 and 29 had very high attendance.


----------



## Martingale

Since those poor Reigns house show numbers were revealed a couple of days ago, I decided to look more into his drawing power at live events, and came across this:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2203700-biggest-takeaways-from-wwe-house-show-attendance

The data is from 2014. It compares individuals who headlined the most live events last year against a baseline (a five-year, non-televised baseline attendance average for the cities each individual has headlined.)

I find it very interesting (yet not surprising at all) that Reigns is the lowest under the baseline at a -24% difference. Which means he performed more poorly on his leg of the tour than the previous 5 year average. That's disturbing for a guy who has been given the push he has received. Add that to the fact that his numbers in June so far have been abysmal as well. 

Not too far behind is Seth Rollins at a -21% difference. The poorly booked excuse can't be used, because last year he had a long stretch where he was undefeated. he was booked very well and given a lot of screen time on RAW.

So the two guys who performed the most poorly in terms of house show attendance, also perform the most poorly whenever they main event RAW or are the main feature, when you look at the last year as a whole (not simply pick and choose one episode here and there.) 

I hope we no longer hear from Reigns and Rollins fans that they are not to blame for the declining ratings.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Smackdown increased from last week:










They were above average so good for them :clap


----------



## Bushmaster

Spoiler



if the ratings increase many will attribute it to Brock and ignore the after PPV bump Raws usually get after big PPVs


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Just getting this out of the way now, if the numbers are up, I'm crediting BORK. If they're down, I'm blaming Reigns Sheamus.

Now I wait in anticipation for the reveal of the numbers that will decide the fate of this thread.


----------



## validreasoning

post ppv bump













The_It_Factor said:


> Raw would be so much better if they'd just say, "you know what, we've lost enough viewers with this new format, let's go back to 2 hours and see what we can salvage."


except it was the nètwork that insisted on raw moving to 3 hours not wwe so only the network would make the switch back..also raw is still one of the most watched shows on all of cable (with it being far and away most watched on the nbc universal family of cable) so there would be no need for them to switch back..what would they fill that other hour with..another repeat of ncis doing 1-1.5 million viewers and then drop their overall average, not happening any time soon. 

the fact that usa are gaining more wwe in prime time (smackdown and tough enough) should tell you everything you need to know about where they stand!!!


----------



## The True Believer

2nd hour gets the biggest rating overall. Was that the same hour where Owens powerbombed MGK off the stage. I didn't watch.


----------



## A-C-P

Special Event or PPV or whatever the hell the WWE is calling them now, Fallout Raws draw the best #s is pretty much what has been proven to me over the last PPV heavy 2 months.


----------



## The_It_Factor

validreasoning said:


> post ppv bump
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> except it was the nètwork that insisted on raw moving to 3 hours not wwe so only the network would make the switch back..also raw is still one of the most watched shows on all of cable (with it being far and away most watched on the nbc universal family of cable) so there would be no need for them to switch back..what would they fill that other hour with..another repeat of ncis doing 1-1.5 million viewers and then drop their overall average, not happening any time soon.
> 
> the fact that usa are gaining more wwe in prime time (smackdown and tough enough) should tell you everything you need to know about where they stand!!!


I'm not questioning their standing with the network, I'm questioning their standing with the fans. We're over-saturated with wrestling these days. It's just too much to sit through for a lot of fans. It may make sense from a business standpoint for USA, but it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense from a business standpoint for WWE.

There's only so much they can do in terms of matchups and angles. We've had three 3 hour ppv's in the past month, on top of 3 hour Raw and 2 hour Smackdown each week. They're burning the candle at both ends, and people are getting bored with it, as the ratings over the past several years suggests.

USA cares about making money, and like you said, WWE will do that better than something like NCIS. On the other hand, WWE seems to be focusing on the present and not the future. If they continue to saturate the market, more and more people are going to stop caring. It's just so much easier for them to come up with material when they aren't having to do so at such an extent.


----------



## StanStansky

Owens and Ambrose are best for business. Does anyone know how they count the overrun? The prospect of Bork doesn't reflect in that last hour.


----------



## Empress

The True Believer said:


> 2nd hour gets the biggest rating overall. Was that the same hour where Owens powerbombed MGK off the stage. I didn't watch.


I think it was the third hour. 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/610635244186660864
Owens was also had his promo and match with Ziggler in the first hour if I'm remembering right. Or it might've started in the first and carried over into the second.


----------



## Frico

The True Believer said:


> 2nd hour gets the biggest rating overall. Was that the same hour where Owens powerbombed MGK off the stage. I didn't watch.


Owens/MGK was in hour 3. Owens/Ziggler was in hour 2.


----------



## validreasoning

The_It_Factor said:


> I'm not questioning their standing with the network, I'm questioning their standing with the fans. We're over-saturated with wrestling these days. It's just too much to sit through for a lot of fans. It may make sense from a business standpoint for USA, but it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense from a business standpoint for WWE.


to be fair once they added smackdown in 1999 they over-saturated the market..in fact you could say they over-saturated it back in 1995 adding the 12 ppvs. since 2006 wwe have had 5 hours of prime time on cable be it 2 hours of raw, 2 hours of smackdown and 1 hour of ecw (which was replaced with nxt in 2010) or mainevent.

financially it makes sense to wwe because they get paid per hour of tv so 3 hours will generate more money for wwe (with little to no extra cost as building is already booked and equipments/talent is already there)



> There's only so much they can do in terms of matchups and angles. We've had three 3 hour ppv's in the past month, on top of 3 hour Raw and 2 hour Smackdown each week. They're burning the candle at both ends, and people are getting bored with it, as the ratings over the past several years suggests.


i don't disagree but at least wwe are not hotshotting everything on free tv these past few years. the last wwe title defence on raw happened 2.5 years ago, the last title change 5 years ago. when was the last ladder match on raw? hhh, taker, rock, lesnar etc never wrestle on raw just ppv

sd has stayed very consistent since moving to syfy while raw has dropped some last 5 years but i reckon if you compared raw to regular season nfl/nba/mlb/nhl games on cable since 2010 it would probably have dropped less than all of them. ufcs numbers on cable have fallen through the floor since 2009.


----------



## Wynter

Still can't avoid that 3rd hour drop even with Brock.

Second hour still doing that spike. Cena and Owens are killing it right now. Shout out to creative/Vince/Trips too. They are really booking the feud with sense, especially Owens. They definitely have a potentially awesome draw in him. I don't see him as the uber face type, more so filling the Triple H role, but maybe a better draw in the long run if WWE keeps booking him like a beast :banderas


----------



## Empress

Wynter said:


> *Still can't avoid that 3rd hour drop even with Brock.*
> 
> Second hour still doing that spike. Cena and Owens are killing it right now. Shout out to creative/Vince/Trips too. They are really booking the feud with sense, especially Owens. They definitely have a potentially awesome draw in him. I don't see him as the uber face type, more so filling the Triple H role, but maybe a better draw in the long run if WWE keeps booking him like a beast :banderas


Did the WWE advertise Brock? I don't think they did. It would've ruined the surprise.Even though it really wasn't if you go online.


----------



## Chrome

Crazy Eyes said:


> Did the WWE advertise Brock? I don't think they did. It would've ruined the surprise.Even though it really wasn't if you go online.


They didn't, but most dirtsheets leaked that he was going to be there so that probably helped the ratings a little. Being a fallout Raw also helped.


----------



## Wynter

Yeah, it was leaked over a week ago, even most of the fans in the audience knew Lesnar was in the building and chanted for him.

It's really hard to avoid that third hour drop. At this point, they might need to try and see how well Cena/Owen do in that hour to help bump that shit :lol

Nah, it's a long show and unless something very special or awesome is going to happen, some people check out. Whether it's from boredom or just tired.


----------



## Chrome

Yeah after the Blackhawks won, I turned on Raw just in time to catch the Lesnar appearance. Blackhawks win the cup and Lesnar returns, not a bad night if I do say so myself. bama


----------



## Empress

*Did Brock Lesnar's Return Help Monday's WWE Raw Viewership?*

Monday's episode of WWE Raw drew 4.114 million viewers which was up last week's 3.645 million viewers.

The show featured fallout from Money In the Bank and the return of Brock Lesnar.

The first hour drew 4.095 million viewers, the second hour drew 4.249 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.997 million viewers.
http://www.wrestlingnewssource.com/...snars-Return-Help-Mondays-WWE-Raw-Viewership/


----------



## Londrick

Seth walked out of MITB with a dominant performance and ratings go up? Don't think that's a coincidence.

Don't see how Brock can get credit not many people knew he would show up.


----------



## The_It_Factor

validreasoning said:


> to be fair once they added smackdown in 1999 they over-saturated the market..in fact you could say they over-saturated it back in 1995 adding the 12 ppvs. since 2006 wwe have had 5 hours of prime time on cable be it 2 hours of raw, 2 hours of smackdown and 1 hour of ecw (which was replaced with nxt in 2010) or mainevent.
> 
> financially it makes sense to wwe because they get paid per hour of tv so 3 hours will generate more money for wwe (with little to no extra cost as building is already booked and equipments/talent is already there)
> 
> 
> 
> i don't disagree but at least wwe are not hotshotting everything on free tv these past few years. the last wwe title defence on raw happened 2.5 years ago, the last title change 5 years ago. when was the last ladder match on raw? hhh, taker, rock, lesnar etc never wrestle on raw just ppv
> 
> sd has stayed very consistent since moving to syfy while raw has dropped some last 5 years but i reckon if you compared raw to regular season nfl/nba/mlb/nhl games on cable since 2010 it would probably have dropped less than all of them. ufcs numbers on cable have fallen through the floor since 2009.


Well, I certainly agree that they've done well booking each event so that certain things are still special, though that's the problem for me. I've never watched Smackdown because I know no storylines will be advanced (and there's enough in-ring stuff on Raw these days anyway), and it's getting to the point where Raw is hard to watch because I know nothing is really going to happen except MAYBE a swerve here or a special return there. Most Raws are just the same thing every week, and I feel like a lot of fans are in the same boat that I am. It's just getting to be a task sitting through them (I DVR and fast-forward a lot until I'm caught up live) as I basically already know the outcome of the title matches, etc.

I have no idea how some people (probably not many) watch every Raw, Smackdown, Superstars, NXT, and PPV's (and now Tough Enough) on a consistent basis. That's like 11 hours of WWE programming per week.

I know I'm old school, but I prefer the format of 1 two-hour Raw and ppv's and that's it. Even the 1 hour Raw and 1 hour superstars in the early 90's was solid.


----------



## Fighter Daron

Wow, Brock Lesnar hour makes the worst rating, impressive.


----------



## LordKain

The ratings for this week's Raw mean nothing since there was a PPV the night before and the numbers pretty much always bump up after those.

We'll see how they are next week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wow, Roman Reigns' hour makes the worst rating, impressive.


----------



## RatedR10

Fighter Daron said:


> Wow, Brock Lesnar hour makes the worst rating, impressive.


Hmm, really? Because I didn't see the overrun number included there...


----------



## Fighter Daron

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Wow, Roman Reigns' hour makes the worst rating, impressive.


Roman Reigns talked for less than a minute. If anything, it was Bray Wyatt's hour.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Fighter Daron said:


> Roman Reigns talked for less than a minute. If anything, it was Bray Wyatt's hour.


I wonder if Roman's daughter draws better than him? Can't be too hard.


----------



## SnapOrTap

Roman Rains making the Ratings go away like the Rain.

Keep it up Roman. 

Keep it up.


----------



## validreasoning

interesting to compare the post ppv bump in terms of raw average live viewership (or lack thereof since last summer)

2014
post summerslam (lesnar wins title) ... 4.19 million *(-106,000 viewers)*
post noc ...............................................3.88 million (+53,000 viewers)
post hiac...............................................3.75 million (+50,000 viewers)
post survivor series (sting debut).........4.29 million (+520,000 viewers)
post tlc..................................................3.52 million *(-179,000 viewers)*

2015
post rumble (blizzard show) .................4.42 million (+320,000 viewers)
post fastlane.........................................4.12 million (+125,000 viewers)
post mania 31 (rollins wins title)............5.36 million (+1.18 million viewers)
post extreme rules ................................3.76 million *(-282,000 viewers)*
post payback..........................................4 million (+312,0000 viewers)
post elimination chamber........................3.97 million (+374,000 viewers)
post mitb.................................................4.11 million (+469,000 viewers)


----------



## The Tempest

> The 6/18 episode of WWE Smackdown on Syfy drew 2.47 million viewers. This is down from last week's show that drew 2.61 million viewers.
> 
> Despite the drop in viewers, Smackdown was the highest rated show on cable Thursday night drawing a 0.7 rating among adults 18-49.


http://www.wrestleview.com/wwe-news/54907-viewer-numbers-for-6-18-wwe-smackdown-viewers-are-down


----------



## Empress

*WWE Raw Social Media Tracking*

-- June 22: Monday's show fell hard in Nielsen's Twitter TV Ratings. After last week's show generated a near-100 percent gain, this week's show gave it all back.

Raw's unique Twitter audience was 1.262 million, down from 2.972 million last week. It was nearly the smallest audience of the year, just topping 1.234 million on January 5.

Total impressions were 7.325 million, down 45 percent from last week's big number of 13.313 million. Two weeks ago, Raw drew 7.127 million.

Among series & specials on Monday night, Raw ranked #2 behind "The Bachelorette" on ABC. If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw would have ranked #3 behind U.S.A. Women in the World Cup and the College World Series on ESPN.

***

WWE Raw Social Media Scoresheet 2015

- Unique High: 3.563 million (3/30 post-WM31)
- Impressions High: 26.587 million (3/30 post-WM31)
- Uniques Low: 1.234 million (1/5)
- Impressions Low: 7.127 million (6/8)
- Avg. Weekly Uniques: 1.935 million
- Avg. Weekly Impressions: 11.493 million
- Avg. Mon. Rank: #2 among series & specials 

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_85805.shtml#.VYmyg_lViko


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

That's what happens when you have a million extra people tweeting lesnar is back!! Everyone knew he was going to show up days before RAW. A week later its back to the usual. Nobody cares.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Crazy Eyes said:


> *WWE Raw Social Media Tracking*
> 
> -- June 22: Monday's show fell hard in Nielsen's Twitter TV Ratings. After last week's show generated a near-100 percent gain, this week's show gave it all back.
> 
> Raw's unique Twitter audience was 1.262 million, down from 2.972 million last week. It was nearly the smallest audience of the year, just topping 1.234 million on January 5.
> 
> Total impressions were 7.325 million, down 45 percent from last week's big number of 13.313 million. Two weeks ago, Raw drew 7.127 million.
> 
> Among series & specials on Monday night, Raw ranked #2 behind "The Bachelorette" on ABC. If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw would have ranked #3 behind U.S.A. Women in the World Cup and the College World Series on ESPN.
> 
> ***
> 
> WWE Raw Social Media Scoresheet 2015
> 
> - Unique High: 3.563 million (3/30 post-WM31)
> - Impressions High: 26.587 million (3/30 post-WM31)
> - Uniques Low: 1.234 million (1/5)
> - Impressions Low: 7.127 million (6/8)
> - Avg. Weekly Uniques: 1.935 million
> - Avg. Weekly Impressions: 11.493 million
> - Avg. Mon. Rank: #2 among series & specials
> 
> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_85805.shtml#.VYmyg_lViko



Interest always is sparked post ppv, plus word of mouth of Brock's imminent return spread across the internet like wildfire.


----------



## Empress

*Monday's WWE Raw Viewership Take A Hit*

Monday's episode of WWE Raw which was headlined by Brock Lesnar took a big hit in viewership according to the official data.

The episode drew 3.670 million viewers overall which was down a considerable amount from last week's 4.114 million

The first hour drew 3.594 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.606 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.812 million viewers.
http://www.wrestlingnewssource.com/news/39286/Mondays-WWE-Raw-Viewership-Takes-A-Hit/


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Brock Lesnar doesn't draw.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Her'es the chart. The only positive is the rating rose every hour.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wow, the first hour did the worst and that was Brock and Heyman's promo. Not even the part timers are drawing, like I've said in the past. Good to see the third hour did the highest of the night. People wanted to see that Rollins' "apology."

:rollins


----------



## A-C-P

Apologizing to 2 Hobbits and a 7 ft piece of Crap draws :Rollins


----------



## Chrome

That's pretty bad considering there was nothing on last night besides baseball.


----------



## Empress

Was Brock advertised to show on RAW? I was surprised to see him.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

A-C-P said:


> Apologizing to 2 Hobbits and a 7 ft piece of Crap draws :Rollins


Hey! I'll have you know that 7 foot piece of crap has aged like a fine wine..

:lmao


----------



## Shocker

Another pitiful viewership number, that is well below what it was in previous years.

When are they going to stop allowing the ratings to tank solely due to the charisma vacuum that is currently holding the world title?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

That's it. WWE is doomed. Brock can't even save them now. Only guy above him is Rock... who will only ever show up for a program during Mania time (when WWE gets a boost anyway). 


Oh wait, just remembered Reigns took up about 20+ minutes of the show... and they get these horrendous numbers. Reigns should go to NXT to work on his drawing ability (and everything else). :reigns2


----------



## Chrome

Shocker said:


> Another pitiful viewership number, that is well below what it was in previous years.
> 
> When are they going to stop allowing the ratings to tank solely due to the charisma vacuum that is currently holding the world title?


Right on time. :rollins


----------



## Shocker

#BadNewsSanta said:


> That's it. WWE is doomed. Brock can't even save them now. Only guy above him is Rock... who will only ever show up for a program during Mania time (when WWE gets a boost anyway).


Brock hasn't been much of a TV draw for a while now. I thought this was well known.

All he usually does is stand in the ring doing nothing.

Though it looks like he helped the 3rd hour a bit.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> Right on time. :rollins


:Seth

:Vince

Parrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrty.


----------



## Marrakesh

Why is everyone so worried? 

WWE aren't. They have :reigns gearing up for the rest of the year. 

They plan to feed him Wyatt at Battleground and are only bothering to make the story appear ''dark'' because they want to generate sympathy for Reigns because no one relates to him :lol It won't work. 

Lesnar will then be served up on a plate for Reigns at Summerslam. Should be a comical reaction to the finish. 

Then we have the eventual Ambrose heel turn to feud with Reigns over the title on the horizon in which we he will also get fed to ''The baddest Samoan on the planet'' :heyman 

After he's done with those guys he still has Kevin Owens to savor for next year too and if Ryback gets any more over they'll turn him as well. They already did this for Cena in 2012. 

The ratings are going to skyrocket when WWE launch this masterplan. 

:vince2


----------



## Erik.

They take Ambrose out of the title picture and this happens?


----------



## Empress

I don't think these ratings are necessarily a reflection on Dean Ambrose. He was in the first hour (which did the lowest rating) and I'm not blaming him for that. 

The overall rating was down but viewership did go up as the show continued. At least the third hour was highest, which is usually not the case. Also, last week was helped by a PPV bump.

What was on last night? The first hour is typically stronger, especially if Brock/Heyman are featured.


----------



## Erik.

Just seems ratings are inconsistent as general and in case shouldn't heavily be relied on. People on this forum probably take more notice of the ratings then the company themselves.


----------



## Peerless

Ambrose out of the main event and the ratings take a hit?

Shocker there :ambrose


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

^The viewership went up as the show went on and the third hour was the highest rated...for the first time in awhile.


----------



## Sicarius

Is Ambrose actually a ratings draw? I constantly read it in this thread. Is their any proof to show that he actually _is_?


----------



## SóniaPortugal

ShowStopper said:


> ^The viewership went up as the show went on and the third hour was the highest rated...for the first time in awhile.


You are right
But the ratings if 3rd hour had were equal to the worst in weeks when Ambrose was in MainEvent

Terrible ratings


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Sicarius said:


> Is Ambrose actually a ratings draw? I constantly read it in this thread. Is their any proof to show that he actually _is_?


Usually when he is handled right and they really give things to do, he did not fail in the ratings
I think the only time he failed was in Rollins vs Ambrose in RAW
When Dean Ambrose is one focus and is treated as MainEvent the ratings are good, when WWE begins to treated badly Dean Ambrose ratings fall
May be coincidence, but last year the same thing happened


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SóniaPortugal said:


> You are right
> But the ratings if 3rd hour had were equal to the worst in weeks when Ambrose was in MainEvent
> 
> Terrible ratings


3rd hour never does the best, but it did last night, even with an Adam Rose match right before the Rollins/Brock segment to close the show.


----------



## Empress

ShowStopper said:


> ^The viewership went up as the show went on and the third hour was the highest rated...for the first time in awhile.


Right. I'm not trying to take anything away from Dean, but if people were only tuning in to see him, wouldn't they have just as easily tuned out after his match was over? Instead, the viewership increased. This is an all hands on deck thing now. 

Overall, these ratings are the norm and inconsistent as  @Erik. pointed out.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

ShowStopper said:


> 3rd hour never does the best, but it did last night, even with an Adam Rose match right before the Rollins/Brock segment to close the show.


I know this, and is positive
But the ratings are terrible


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Crazy Eyes said:


> Right. I'm not trying to take anything away from Dean, but if people were only tuning in to see him, wouldn't they have just as easily tuned out after his match was over? Instead, the viewership increased.
> 
> Overall, these ratings are the norm and inconsistent as @Erik. pointed out.


Yep. And as I've been saying for months in here, no one in WWE is currently drawing much on Raw. Not even Brock, as evidenced by last night, and not Cena, either. Count in Rollins, Ambrose, Reigns, and whoever else. But I don't think it's any of their faults, either. It's just the way the TV landscape is nowadays. They're not going to draw 5's and 6's like they did in the Attitude Era. Not even when Brock or any of the other big name part timers are around. It just doesn't work that way anymore.



> I know this, and is positive
> But the ratings are terrible


Of course they are. They've been in this range for years now. It's nothing new and none of the 'big names' draw anymore, either. I don't think WWE cares much, though. They get paid handsomely by USA to produce 3 hours every Monday night, and they do it, regardless of ratings.


----------



## Kabraxal

Chrome said:


> That's pretty bad considering there was nothing on last night besides baseball.


I was watching the Women's World Cup.. and surprisingly, seems a lot of people were given the chart.


----------



## Undertakerowns

But damn they lost 500,000 viewers in a week and there was no competition. Weird.


----------



## RoyalFlush

ShowStopper said:


> Yep. And as I've been saying for months in here, no one in WWE is currently drawing much on Raw. Not even Brock, as evidenced by last night, and not Cena, either. Count in Rollins, Ambrose, Reigns, and whoever else. But I don't think it's any of their faults, either. It's just the way the TV landscape is nowadays. They're not going to draw 5's and 6's like they did in the Attitude Era. Not even when Brock or any of the other big name part timers are around. It just doesn't work that way anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they are. They've been in this range for years now. It's nothing new and none of the 'big names' draw anymore, either. I don't think WWE cares much, though. They get paid handsomely by USA to produce 3 hours every Monday night, and they do it, regardless of ratings.


When are you going to stop lying? Viewership in the 3.6 million range has not been happening for years like you claim. June has averaged more than that in previous years.

But it's more than just a general decline in viewership. RAWs centered around Rollins have always drawn very weak numbers. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, because he failed to draw last year as well, both on TV and at house shows.

Stop lying.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RoyalFlush said:


> When are you going to stop lying? Viewership in the 3.6 million range has not been happening for years like you claim. June has averaged more than that in previous years.
> 
> But it's more than just a general decline in viewership. RAWs centered around Rollins have always drawn very weak numbers. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, because he failed to draw last year as well, both on TV and at house shows.
> 
> Stop lying.


Yes, you're right. Raw has been drawing 4-5million plus for years right up until Rollins became champion. Yeah, no. Wave bye bye.


----------



## RoyalFlush

ShowStopper said:


> Oh look who's back again. Wave bye bye.


No worries. You'll always be corrected when you lie. Don't let it happen again.


----------



## RoyalFlush

ShowStopper said:


> Yes, you're right. Raw has been drawing 4-5million plus for years right up until Rollins became champion. Yeah, no. Wave bye bye.


They've been drawing much better this time of year in past years. That's a fact.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RoyalFlush said:


> No worries. You'll always be corrected when you lie. Don't let it happen again.


The only lying taking place in this thread is you creating false user names. Now, multiple ones on a daily basis. So, so sad. Rollins certainly draws you to this thread. 

:rollins


----------



## The_It_Factor

Ratings are so random... But it's pretty comical watching people try to make sense of them to put whatever guy they like over if the rating is good (I can't believe I just said "good" for the ratings over recent years.. But you get it), or blame it on someone they don't like if the rating is bad.

I have to assume people are trolling when they make statements like, "ratings go down when Ambrose isn't in the main event"... As if hundreds of thousands of wrestling fans say, "oh, it's just Lesnar on TV and not Ambrose? Who wants to see this?!" ::turns channel::


----------



## RoyalFlush

ShowStopper said:


> The only lying taking place in this thread is you creating false user names. Now multiple ones on a daily basis. So, so sad.
> 
> :rollins


pwinsider[dot]com/article/92038/raw-audience-sees-large-drop.html?p=1

change the [dot] with a "."

You'll see that your claims are false.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RoyalFlush said:


> pwinsider[dot]com/article/92038/raw-audience-sees-large-drop.html?p=1
> 
> change the [dot] with a "."
> 
> You'll see that your claims are false.


I've seen all the reports. Raw ratings have been in this range for YEARS. Funny how you had nothing to say last week and the fact that Rollins' segment last night outdrew Brock's segment in Hour 1. 

:ha


----------



## RoyalFlush

ShowStopper said:


> I've seen all the reports. Raw ratings have been in this range for YEARS. Funny how you had nothing to say last week and the fact that Rollins' segment last night outdrew Brock's segment in Hour 1.
> 
> :ha


The RAW ratings have not been in this range for years, as the link I posted clearly states. You are lying again. Stop it.

Brock was in that same segment last night. Are you high?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RoyalFlush said:


> The RAW ratings have not been in this range for years, as the link I posted clearly states. You are lying again. Stop it.
> 
> Brock was in that same segment last night. Are you high?


Brock's main segment was the first one of the night. The last segment of the night was billed as Rollins' apology to the Authority and Brock didn't come out until the very end. So, yeah...

Raw's ratings have been seeing a decline every year on a year to year basis for awhile now. The funny part is no one is even claiming Rollins is a draw. No one on the roster is anymore, including Brock. Your obsession is arguing with yourself. You have a very unhealthy obsession and I'd get it checked out. Seriously.


----------



## RoyalFlush

ShowStopper said:


> Brock's main segment was the first one of the night. The last segment of the night was billed as Rollins' apology to the Authority and Brock didn't come out until the very end. So, yeah...
> 
> Raw's ratings have been seeing a decline every year on a year to year basis for awhile now. The funny part is no one is even claiming Rollins is a draw. No one on the roster is anymore, including Brock. Your obsession is arguing with yourself. You have a very unhealthy obsession and I'd get it checked out. Seriously.


Obviously it was such a huge shock seeing Brock interrupt the "apology" of the guy he is currently feuding with. Surely not a single person expected that. 

They have been seeing a decrease, but the drop this year has been much more significant. They've always managed to average above 4 million around this time of year. 

You have as much of an obsession as I do, seeing as how you constantly reply.


----------



## tboneangle

First Time coming in here. Couple questions

1.i keep hearing Ambrose is a big draw. Any. Truth to this?
2. I keep hearing Rollins tanks the ratings. Is there any truth to this? I hope not I love Rollins. I honestly think anything post mania doesn't matter to the fans or wwe and today nobody really draws.


----------



## RoyalFlush

tboneangle said:


> First Time coming in here. Couple questions
> 
> 1.i keep hearing Ambrose is a big draw. Any. Truth to this?
> 2. I keep hearing Rollins tanks the ratings. Is there any truth to this? I hope not I love Rollins. I honestly think anything post mania doesn't matter to the fans or wwe and today nobody really draws.


1. Not a _big_ draw, but there have been spikes in viewership whenever he has entered the main event picture. Would be silly to expect him to be a big draw when he constantly jobs to everyone. But he has certainly done better in that department than the other two former Shield members.

2. Yes. This is true.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RoyalFlush said:


> Obviously it was such a huge shock seeing Brock interrupt the "apology" of the guy he is currently feuding with. Surely not a single person expected that.
> 
> They have been seeing a decrease, but the drop this year has been much more significant. They've always managed to average above 4 million around this time of year.
> 
> You have as much of an obsession as I do, seeing as how you constantly reply.



That's fine. But it was still billed and advertised as Rollins' apology to the Authority. And Brock's appearance in that segment came way after 11PM.

There are plenty of 3's mixed in 2012 and 2013 and 2014, as well. You want to blame it all on ONE guy? Go right ahead. I'm done. But no one with a tad of logic and fairness does that. Rollins isn't a draw, but neither is anyone else currently on the roster. And I will continue to say that until someone else starts drawing and drawing consistently.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

tboneangle said:


> First Time coming in here. Couple questions
> 
> 1.i keep hearing Ambrose is a big draw. Any. Truth to this?
> 2. I keep hearing Rollins tanks the ratings. Is there any truth to this? I hope not I love Rollins. I honestly think anything post mania doesn't matter to the fans or wwe and today nobody really draws.


No and no. No one is drawing. Brock was on last night's show and it didn't get a big rating. That's all you need to see right there.


----------



## tboneangle

ShowStopper said:


> I'd rather like guys that are actually talented than guys who supposedly "draw." Especially since no one today draws, not even your precious favorites. Must cut deep if it makes you want to create a new user name every week to post on this thread.
> 
> :ti





ShowStopper said:


> No and no. No one is drawing. Brock was on last night's show and it didn't get a big rating. That's all you need to see right there.


This is exactly what I figured. In 2015 outside of mania and a few marquee matches. Nobody draws. Personally I find Rollins the best part of the show along with cenas open challenges (which haven't seen in a while)


----------



## RoyalFlush

ShowStopper said:


> That's fine. But it was still billed and advertised as Rollins' apology to the Authority. And Brock's appearance in that segment came way after 11PM.
> 
> There are plenty of 3's mixed in 2012 and 2013 and 2014, as well. You want to blame it all on ONE guy? Go right ahead. I'm done. But no one with a tad of logic and fairness does that. Rollins isn't a draw, but neither is anyone else currently on the roster. And I will continue to say that until someone else starts drawing and drawing consistently.


"3s" A bit of a difference between 3.9 million and 3.6. And most were 4 or better.

I have corroborating evidence in the form of very weak house show attendance numbers for Rollins (and weak merch sales in comparison to other heels the last time we had a list.)

No one is a big draw on the roster because they constantly push guys who have no drawing potential - Rollins, Reigns, Sheamus, Orton, etc.

The guys who show potential like Ambrose and Wyatt get jobbed out when it matters.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RoyalFlush said:


> "3s" A bit of a difference between 3.9 million and 3.6.
> 
> I have corroborating evidence in the form of very weak house show attendance numbers for Rollins (and weak merch sales in comparison to other heels the last time we had a list.)
> 
> No one is a big draw on the roster because they constantly push guys who have no drawing potential - Rollins, Reigns, Sheamus, Orton, etc.
> 
> The guys who show potential like Ambrose and Wyatt get jobbed out when it matters.


3.9 and 3.6 million isn't as big of a difference as you think. Especially when their are a ton more ways and options to watch Raw in 2015 then there was a few years ago.


----------



## RoyalFlush

ShowStopper said:


> 3.9 and 3.6 million isn't as big of a difference as you think. Especially when their are a ton more ways and options to watch Raw in 2015 then there was a few years ago.


It is when in 2015 3.6 is the norm, and in previous years 3.9 was the lowest they drew.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RoyalFlush said:


> It is when in 2015 3.6 is the norm, and in previous years 3.9 was the lowest they drew.


Lots of 3's mixed into these supposed high drawing years. That's because they weren't. And even if that were the case, it really isn't a huge difference. WWE declined from those the mid 2000's into the years you are talking about right now. They keep steadily declining over the past 10 years, no matter who is on top. Mix in that now in this era you have more options, more channels, and more ways to watch Raw and I guarantee whoever the next Champion is will be dealing with the same stuff. Hell, we've already seen it.


----------



## RoyalFlush

ShowStopper said:


> Lots of 3's mixed into these supposed high drawing years. That's because they weren't. And even if that were the case, it really isn't a huge difference. WWE declined from those the mid 2000's into the years you are talking about right now. They keep steadily declining over the past 10 years, no matter who is on top. Mix in that now in this era you have more options, more channels, and more ways to watch Raw and I guarantee whoever the next Champion is will be dealing with the same stuff. Hell, we've already seen it.


Are you sure you're looking at the right time of the year? Doesn't seem as if you are.

TV ratings are only part of it. I see you haven't addressed the corroborating evidence of weak house show attendance numbers when he headlines and his weak merch ranking when the last list was released.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RoyalFlush said:


> Are you sure you're looking at the right time of the year? Doesn't seem as if you are.
> 
> TV ratings are only part of it. I see you haven't addressed the corroborating evidence of weak house show attendance numbers when he headlines and his weak merch ranking when the last list was released.


Definitely looking at the right numbers. More 3's and low 4's in those years than even I myself anticipated. The way you speak about it, you'd think they'd average 5 and 6 million viewers per week back then. Yes, now TV ratings are "only a part of it." Sure thing. Funny how you move on from one point to the next just like that. And a chicken-shit heel aligned with the Authority not selling a ton of merchandise? Shocking. Man, just for the reason of proving a few ...... in particular wrong, I can't wait until he turns face.


----------



## The Tempest

Seriously, whoever lies behind these fake accounts needs to stop. This Seth hate all of a sudden is plain embarassing. And I'm talking to you, stop making all these stupid accounts. Not only you won't change anything, but I also encorage you to get a fucking life. WWE overall is in a bad shape no matter who's featured on the shows.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

The_It_Factor said:


> Ratings are so random... But it's pretty comical watching people try to make sense of them to put whatever guy they like over if the rating is good (I can't believe I just said "good" for the ratings over recent years.. But you get it), or blame it on someone they don't like if the rating is bad.
> 
> I have to assume people are trolling when they make statements like, "ratings go down when Ambrose isn't in the main event"... *As if hundreds of thousands of wrestling fans say, "oh, it's just Lesnar on TV and not Ambrose? Who wants to see this?!" ::turns channel::*


I do that LOL
And I think a lot of people do it, not exactly for Ambrose and Lesnar but for those they like


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Are people seriously crediting Seth for the last hour spike or ironically trolling? OBVIOUSLY they were waiting for Brock.*


----------



## Louaja89

Legit BOSS said:


> *Are people seriously crediting Seth for the last hour spike or ironically trolling? OBVIOUSLY they were waiting for Brock.*


They were waiting to see Brock get his hands on Rollins , not anybody else. So yeah Brock was the draw but Rollins helped as well.


----------



## Mqwar

The Tempest said:


> WWE overall is in a bad shape no matter who's featured on the shows.



That's a terrible excuse for having a shit champion. If this is true, why don't we make Heath Slater the WWE champion instead? Heck, that guy has far more entertaining and charismatic personality when compared to Seth Rollins boring out the audience and driving out RAW viewers everyweek in the main event. 

Worst WWE Champion in modern history!


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Louaja89 said:


> They were waiting to see Brock get his hands on Rollins , not anybody else. So yeah Brock was the draw but Rollins helped as well.


*
By existing? No, it doesn't work that way. You don't ignore weeks of ratings drops during his boring segments because Brock showed up to make one interesting.*


----------



## Louaja89

Legit BOSS said:


> *
> By existing? No, it doesn't work that way. You don't ignore weeks of ratings drops during his boring segments because Brock showed up to make one interesting.*


That segment was advertised as an Authority segment , but those people didn't tune in to see Lesnar beat Kane or J&J up . If they only wanted to see Brock , the first hour would've been higher.
As for your second statement , I really wish I knew why people keep saying that Rollins tanks in the ratings when there is no proof of that since we don't have the quarters anymore. And even if it was true , Rollins has barely been a main eventer for a year , is only 29 years old and you're telling me that you would put the blame on him for declining ratings .
I can't remember the last time a heel won his first world title at 28. So there is no reason to blame him for ratings who haven't even dropped since he became champion.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Louaja89 said:


> That segment was advertised as an Authority segment , but those people didn't tune in to see Lesnar beat Kane or J&J up . If they only wanted to see Brock , the first hour would've been higher.


*Lesnar opened the show and was teased to reappear all night-hence Triple H bluntly pointing it out that Seth was only trying to reassemble the Authority to save him from another ass whooping.*



> As for your second statement , I really wish I knew why people keep saying that Rollins tanks in the ratings when there is no proof of that since we don't have the quarters anymore. And even if it was true , Rollins has barely been a main eventer for a year , is only 29 years old and you're telling me that you would put the blame on him for declining ratings .


*So how about you and others in this thread defending Seth who were willing to blame Reigns for ratings drops if he became champion at Wrestlemania? Do you not see how hypocritical that is? This is despite Reigns having month long streaks of ratings increases for his hour, which btw continued on Monday. *



> I can't remember the last time a heel won his first world title at 28. So there is no reason to blame him for ratings who haven't even dropped since he became champion.


*Brock won it as a heel at 25. The Rock won it as a heel at 27. The ratings HAVE dropped since Seth has become champion. That's an undeniable :fact that's been proven in this very thread. Stop making excuses for his boring segments.*


----------



## Louaja89

Legit BOSS said:


> *Lesnar opened the show and was teased to reappear all night-hence Triple H bluntly pointing it out that Seth was only trying to reassemble the Authority to save him from another ass whooping.*
> 
> 
> *So how about you and others in this thread defending Seth who were willing to blame Reigns for ratings drops if he became champion at Wrestlemania? Do you not see how hypocritical that is? This is despite Reigns having month long streaks of ratings increases for his hour, which btw continued on Monday. *
> 
> 
> *Brock won it as a heel at 25. The Rock won it as a heel at 27. The ratings HAVE dropped since Seth has become champion. That's an undeniable :fact that's been proven in this very thread. Stop making excuses for his boring segments.*


When Brock Lesnar won his title , it was in 2002 , completely different times . I won't even talk about Rocky and the period in which he won the belt.
Aside from the periods in which they won the belt and the other stars that were in the company at the time , you compared him with fucking Rock and Brock , two of the biggest pushes ever.
As for Reigns , I clearly see the hypocrisy which is why I always blamed Vince and not Reigns for the ratings during the RTWM.
Even if the ratings had dropped which isn't true , there is no proof that it is because of Seth and his push as top heel .


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Louaja89 said:


> When Brock Lesnar won his title , it was in 2002 , completely different times . I won't even talk about Rocky and the period in which he won the belt.
> Aside from the periods in which they won the belt and the other stars that were in the company at the time , you compared him with fucking Rock and Brock , two of the biggest pushes ever.
> As for Reigns , I clearly see the hypocrisy which is why I always blamed Vince and not Reigns for the ratings during the RTWM.
> Even if the ratings had dropped which isn't true , there is no proof that it is because of Seth and his push as top heel .


*Then don't say you can't remember when someone as young as 28 won the title if you're not willing to be corrected. If you want to ignore all the numbers in this thread that show that how Seth's reign has decreased ratings then it's not my problem. I'm not gonna waste my time providing information that's right in your face. It's SOOO funny how Seth gets praised for ratings increases, but absolved of all blame for decreases because "he's too young!!!" Well, he doesn't need to be champion then. Btw, the top heel is feuding with the top face in the mid card. No amount of cheers is going to change that.*


----------



## Louaja89

Legit BOSS said:


> *Then don't say you can't remember when someone as young as 28 won the title if you're not willing to be corrected. If you want to ignore all the numbers in this thread that show that how Seth's reign has decreased ratings then it's not my problem. I'm not gonna waste my time providing information that's right in your face. It's SOOO funny how Seth gets praised for ratings increases, but absolved of all blame for decreases because "he's too young!!!" Well, he doesn't need to be champion then. Btw, the top heel is feuding with the top face in the mid card. No amount of cheers is going to change that.*


Would you have blamed Brock and Rocky for bad ratings when there were biggers stars than them in the company at the time ? I know I wouldn't have.
Those numbers don't show that Rollins segments bombed which is all that matters , all they show is that WWE as a whole is bombing.
Finally , I love Owens as much as you but he is definitely not the top heel. He is with Rollins the best performer in WWE today but he is not the top heel.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

This rating should be very alarming for WWE. They need to pull the trigger on whatever big summer angle they are planning.


----------



## Empress

I think Kevin Owens is the top heel. If for no other reason than his imposing presence and the fact that he's a one man wrecking crew. He also has the best booking on the roster. The hour in which he appears on RAW seem to do solid. But then again, he's usually paired with John Cena who is one of the few proven draws of this dwindling era.


----------



## The Tempest

Mqwar said:


> That's a terrible excuse for having a shit champion. If this is true, why don't we make Heath Slater the WWE champion instead? Heck, that guy has far more entertaining and charismatic personality when compared to Seth Rollins boring out the audience and driving out RAW viewers everyweek in the main event.
> 
> Worst WWE Champion in modern history!


That's not an excuse. I'm not defending anybody because like I said, the overall product is pretty bad, no matter who headlines RAW. And I do criticize Seth's booking, a lot.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

WWE is dying :crying:
It is the result of not listening to the public :frown2:


----------



## validreasoning

Raw finished 2nd, 3rd and 4th in the cable top 25 for last week


----------



## validreasoning

the mark warfare over who is and who isn't drawing is hilarious

here are the real facts..raws viewership went down the night after the belt was taken off of cena and put on lesnar and hasn't returned to the numbers pre summerslam 14 since. lesnar or rollins as champion doesn't make a jot of difference

raw first 3 months of 2015 with lesnar as champion averaged *4 milllion viewers live*
raw last 3 months with rollins as champion has averaged *3.93 million viewers live*

anyways here are the live+ 3 day dvr viewership for the last few weeks from pwtorch


----------



## DJHJR86

validreasoning said:


> raw last 3 months with rollins as champion has averaged *3.93 million viewers live*


:Cocky


----------



## LeveeBreaks

validreasoning said:


> the mark warfare over who is and who isn't drawing is hilarious
> 
> here are the real facts..*raws viewership went down the night after the belt was taken off of cena and put on lesnar and hasn't returned to the numbers post summerslam 14 since. lesnar or rollins as champion doesn't make a jot of difference*
> 
> raw first 3 months of 2015 with lesnar as champion averaged *4 milllion viewers live*
> raw last 3 months with rollins as champion has averaged *3.93 million viewers live*
> 
> anyways here are the live+ 3 day dvr viewership for the last few weeks from pwtorch
> ]


Which is exactly what you'd expect. Cena is easily the biggest draw on the roster. Brock's drawing power diminished greatly after his first two PPVs after his return. And Rollins has never shown any drawing power at any point in his career.

We really have enough evidence for Rollins' lack of drawing power (house show attendance, TV ratings, merch sales.)

BTW Brock not drawing on TV makes sense. He doesn't do shit most of the time.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

SóniaPortugal said:


> WWE is dying :crying:
> It is the result of not listening to the public :frown2:


Typical internet fans' logic. 

WWE pushes your favourite star? Well it rocks:cheer

WWE pushes 'the real deal'? It sucks, it is dying, hilarious:lmao


Don't worry lady, WWE won't die, even if they don't push your favourite stars:vince5


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Boots2Asses said:


> Typical internet fans' logic.
> 
> WWE pushes your favourite star? Well it rocks:cheer
> 
> WWE pushes 'the real deal'? It sucks, it is dying, hilarious:lmao
> 
> 
> Don't worry lady, WWE won't die, even if they don't push your favourite stars:vince5


"Typical internet fans" ... who is not this in the Internet Age?

You do not know me if you say this
If "the real deal" result in ratings and sales, I accept perfectly
But this time the "the real deal" are failing.
I love Rollins, but his reign is being super repetitive
He also does not have Faces to "fight" or rather he has but WWE insists depush these Faces


----------



## StraightYesSociety

validreasoning said:


> Raw finished 2nd, 3rd and 4th in the cable top 25 for last week


Somewhere Billionaire Ted smiled that TNT beat Vince again.


----------



## BOOTS 2 ASSES

SóniaPortugal said:


> "Typical internet fans" ... who is not this in the Internet Age?
> 
> You do not know me if you say this
> If "the real deal" result in ratings and sales, I accept perfectly
> But this time the "the real deal" are failing.
> I love Rollins, but his reign is being super repetitive
> He also does not have Faces to "fight" or *rather he has* but WWE insists depush these* Faces*


So in other words either push Dean Ambrose or die?:ambrose


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Boots2Asses said:


> So in other words either push Dean Ambrose or die?:ambrose


Again to draw conclusions without knowing me
Yes I am Dean Ambrose fan, but I was speaking in general
WWE currently do not have a Face to Rollins.

*Lesnar: *he is temporary

*Roman:* people prefer Rollins

*Ambrose, Ziggler:* apparently without direction

*John Cena: *is busy with USA title

*Orton: *is on vacation


----------



## Starbuck

People still arguing Ambrose is a draw? :lol

Brock Lesnar doesn't draw any more? :lol

No Authority promo to start the show and the first hour is abysmal? :lol

Somebody get our lord and saviour :rock4 on the phone please.


----------



## CmPunk=GOD

Dis fucking thread.

2015 and there is still people enough stupid to think there are wrestlers capable to move the WWE viewership significantly. 

:maury


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Somebody get our lord and saviour :rock4 on the phone please.


They did, but he arrived a couple nights early.


----------



## ellthom

SóniaPortugal said:


> WWE is dying :crying:
> It is the result of not listening to the public :frown2:


WWE will never listen to us, their viewership could be down to 1, and they still wouldn't understand that!


----------



## Chrome

#BadNewsSanta said:


> They did, but he arrived a couple nights early.


If only Rock was in DC. :frown2:


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Really
Awful
Wrestling


----------



## Empress

*WWE RAW Viewership Down Again for This WeekWWE RAW Viewership Down Again for This Week*
By Marc Middleton
Jun 30, 2015 - 4:22:51 PM

- Monday's episode of WWE RAW, featuring Seth Rollins and Kane vs. Roman Reigns and Dean Ambrose in a No DQ main event, drew 3.462 million viewers. This is down from last week's 3.670 million viewers.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.362 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.544 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.482 million viewers.

RAW was #3 for the night behind Street Outlaws and Love & Hip-Hop.

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...ek.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


----------



## A-C-P

I mean I know this thread is all about over reacting and putting WAY to much stock in the ratings #s , but I am legitimately wondering at what point will a # concern the WWE and/or USA enough to cause some major changes?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE




----------



## Louaja89

That show didn't deserve more viewers than that.


----------



## Empress

A-C-P said:


> I mean I know this thread is all about over reacting and putting WAY to stock in the ratings #s , but I am legitimately wondering at what point will a # concern the WWE and/or USA enough to cause some major changes?


At this point, I think the WWE is all about the bottom line and the bare minimum of viewers. If they hit those, they seem to think they're in the clear.

Last night's show was below standards. It deserves the low rating but something needs to be done going forward. 

If I were booking the WWE, I'd make this the summer of Ambrose and give him the belt. I'm not saying that he will bring the ratings back up. No one person can really do that but at least you have a fresh storyline in place. Seth Rollins & The Authority angle is beating a dead horse. I'm glad the WWE is booking Rollins as a strong heel but there needs to be a strong face in contrast. Reigns is regrouping himself and Ambrose has the best reactions consistently. Just give him a title run and see what happens.


----------



## A-C-P

Crazy Eyes said:


> At this point, I think the WWE is all about the bottom line and the bare minimum of viewers. If they hit those, they seem to think they're in the clear.
> 
> Last night's show was below standards. It deserves the low rating but something needs to be done going forward.
> 
> If I were booking the WWE, I'd make this the summer of Ambrose and give him the belt. I'm not saying that he will bring the ratings back up. No one person can really do that but at least you have a fresh storyline in place. Seth Rollins & The Authority angle is beating a dead horse. I'm glad the WWE is booking Rollins as a strong heel but there needs to be a strong face in contrast. Reigns is regrouping himself and Ambrose has the best reactions consistently. Just him a run and see what happens.


There is not ONE thing the WWE can do to immediately improve things, it is going to take some MAJOR over haul in the way the show is presented on the whole, not just a change in the "major players"

But giving Ambrose the run as the "top face" that he has earned IMO would be a good start.

And as rosy of a picture they like to paint in regards to their network #s , I am thinking those are following these ratings #s somewhat to.


----------



## Fandangohome

Here's an idea, whilst the ratings suck, why not take a chance on someone they ordinarily wouldn't push?


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Dean Ambrose with a strong image the ratings are good, but when WWE starts depush Dean Amborse the ratings fall
Happen the same last year
Coincidence or not, but it did happen and is happening


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Meh, they deserve that for the overall shit show we got (with Cesaro/Cena being the only saving grace), on top of advertising a main event match that we've seen countless times already.

Edit: _Wait, sorry, forgot my gimmick. Ahem... _Reigns gets put in a main event that's advertised up to wazoo, numbers drop to the lowest of lows. Coincidence? I think not. Solution? Never have Reigns main event again and we'll be all good.


----------



## Marv95

Crazy Eyes said:


> At this point, I think the WWE is all about the bottom line and the bare minimum of viewers. If they hit those, they seem to think they're in the clear.
> 
> Last night's show was below standards. It deserves the low rating but something needs to be done going forward.
> 
> If I were booking the WWE, I'd make this the summer of Ambrose and give him the belt. I'm not saying that he will bring the ratings back up. No one person can really do that but at least you have a fresh storyline in place. Seth Rollins & The Authority angle is beating a dead horse. I'm glad the WWE is booking Rollins as a strong heel but there needs to be a strong face in contrast. Reigns is regrouping himself and Ambrose has the best reactions consistently. Just give him a title run and see what happens.


Or have Reigns turn heel between BG and Summerslam, have him beat Lesnar for the title in some screwy fashion at SS, then he and Ambrose can feud for the belt during the fall. Take Rollins off TV after his unofficial face turn in August. But yeah the show needs an overhaul and as stupid as it sounds one of the other things they can do is slowly change back to TV-14 DLV, have it enforced and stick to it.


----------



## Tardbasher12

Announcing shitty main event = bad idea.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

The entire show needs an revamp, ITS TIME TO SHAKE THINGS UP A BIT. Where are ya hiding Vince?!

It's not fair to blame one guy when everything sucks and the storylines suck. Rollins isn't booking himself to be a dorky chickenshit with the Authority for a year. The group needs to go. Big Show, Kane and Henry need to go. Stale midcard acts that haven't changed in over 5 years need to go- Good bye Ziggler and Sheamus. Show something, evolve, change, or gtfo.

For every hit like Owens we can 2 hours of filler stale trash. Oh yeah that's another problem. 3 hours of wrestling is to much even for the most diehard fans.


----------



## LOL-ins

*How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

Isn't it a lot fucking worse? Shouldn't we be calling it Seth "2.2" Rollins.


----------



## Dark Paladin

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*






On a serious note, even when he was in his prime (in terms of popularity), he was never marketed as the main attraction. You can't really blame Punk if Vince had a preference towards Cena throughout his main event run + tenure with WWE.


----------



## funnyfaces1

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

It's something that is seriously beyond me. Punk got a lot of undeserved crap regarding ratings back in 2012, even though based on segment ratings he was the biggest draw on the active roster. Three years later, people realize that it can and will get worse, even when guys like HHH, The Rock, and Brock Lesnar make appearances.


----------



## LordKain

It wouldn't shock me if next weeks ratings are even lower then this weeks ratings are.

The product's unwatchable and the fans in attendance as well as the viewers watching at home have just given up on things getting any better at this point and have began leaving in doves with no intention of ever coming back either.


----------



## BeastIncarnate

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

This week's RAW didn't get a 2.2.

"Monday's June 29 edition of WWE Raw scored a* 2.51* rating, down from the 2.63 rating the show drew last. Raw averaged 3.462 million viewers, down from the 3.670 million average from last week."


----------



## MELTZERMANIA

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

Double standards.


----------



## Dub J

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

Because Seth is an entertaining heel and Punk pretty much relied on worked shoots?


----------



## Marv95

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*



BeastIncarnate said:


> This week's RAW didn't get a 2.2.
> 
> "Monday's June 29 edition of WWE Raw scored a* 2.51* rating, down from the 2.63 rating the show drew last. Raw averaged 3.462 million viewers, down from the 3.670 million average from last week."


Yeah judging from the numbers in the other thread that's about right. Still not good. And it's not even NFL season.


----------



## Shadowcran

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

Blaming one person for bad ratings is just lazy. 

The entire show is shit, you could have God and Allah booked in a winner takes over the earth match, but if the rest of the show is Big Slow/Mark Henry types, nobody is going to give a rat's ass.


----------



## Simpsons Modern Life

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

You think that's bad I was just laid in bed and heard a random fart noise, I don't whether to laugh or be scared as hell!!! lol


----------



## Empress

LordKain said:


> I wouldn't be shocked if next week's Raw the ratings are even lower.


If they put on another crap show, they deserve it. And bringing Brock back every few weeks for a bounce in the ratings isn't helping the situation. The WWE should want consistent ratings, not a shot in the arm that only lasts a week. Even the Wrestlemania bump was short lived.

The WWE has the talent to make for a better product; creative is failing them. Cena/Owens is an example of what they're doing right. But I'm at a loss as to how you start off a show with a promo that dragged and then follow it up with a random Big Show/Mark Henry match. Henry still has one epic heel run left in him. He shouldn't be a jobber. 

And whether one finds Orton boring or not, he's still one of the top guys. Make him matter. He doesn't need to hold the WWE title, but have him legitimize the IC belt. 

Something needs to drastically happen in the next few weeks. Rollins loses the belt, Ambrose is pushed as the #1 face or Reigns turns heel. If the WWE really had a set, all of these things would happen all at once. The overall show is in desperate need of a creative overhaul.


----------



## Marv95

2.51. Lowest non-holiday Raw rating since October 2012(2.49). And it ain't even NFL season.

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_85947.shtml


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

LOLWWE. They have some balls to announce that "main event" late last week (Friday, I think it was?) like they are actually proud of it and wanted to advertise it like it's something to be proud of. Fuck ratings. As long as WWE keeps giving us tag team main events every fucking week, I want them to go bankrupt, nevermind bad ratings, because apparently they can still stay afloat with bad ratings, unfortunately.


----------



## Empress

They're showing a rerun of RAW on USA now. Does this count for ratings or something?


----------



## VitoCorleone

Nobody should blame Seth Rollins for that shitty ratings..
He is a really good in ring worker that even if he would be Face deliver a 5 Star Match. His Mic Skills are also awesome.

First of all Brock Lesnar didnt had a appearance in this show. I saw enough guys that didnt watched Raw because Lesnar didnt appear.
He draws people thats not a secret anymore. But i seen on german forums these comments "Lesnar will not appear in the show well i will not watch this show live" Lesnar draws.

Then you had this shitty main event with Ambrose,Reigns,Kane & Rollins. We know that bunch of people dont even tune in to Raw because they have enough of this Reigns & Ambrose Team Up & Kane in the Man Event at the End of every Raw. By the Way we allready saw this match up several times on SmackDown & Raw. Why should people tune in in this match? Nobody Cares.
And a No DQ Match with tagging makes this Match more shit than it already is. Nosense!

Then you have this no sense matches like Barrett vs Swagger or Henry vs Show the 1846th. Why should i watch this? would be the question. For me these are the perfect matches for a Superstars Taping and i think some people will even agree with me.

The openning segment was for me entertaining. It was awesome but i can agree if you dont like this because this segment didnt help to build the Feud against Lesnar and was just a product placement. But Rollins made a good job there.

You should expect a bad rating if you book nosense matches that nobody care a main event that you allready seen and having enough of it. Plus No Orton No Lesnar. No cant blame Rollins.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

Blaming ratings on one person never makes sense.

Its just what haters do to justify their hate for a character or performer.

Doesn't matter if its Punk, Cena, Reigns, Rollins, the Gobbledy Shockmaster(fusion HA);a show's ratings relies on millions and millions of factors.


----------



## OwenSES

The booking/writing just is not good enough. It doesn't matter if it's Rollins, Ambrose, Lesnar or Reigns as champion the ratings would still down


----------



## BK Festivus

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

I actually didn't watch last night because the shows have been so dull lately. Even when there's an awesome segment or match like Cena vs Cesaro, I still didn't watch because RAW hasn't been interesting. My point is that the show quality as a whole needs to improve and 1-2 people shouldn't ever be held responsible for ratings. When the entire show is of good quality, people will have more of a desire to tune in.


----------



## Gretchen

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

People that call him CM "2.2" Punk are retards.

Just like everyone that likes to attribute shitty ratings to the champ rather than the piss poor quality of the show.


----------



## RatedR10

Once upon a time people on this board were calling CM Punk a ratings killer because shows with him as champ had 2.5 - 2.8 ratings going head-to-head with Monday Night Football.

Here we are in the summer. No competition, no nothing, we should be passed the Wrestlemania lull...instead, it's a sinking ship and there's seemingly nothing to plug the hole. And this is not on one superstar. It's not on Rollins, Reigns, Ambrose just like it wasn't on Punk back then. This is on the writing and the product itself. It's the same pattern as 2012 when Punk was champ and it's the same now. Nothing has changed, and people have finally had enough.

It's time for WWE to completely change the way they do TV, whether it's overhauling creative or Vince resigning from the creative aspect and focusing on the business side of things while HHH takes over creatively. Something has to change.


----------



## LordKain

Who's going to want to still around and watch a product in which the heels win all time? Not to many people will. Yet do Vince, Dunn Triple H or Stephanie realise this? No they don't and until they do (which will likely be never) things will only continue to get worse.


----------



## Chrome

Marv95 said:


> 2.51. Lowest non-holiday Raw rating since October 2012(2.49). And it ain't even NFL season.
> 
> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_85947.shtml


Feels like every week they're setting a record. :lol

Wait 'til football season gets here. bama4


----------



## Loader230

*WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

*WWE Raw TV Ratings*

_-- June 30: Monday's WWE Raw *scored a 2.51 rating.* 

*It was the lowest rating of the year. The previous low was a 2.50 rating on December 29 during the holiday season.*

For a regular episode of Raw, it was the lowest rating since a 2.49 rating in October 2012.


- Raw's product is not sticking with viewers from week-to-week, as WWE continued its first hour viewership issue...

Hourly Break Down: Raw opened soft with 3.362 million first hour viewers, increased to 3.544 million second hour viewers, and fell again to 3.482 million third hour viewers.

Overall, Raw averaged 3.462 million viewers, down 5.7 percent from last week. It was the fewest viewers of the year and fewest since nearly the exact same audience on Dec. 29.

- In the key demographics, Raw took a hit across the board. Raw's adults 18-49 rating covering male & female viewers fell to a two-month low, males 18-34 fell to a year low, and males 18-49 fell to a two month-low. _







All thanks to our dullest and the lowest drawing WWE champion.


----------



## Nine99

Cue Rollins evil cackle in your face please OP.


----------



## BrettSK

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Maybe if they booked him and everyone else to actually matter we wouldn't be having this constant discussion..


----------



## Frenetic

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Of course it's definitely Rollins... What a whole load of nonsense OP. What about factoring in that the main event on Raw was announced in advance? Tag team matches - especially ones involving Kane - are not interesting at all. The main problem is for me is that WWE simply does not know how to control Rollins' character. I mean, Rollins has been killing it on the mic - he's has mastered the art of mannerisms on WWE. He's clearly an elite level talent, but the way his character has been booked does not create compelling TV.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Well done Seth, you uncharismatic twat. And of course the rest of the goofs he hangs around with.

Do they have to get to the 1's before Vince realizes DEAN AMBROSE IS THE RIGHT CHOICE. You have failed with Reigns and you have failed with Rollins. Check behind door #3, idiot.


----------



## Armani

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

I mean the only good part of the show is the U.S. Title open challenge. The rest is the same dull show. Mainly because I hate all the 4 guys in the ME and I'm pretty sure a lot share that.


----------



## Jonasolsson96

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

I wouldnt put this on Rollins. The show as a whole just sucks. I can barely watch raw and finished this weeks episode in 40 min.


----------



## Frenetic

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> Well done Seth, you uncharismatic twat. And of course the rest of the goofs he hangs around with.
> 
> Do they have to get to the 1's before Vince realizes DEAN AMBROSE IS THE RIGHT CHOICE. You have failed with Reigns and you have failed with Rollins. Check behind door #3, idiot.


Again, this is pure nonsense. That's all that needs to be sad about your points.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

There's a ratings thread for this. On top of that, this just seems like a bait thread for Rollins marks anyway.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> Well done Seth, you uncharismatic twat. And of course the rest of the goofs he hangs around with.
> 
> Do they have to get to the 1's before Vince realizes DEAN AMBROSE IS THE RIGHT CHOICE. You have failed with Reigns and you have failed with Rollins. Check behind door #3 , idiot.


This.

Seth Rollins is the most overrated Wrestler in modern day wrestling. Offers absolutely NOTHING new, yet is treated as a big deal while beeing the worst member of the Shield with the least charisma and mic skills...and probably the smallest dick of the three.

But who needs a charismatic DA LOOK Reigns or awesome perfomer LUNATIC FRINGE when you can get this small dicked bitch boy. WWE has their blood on its own hands for choosing this guy as their "Nr.1 Guy". Seth Rollins was always the worst of the three. It's nice how he politicked out of giving Ambrose a reing...but I guess Ambrose wasn't to retarded enough to be WWE Champion as talent obviously gets minus points in modern WWE.

Reigns > Rollins

Amrbose > Rollins

Fact.


----------



## Captain Edd

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

How is it the lowest point if the ratings were worse in 2012?


----------



## Silver Spoon Mutha

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

I was annoyed at the wrestling interrupting the Apple and Cadillac advertisement show yesterday.


----------



## nwoblack/white

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

What? You mean to say raws highest rated hour was when they actually had on a fairly good match cena/ceasro? What? in ring product ruled the night? And here i thought people watched for the entertaining soap operas ie "sports entertainment"


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

It's all that evil Rollins fault!!! :rollins He is so ugly every time you put it on USA Network omg what is that file thing, ugh. 3 million viewers lost in one segment. Can't be that broadcast tv in general has declined about 15%. It is like in music, selling is based on a various things. No one consistently sells in the millions, Taylor even sold 25k last week in sales. So using Rollins as an argument as to why ratings are down is obsurd. Katy Perry could perform naked target the male demographic, ratings still woulden't move an inch, pardon the pun.


----------



## Lumpy McRighteous

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



> Raw's product is not sticking with viewers from week-to-week, as WWE *continued its first hour viewership issue...*


:vince6: "So after nearly 2 years, my audience _still_ doesn't appreciate 15-20 minute long promos involving my idiot daughter, doofus son-in-law, Big Red Retard in a suit and tie, vanilla midget security team and ball-less corporate champion?!? Well that settles it! DUNN! GET FLO RIDA OR FLORIDA-GEORGIA LINE ON THE PHONE AND TELL THEM THEY'VE GOT A CONCERT NEXT WEEK!"


----------



## SpeedStick

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

its the same show every week


----------



## CoolGuy45

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Loudness said:


> This.
> 
> Seth Rollins is the most overrated Wrestler in modern day wrestling. Offers absolutely NOTHING new, yet is treated as a big deal while beeing the worst member of the Shield with the least charisma and mic skills...*and probably the smallest dick of the three.*
> 
> But who needs a charismatic DA LOOK Reigns or awesome perfomer LUNATIC FRINGE when you can get this *small dicked bitch boy*. WWE has their blood on its own hands for choosing this guy as their "Nr.1 Guy". Seth Rollins was always the worst of the three. It's nice how he politicked out of giving Ambrose a reing...but I guess Ambrose wasn't to retarded enough to be WWE Champion as talent obviously gets minus points in modern WWE.
> 
> Reigns > Rollins
> 
> Amrbose > Rollins
> 
> Fact.


Still way longer than yours. Have wrestling fans really gotten to the point where they insult the wrestler's penis size? Sad, sad times man.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

LMAO at butthurt Rollins fanboys.

It's a fact that if he'd have lost to Ambrose that ratings would have gone up because a real man with charisma that actually attracts fanbases would have gotten people to turn in. B-but...you got Seth Rollins. Everybody wants to watch Ambrose, nobody wants to listen to this high pitched narrow shouldered bitch boy...that's a fact. He can shove himself and his 190lbs outta the door.

Instead of going for The Look (Reigns) or Talent (Ambrose) they went with the shittiest guy of the three. I wonder how many dicks he sucked to get to his position cause he's far away from beeing better than either guy.


----------



## RyanPelley

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

People still faulting an entire poorly written program on a poorly booked champion. People tune in for only the champion, right?


----------



## Jingoro

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*



Dub J said:


> Because Seth is an entertaining heel and Punk pretty much relied on worked shoots?


worked shoots are entertaining aren't they? the segment with seth giving gifts to all his authority buddies was so bad it was almost good, but still probably the worst raw segment of 2015. 

i reflexively put my hand over my face and watched it through my fingers cuz it was so horrible.


----------



## Solf

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Loudness said:


> probably the smallest dick of the three.



What a mindblowing point. So this was the key to all the drawing problems no one had figured until now...

Push Johnny Sins.

That said, looking forward to your next "pussy dick dick cock pussy dick *** fuck dick cock pussy bitch cock" post, I'm sure it will be interesting as always.


----------



## HHHbkDX

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

It's not just Rollins. Literally EVERYTHING about this garbage ass product is sleep inducing. They just don't give a fuck anymore. Even the segments/matches with wrestlers worth giving a damn about are boring because of dull, pointless, and stupid booking. WWE realizes that they can give even less than a half-assed effort and still remain profitable enough to stay on television.


----------



## Dub J

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*



Jingoro said:


> worked shoots are entertaining aren't they? the segment with seth giving gifts to all his authority buddies was so bad it was almost good, but still probably the worst raw segment of 2015.
> 
> i reflexively put my hand over my face and watched it through my fingers cuz it was so horrible.


One was and then he got stale. His promos were usually something about Chicago and going for cheap pops. Only time I really liked Punk was back in his SES days.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



RyanPelley said:


> People still faulting an entire poorly written program on a poorly booked champion. People tune in for only the champion, right?


FACT- An entirely poor written run with Ambrose - Ratings

An entirely poor written run with Reings - Ratings

An enterily poor written run with Rollins - Shit Ratings.

People need to accept that he's the worst, least talented and inferior member of the three. While Reigns and Ambrose have increased ratings for their segments, Rollins was concentrating on bringing the low. Ambrose could hold a fart and still have better reactions than Rollins, because he's...better..and that's the truth.


----------



## nwoblack/white

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

What makes me laugh is ROH and TNA's rating are going UP.

not a tna fan really but there GAINING VIEWERS on a obscure channels. ROH is as well. ROH ROH ROH...EAT SHIT WWE FANBOYS...your comic book sports entertainment is dying.


----------



## redapple

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Raw is too long with so much fuller and ads. A 2 hour show and cut the shit would be better.


----------



## MELTZERMANIA

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

It's not Rollins, it's the whole entire show. It's stale. The Authority angle jus played out. Can't blame one person for all 3 hours, you just can't.


----------



## RyanPelley

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Loudness said:


> FACT- An entirely poor written run with Ambrose - Ratings
> 
> An entirely poor written run with Reings - Ratings
> 
> An enterily poor written run with Rollins - Shit Ratings.
> 
> People need to accept that he's the worst, least talented and inferior member of the three. While Reigns and Ambrose have increased ratings for their segments, Rollins was concentrating on bringing the low. Ambrose could hold a fart and still have better reactions than Rollins, because he's...better..and that's the truth.


I accept that you think he's the worst and least talented member. Opinions.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Solf said:


> What a mindblowing point. So this was the key to all the drawing problems no one had figured until now...
> 
> Push Johnny Sins.
> 
> That said, looking forward to your next "pussy dick dick cock pussy dick *** fuck dick cock pussy bitch cock" post, I'm sure it will be interesting as always.


The fact that this part of my post insulted you reflects a lot about you.



RyanPelley said:


> I accept that you think he's the worst and least talented member. Opinions.


I can agree with that. Who do you like the most? Ambrose? I think he's the most fit to beeing the WWE WHC.


----------



## Hatsune Miku

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

Why is everybody taking the piss on Rollins? First off ratings doesnt mean anything in this day and age as nobody but certain people are draws. Secondly why blame Rollins just because of RAW getting 2.5 ratings? That logic makes no sense. You cant blame ONE guy just because the ratings dipped below average, even if he's the he's the wwe/whc holder. Blame the bookers for booking such lazy and terrible shows instead of pointing the blame on one guy saying "see!? RAW sucks because of Rollins! He's responsible for RAW being terrible"
Give me a break will ya?

You Rollins haters are grasping at straws and just blame any little thing that happens on Rollins that Its sad. RAW always been bad for years no matter Whos on top with the title. So unless the bookers make a competent show that doesn't put me to sleep at times then maybe the ratings will go up.


----------



## #Mark

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

Because people don't know much about ratings.


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

Rollins isn't that bad..

All they need to do is actually book a good show from top to bottom, that's why they are there every week but y'know fuck the audience.


----------



## From Death Valley

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Is not Rollins 

People are tired of the fucking shiity booking and fuck shit shenanigans shiity writing and mother fucking bitch ass cena the authority old ass Kane and fat ass bitch big show people wants to see Bray Cesaro Rusev Dean Tyson Kidd Hell I'll even throw Ziggler and swagger there to get their time to shine.

The attitude era had fuck shit like x pac and they had a strong rating they're tired of seeing this shit every authority storyline has been the same since Rollins became champion they don't know how to book him anymore so the story line goes new challenger gets beat up by JnJ and Kane fight the odds and loses to Rollins.

And cena does not need an explanation everyone knows fuck boy cena.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

Because Punk haters never were the sharpest tools in the shed. Rollins haters aren't much better it seems because blaming him for these bad ratings is silly too. And fwiw, I've seen plenty of people on here bash Rollins for the bad ratings, so he's definitely some getting backlash for it even though it's not his fault.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

The idea that a 2.2 rating is Punks or Rollins fault is kinda obsurd. It is not the reflection of who is the champ, but the overall quality of the product. People praised Punk in 2012, had a 5 star match with Cena at MITB. But ratings were no different they are now. Why? Because ratings are subjective. It is all programming. It all depends on what is on the other network. The Big Bang Theory and Walking Dead are really the only shows that can garner regular 3.0's. This does not mean WWE is at an all time low, just sign of the times. It is all relative. In 2000 Rock had the highest rated raw segment even to this day with This is Your Life. The one with Cena was the lowest rated ever. Does that mean Rock is better then Cena? YES lol. But not neccssarily, it is all subjective.


----------



## RyanPelley

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Loudness said:


> I can agree with that. Who do you like the most? Ambrose? I think he's the most fit to beeing the WWE WHC.


I like Rollins the most, but I still like Ambrose a lot. I think the problem with Rollins right now is the dull Authority segments. I mean, I find enjoyment in them, but they are so redundant and dull that I can see why people are tuning out. The general formula of Raw is the exact same. Authority stuff, Kane vs. Ambrose / Reigns, Big Show vs. Ambrose / Reigns, backstage Authority stuff, Kane interference, etc.

Ambrose is booked like shit despite people liking him. Him chasing the Title is enough to gain viewership, which I believe it did (I'm not one for the ratings discussion, so I really don't know for certain). 

I think Ambrose chasing title - eventually winning title - Rollins chasing - maybe swap a few times would be fresh enough to pull viewers, because it wouldn't be the same stupid ass formulaic bullshit that we get every week. I mean, it sounds more appealing than what we get now. I feel like Rollins would be more appealing to most people with an angle that's actually refreshing and well done (Ambrose).


----------



## Loudness

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



RyanPelley said:


> I like Rollins the most, but I still like Ambrose a lot. I think the problem with Rollins right now is the dull Authority segments. I mean, I find enjoyment in them, but they are so redundant and dull that I can see why people are tuning out. The general formula of Raw is the exact same. Authority stuff, Kane vs. Ambrose / Reigns, Big Show vs. Ambrose / Reigns, backstage Authority stuff, Kane interference, etc.
> 
> Ambrose is booked like shit despite people liking him. Him chasing the Title is enough to gain viewership, which I believe it did (I'm not one for the ratings discussion, so I really don't know for certain).
> 
> I think Ambrose chasing title - eventually winning title - Rollins chasing - maybe swap a few times would be fresh enough to pull viewers, because it wouldn't be the same stupid ass formulaic bullshit that we get every week. I mean, it sounds more appealing than what we get now. I feel like Rollins would be more appealing to most people with an angle that's actually refreshing and well done (Ambrose).


I agree.

The wrestlers today...Rollins is a prime example. I think'k he presented as bad...and because of that I don't wanna present myself like that.


----------



## Solf

Loudness said:


> The fact that this part of my post insulted you reflects a lot about you


Don't worry, it didn't insult me as much as it did my intelligence.


----------



## ONEWAY

The problem is not only do they not exactly deliver "must see TV", but people have the option more than ever these days to skip weeks and not miss much.

I used to be pissed back in the day if I missed a week of Raw (before DVR days), but now I can miss 2 or 3 consecutive Raws, maybe even a B Pay Per View, and not feel like I missed much.

Maybe part of the reason many like myself feel like this is technology. Back in the Attitude Era and Monday Night Wars, if you missed Raw/Nitro, it sucked because you had no DVR, taping it on VHS was a chore, and there was no YouTube or whatever to fall back on the next days to see what you missed. You missed it, you went to school the next day, and it sucked balls hearing your friends talking about some of the awesome segments that happened. 

These days you miss a week, nothing cool happened, no big deal. Something cool happens, no big deal either, you just watch your DVR that week or find it online (i.e Cena vs Cesaro match).

Not saying the product can't improve, because holy F, can it ever. But living in times where you have the option to miss something and scout it out later if need be sure helps decline the viewership. I do agree with previously mentioned week after week seing like the same exact show, that gets kind of annoying.


----------



## LordKain

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



RyanPelley said:


> I like Rollins the most, but I still like Ambrose a lot. I think the problem with Rollins right now is the dull Authority segments. I mean, I find enjoyment in them, but they are so redundant and dull that I can see why people are tuning out. The general formula of Raw is the exact same. Authority stuff, Kane vs. Ambrose / Reigns, Big Show vs. Ambrose / Reigns, backstage Authority stuff, Kane interference, etc.
> 
> Ambrose is booked like shit despite people liking him. Him chasing the Title is enough to gain viewership, which I believe it did (I'm not one for the ratings discussion, so I really don't know for certain).
> 
> I think Ambrose chasing title - eventually winning title - Rollins chasing - maybe swap a few times would be fresh enough to pull viewers, because it wouldn't be the same stupid ass formulaic bullshit that we get every week. I mean, it sounds more appealing than what we get now. I feel like Rollins would be more appealing to most people with an angle that's actually refreshing and well done (Ambrose).


The problem is they'll never give Ambrose a proper run with the title regardless because Vince doesn't see anything in him and Triple H is far too arrogant and stubborn to ever admit that he failed with his golden boys.

I'm a fan of all three of those guys but they were all pushed too soon and far too fast as well and unfortunately now their all paying them price for it when the real blame should be put on HHH, Dunn, Stephanie and Vince themselves.


----------



## Pronoss

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Move back to edgier adult content and watch ratings soar!

It's not a sponsors thing as they have exact same sponsors as tv-ma series on AMC in Sunday evening timeslots.


16-40 want adult content, that's why shows like Breaking Bad, Dexter, Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, The Tudors, House of Cards, Orange is New Black, Battlestar Galactica, True Blood, Boardwalk Empire, Attack on Titan, etc all are award winning highest rated shows


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

They will just pay Brock more money. :vince


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

:lmao


and nba nfl etc are all done 


wwe sucks lol


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

Its a different time in WWE now.


----------



## mezomi

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

This is not the fucking fault of anyone on the roster. No fucking change in the champion would changes this This show has no sense of direction, no character progression no damn storytelling, and no reason to even watch it unless you enjoy commercials. Every damn show on television is more professional and worthwhile of your time. All of the soul and excitement of Raw just disappeared. Ever show is the same as the last and every feud is the same as the last. Nothing ever changes and we are about to get a Sheamus championship run. Raw opens with a 20 minute same old shit authority promo every week setting up a same old shit main event every week. Ambrose, Rollins, Stone Cold, Brock Lesnar, Kevin Owens, Daniel Bryan, CM Punk or even the Rock would not be able to same this shit. Its not about pushes or who is the champion or who gets TV time. If this company was anywhere near competent they could succeed with any roster. Look at Lucha Underground. They took a bunch of jobbers and unknowns and made a must watch show that could even be nominated for an Emmy. It's pathetic that a billion dollar corporation cannot do the same. Everything this company does now is shit, even NXT which is only tolerable because it is one hour and the novelty of watching the future (the specials are amazing though). This company does not get that less and less people will watch this shit since it is nearly impossible to gain fans with this product. They may have had a successful quarter recently, but, sooner or later they will begin an irreversible decline that will destroy the entire damn business if they don't change their entire damn show and change people's perceptions. They cant copy the past either so don't start with that trashy Attitude Era shit. WE NEED SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

I got bored. It's still very true.


----------



## CmPunk=GOD

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

These called Punk haters are hilarious, they didn't blame Cena, that was the one taking the spotlight and drawing shitty overruns, they blame Punk because he was the champ when he wasn't even the main focus of the show.

Dumb motherfuckers.. But what you can't expect of someone who hates the GOAT?


----------



## The One Man Gang

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

right, the reason Raw sucks now is because of who is carrying around a scripted championship belt and nothing to do with the lack of entertaining story lines.


----------



## NasNYG567

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

I've never understood why the champion should be praised/blamed for good/bad ratings, 90% of people will tune in for more than one person


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

I don't know because nothing draws well at Christmas, not to mention they are ALL IN on Seth Rollins, whereas they didn't even half ass Punk's title reign, they quarter assed it and had Cena as the main focus. He's the one that deserves all the blame. 

That's WWE for you, though, they're not a business. Punk outsells Cena in merchandise, they immediately cut back on Punk merchandise so that he can't. Seth Rollins tanks in the ratings during a perfectly viable time of the year, consistently, they pat him on the head and say good job.


----------



## rocknblues81

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Loudness said:


> LMAO at butthurt Rollins fanboys.
> 
> It's a fact that if he'd have lost to Ambrose that ratings would have gone up because a real man with charisma that actually attracts fanbases would have gotten people to turn in. B-but...you got Seth Rollins. Everybody wants to watch Ambrose, nobody wants to listen to this high pitched narrow shouldered bitch boy...that's a fact. He can shove himself and his 190lbs outta the door.
> 
> Instead of going for The Look (Reigns) or Talent (Ambrose) they went with the shittiest guy of the three. I wonder how many dicks he sucked to get to his position cause he's far away from beeing better than either guy.


I hate his terribly fake laugh.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

I've not been a fan of Rollins since Mania but pinning the ENTIRE blame on him is completely asinine. I agree he deserves a lot but not acknowledging the other factors that make up a show denies everything else that people either don't enjoy or pay to see. The WWF wouldn't have drawn as much as it did during the AE without their supplementary characters. Likewise, no one wanted to see the Godwinns, Jeff Jarrett, Mabel, or Duke Drese in '95 no matter how much Bret was keeping things just a bit above water.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*



CmPunk=GOD said:


> These called Punk haters are hilarious, they didn't blame Cena, that was the one taking the spotlight and drawing shitty overruns, they blame Punk because he was the champ when he wasn't even the main focus of the show.
> 
> Dumb motherfuckers.. But what you can't expect of someone who hates the *GOAT?*


Yeah nah coming from a Punk Mark I can't take your biast seriousley lol.


----------



## deathslayer

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Well let's see... Authority to open show with long segment, 2 on show product placements, random Hawaii celebration, big show vs mark Henry as opening match.

Lowest ratings? No shit.


----------



## JimCornette

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

"Let's give Sheamus a title run, that will increase the ratings":HHH2

"Good idea":vince


----------



## Kabraxal

Chrome said:


> Feels like every week they're setting a record. :lol
> 
> Wait 'til football season gets here. bama4


Should I feel bad I'm looking forward to the slaughter and the shadow of death hanging over this shit company?


----------



## Chrome

Kabraxal said:


> Should I feel bad I'm looking forward to the slaughter and the shadow of death hanging over this shit company?


With the shows they've been putting on lately, not one bit.


----------



## hbgoo1975

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



mezomi said:


> This is not the fucking fault of anyone on the roster. No fucking change in the champion would changes this This show has no sense of direction, no character progression no damn storytelling, and no reason to even watch it unless you enjoy commercials. Every damn show on television is more professional and worthwhile of your time. All of the soul and excitement of Raw just disappeared. Ever show is the same as the last and every feud is the same as the last. Nothing ever changes and we are about to get a Sheamus championship run. Raw opens with a 20 minute same old shit authority promo every week setting up a same old shit main event every week. Ambrose, Rollins, Stone Cold, Brock Lesnar, Kevin Owens, Daniel Bryan, CM Punk or even the Rock would not be able to same this shit. Its not about pushes or who is the champion or who gets TV time. If this company was anywhere near competent they could succeed with any roster. Look at Lucha Underground. They took a bunch of jobbers and unknowns and made a must watch show that could even be nominated for an Emmy. It's pathetic that a billion dollar corporation cannot do the same. Everything this company does now is shit, even NXT which is only tolerable because it is one hour and the novelty of watching the future (the specials are amazing though). This company does not get that less and less people will watch this shit since it is nearly impossible to gain fans with this product. They may have had a successful quarter recently, but, sooner or later they will begin an irreversible decline that will destroy the entire damn business if they don't change their entire damn show and change people's perceptions. They cant copy the past either so don't start with that trashy Attitude Era shit. WE NEED SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
> 
> I got bored. It's still very true.


That's save this shit, not same.


----------



## hbgoo1975

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Pronoss said:


> Move back to edgier adult content and watch ratings soar!
> 
> It's not a sponsors thing as they have exact same sponsors as tv-ma series on AMC in Sunday evening timeslots.
> 
> 
> 16-40 want adult content, that's why shows like Breaking Bad, Dexter, Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, The Tudors, House of Cards, Orange is New Black, Battlestar Galactica, True Blood, Boardwalk Empire, Attack on Titan, etc all are award winning highest rated shows


Would they rather have John Cena rape Stephanie McMahon? Kevin Dunn sexually molest Paige? Would they prefer A fat slob screaming like Mariah Carey in his underwear while CRAP falls form the ceiling?!


----------



## mezomi

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



hbgoo1975 said:


> That's save this shit, not same.


I'm assuming you are referring to the Attitude Era comment. If so, here is my refute.

I will not deny that going back to that would be fun to watch. It would not be good as the writing team would remain the same but that's besides the point. The Attitude Era was trashy as hell and would not appeal or be accepted by society today. Now, being edgy is what they really need to be, but not in the same way as before. They need to latch on to what actual popular TV shows are doing. Don't quote me on this because I am not the most "trendy" person, but more complex stories and realism seem to be popular now, so WWE needs to head in that direction. How? That is not my job. All I know is that the Attitude Era is passe just as the Golden Era was and I would say how modern WWE is but to be passe would mean this was popular at one point.


----------



## Bayley <3

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Without reading the entire thread, let me guess. 

OP is an Ambrose fanboy who thinks making him champ will magically boost ratings up by millions. 

The more I read delusional posts by Ambrose fanboys, the more I hope he never gets the title just to watch them lose their shit.


----------



## Hawkke

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> Well done Seth, you uncharismatic twat. And of course the rest of the goofs he hangs around with.
> 
> Do they have to get to the 1's before Vince realizes DEAN AMBROSE IS THE RIGHT CHOICE. You have failed with Reigns and you have failed with Rollins. Check behind door #3, idiot.


Sorry but I have to disagree, and not on any lack of merit on Dean's part to be perfectly fair. They can check behind a door that opens to a Super Wrestlerman made of a magical fusion of the best qualities of The Rock, Stone Cold, Carry Grant, Robin Williams and Hulk Hogan himself and it would be meaningless. Fully and utterly meaningless as it is now if they don't relearn booking 101 and starting writing compelling stories behind feuds and matches again.

Hell, something tells me Super Wrestlerman there would do the smart thing and punch his ticket to a movie career as soon as he could :lol


----------



## The Bloodline

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

It's the whole show. It's not fun. The continuity sucks. The booking for talent is very weak and inconsistent. No characters are really over and they make sure of it. The main event scene is boring and overdone. The authority breaking up is what's best.

Set up something special for the following Raw. Plan ahead of time. Hype up Raw for a change. I'm no workrate mark but damn, WWE may be putting out the worst actual wrestling quality. It's so rare that I'm impressed by a Raw match. I almost forgot weekly in ring stuff could be fun til i gave other companes a chance.. If they're not gonna focus on compelling stories and character development with promos let these guys get over with their in ring stuff. Every match is made to be so bland. Look how long it took for Cena to even be given permission to open up a little. Fans actually do like good matches.

All of that aside 3 hours of Raw is slowly killing them. It's simply too damn long for weekly television. To be fair, the show wouldn't be half as bad if it was 2 hours again. I really believe that.


----------



## FITZ

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

If I lived alone and didn't have family that liked watching Raw every week I wouldn't watch the show. I would get the Network, watch the specials and read the results or download the show and watch a few parts. I really don't know how people can sit through a 3 hours Raw at this point.


----------



## KingLobos

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Not surprising I haven't watched in at least a month. Nothing interests me. 

"But but but how about that five star classic between Cesaro and Cena guyzzz?"

:eyeroll YAWN.


----------



## sharkboy22

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Well that settles it. Rollins isn't a draw. Time to put the belt back on Cena.


----------



## #Mark

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Haven't watched an episode of RAW since a few weeks after Mania and it's precisely because of the ME scene. I don't care about the Authority, Rollins, or Ambrose. The only reason to tune in is for Cena/Owens and Brock but he rarely ever appears.


----------



## Rick_James

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

This just goes to show when the WWE caters to the noisy weirdo's that cheer for small guys, the ratings inevitably will suffer. Rollins isn't all bad, but let's face it, he's simply not champ material. You can't blame it *all* on him, but he does deserve a lot of it. I will say, he's not a natural talker, but he is doing about as well as you possibly can, but it obviously is not enough still. I rarely watch, but when I do, the show always opens up with him and the segments always end up being boring as hell. It doesn't help that he's paired up with J&J security (devoid of personality) and Kane (everyone is sick of him).


----------



## Sweettre15

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

As someone else said, it takes a major change in the shit product to increase the ratings. Some people here aren't the least bit subtle about the fact that they simply have an Anti-Rollins agenda and choose to blame shit all on him.

The fact of the matter is:

*- The format is tired and stale

- The angles are tired and stale

- The roster is creatively handcuffed and micromanage

- There is no true effort to maintaining a fluid continuity*

All of this needs to be changed for the product to get better ratings. No reason blaming one guy...I never blamed one guy for ratings going down and still won't because it just doesn't work that way, they are responsible for their individual segments, Merch sales, and house show business to an extent.

WWE could have built an all star team out of this roster but failed with their lack of effort, direction or willingness to change.


----------



## Chan Hung

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

They don't have MUST SEE Tv like they used to. They think we will enjoy the same recycled matches each Monday. To their credit, its hard to make things fresh each week, but that is what they are paid to do.


----------



## bipartisan101

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

People need to understand that this is ALWAYS the lowest point in the year for WWE. They hit two extremely low periods. One between MITB and Summerslam, the other between Night of Champions and Survivor Series. Yet despite this pattern, we always hear complaining every year that the champion is under-performing. Last year when numbers were bad at this time, people were using it as an "example" of how Cena's appeal has worn off.


----------



## BKendrickBestINTW

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Rollins has to drop the belt to Lesnar. Even though it will piss off some backstage, if you have Lesnar drop it to Reigns at SummerSlam, it could ease the tension somewhat. Politics suck.


----------



## Reign Man

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



KingLobos said:


> Not surprising I haven't watched in at least a month. Nothing interests me.
> 
> "But but but how about that five star classic between Cesaro and Cena guyzzz?"
> 
> :eyeroll YAWN.


But there were 18 pinfall attempts in that 16 minute match. There were even finisher kickouts. MATCH OF THE YEAR! MATCH OF THE YEAR! All credit goes to Cena because it's not WWE are putting Cena against the best wrestlers in the company and giving his matches more time than anybody else's just to make him look good.


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Don't even start with the Rollins bashing. It's a fucking 3-hour show and if you're lucky you might be entertained for 30-60 out of those 180 minutes every single week. The only thing I cared about last night was Cena vs. Cesaro, the rest of the show sucked and I didn't care about anything that happened. It's not all about who's the champ or who's in the main event. If they don't have enough interesting ideas to fill 3 hours every week (and they clearly don't), either get better writers or work out a deal with USA Network to cut the show back down to 2 hours in the near future. They better hope the die hard fans like myself don't start changing the channel, because if that happens they're in serious trouble.


----------



## Trifektah

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

This authority shit needs to end a fucking year ago. It is AWFUL.

How many times are they going to book Rollins/Ambrose/Reigns/Kane in fucking matches!?!?!

It's the same god damn show week after week after week. An 8 year old could write a better show than the shit they come up with.


----------



## Dargz

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Since the 3hour format I have never been able to sit through the entire show in saying that i also have not watched an episode in about a year. Very rarely will i read anything or hear of something that will make me want to watch a show.


----------



## Wildcat410

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

The product is utterly predictable. There are just not many compelling reasons to tune in.

The Authority angle has far overstayed it's welcome or purpose as well.


----------



## hopeful cubs fan

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

If you blame the ratings on one person then you're an idiot. FACT


----------



## domotime2

Anyone who blames one wrestler on TV ratings......just doesn't get it....or they're trolling for responses. I said this when Orton was champion, when Bryan was champion, when Lesnar was champion, and now when Rollins is champion. It's the overall product, not one guy.

Rollins is fulfilling his role PERFECTLY in my opinion....raw needs to stop being 3 hours and the WWE needs to come up with a new strategy to draw interest on a weekly basis.


----------



## RyanPelley

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

What are you talking about? Plenty of people are whining about Rollins already.


----------



## Monterossa

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

didn't they went down to 2.2 a few years ago? CM Punk must be the worst face of the company ever. oh wait... he is.


----------



## gabrielcev

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

I don't blame Rollins. I blame writers, bookers cough cough Vince.


----------



## PoppaDaddy

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Hopefully the writers and bookers see this and make some changes to the show.


----------



## FreakyZo

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Monterossa said:


> didn't they went down to 2.2 a few years ago? CM Punk must be the worst face of the company ever. oh wait... he is.


Yeah except he was a heel at the time during a Christmas Eve show that was taped which he was on for about 10mins max....try again.


----------



## Roho

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

There's just no one that anyone really wants to tune in and see. Aside from Lesnar and Cena, they have no stars and their biggest star is currently involved in a out-of-nowhere feud with some fat nobody who became the new internet darling. 

It's impossible to build new stars when the fans are clamoring for someone new to take the spot of the guy they were clamoring for a month prior...


----------



## jcmmnx

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

I think Rollins is a good performer, but he's grossly miscast as heel ace of the company. That role sucked when HHH did it, and he was actually a star. WWE has always been a babyface company, and they aren't going to turn things around bitching out Ambrose, Reigns, and Brock fucking Lesnar to the Authority geeks.


----------



## CoolGuy45

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

I always wonder how us wrestling fans/viewers can use drawing/ratings as fuel for our dislike of wrestlers. What, exactly, do ratings matter to us, the viewers. I am sick and tired of hearing "X doesn't draw so he shouldn't be champion." YOU'RE watching, therefore YOU have been drawn, so why do you care if other people watch. Maybe I didn't word that mini-rant very well but I'm very tired and this thread really got me going.


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

Yeah can't try to make excuses as to why it's dropping this bad. With no sports competition going against the show, it shouldn't be this low. The quality of the show has been bad lately and it has been a chore for me to watch lately.


----------



## krai999

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

I'm tired of pussy heel champions like rollins. Give us strongly booked heel like how Triple H was back in the day ffs.


----------



## Fandangohome

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*

If you put the belt on Ambrose, the ratings will increase for a week or 2 before they fall again. Same goes for Reigns. The Shield guys are overrated as singles performers, there's a reason they worked so well as a unit, they each hid each others flaws. Rollins could cover Ambrose and Reigns weaknesses in the ring, Ambrose could cover Rollins and Reigns lack of charisma, and Reigns, uh, well he has nice hair and gets women wet. 


If they'd tried to push each of the 3 while keeping the Shield active as a fallback option, it would have been better, and they may have built 3 stars in the progress, however, it's all gone tits up and none of the 3 are championship material right now. Just because Ambrose is over doesn't mean he's championship worthy, he's really bad in the ring to the point that the only good matches he has are with Rollins, who can cover him.

The most non-Cena championship-ready guys they have on the roster are Brock Lesnar and Kevin Owens, Brock has Heyman to draw people in, and then Brock can deliver, and Owens is totally compelling as a morally challenged family man. Brock's last run wasn't too bad, and Owens has been a draw in every indie promotion he's worked for.


----------



## Redzero

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

Blame the whole show.

The show atm is fucking terrible except for Owens.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*

^Yeah I don't get how anyone can logically blame one person for bad ratings, its all subjective. It was not Punks fault for the 2.2, and its not Rollins fault for 2.2 now. It was Rocks fault for the 5.0's haha but I degress.


----------



## The Bloodline

This is great news. I hope they continue losing more viewers til they go back to 2 hours and find a new damn approach. I keep watching cause I have a strong love for wwe but I can imagine many people aren't nearly as loyal to the product. Can't blame them eithe. I don't see how this program would appeal to anyone just starting out or trying to return


----------



## Lastier

*Re: How come CM Punk got shit for getting 2.2's for a Christmas shows yet Seth Rollins gets a 2.2 in June and no backlash?*



Redzero said:


> Blame the whole show.
> 
> The show atm is fucking terrible except for Owens.


This

It's basically a fill in the blanks show every week. They use the same script and only change up the wrestlers name.


----------



## Cliffy

People saying ratings aren't important are way off. USA has wwe on their network to help them make the number 1 network spot. They aren't in that spot anymore as the whole network average has gone down.

Seth isn't helping obviously but he's not the only reason ratings are going down. Cena not being on top is a massive factor.


----------



## Loudness

Solf said:


> Don't worry, it didn't insult me as much as it did my intelligence.


Yeah when rational Reigns/Ambrose fans come up with facts, just get personal. Do it passively agressively, because no balls to go all out.

Fact is Rollins charisma completely gets dwarfed by the alpha males. He is a hard worker, but he just doesn't stand out. He's just a normal guy that happens to be a good wrestler. Ambrose/Reigns on the other hand are real entertainers. You can listen any non-WWE interview with them and compare them to any random Rollins interview. They're naturally interesting people, and that's why they have so many people cheering for them, even if their ring skills aren't up to par. They bring the lulz all the time wheras Rollins has tio think hard and deep before he comes up with a witty line. 

Basically...Rollins is a B-Player, he is good, but only as long as you have the alpha male Ambrose and Reings standing in front of him. Without them he's useless. However Ambrose and Reigns can stand out by themselves due to their talent and alpha genetics and talent. Now I'm not saying it's his fault, he's a good jobber...but when it comes to real men he just doesn't compare to the charismatic, talkative wrestlers hence why he should take a backseat to his other former Shield members.

And this is why everybody tunes out when Rollins comes on. He just doesn't have it. You can have Rollins walking on one line of the street and Ambrose on the other and everybody will be looking at Ambrose. Why? He is just far more charismatic. There is nothing Rollins can do that will ever make him even half the man Ambrose is and ratings reflect that. This is the difference between an alpha male like Ambrose...somebody that inspires people and a beta male like Rollins, a guy that is born to be a follower.


----------



## Fandangohome

*Re: WWE officially hits its lowest point!*



Mer De Merde said:


> Wrong. Give the belt to Ambrose, let him cut *his own* promos with the same regularity that Rollins is currently getting, and watch the ratings increase significantly from Seth Rollins' reign of, eh... shitiness. Dean Ambrose reciting words that are his own - words they he actually believes in = Best promo guy in the company, not named Paul Heyman.
> 
> _________________________________
> 
> Go to youtube, type "jon moxley promo" or "Dean Ambrose FCW promo", then realize how insanely epic the dude can be!
> 
> And LOL at muppets who claim Kevin Owens is better. Just no, mate. Just no.


I've seen a lot of Jon Moxley, and even on his best day, he can't touch Heyman on the mic. And i find Owens/Steen's promos to be better than Ambrose/Moxley's. Moxley was _way_ too melodramatic for my taste, the material was good, but the delivery was hit or miss IMO. Plus he's a poor wrestler, and i like people who can wrestle. Owens can talk and wrestle.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

Sorry but Wrestlers is to blame about this too, they are the reason the people want to see WWE

Have no logic to blame only WWE writers

WWE is currently focusing on:

Seth Rollins and the Authority

Roman Reings vs Wyatt

Cena vs Owens

Cena vs Owens are those that attract more viewers, but the others are failing

Writers and Wrestlers (Rollins, Kane, Reigns and Wyatt) are failing
And I'm Rollins and Wyatt fan, but they are failing

"Ratings no longer matters" .... LOL this is stupid because it is TV that sells WWE, because it is the TV that presents WWE to general public


----------



## Solf

This is insane. This ******* is really talking about "alpha males" and still ranting about cocks somehow. And then people start wondering why is wrestling viewed as a retard's hobby. 

Look at the audience...


----------



## Sweettre15

Food for thought for the Rollins bashers....How can we say Rollins is or isn't responsible for the ratings in ANYWAY without quarter hour breakdowns that count individual segments' numbers?

Is Wrestler I don't Like = Not A Draw really sound logic for these type of discussions ?


----------



## Empress

Ravensflock88 said:


> This is great news. *I hope they continue losing more viewers til they go back to 2 hours and find a new damn approach. * I keep watching cause I have a strong love for wwe but I can imagine many people aren't nearly as loyal to the product. Can't blame them eithe. I don't see how this program would appeal to anyone just starting out or trying to return


I think HHH said that USA has said no to switching RAW back to two hours. There's too much money involved.

I hope that once Smackdown starts airing on the USA, they'll change their minds. Four hours of wrestling broken up in two days is better than three hours on a Monday that under perform.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Oh man, I can't wait until these other guys win the title and they don't draw. These guys complaining better hope their guy draws a SHIT TON, because if they don't, they are going to get plastered in this thread. It's coming.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Value_at_Risk said:


> Unfortunately, in Ambrose's case, we will never get a chance to see if he can draw or not.
> 
> You'll have to stick to bashing Reigns when he inevitably wins the title.


Maybe, maybe not. But Reign's marks have been fine recently. I think even most of them know no one is a draw on this roster. Brock proved that last week. I don't see people claiming Reigns will turn the ratings around. Just 2 Ambrose marks who are going to get destroyed when/if it happens.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Value_at_Risk said:


> Brock proved he wasn't a draw anymore long ago. After his first two PPVs after his return. You probably just weren't paying attention.
> 
> Cena and HHH are still draws. I don't know why you can't accept that.
> 
> Ambrose is never going to get the title. But he sure as hell couldn't do any worse than Rollins, based on everything we've seen so far.
> 
> To get so much screen time in that first hour and have it only draw 3.3 million viewers. That's fucking rough, dude.


That's funny, because just last week, under one of your other multiple accounts, you made it seem like Brock still draws. Just one week later a complete mind change? Color me shocked. Cena and HHH were draws. Not anymore.

Ambrose will get the title. And he will get turned on just like every champion on here. And when he does become Champ, I want 4.5 - 5million viewers every week on a consistent basis, otherwise I'm going to shit on him just for you and one other guy. Heard Dean lost again on SD last night. Yet another loss. Must be rough.    Oh, and enjoy your last few moments on here once again.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Value_at_Risk said:


> I wasn't acting as if he was a draw. You just have reading comprehensions skills (which is common among Rollins fans, seemingly.) I was responding to someone's claim about Rollins being responsible for the 3rd hour maintaining, when Rollins has never shown any ability to draw at any point in his career, while Brock has. That number for the 3rd hour was still dog shit though.
> 
> Ambrose isn't getting the title. Ever. That's something even you should be able to realize by now.


Sorry. Your back-pedaling isn't going to work, bro. Too late in the game for that. Re-joining every single day to harass people did you in. When Ambrose gets the title, it's going to happen plenty and often. Get ready for it, whether you're here on another new account (sad and pathetic) or just reading the thread as a lurker.


----------



## Louaja89

Value_at_Risk said:


> And why are Rollins fans so sensitive? So your guy can't draw - who cares? He's still the champ, even without doing a single thing to deserve it.
> 
> I would think an HBK fan would be used to their favorite being a failure when it comes to drawing money.


Stop posting buddy , you're embarrassing yourself week after week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Value_at_Risk said:


> What backpedaling? I told you last week Brock has not been a big draw for a while.
> 
> When Ambrose wins the title you won't even see me in this thread. Unlike you, I'm not that sensitive and I don't need reassurance. I'll be glad if he even gets a 1 minute title reign before Sheamus cashes in on him.
> 
> For some reason it just eats you up inside that Rollins is an anti-draw. 3.3 million in that first hour. Damn.


Continued back-pedaling. Not working.

Oh yeah, I really care about drawing when guys like HBK and Seth Rollins are among my favorites of all time. :eyeroll The fact that these guys don't draw just re-iterate that I'm liking the right guys, because most wrestling fans (not here) out there wouldn't know talent if it smacked them in the face. This thread is nothing more than an LOL and entertainment. Been that way since I joined late 2012.


----------



## superuser1

Its hilarious how Cena and Orton always got the blame when ratings were low but now Cena is in the midcard and Orton hasn't been on tv in weeks the ratings are at an alltime low lmao


----------



## DoubtGin

I'd not blame a single person for those ratings at all. There is next to no interesting storyline going on right now. Nothing important happens.

The Authority angle being around for close to two years doesn't really help either, I guess.


----------



## ikarinokami

The only draw is daniel bryan. once it set in that daniel bryan might not come back, a lot of viewers jumped ship. until they find someone to replace him, who can capture people's imginations, the ratings will continue to decline. Wresteling is about the stars as well as the presentation. People will watch, if there is someone they want to see.


----------



## CodyRhodesMark

I hope they continue to descend. Rollins has the potential to be a draw. Look at his supposed counter part Edge. Edge was a bad ass cheating arsehole with a hot woman. Rollins is a cowardly emo who hangs around with 2 'midgets' and an old bald man. I know who I'd rather cheer or boo


----------



## CodyRhodesMark

ikarinokami said:


> The only draw is daniel bryan. once it set in that daniel bryan might not come back, a lot of viewers jumped ship. until they find someone to replace him, who can capture people's imginations, the ratings will continue to decline. Wresteling is about the stars as well as the presentation. People will watch, if there is someone they want to see.


Cena is a draw and Brock was a draw. I do agree that Daniel's absence will have detracted some viewers, myself included, I didn't watch much during his absence last year and the same has happened this year.


----------



## Srdjan99

Are the ratings for Tough Enough in?


----------



## SóniaPortugal

superuser1 said:


> Its hilarious how Cena and Orton always got the blame when ratings were low but now Cena is in the midcard and Orton hasn't been on tv in weeks the ratings are at an alltime low lmao


This
But now is WWE blame and not Rollins and Reigns


----------



## Empress

Srdjan99 said:


> Are the ratings for Tough Enough in?


I found some preliminary stuff.



> On USA, WWE TOUGH ENOUGH started the night down 0.08 to 0.32













http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-100-tuesday-cable-originals-6-30-2015.html

This is the info for last week:

– WWE’s latest iteration of Tough Enough didn’t exactly set the world on fire with its debut. The premiere episode, which aired last night, drew 1.209 million viewers and a 0.4 rating in the 18 – 49 demographic. While those numbers are massively down from the 3.3 million that the last season debuted with in 2011, it’s also been four years and that season premiered directly after WrestleMania, when WWE watching is traditionally at a high.

The show finished as the #21 show among cable programs for the night.
http://411mania.com/wrestling/wwe-tough-enough-ratings-premiere/


----------



## Empress

*WWE Tough Enough ratings for week 2*

Wednesday, 01 July 2015 13:42

Tough Enough did 1.05 million viewers Tuesday night, a drop from 1.21 million the previous week. The replay of Raw did not crack the top 100 shows in the 18-49 demo on cable last night.

http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-stories/96-wwe-news/43360-wwe-ratings-for-last-night

*WWE Tough Enough 2015 episode 2 ratings: Viewers down again despite Raw lead-in*
WWE spent months heavily hyping the return of Tough Enough on Tuesday nights on the USA Network. Then, the big debut drew just 1.20 million viewers last week, a disaster considering the numbers for the Stone Cold Steve Austin hosted season back in 2011.

That's without mentioning how much the company has invested in this show, like a $250,000 contract for the winners, one male and one female.

To improve the number for episode two, USA put a two hour replay of this week's episode of Monday Night Raw on as a lead-in. Not only did it fail to gain viewers, the number dropped down to 1.05 million. What's more, the Observer reports the Raw replay failed to register in the top 100 shows of the night in the coveted 18-49 demo. It did just 604,000 viewers.

This bad news comes on the heels of this week's episode of Raw doing one of the lowest non-holiday viewership totals since 1997. Rumors are already suggesting a potential panic move could be coming to improve Raw's ratings. Might the same be true for Tough Enough?

http://www.cagesideseats.com/2015/7...15-episode-2-ratings-viewers-down-raw-lead-in


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

250k$ contract?????? That's more than what they pay most on the roster.

And whoever thought Tough Enough would draw decent ratings on tv should be fired. It should have been network exclusive or not at all.


----------



## Fandangohome

All the hype they put into TE and it's a complete bust. If it keeps doing this poorly, i could see USA dropping it, like soon. Even a rerun of some mundane comedy could do better numbers.


And Rollins can't be blamed for TE's poor numbers before the haters get any big ideas.


----------



## Goldusto

Crazy Eyes said:


> *WWE Tough Enough ratings for week 2*
> 
> Wednesday, 01 July 2015 13:42
> 
> Tough Enough did 1.05 million viewers Tuesday night, a drop from 1.21 million the previous week. The replay of Raw did not crack the top 100 shows in the 18-49 demo on cable last night.
> 
> http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-stories/96-wwe-news/43360-wwe-ratings-for-last-night
> 
> *WWE Tough Enough 2015 episode 2 ratings: Viewers down again despite Raw lead-in*
> WWE spent months heavily hyping the return of Tough Enough on Tuesday nights on the USA Network. Then, the big debut drew just 1.20 million viewers last week, a disaster considering the numbers for the Stone Cold Steve Austin hosted season back in 2011.
> 
> That's without mentioning how much the company has invested in this show, like a $250,000 contract for the winners, one male and one female.
> 
> To improve the number for episode two, USA put a two hour replay of this week's episode of Monday Night Raw on as a lead-in. Not only did it fail to gain viewers, the number dropped down to 1.05 million. What's more, the Observer reports the Raw replay failed to register in the top 100 shows of the night in the coveted 18-49 demo. It did just 604,000 viewers.
> 
> This bad news comes on the heels of this week's episode of Raw doing one of the lowest non-holiday viewership totals since 1997. Rumors are already suggesting a potential panic move could be coming to improve Raw's ratings. Might the same be true for Tough Enough?
> 
> http://www.cagesideseats.com/2015/7...15-episode-2-ratings-viewers-down-raw-lead-in


PANIC MODE should have set in when D Bry got sidelined and they were going to be losing some of their major star power, a plan to give the IC title relevancy went up in smoke and his career too, and now WWEs ratings are in the toilet because they faied to plug the huge gap he left, alongside a few other leaks.

WHY ARE NEW DAY 3MB STATUS??? WHY THEY FUCK WOULD YOU DO THAT? 

they were starting to gain traction, they were getting over finally , and wwe threw all the black guys under a bus by giving PTP the belts when they have no business being anywhere near it until they gained more stock, and New Day had momentum. I mean look at the cesaro/kidd matches, some of the best tag team bouts since dudleys/hardies etc, we were beginning to circle Shield Vs Wyatts territory only for them to drop the straps and become total worthless jobbers.

Half the roster is injured, the other half is touring, and some random scrubs are shooting movies only 7 people will ever see, WWE needs to sort everything top to bottom pronto.

Seth vs edge comparison there is only one answer I have for you and that is : Lana.

Lana should have allied with the authority not ziggles, kept her heel persona, since that is the only edge she has as a character.

what she is doing now this trish/sable horseshit is beyond nonsensical and has made me completely 100% lose interest in the angle.

Her Character was telling you puerile scum to eat shit but corpsing and smiling in an adorable fashion at all the adulation and praise she was getting for her presence, THAT is what got her over, not all these stupid skits and segments she is doing and cheating on her cuckold boyfriend.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Raw is now getting beat by the Discovery Channel. The current product/viewer situation is worse than the last days of WCW.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Marv95 said:


> 2.51. Lowest non-holiday Raw rating since October 2012(2.49). And it ain't even NFL season.
> 
> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_85947.shtml


A 2.51 vs no competition? Lol...


----------



## LilOlMe

From Meltzer's July 6, 2015 column:


> *Raw in May averaged a 2.66 rating and 3.69 million viewers, making it the lowest month outside of football season in 17 years.* That number was down 5.3% in ratings and 5.6% in total audience from the 2.81 rating and 3.91 million viewers last year. In 2013, the numbers were a 2.89 average rating and 4.04 million viewers.





> *Raw on 6/29 fell to an 18 year seasonal low, dating back to the period when Nitro was handing Raw a beating*, doing a 2.51 rating and 3.46 million viewers (1.43 viewers per home).
> 
> The previous non-Holiday low outside of football season was set on 5/4, a 2.55 rating and 3.57 million viewers. Aside from holiday shows that fell on July 4th, Christmas and New Year's Eve, it was the least-watched episode of the show since 1997, except for a December 3, 2012 episode against a New York Giants vs. Washington Redskins game that did monster ratings. Raw that night did a 2.52 rating and 3.43 million viewers. The October 22, 2012, episode against the NFL did a 2.48 rating and 3.55 million viewers, which would be the only lower rating since the Monday Night Wars, except for a holiday show.
> 
> What makes this number so bad is that there was no sports competition of note, with the biggest sports event being a routine baseball game that did 669,000 viewers on ESPN. So there was no reason for this number other than a lack of interest in the product.



About Tough Enough:


> The first episode of Tough Enough on 6/23 did 1.21 million viewers on USA. The network's prime time average for the prior week was 1.50 million viewers, which put USA in fifth place for the week.
> 
> For a wrestling show to be a success, particularly on USA, is has to beat the station's prime time average. For a comparison, the first week of the 2011 Steve Austin season of Tough Enough did 3.33 million viewers, but that was misleading because it was at 8 p.m. on the day after WrestleMania. But the second week's show did 2.79 million viewers. And that show wasn't renewed. Four years later, because the USA Network numbers have dropped to well below what Tough Enough had been doing, they came back for this current season.
> 
> Obviously the first week numbers were a huge disappointment, because the day after they came out, USA and WWE agreed to air a two-hour edited version of Raw from 6-8 p.m. on Tuesday at least for this week with the hopes a Raw rebroadcast would give the second week a strong lead-in.


The night after WM did over 5 million. That shows you that there _is_ an audience out there that is grabbable, if you're putting on a hot product.


----------



## IdealGasLaw

Worst drawing champion/main eventer in nearly 2 decades.


----------



## amhlilhaus

Is the low ratings due to rollins, or could it be kane, j n j and a 20 plus year old 'evil authority' angle?


----------



## KO Bossy

I'm not a Rollins mark by any means, but I don't blame the guy for this. Not his fault he's booked like an incompetent chump. That whole first segment Monday was like the fucking showcase showdown on Price is Right. Apple Watches, Hawaiian vacation and







...just needed Rod Roddy doing the product explanations and it'd be complete. I love Price is Right, but that segment was beyond lame. The whole product is shit right now, its ice cold and ratings are slipping further and further down the drain. 

I wonder how low they need to drop before Vince and friends figure out "hey, maybe we shouldn't have completely ignored what the fans wanted all this time?"


----------



## superuser1

IdealGasLaw said:


> Worst drawing champion/main eventer in nearly 2 decades.


lmao they wanted orton off tv and they got their wish.....they wanted cena in the midcard and they got their wish....they didnt want reigns as champion and they got their wish.....haha and now ratings are at an all time low


----------



## Chrome

That rating is hilariously bad. Good grief. :mj4

At least on that Oct. 22, 2012 Raw they were facing MNF, the presidential debate, and playoff baseball, so the low rating wasn't a surprise. There's like, NOTHING going on right now that can cause such a low rating, aside from WWE's own incompetency of course. 

"But they'll still watch right won't they???" :vince7


----------



## Kabraxal

Crazy Eyes said:


> *WWE Tough Enough ratings for week 2*
> 
> Wednesday, 01 July 2015 13:42
> 
> Tough Enough did 1.05 million viewers Tuesday night, a drop from 1.21 million the previous week. The replay of Raw did not crack the top 100 shows in the 18-49 demo on cable last night.
> 
> http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-stories/96-wwe-news/43360-wwe-ratings-for-last-night
> 
> *WWE Tough Enough 2015 episode 2 ratings: Viewers down again despite Raw lead-in*
> WWE spent months heavily hyping the return of Tough Enough on Tuesday nights on the USA Network. Then, the big debut drew just 1.20 million viewers last week, a disaster considering the numbers for the Stone Cold Steve Austin hosted season back in 2011.
> 
> That's without mentioning how much the company has invested in this show, like a $250,000 contract for the winners, one male and one female.
> 
> To improve the number for episode two, USA put a two hour replay of this week's episode of Monday Night Raw on as a lead-in. Not only did it fail to gain viewers, the number dropped down to 1.05 million. What's more, the Observer reports the Raw replay failed to register in the top 100 shows of the night in the coveted 18-49 demo. It did just 604,000 viewers.
> 
> This bad news comes on the heels of this week's episode of Raw doing one of the lowest non-holiday viewership totals since 1997. Rumors are already suggesting a potential panic move could be coming to improve Raw's ratings. Might the same be true for Tough Enough?
> 
> http://www.cagesideseats.com/2015/7...15-episode-2-ratings-viewers-down-raw-lead-in


Considering the focus of TE has been the idiotic melodrama and TD type reality TV, it's now wonder it is failing. They are impossible to watch right now with how bad they are and only goes to show that Vince's "entertainment" focus just doesn't work.


----------



## SpeedStick

amhlilhaus said:


> Is the low ratings due to rollins, or could it be kane, j n j and a 20 plus year old 'evil authority' angle?


Its low rating due to it being too long and same show over and over..


----------



## RollinsFxxkingSux

I wonder if Randy Orton resents Seth Rollins for being a far greater ratings killer than he ever was. Probably not, if anything, Randy is most likely thankful 

Seth "The Ratings Killer" Rollins


----------



## The Tempest

RollinsFxxkingSux said:


> I wonder if Randy Orton resents Seth Rollins for being a far greater ratings killer than he ever was. Probably not, if anything, Randy is most likely thankful
> 
> Seth "The Ratings Killer" Rollins


I wonder when you'll stop making all these shit accounts just because you have nothing better to do.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Tough Enough not breaking a million viewers next week will be sad representation of how far this company has fallen.


----------



## RollinsFxxkingSux

The Tempest said:


> I wonder when you'll stop making all these shit accounts just because you have nothing better to do.


Does being reminded of Rollins' abject failure as a main-eventer hurt you? Too bad


----------



## RollinsFxxkingSux

WesternFilmGuy said:


> Tough Enough not breaking a million viewers next week will be sad representation of how far this company has fallen.


That's what happens when you put the title on a perpetual loser like Seth Rollins


----------



## The Tempest

RollinsFxxkingSux said:


> Does being reminded of Rollins' abject failure as a main-eventer hurt you? Too bad


Nah I'm fine, the only failure I see in this thread is you and all the accounts you made over these past months because you're butthurt that Rollins is the champion. Anyway, you're not going to last long, so bye :kobe3


----------



## Starbuck

Raw has been the exact same show for around 5 months. And I mean the EXACT same show. For 5 months. There's only so much Rollins/Kane/Reigns/Ambrose variations people can watch before they stop giving a shit because they've seen it every week. For 5 MONTHS STRAIGHT. It's not Rollins or Ambrose or Reigns or even Kane. It's Rollins, Ambrose, Reigns and Kane TOGETHER in any segment or match. It's the same thing every week. Who wants to watch that shit? Clearly nobody because people aren't bothering any more. WWE has conditioned its audience to expect some sort of opening, middle and closing segment involving any combination of those 4 guys. It's tired and completely beyond boring 5 months in. That's what needs to change above anything else. Do something new and I wouldn't be surprised if it bumped the numbers a bit. Very obviously people have had their fill of the revolving Rollins/Reigns/Kane/Ambrose door.


----------



## Badbadrobot

This is not about who's the champ, it's solely about creative not being creative


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Cena needs the belt back.


----------



## Marv95

WesternFilmGuy said:


> Cena needs the belt back.


Or if you wanna immediately spark interest? Turn him heel. Champ or not.

It's basically the only huge thing they can accomplish(besides going back to TV14) to get a buzz about the product, from hardcores to casuals.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Nobody is going to tune in because Cena is a heel. It's sad that people buy that. People hate him because he is a shit talent who has been pushed too long. Turning him heel and making him a focus won't satisfy those people as he will still be being pushed.

But Cena fans will be more likely to tune in if he is the champ.


----------



## Erik.

Yeah, putting the belt on Cena will raise the ratings for a week or two in the same way putting the belt on anyone new would. It's not the solution though.


----------



## hbgoo1975

WesternFilmGuy said:


> Tough Enough not breaking a million viewers next week will be sad representation of how far this company has fallen.


They are only pleasing greedy old farts who lust after women who don't deserve to be in the ring! Tough Enough has that!


----------



## Fighter Daron

WesternFilmGuy said:


> Nobody is going to tune in because Cena is a heel. It's sad that people buy that. People hate him because he is a shit talent who has been pushed too long. Turning him heel and making him a focus won't satisfy those people as he will still be being pushed.
> 
> But Cena fans will be more likely to tune in if he is the champ.


You can say Cena is a bad worker for as long as you want even though it isn't true, but the thing is, he is the best promo in the business right now, if he turned heel and was given the proper liberty, he would rock the mic.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Fighter Daron said:


> You can say Cena is a bad worker for as long as you want even though it isn't true, but the thing is, he is the best promo in the business right now, if he turned heel and was given the proper liberty, he would rock the mic.


Link me his best match and tell me what he did to make it so great.

Cena is decent with promos, but that still doesn't answer why people who left because of Cena come back.

WWE's problem is they are pushing Indy wrestlers like Seth Rollins. Their fan base doesn't want to see that (obviously). They have been conditioned to want Cena and Orton for the last 10 years. So give them Cena and Orton.


----------



## hbgoo1975

WesternFilmGuy said:


> Link me his best match and tell me what he did to make it so great.
> 
> Cena is decent with promos, but that still doesn't answer why people who left because of Cena come back.
> 
> WWE's problem is they are pushing Indy wrestlers like Seth Rollins. Their fan base doesn't want to see that (obviously). They have been conditioned to want Cena and Orton for the last 10 years. So give them Cena and Orton.


And retards like the Ungrateful Khali, pieces of shit like Kane and The Big Show, etc.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Exactly. They can't just change to all these Indy wrestlers and expect not to get closer to these Indy companies in popularity. With their main event right now being a mix of football players, 40 yr demons, and Indy wrestlers WWE has to make up their mind on what kind of direction they want.

Go with Reigns. That would be the best way to continue to be different instead of pushing every damn ROH main eventer from 5 years ago in the main event. Like WTF?


----------



## #Mark

Starbuck said:


> Raw has been the exact same show for around 5 months. And I mean the EXACT same show. For 5 months. There's only so much Rollins/Kane/Reigns/Ambrose variations people can watch before they stop giving a shit because they've seen it every week. For 5 MONTHS STRAIGHT. It's not Rollins or Ambrose or Reigns or even Kane. It's Rollins, Ambrose, Reigns and Kane TOGETHER in any segment or match. It's the same thing every week. Who wants to watch that shit? Clearly nobody because people aren't bothering any more. WWE has conditioned its audience to expect some sort of opening, middle and closing segment involving any combination of those 4 guys. It's tired and completely beyond boring 5 months in. That's what needs to change above anything else. Do something new and I wouldn't be surprised if it bumped the numbers a bit. Very obviously people have had their fill of the revolving Rollins/Reigns/Kane/Ambrose door.


The main event scene has always been a revolving door of four to five top guys.. For example, Austin, Kane, Vince, and Taker worked nearly all of 1998 together. People just happen to not care much about this revolving door because Rollins, Ambrose, and Reigns aren't particularly engaging and Kane is obviously awful.


----------



## TheShieldSuck

WesternFilmGuy said:


> Link me his best match and tell me what he did to make it so great.
> 
> Cena is decent with promos, but that still doesn't answer why people who left because of Cena come back.
> 
> WWE's problem is they are pushing Indy wrestlers like Seth Rollins. Their fan base doesn't want to see that (obviously). They have been conditioned to want Cena and Orton for the last 10 years. So give them Cena and Orton.


Orton got the lowest ratings in Smackdown history when he was champ. 

Nobody is a draw but Lesnar.


----------



## The Tempest

Last week SmackDown scored 2,265,000 viewers
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...y-values-complications-graceland-more/426358/


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Good. Smackdown has been great. It's only fair to keep dropping to LU, TNA, ROH numbers.


----------



## validreasoning

TheShieldSuck said:


> Orton got the lowest ratings in Smackdown history when he was champ.
> 
> Nobody is a draw but Lesnar.


raw viewership fell the night after the belt was put on lesnar at summerslam and hasn't returned to the level pre-summerslam 14 since..

first 3 months of 2015, raw averaged 4 million viewers live with lesnar as champion

last 3 months of 2015, raw has averaged 3.9 million viewers live with rollins as champion


----------



## Empress

It looks like Vince hit the panic button and moved John Cena back into the main event of RAW. We'll see how they do in the ratings later on today.


----------



## CarDoor

validreasoning said:


> last 3 months of 2015, raw has averaged 3.9 million viewers live with rollins as champion


This includes that outlier the night after WM. That's a RAW that always does a high rating. This year it did a high viewership number due to lack of NCAA.

Brock is definitely not the draw he was in his first 2 PPVs after his return, but he's also not a ratings killer like Rollins. Last week was the least watched RAW outside of NFL season in nearly 2 decades. May averaged the least amount of viewers in nearly 2 decades. June wasn't much better. Viewership continues to decline with this geek as champion.

Not to mention that Brock was absent for most of his title run. It was Rollins who received the most screen time during that period any way, which is why the ratings were so low for most of those RAWs.


----------



## CarDoor

Crazy Eyes said:


> It looks like Vince hit the panic button and moved John Cena back into the main event of RAW. We'll see how they do in the ratings later on today.


They made the right call.

Rollins was not the focus of RAW tonight for the first time in quite a while. He did not open the show, nor did he close it. He had a short promo, and that segment was saved by Brock coming out and destroying that car.

The viewership number will be higher this week. I guarantee it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by validreasoning View Post
> last 3 months of 2015, raw has averaged 3.9 million viewers live with rollins as champion



Thanks for posting.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So can we expect the rating today or will it be delayed due to the holiday (as usual)?


----------



## LilOlMe

validreasoning said:


> raw viewership fell the night after the belt was put on lesnar at summerslam and hasn't returned to the level pre-summerslam 14 since..
> 
> first 3 months of 2015, raw averaged 4 million viewers live with lesnar as champion
> 
> last 3 months of 2015, raw has averaged 3.9 million viewers live with rollins as champion


This is completely disingenuous. You are comparing non-football season to football season, and you know it.

As for last night, they booked this show to try to build as the show went on. Let's see what happens. Hopefully they didn't do too much damage with the previous weeks, especially for the first hour, but that may be the case.


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Thanks for posting.


Why the smiley? You realize that's a terrible number outside of football season right?

Don't forget, last week had the lowest rating in nearly 2 decades (with the 1st hour in which Rollins had 50% of the screen time drawing a laughable 3.3 million.) The entire month of May averaged the lowest rating in nearly 2 decades. June was nearly just as bad.

Viewership will be higher for last night since Rollins wasn't the main focus. Count on that.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

LilOlMe said:


> This is completely disingenuous. You are comparing non-football season to football season, and you know it.
> 
> As for last night, they booked this show to try to build as the show went on. Let's see what happens. Hopefully they didn't do too much damage with the previous weeks, especially for the first hour, but that may be the case.


There is no Monday Night football the first 3 months of 2015 (January to March). Playoffs start in January, which was his point.


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> There is no Monday Night football the first 3 months of 2015 (January to March). Playoffs start in January, which was his point.


True. That's not what makes the comparison poor. What makes the comparison poor is that Brock never showed up during his title reign. On the RTWM it was a combination of Rollins and Reigns being featured, which resulted in very bad numbers. Then after Rollins won the title he was the main focus by himself, and the numbers continued to decline.


----------



## LilOlMe

My mistake, I saw the "last 3 months" and got it mixed up. Don't know what he's trying to prove, because Lesnar rarely shows up. The person didn't say put the belt on him, they just said that he's a draw.

The shows in the first few months of the year were built around Reigns. 

I think that Lesnar's drawing power has diminished, but he's one of the few who's capable of popping a rating on his own. There's a reason why Vince built the show around people wanting to stick around to see Brock's destruction, the week after some of the worst ratings ever (same with putting Cena in the main event). Will it work now? I think so, but I'm not sure. But it's worked in the past.

Comparing Lesnar to regular champions who always show up is silly. The season was rarely built around Lesnar.


----------



## Cliffy

i don't think the rating is going to go down that much with MNF

Most of the casual viewers of Raw have been run off and we're starting to get down to the ultra hardcores that will watch no matter what and don't like sports.

Plus the MNF schedule sucks outside of a handful of games.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AdobeFlash said:


> Why the smiley? You realize that's a terrible number outside of football season right?
> 
> Don't forget, last week had the lowest rating in nearly 2 decades (with the 1st hour in which Rollins had 50% of the screen time drawing a laughable 3.3 million.) The entire month of May averaged the lowest rating in nearly 2 decades. June was nearly just as bad.
> 
> Viewership will be higher for last night since Rollins wasn't the main focus. Count on that.


Averaging 3.9 million viewers per week, especially after WM season is not bad at all. It's actually quite good for a first time champion and a heel champion, at that. Enjoy your last few moments under your second name *TODAY*. (All joking aside, I really do feel bad for you and what your life must be like).


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Averaging 3.9 million viewers per week, especially after WM season is not bad at all. It's actually quite good for a first time champion and a heel champion, at that. Enjoy your last few moments under your second name *TODAY*. (All joking aside, I really do feel bad for you and what your life must be like).


No, it isn't. That's a very poor average for the time period. 

That 3.9 doesn't include last week's 3.4 million average, because I saw that poster saying the same thing the week before. It also includes that 5+ million number the night after Mania, which was clearly an outlier. 

The numbers have been declining at a rapid pace since then. They've reached historical lows.


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> (All joking aside, I really do feel bad for you and what your life must be like).


LOL the only person you should be feeling sorry for is yourself. You post here waaaaay more than I do.

You: 18+ posts per day

What a loser.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AdobeFlash said:


> No, it isn't. That's a very poor average for the time period.
> 
> That 3.9 doesn't include last week's 3.4 million average, because I saw that poster saying the same thing the week before. It also includes that 5+ million number the night after Mania, which was clearly an outlier.
> 
> The numbers have been declining at a rapid pace since then. They've reached historical lows.


3.9 million per week in this era is damn good. Especially in one of WWE's slow seasons, right after WM. This is much better than I anticipated. It could take into account last week's show and barely be affected since we are talking about at least 3 months worths of shows now. WWE would take 3.9 million per week in the spring and be very happy. I am very happy to hear this news. Thanks for posting validreasoning. (Y)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AdobeFlash said:


> LOL the only person you should be feeling sorry for is yourself. You post here waaaaay more than I do.
> 
> You: 18+ posts per day
> 
> What a loser.


Posting 18 posts per day is easy as fuck when they are responding to posts like yours. Go ahead, start another account in a few minutes.


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> 3.9 million per week in this era is damn good. Especially in one of WWE's slow seasons, right after WM. This is much better than I anticipated. It could take into account last week's show and barely be affected since we are talking about at least 3 months worths of shows now. WWE would take 3.9 million per week in the spring and be very happy. I am very happy to hear this news. Thanks for posting validreasoning. (Y)


It's been much lower than it has been in recent years. Why would they be happy about that? This is just you being delusional.

The rapid pace at which the numbers have been declining since he won the title speaks volumes. There's no competition for WWE currently and the numbers are still at historical lows.

Is there anything this guy can be profitable at? He can't draw ratings on TV, can't draw well at house shows, and can't sell merchandise.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AdobeFlash said:


> It's been much lower than it has been in recent years. Why would they be happy about that? This is just you being delusional.
> 
> The rapid pace at which the numbers have been declining speaks volumes. There's no competition for WWE currently and the numbers are still at historical lows.
> 
> Is there anything this guy can be profitable at? He can't draw ratings on TV, can't draw well at house shows, and can't sell merchandise.


Historical lows just shows how uninformed you are. Drawing 3.9 million viewers per week in a WWE "off season" isn't "historical lows." You can cry about this until the cows come home, but the number is right there for you to see. Nearly 4 million viewers per week right after WM season is far from "historical lows." You can say it all you want, but just because you say it and find different ways to say it under different user names doesn't make it true. It just makes people take your misinformation even less serious. Bye bye, now.


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Historical lows just shows how uninformed you are. Drawing 3.9 million viewers per week in a WWE "off season" isn't "historical lows." You can cry about this until the cows come home, but the number is right there for you to see. Nearly 4 million viewers per week right after WM season is far from "historical lows." You can say it all you want, but just because you say it and find different ways to say it under different user names doesn't make it true. It just makes people take your misinformation even less serious. Bye bye, now.


From Meltzer's July 6, 2015 column: (which was posted earlier in this thread)




> *Raw in May averaged a 2.66 rating and 3.69 million viewers, making it the lowest month outside of football season in 17 years.* That number was down 5.3% in ratings and 5.6% in total audience from the 2.81 rating and 3.91 million viewers last year. In 2013, the numbers were a 2.89 average rating and 4.04 million viewers.





> *Raw on 6/29 fell to an 18 year seasonal low, dating back to the period when Nitro was handing Raw a beating, doing a 2.51 rating and 3.46 million viewers (1.43 viewers per home).*
> 
> The previous non-Holiday low outside of football season was set on 5/4, a 2.55 rating and 3.57 million viewers. Aside from holiday shows that fell on July 4th, Christmas and New Year's Eve, it was the least-watched episode of the show since 1997, except for a December 3, 2012 episode against a New York Giants vs. Washington Redskins game that did monster ratings. Raw that night did a 2.52 rating and 3.43 million viewers. The October 22, 2012, episode against the NFL did a 2.48 rating and 3.55 million viewers, which would be the only lower rating since the Monday Night Wars, except for a holiday show.
> 
> *What makes this number so bad is that there was no sports competition of note, with the biggest sports event being a routine baseball game that did 669,000 viewers on ESPN. So there was no reason for this number other than a lack of interest in the product.*



Ouch, guy.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AdobeFlash said:


> From Meltzer's July 6, 2015 column: (which was posted earlier in this thread)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ouch, guy.


2 Weeks out of a 3.5 month title reign?!?? That's the best you got? Come on, bro. The way you speak this has been happening every week since he won the title. Do better. If you're still here that is, which you probably won't be. :hbk1


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> 2 Weeks out of a 3.5 month title reign?!?? That's the best you got? Come on, bro. The way you speak this has been happening every week since he won the title. Do better. If you're still here that is, which you probably won't be. :hbk1


2 weeks? It's an entire month, kiddo. June had similar numbers, and I'm sure that will account for near historical lows as well.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Thanks for posting @validreasoning




> the mark warfare over who is and who isn't drawing is hilarious
> 
> here are the real facts..raws viewership went down the night after the belt was taken off of cena and put on lesnar and hasn't returned to the numbers pre summerslam 14 since. lesnar or rollins as champion doesn't make a jot of difference
> 
> raw first 3 months of 2015 with lesnar as champion averaged 4 milllion viewers live
> raw last 3 months with rollins as champion has averaged 3.93 million viewers live





> raw viewership fell the night after the belt was put on lesnar at summerslam and hasn't returned to the level pre-summerslam 14 since..
> 
> first 3 months of 2015, raw averaged 4 million viewers live with lesnar as champion
> 
> last 3 months of 2015, raw has averaged 3.9 million viewers live with rollins as champion


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Thanks for posting @validreasoning


Both title reigns produced incredibly bad numbers. Only Brock never showed up during his, and it was Rollins receiving the most screen time during that period.

You haven't helped your argument at all.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Thanks again, validreasoning. Good stats/facts as per usual. The man is a machine with stuff like that. :lol


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Thanks again, validreasoning. Good stats/facts as per usual. The man is a machine with stuff like that. :lol


Sorry to disappoint you, but 3.9 million average is not accurate at all. 

These numbers can all be found here: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/?s=wwe#feed

Let's look at all of the full months Rollins has held the title in (April, May, June):

*April 6*
Hour 1: 4.3
Hour 2: 4.039
Hour 3: 3.552
Average: 3.96

*April 13*
Hour 1: 3.686
Hour 2: 3.786
Hour 3: 3.525
Average: 3.669

*April 20*
Hour 1: 4.105
Hour 2: 4.136
Hour 3: 3.873
Average: 4.038

*April 27*
Hour 1: 3.823
Hour 2: 3.855
Hour 3: 3.59
Average: 3.756

*April average: 3.85*

*May 4*
Hour 1: 3.422
Hour 2: 3.709
Hour 3: 3.588
Average: 3.573

*May 11*
Hour 1: 3.824
Hour 2: 3.583
Hour 3: 3.385
Average: 3.597

*May 18*
Hour 1: 4.001
Hour 2: 4.001
Hour 3: 3.955
Average: 3.986

*May 25*
Hour 1: 3.790
Hour 2: 3.585
Hour 3: 3.423
Average: 3.599

*May average: 3.689*

*June 1*
Hour 1: 3.946
Hour 2: 4.113
Hour 3: 3.862
Average: 3.974

*June 8*
Hour 1: 3.678
Hour 2: 3.609
Hour 3: 3.647
Average: 3.645

*June 15*
Hour 1: 4.095
Hour 2: 4.249
Hour 3: 3.997
Average: 4.114

*June 22*
Hour 1: 3.594
Hour 2: 3.606
Hour 3: 3.812
Average: 3.67

*June 29*
Hour 1: 3.362
Hour 2: 3.544
Hour 3: 3.482
Average: 3.463

*June average: 3.773*

_*Average 3 months: 3.77*_


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Sorry. I have to take @validreasoning just a tad more seriously than some troll who re-joins a wrestling message board 20 times per day. Yep. Gonna have to go with him.


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Sorry. I have to take @validreasoning just a tad more seriously than some troll who re-joins a wrestling message board 20 times per day. Yep. Gonna have to go with him.


No problem. The numbers are all here: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/?s=wwe#feed

Have him check the link. Or better yet, you can do it yourself, little guy.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Thanks, again, valid. You are the man. (Y)


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:lmao

Guess I'll have the answer to my question by the end of the day, whether someone tells me or not. :lol


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Thanks, again, valid. You are the man. (Y)


Yes, thanks for incorrect numbers, which anyone can see by viewing this link: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/?s=wwe#feed

The link we use every week to see the ratings.

Rollins has drawn 3.77 million viewers per week in April, May, and June, on average.

Just as awful as expected.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Valid is such a good poster. No need for him (or anyone else :lmao) to start thousands of new user names every single day on a wrestling message board.

:ha :ti


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Valid is such a good poster. No need for him (or anyone else :lmao) to start thousands of new user names every single day on a wrestling message board.
> 
> :ha :ti


No need to go off topic. This is the ratings thread.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It's very much on topic. You shouldn't be here. Valid should. Good poster. Thanks again, valid. (Y)


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> It's very much on topic. You shouldn't be here. Valid should. Good poster. Thanks again, valid. (Y)


It is very much off topic, because none of that changes the facts which can be found here: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/?s=wwe#feed

I suppose you will not address this, though. Fair enough, I would be embarrassed too if my favorite drew such poor numbers as champion.


----------



## LilOlMe

The guy's a troll, but the numbers are the numbers. If that's what's in the link, that's what's in the link.

Shows you you can't just take stats that people just post on their own as gospel, though I'm sure it was an honest mistake on the OP's part.

In fairness to Rollins, the first three months actually includes the post-WM show. It was on March 30, so it's in the first quarter, not the second one.

The shows are just terrible, and they aren't booking them correctly. Still don't think you can entirely lay the blame on any one person.

Starbuck is right about every show seeming the same.


Found this June 30, 2015 article:


> WWE REPORT: Raw TV Ratings First-Half Report Card - Raw down 9% through first 26 weeks, plus nine-year break down
> 
> Jun 30, 2015 - 5:00:20 PM
> 
> WWE Raw completed the first-half of 2015 with a thud, registering a year-low 2.51 rating on Monday night.
> 
> Three months ago, Raw was sitting pretty with a 3.68 rating and nearly five-and-a-half million viewers the night after WrestleMania. That was also the last time Raw scored above a 3.0 rating.
> 
> *Averaging the highs, lows, and in-betweens, Raw averaged a 2.83 rating and 3.944 million viewers (live + same day) during the first-half of 2015.
> 
> The 26-week average in 2014 was a 3.09 rating and 4.339 million viewers, a decline of 8.4 percent and 9.1 percent, respectively, this year.*
> 
> The following is a nine-year break down of Raw's live+same day ratings and viewership, capturing the effect of three-hour Raws, softer WrestleMania Seasons in recent years, and more DVR viewership. At some point, WWE has to ask the question of whether more TV Revenue from the third hour of Raw is worth the trade-off...
> 
> - 2015 First-Half: 2.83 rating / 3.944 million viewers (WM31 season)
> - 2014 1H: 3.09 rating / 4.339 million viewers (WM30 season)
> - 2013 1H: 3.16 rating / 4.365 million viewers (WM29 season)
> 
> - 2012 1H: 3.14 rating / 4.498 million viewers (two-hour Raw era; Raw moved to three-hours on July 23, 2012)
> 
> - 2011 1H: 3.37 rating / 5.112 million viewers (WM27 season)
> - 2010 1H: 3.39 rating / 4.932 million viewers (WM26 season)
> - 2009 1H: 3.67 rating / 5.394 million viewers (WM25 season)
> - 2008 1H: 3.41 rating / 4.922 million viewers (WM24 season)
> - 2007 1H: 3.88 rating / 5.319 million viewers (WM23 season)
> 
> ***
> 
> 2015 WWE Raw Scoresheet
> 
> - Avg. Rating: 2.83 rating
> - Avg. Viewers: 3.944 million
> - 2015 High: 3.68 rating / 5.363 million viewers (3/30 post-WM31)
> - 2015 Rating Low: 2.51 rating (6/29), plus 2.55 ratings on 5/4 & 5/25
> - 2015 Viewers Low: 3.462 million viewers (6/29)
> - Avg. 2H to 3H Decline: -4.8 percent


http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_85946.shtml#.VZwu3_nEa1Z

It is interesting how much they've fallen off since 2011. They used to average around 5 million during WM season.

I understand why they added a 3rd hour from a financial standpoint, but it seems like they were woefully unprepared for booking an additional hour correctly.

What is also interesting is that Bryan vs. The Authority RTWM seemed to really have stopped the ratings from careening. It's funny how the one thing that wasn't intentional and planned, was what actually ended up working out the best. Maybe there's a lesson in that?


----------



## AdobeFlash

BTW even if you add that night after WM to the numbers I posted (which is SUCH an obvious outlier) you still only get 3.886 million per episode.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I like how this guy acts like he's just another poster on here. Guy has been banned about 255 times and re-joins multiple times PER day. Anything he posts about is off topic because you're not a legitimate poster here. 

The obsession is *real* (and frightening).

Even if it was 3.77, that's still _nowhere_ near as bad as you make it out to be to the point where you re-join multiple times every. single. day, posting with an absolute hard-on for him and Reigns to a lesser degree, although I expect that to change when he becomes champion, like some kind of a stalker. The fact that Brock isn't even drawing either makes all of these arguments almost meaningless. Brock is by far the biggest name on the full time *and* part time roster and his reign drew just a tad more than Seth's. *And Brock also had the advanage of being the champion during the Road to WM, which is always the highest rated 3 months of the year for Raw. The fact that Seth's reign is barely below Brock's during the Road to WM and Rollins' is during the quiet period of the year for WWE is even better.* If he's not drawing, no one in WWE is. They want to make ratings better, make the fucking show better from top to bottom.


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> I like how this guy acts like he's just another poster on here. Guy has been banned about 255 times and re-joins multiple times PER day. Anything he posts about is off topic because you're not a legitimate poster here.
> 
> The obsession is *real* (and frightening).
> 
> Even if it was 3.77, that's still _nowhere_ near as bad as you make it out to be to the point where you re-join multiple times every. single. day, posting with an absolute hard-on for him and Reigns to a lesser degree, although I expect that to change when he becomes champion, like some kind of a stalker. The fact that Brock isn't even drawing either makes all of these arguments almost meaningless. Brock is by far the biggest name on the full time *and* part time roster and his reign drew just a tad more than Seth's. And Brock also had the advanage of being the champion during the Road to WM, which is always the highest rated 3 months of the year for Raw. If he's not drawing, no one in WWE is. They want to make ratings better, make the fucking show better from top to bottom.


Brock barely showed up, guy. But yes, his drawing power has certainly diminished. Just because he isn't a huge draw does not mean he is on the level of Rollins though. He is still a bigger draw than Rollins. That's a fact.

BTW, Brock is not the biggest name they have. That's John Cena.

3.77 million is terrible for that period. Look at the facts the other guy posted on this page.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AdobeFlash said:


> Brock barely showed up, guy. But yes, his drawing power has certainly diminished. Just because he isn't a huge draw does not mean he is on the level of Rollins though. He is still a bigger draw than Rollins. That's a fact.
> 
> BTW, Brock is not the biggest name they have. That's John Cena.
> 
> 3.77 million is terrible for that period. Look at the facts the other guy posted on this page.


I like how you left out that Brock was champion during the Road to WM (Jan. - March), the highest rated 3 months of Raw every single year. Good try. And no, it's not terrible for post WM season.

And no, Brock is a bigger name than Cena. Brock has cache and a name outside of WWE, thanks to his UFC involvement.


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> I like how you left out that Brock was champion during the Road to WM (Jan. - March), the highest rated 3 months of Raw every single year. Good try.
> 
> And no, Brock is a bigger name than Cena. Brock has cache and a name outside of WWE, thanks to his UFC involvement.


Brock barely showed up during the RTWM. That's why comparisons over extended periods are silly. Brock did not appear consistently for these comparisons to be valid. 

No, Brock is not a bigger name. Cena has always been a bigger draw than him inside the WWE. Brock was a massive draw in UFC, but that's it. It never translated to massive drawing power in the WWE.


----------



## validreasoning

LilOlMe said:


> My mistake, I saw the "last 3 months" and got it mixed up. Don't know what he's trying to prove, because Lesnar rarely shows up.


lesnar was on raw most of the first 3 months of this year..plus lesnar is supposed to be an attraction whereas rollins you get to see every week on raw and sd (and every ppv and sometimes mainevent)..plus the first 3 months of the year are meant to be the hottest when its mania season, the 3 months post mania wwe usually have to come up with something big like nexus or trump buying raw or punks pipebomb to keep viewers around.

as for lesnars dates he appeared most weeks in the lead into mania, he was on raw march 9th and 23rd which that list doesn't include http://www.wrestlingrumors.net/brock-lesnar-added-tv-dates/



AdobeFlash said:


> That 3.9 doesn't include last week's 3.4 million average, because I saw that poster saying the same thing the week before. It also includes that 5+ million number the night after Mania, which was clearly an outlier.


it includes last weeks number yes. average was 3.93 million before last week and 3.9 million after last weeks numbers were accounted for..why would you ignore the night after mania btw, thats like ignoring the night after the rumble number when rock when the title..


----------



## LilOlMe

They don't even advertise Brock on RAW beforehand, half the time that he appears on RAW.

Who is right with regard to the numbers for the past three months? Someone can do the math from Adobe's link. I doubt he would make up the math, since he posted the actual numbers. It's pretty easy to prove or disprove.

I need the source for Brock showing up most of the time in the first three months. He tends to do every other week, which is not most of the time. Like I said, it's rarely even advertised as well. I get why the WWE makes that choice from a "fun for the show perspective", but it negates his ability to draw.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

So, the night after WM is counting for Brock's reign, even though Rollins was the Champion that night. Even better. There you go, then. Doesn't matter if he "barely showed up." The hottest time of the year is the hottest time of the year, period. And he gets extra help from the night after WM counting during his reign (1st Quarter of 2015), even though he wasn't Champion that night.

Now, Brock was never a draw. More back-pedaling dating back to previous weeks. Not even worth debating anymore. Back to having converstaions with non-rejoiners.


----------



## AdobeFlash

validreasoning said:


> lesnar was on raw most of the first 3 months of this year..plus lesnar is supposed to be an attraction whereas rollins you get to see every week on raw and sd (and every ppv and sometimes mainevent)..plus the first 3 months of the year are meant to be the hottest when its mania season, the 3 months post mania wwe usually have to come up with something big like nexus or trump buying raw or punks pipebomb to keep viewers around.
> 
> as for lesnars dates he appeared most weeks in the lead into mania, he was on raw march 9th and 23rd which that list doesn't include http://www.wrestlingrumors.net/brock-lesnar-added-tv-dates/
> 
> 
> 
> it includes last weeks number yes. average was 3.93 million before last week and 3.9 million after last weeks numbers were accounted for..why would you ignore the night after mania btw, thats like ignoring the night after the rumble number when rock when the title..


Your number was incorrect. Check the later posts in this thread. It's 3.77 million without the night after Mania and 3.88 million with it.

It's an outlier, that's why you'd ignore it. Every single number after that RAW was centered around 3.7 million. Every single RAW after Mania draws a good number, but especially this year when it did not go up against the NCAA.

But even if you don't ignore it, it's still not a flattering number.


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> So, the night after WM is counting for Brock's reign, even though Rollins was the Champion that night. Even better. There you go, then. Doesn't matter if he "barely showed up." The hottest time of the year is the hottest time of the year, period. And he gets extra help from the night after WM counting during his reign (1st Quarter of 2015), even though he wasn't Champion that night.
> 
> Now, Brock was never a draw. More back-pedaling dating back to previous weeks. Not even worth debating anymore. Back to having converstaions with non-rejoiners.


Who is counting it for Brock's reign? No one.

He didnt show up. Of course it matters, especially when Rollins ended up main eventing some of those RAWs on the RTWM.

Brock was never a massive draw in the WWE outside of his first 2 PPVs after his return. That's a fact. Still a bigger draw than Rollins though.


----------



## LilOlMe

ShowStopper said:


> So, the night after WM is counting for Brock's reign, even though Rollins was the Champion that night. Even better. There you go, then. Doesn't matter if he "barely showed up." The hottest time of the year is the hottest time of the year, period. And he gets extra help from the night after WM counting during his reign (1st Quarter of 2015), even though he wasn't Champion that night.


I agree that comparing RTWM with the next quarter isn't comparable. Just as comparing Lesnar's reign to Rollins' or anyone else's isn't either, due to the uniqueness of Lesnar's schedule and the way that they advertise him.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

LilOlMe said:


> I agree that comparing RTWM with the next quarter isn't comparable. Just as comparing Lesnar's reign to Rollins' or anyone else's isn't either, due to the uniqueness of Lesnar's schedule and the way that they advertise him.


I'm not the one who opened the comparison to those two guys, though. :shrug And while it is different due to Brock being a part-timer, that's all we have to compare the numbers during his reign to anyone else's.

The back-pedaling of the re-joiner continues..


----------



## Empress

*WWE Raw Social Media Tracking*

-- July 6: Monday's show returned to Nielsen's Twitter TV Ratings after not being included in last week's rankings.

Chicago Raw ranked #2 on Monday night among series & specials, trailing "The Bachelorette" on ABC.

If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw would have ranked #3 behind Wimbledon coverage and St. Louis Cardinals vs. Chicago Cubs MLB baseball on ESPN that also took place in Chicago. Coincidentally, WWE ran a bit with J&J Security driving around Wrigley Field before Brock Lesnar smashed their vehicle and Paul Heyman referenced St. Louis, the host city for Battleground, during Raw's opening promo.

Raw's unique Twitter audience was 1.373 million, slightly up from two weeks ago when Raw registered 1.262 million uniques. But, still well below the 2015 average. Also, Cards-Cubs doubled Raw's unique audience with 2.787 million.

Total impressions were 8.969 million, a more pronounced improvement from two weeks ago at 7.325 million impressions. This was also below the 2015 average.

***

WWE Raw Social Media Scoresheet 2015

- Unique High: 3.563 million (3/30 post-WM31)
- Impressions High: 26.587 million (3/30 post-WM31)
- Uniques Low: 1.234 million (1/5)
- Impressions Low: 7.127 million (6/8)
- Avg. Weekly Uniques: 1.914 million
- Avg. Weekly Impressions: 11.396 million
- Avg. Mon. Rank: #2 among series & specials 

http://www.pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_86075.shtml#.VZw2K_lVikp


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/618514014818009088


----------



## validreasoning

AdobeFlash said:


> Your number was incorrect. Check the later posts in this thread. It's 3.77 million without the night after Mania and 3.88 million with it.


you are arguing over 3.88 and 3.9, seriously 

i took my numbers from pwinsiders averages, i went back and its actually 3.894 million average live over the last 14 weeks since rollins got the belt. (these are all live numbers and dvr is adding about 12-17% to viewership post mania, unknown how many were watching pre mania on dvr but its probably around the same)

regardless none of us know the quarter numbers and those are of key importance as nobody is making a big enough difference on a 3 hour 15 minute broadcast anyway, not lesnar, not even the rock. if rollins was such a ratings killer as you claim then why hasn't vince taken the belt off him yet..he has has multiple chances to do so over the past 3 months and didn't...that in itself is a good indication he is happy enough to continue along this path for now.

i don't buy the excuse that lesnar isn't advertised every week, is cena or rollins, orton or the new day advertised each week? if enough people are clamouring to see lesnar on raw then they will tune in regardless just in the hope he is there


----------



## AdobeFlash

validreasoning said:


> you are arguing over 3.88 and 3.9, seriously
> 
> i took my numbers from pwinsiders averages, i went back and its actually 3.894 million average live over the last 14 weeks since rollins got the belt. (these are all live numbers and dvr is adding about 12-17% to viewership post mania, unknown how many were watching pre mania on dvr but its probably around the same)
> 
> regardless none of us know the quarter numbers and those are of key importance as nobody is making a big enough difference on a 3 hour 15 minute broadcast anyway, not lesnar, not even the rock. if rollins was such a ratings killer as you claim then why hasn't vince taken the belt off him yet..he has has multiple chances to do so over the past 3 months and didn't...that in itself is a good indication he is happy enough to continue along this path for now.
> 
> i don't buy the excuse that lesnar isn't advertised every week, is cena or rollins, orton or the new day advertised each week? if enough people are clamouring to see lesnar on raw then they will tune in regardless just in the hope he is there


Yes, 3.88 (which again, is not a flattering number) if you include post-Mania RAW, which always draws a high number anyways. The numbers get much much worse after that. It's 3.77 million after that.

Why didn't he take it off of Orton or Sheamus or Punk when they weren't drawing? Who knows what the fuck goes on in his head. He'll be taking it off of him at Battleground, though.

If viewership was the only data we had you'd have a point. There's plenty of corroborating evidence, however - weak house show attendance and merchandise numbers.


----------



## Londrick

ShowStopper said:


> Posting 18 posts per day is easy as fuck when they are responding to posts like yours. Go ahead, start another account in a few minutes.


You should do what he does and make 18 alts a day. :duck


----------



## Badbadrobot

The show was swapped round to obviously impact ratings:

No Seth at the start, but Brock, that never happens they nearly always open with some dull heel bs

Whc segment slap bang in the middle

Cena closing the show with the U.S. Challenge which is undoubtedly a highlight of the show over the last few months and so much better that their awful tag team matches.


These were all great calls and I'd say the last hour should be much stronger than previous weeks ratings and next week should see a boost at opening. The bigger question is are they brave enough to stay away from the old format and keep mixing it up like this?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Evalution said:


> You should do what he does and make 18 alts a day. :duck


Hmm..

Probably beats arguing over a 3.88 vs. 3.9 rating..

:ha


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Hmm..
> 
> Probably beats arguing over a 3.88 vs. 3.9 rating..
> 
> :ha


I'm not, I'm arguing over 3.77 million (no one with a brain would give much weight to that outlier after Mania) vs 4+ million which is supposedly what Brock drew during his reign. A reign during which he was absent for the most part, and during which Rollins main evented several RAWs. Those RAWs main evented by Rollins during that period drew very poor numbers just as they have all through his title reign.

Meltzer's column indicated ratings are currently the lowest they have been in nearly 2 decades. A poster posted data which shows how far ratings have fallen during the first half of this year in comparison to previous years. 

This is really getting under your skin, isn't it?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AdobeFlash said:


> I'm not, I'm arguing over 3.77 million vs 4+ million which is supposedly what Brock drew during his reign. A reign during which he was absent for the most part, and during which Rollins main evented several RAWs. Those RAWs main evented by Rollins during that period drew very poor numbers just as they have all through his title reign.
> 
> This is really getting under your skin, isn't it?


Don't feel bad because validreasoning corrected you. And yes, getting underneath my skin... Not the guy who re-joins a wrestling website ti) 20 times per day. :dance

:eyeroll


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Don't feel bad because validreasoning corrected you. And yes, getting underneath my skin... Not the guy who re-joins a wrestling website ti) 20 times per day. :dance
> 
> :eyeroll


He didn't, he agreed with me. No surprise a Rollins fan can't read.

3.77 million per episode after the post-Mania RAW. Let that sink in.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Fuck I was wrong. It's actually higher than a 3.8..



> you are arguing over 3.88 and 3.9, seriously
> 
> i took my numbers from pwinsiders averages, i went back and its actually *3.894 million average live over the last 14 weeks since rollins got the belt. *(these are all live numbers and dvr is adding about 12-17% to viewership post mania, unknown how many were watching pre mania on dvr but its probably around the same)


D'oh! Even better. Great job, Seth!

:Cocky


----------



## The Tempest

AdobeFlash said:


> I'm not, I'm arguing over 3.77 million (no one with a brain would give much weight to that outlier after Mania) vs 4+ million which is supposedly what Brock drew during his reign. A reign during which he was absent for the most part, and during which Rollins main evented several RAWs. Those RAWs main evented by Rollins during that period drew very poor numbers just as they have all through his title reign.
> 
> Meltzer's column indicated ratings are currently the lowest they have been in nearly 2 decades. A poster posted data which shows how far ratings have fallen during the first half of this year in comparison to previous years.
> 
> This is really getting under your skin, isn't it?


You rejoined this forum, again? Ffs get over it, you can't let it go because you're so butthurt about it. Get out and enjoy the real world instead of moaning about Rollins 24/7 like a geek. Bye :ha


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Fuck I was wrong. It's actually higher than a 3.8..
> 
> 
> 
> D'oh! Even better. Great job, Seth!
> 
> :Cocky


Which is still way lower than it has been for this time period in previous years. The decline has been much sharper.

But again, 3.77 million since after that post-Mania RAW. Ouch.


----------



## The True Believer

Glad I came to this thread. This popcorn I'm eating needed more salt.


----------



## AdobeFlash

The Tempest said:


> You rejoined this forum, again? Ffs get over it, you can't let it go because you're so butthurt about it. Get out and enjoy the real world instead of moaning about Rollins 24/7 like a geek. Bye :ha


You imbeciles still post here more regularly than I do. I come here only on Mondays and Tuesdays to rub it in your faces that I was right long ago. Long before he was ever champion.

So if anyone needs to get out, it's you, kiddo.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Tempest said:


> You rejoined this forum, again? Ffs get over it, you can't let it go because you're so butthurt about it. Get out and enjoy the real world instead of moaning about Rollins 24/7 like a geek. Bye :ha


:lmao

Owned. Ouch.

Anyway, this was a fantastic day Y'all. Never imagined that Rollins' title reign was that close to drawing 4 million per week. Great day. :cheer

:Cocky


----------



## AdobeFlash

ShowStopper said:


> Anyway, this was a fantastic day Y'all. Never imagined that Rollins' title reign was that close to drawing 4 million per week. Great day.


During a time period which draws _at least_ over 4.3 million per week historically. He wasn't even able to break 4 million on average when you add that outlier after WM.

Rollins fans aren't very good at math.


----------



## The Tempest

AdobeFlash said:


> You imbeciles still post here more regularly than I do. I come here only on Mondays and Tuesdays to rub it in your faces that I was right long ago. Long before he was ever champion.
> 
> So if anyone needs to get out, it's you, kiddo.


Yeah go on, continue to further bury yourself like the butthurt, unoriginal and annoying person that you are, I can use a good laugh :ti



ShowStopper said:


> :lmao
> 
> Owned. Ouch.
> 
> Anyway, this was a fantastic day Y'all. Never imagined that Rollins' title reign was that close to drawing 4 million per week. Great day. :cheer
> 
> :Cocky


Glad to have been of service to you :rollins


----------



## AdobeFlash

The Tempest said:


> Yeah go on, continue to further bury yourself like the butthurt, unoriginal and annoying person that you are, I can use a good laugh :ti


No need, guy. Nothing you can say will make me stop pointing out the facts. You can count on that.


----------



## Bushmaster

Why do you waste your time with him Showstopper or even in this thread, both are crazy and terrible :rollins4


----------



## TheShieldSuck

Anyone got the number yet?


----------



## Empress

TheShieldSuck said:


> Anyone got the number yet?


They are delayed due to the holiday. But their Twitter rating went slightly up.


----------



## Sweettre15

_Monday's episode of WWE RAW, featuring Brock Lesnar plus John Cena vs. Cesaro in the main event slot,* drew 3.647 million viewers.* This is up from last week's 3.462 million viewers.

For this week's show, the first hour drew *3.637 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.689 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.615 million viewers.*

RAW was #4 for the night behind Love & Hip-Hop and Shark Week programming._


----------



## LordKain

If people think the ratings are bad now just wait and see how bad their going to be once they put the belt back on Lesnar as SummerSlam and he only shows up once in a blue moon.

WWE can't do anything right anymore and even the hardcore fans have finally had enough and aren't watching anymore.


----------



## A-C-P

Sweettre15 said:


> _Monday's episode of WWE RAW, featuring Brock Lesnar plus John Cena vs. Cesaro in the main event slot,* drew 3.647 million viewers.* This is up from last week's 3.462 million viewers.
> 
> For this week's show, the first hour drew *3.637 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.689 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.615 million viewers.*
> 
> *RAW was #4 for the night behind* Love & Hip-Hop and *Shark Week programming*._



Return of:










Confirmed, Brock Lesnar vs Jaws = WM32 Main Event :vince$


----------



## StraightYesSociety

LordKain said:


> If people think the ratings are bad now just wait and see how bad their going to be once they put the belt back on Lesnar as SummerSlam and he only shows up once in a blue moon.
> 
> WWE can't do anything right anymore and even *the hardcore fans have finally had enough and aren't watching anymore.*


Mark got his friends and went home, just like uncle Haitch wanted.


----------



## LordKain

A-C-P said:


> Return of:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Confirmed, Brock Lesnar vs Jaws = WM32 Main Event :vince$


:maury

The scary thing is I wouldn't put it past Vince to a try and book that match at this point either. :lmao


----------



## TrainingCamp

CarDoor said:


> They made the right call.
> 
> Rollins was not the focus of RAW tonight for the first time in quite a while. He did not open the show, nor did he close it. He had a short promo, and that segment was saved by Brock coming out and destroying that car.
> 
> *The viewership number will be higher this week. I guarantee it*.


Damn, right again. These things are too easy to predict when you actually know what the fuck you're talking about.

Still a shitty number though, obviously. It will stay this way until the right young guys get pushed.


----------



## Wynter

Meh, viewership I guess. 3rd hour didn't experience a huge drop, but I am shocked it dropped since the Cena vs Owens feud seemed to be drawing the highest no matter what hour they were in. 

Second hour had a pretty good increase. 

Meh, I'm becoming apathetic to the product. Same shit, different Monday. I shouldn't only enjoy 1 or 2 segments in a 3 hour show. It makes no sense. 

Even Smackdown has been shit and uninspired when it used to be pretty good for a while. This build up to Battleground has been a lazy piece of shit outside of the Lesnar stuff. They started off well with bray vs Roman but they're getting lazy with focusing on run ins. How about some character development and the creative segments they started with. 


Siiiiiigh. It's just blah to me now. Same guys in the main event. Lazy booking. Repetitive match ups. Constant dirty finishes because people can't afford to lose clean. Same people getting pushed. 

BLAH!!


----------



## TrainingCamp

Ramsay Bolton said:


> Meh, viewership I guess. 3rd hour didn't experience a huge drop, but I am shocked it dropped since the Cena vs Owens feud seemed to be drawing the highest no matter what hour they were in.
> 
> Second hour had a pretty good increase.


What are you talking about? It stayed consistent throughout all 3 hours. Still better than the Rollins-centric show last week though. But overall, not a very good number.


----------



## Wynter

TrainingCamp said:


> What are you talking about? It stayed consistent throughout all 3 hours. Still better than the Rollins-centric show last week though. But overall, not a very good number.


Why are you confused? I'm just shocked the third hour didn't increase with Cena, Owens and the challenge. I can't remember, was Seth and Brock in the third hour too? 

Either way, I agree. The number isn't very good. That's why I went meh even though it was consistent at least.


----------



## TrainingCamp

Ramsay Bolton said:


> Why are you confused? I'm just shocked the third hour didn't increase with Cena, Owens and the challenge. I can't remember, was Seth and Brock in the third hour too?
> 
> Either way, I agree. The number isn't very good. That's why I went meh even though it was consistent at least.


The difference between each hour is so small that I am sure it falls well within the margin of error anyways. For all intents and purposes, they were virtually identical.

Considering that the 3rd hour usually sees a drop, staying consistent isn't that bad. But he was main eventing with Cesaro. I doubt the casual viewer cares much about him.

Either way, this is just goes to show that when you go from a Rollins-centric RAW the week before to one in which he doesn't dominate screen time, the viewership goes up (as has always been the case.)

Keep that up, WWE.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This is the chart. Apparently lackluster ratings is the new normal for WWE. I wonder how much Pro Football will take out of them this fall?


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All wTV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here***



TrainingCamp said:


> The difference between each hour is so small that I am sure it falls well within the margin of error anyways. For all intents and purposes, they were virtually identical.
> 
> Considering that the 3rd hour usually sees a drop, staying consistent isn't that bad. But he was main eventing with Cesaro. I doubt the casual viewer cares much about him.
> 
> Either way, this is just goes to show that when you go from a Rollins-centric RAW the week before to one in which he doesn't dominate screen time, the viewership goes up (as has always been the case.)
> 
> Keep that up, WWE.


Oh yea, I wasn't saying it was a bad thing. Because you're right, it was consistent unlike other weeks. I just honestly expected an increase because of Cena and Owens. But again as you said, Cesaro and Cena had a long match and many may have not cared or thought nothing much would happen.


----------



## RAW1234

*Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

This week's RAW did *3.647* million viewers.

Both Lesnar and Heyman opened the show and the show consistently lost viewers and only did 3.615 million for the final hour which had both *John Cena* and *Brock Lesnar*. 


There ware no Rollins talk segments and NO AUTHORITY.

The* May 18* show which was built around Seth Rollins "*Architect of a Dream*" did better numbers.

*Hour one: 4.00 million
Hour two: 4.00 million
Hour three: 3.99 million*


STOP BLAMING SETH ROLLINS and STOP BLAMING THE AUTHORITY.

EVEN BROCK LESNAR AND JOHN CENA ON THE SHOW DREW WORSE NUMBERS FOR THEIR HOURS.


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Last week's show was Rollins-centric. This week's show was not. Viewership increased this week.

Viewership since he has been champion, on average, has been the lowest it has been in a very long time.

What about the weak house show attendance numbers when he headlines, or weak merchandise sales? Can we not blame him for those either?


----------



## Łegend Ќiller

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Only Orton can save this shit.


----------



## RAW1234

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> Last week's show was Rollins-centric. This week's show was not. Viewership increased this week.
> 
> Viewership since he has been champion, on average, has been the lowest it has been in a very long time.
> 
> What about the weak house show attendance numbers when he headlines, or weak merchandise sales? Can we not blame him for those either?


The last week's show *gained viewers consistently for all 3 hours*.

This week's show* lost viewers consistently for all 3 hours*. 

Isn't a "big draw" like *Brock Lesnar* supposed to *keep* the viewers? 

Paul Heyman announced "Brock is not going anywhere" when he opened the show and the show still lost viewers which means many casuals just didn't cared. 

Cena headlining show in Saginaw , Michigan drew only *2,500 fans*. 

2,500 fans AFTER 10 YEARS BEING PROMOTED AS THE TOP BABYFACE.


Seth Rollins debuted 2 and a half years ago and he is a CHICKENSH*T HEEL.

AND He has been headlining house shows along with DEAN AMBROSE (who is the babyface and supposed to draw people in). And their house shows drew 3,500 fans in average. 

Shield guys are drawing 3,500-4,000 fans just after being in the company for 2 years and being terribly booked. Compared to Cena they are doing great.

Its not the job of a chickenshit heel to sell merchandise. Seth Rollins is not a "Cool" and "dominant" heel who barely gets heat.

He is the only real heel on the current roster who gets heat from marks and smarks alike.


----------



## Amazing End 96

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

the quality of the show doesn't make a difference. theirs been worse Raws with bigger ratings so quit blaming wrestler's etc. it doesn't make a difference.


----------



## Reign Man

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

I believe Brock was only on in hours 1 and 2. Hour 3 was Cena/Cesaro and New Day.


----------



## RAW1234

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



Reign Man said:


> I believe Brock was only on in hours 1 and 2. Hour 3 was Cena/Cesaro and New Day.


Hour 1 and Hour 3. Hour 2 ended after the Wade Barrett match.


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



RAW1234 said:


> The last week's show *gained viewers consistently for all 3 hours*.
> 
> This week's show* lost viewers consistently for all 3 hours*.
> 
> Isn't a "big draw" like *Brock Lesnar* supposed to *keep* the viewers?
> 
> Paul Heyman announced "Brock is not going anywhere" when opened the show and the show still lsot viewers which means many casuals just didn't cared.
> 
> Cena headlining show in Saginaw , Michigan drew only *2,500 fans*.
> 
> 2,500 fans AFTER 10 YEARS BEING PROMOTED AS THE TOP BABYFACE.
> 
> 
> Seth Rollins debuted 2 and a half years ago and is a CHICKENSH*T HEEL.
> 
> AND He has been headlining house shows along with DEAN AMBROSE (who is the babyface and supposed to draw people in). And their house shows drew 3,500 fans in average.
> 
> Shield guys are drawing 3,500-4,000 fans just after being in the company for 2 years and being terribly booked. Compared to Cena they are doing great.
> 
> Its not a job of a chickenshit heel to sell merchandise. Seth Rollins is not a "Cool" and "dominant" heel who barely gets heat.
> 
> He is the only real heel on the current roster who gets heat from marks and smarks alike.


Lesnar is no longer a big draw. This has been the case ever since his first 2 PPVs.

You're using single house shows to prove your point. That's not a very smart thing to do. And he was headlining against a number of different faces. Here are the averages for a large sample size from last year for the headliners, including Rollins: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2203700-biggest-takeaways-from-wwe-house-show-attendance

Awful numbers for Rollins. You can go tally up the numbers for _this year_ from wrestlinginc and do the same kind of analysis.

Also, heels can sell merchandise too. Good ones that is. It has been happening all throughout wrestling history.


----------



## Simpsons Modern Life

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

The wrestlers don't make the show, the writers make the show, the wrestlers just do what they are told to do.

Yes, the wrestlers performance counts, of course, but ultimately, that's not what keeps people intrigued, it's what they're doing and what's going on that does, and he's just doing what he's told to do.

You can't blame the wrestlers for this.


----------



## Reign Man

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> Lesnar is no longer a big draw. This has been the case ever since his first 2 PPVs.
> 
> You're using single house shows to prove your point. That's not a very smart thing to do. And he was headlining against a number of different faces. Here are the averages for a large sample size form last year: bleacherreport[dot]com/articles/2203700-biggest-takeaways-from-wwe-house-show-attendance
> 
> (replace the [dot] with ".")
> 
> Awful numbers for him. You can go tally up the numbers for _this year_ from wrestlinginc and do the same kind of analysis.
> 
> Also, heels can sell merchandise too. Good ones that is. It has been happening all throughout wrestling history.


Then they should put him against better opponents. Who the fuck wants to see Brock vs. Triple H three times, Brock vs. Cena four times and Brock vs. Big Show?


----------



## CM punker

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



Łegend Ќiller;50279234 said:


> Only Punk can save this shit.


Fixed


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



Reign Man said:


> Then they should put him against better opponents. Who the fuck wants to see Brock vs. Triple H three times, Brock vs. Cena four times and Brock vs. Big Show?


The numbers in that post were for Seth, not for Brock.

Brock isn't a big draw, but he still has more appeal than most others on the roster (other than Cena and HHH.)


----------



## What A Maneuver

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

The only person to blame for poor ratings is Vince McMahon.


----------



## RAW1234

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> Lesnar is no longer a big draw. This has been the case ever since his first 2 PPVs.
> 
> You're using single house shows to prove your point. That's not a very smart thing to do. And he was headlining against a number of different faces. Here are the averages for a large sample size from last year for the headliners, including Rollins: bleacherreport[dot]com/articles/2203700-biggest-takeaways-from-wwe-house-show-attendance
> 
> (replace the [dot] with ".")
> 
> Awful numbers for Rollins. You can go tally up the numbers for _this year_ from wrestlinginc and do the same kind of analysis.
> 
> Also, heels can sell merchandise too. Good ones that is. It has been happening all throughout wrestling history.


Those numbers are from 2014 when Rollins wasn't even the champion.

*2014*

Seth Rollins was drawing *4,200 fans* just during his push was starting and he wasn't even holding the title

He wasn't even being advertised as an attraction back then. Those are GREAT numbers.

And about the merchandise:

"A good heel doesn't care about selling merchandise and being liked outside the ring. There should be no redeeming quality about him whatsoever" - Jim Ross

Rollins is the only good heel on the roster. 

Owens gets NO HEAT.


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



RAW1234 said:


> Those numbers are from 2014 when Rollins wasn't the champion.
> 
> *2014*
> 
> Seth Rollins drawing 4,200 fans just during his push was starting and he wasn't even holding the title.
> 
> And he wasn't even being advertised as an attraction back then. Those are GREAT Numbers.
> 
> A good heel doesn't care about selling merchandise and being liked outside the ring. There should be no redeeming quality about him whatsoever" - Jim Ross
> 
> Rollins is the only good heel on the roster.
> 
> Owens gets NO HEAT.


Yes, they were from last year. The point is, he has never drawn. You can go tally up the shows he has headlined this year and do the same kind of analysis. Someone posted some of his numbers from this year and compared them to the previous 5 or 7 year average for the same cities. The results are just as poor. He used data from wrestlinginc, so you can check that site for the data. You should compare them to what those cities have drawn in the past.

I guess The Rock was a terrible heel too, because he was selling a ton of merchandise and drawing viewers on TV and people to house shows, right? That's not the GOAL of a heel, but if you're good at your job, you will draw people to the product. Not push them away like Rollins has done.


----------



## Godway

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

The show sucks because of the Authority. It has always sucked because of the Authority, and it's become who cares-wrestling since that angle started. Get them the fuck out of the main event program and you'd see a turn around. 

Ratings are bad because they've been running the same fucking angle since Wrestlemania. With a bunch of shitty performers that nobody fucking cares about. They're not giving anyone else a chance to get hot. 

Who can get hot when they have to work with momentum-killers like Show, Kane, or two midgets? It's undermining to their roster. The show isn't going to get any better until the Authority gets off our TV screens, Kane/Show especially. They drag everything around them down.


----------



## RAW1234

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> Yes, they were from last year. You can go tally up the shows he has headlined this year and do the same kind of analysis. Someone posted some of his numbers from this year and compared them to the previous 5 or 7 year average for the same cities. The results are just as poor. He used data from wrestlinginc, so you can check that site for the data. You should compare them to what those cities have drawn in the past.
> 
> I guess The Rock was a terrible heel too, because he was selling a ton of merchandise and drawing viewers on TV and people to house shows, right? That's not the GOAL of a heel, but if you're good at your job, you will draw people to the product. Not push them away like Rollins has done.


Oh you're that Rollins hater who keeps getting banned and making alt. accounts to post crap because you have an agenda. No point going back and forth with you.

A show focused around Rollins drew better than a show having two 20 minute Brock Lesnar segments and John Cena in the main-event. 

That's all that matters.


----------



## gabrielcev

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

It's not Rollins. It's just the utter lack of interest in the product. So much filler. I don't find myself getting excited to watch wrestling anymore.


----------



## The5star_Kid

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



RAW1234 said:


> This week's RAW did *3.647* million viewers.
> 
> Both Lesnar and Heyman opened the show and the show consistently lost viewers and only did 3.615 million for the final hour which had both *John Cena* and *Brock Lesnar*.
> 
> 
> There ware no Rollins talk segments and NO AUTHORITY.
> 
> The* May 18* show which was built around Seth Rollins "*Architect of a Dream*" did better numbers.
> 
> *Hour one: 4.00 million
> Hour two: 4.00 million
> Hour three: 3.99 million*
> 
> 
> STOP BLAMING SETH ROLLINS and STOP BLAMING THE AUTHORITY.
> 
> EVEN BROCK LESNAR AND JOHN CENA ON THE SHOW DREW WORSE NUMBERS FOR THEIR HOURS.


Look, like I've said before, the show and the company has been losing viewers steadily since the end of Austin/Rock. It is what it is. It's not like Raw was doing immense views before Rollins was champ. And it's not like some of the PPVs which had Lesnar main eventing were breaking records. The company lacks huge stars.


----------



## RAW1234

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



Godway said:


> The show sucks because of the Authority. It has always sucked because of the Authority, and it's become who cares-wrestling since that angle started. Get them the fuck out of the main event program and you'd see a turn around.
> 
> Ratings are bad because they've been running the same fucking angle since Wrestlemania. With a bunch of shitty performers that nobody fucking cares about. They're not giving anyone else a chance to get hot.
> 
> Who can get hot when they have to work with momentum-killers like Show, Kane, or two midgets? It's undermining to their roster. The show isn't going to get any better until the Authority gets off our TV screens, Kane/Show especially. They drag everything around them down.


Authority wasn't on the show this week except the 2 minute backstage skit. 

The Authority heavy shows have actually done way better numbers than the one without them (especially after they advertised their return).

Kane wasn't on the show this week.

Just because you hate someone that doesn't make them any less of a draw and just because you like someone doesn't make them a bigger draw than they are. 

Anway, stop trying to change the direction the thread. The show did poor numbers and consistently lost viewers with two 20 minute Brock Lesnar segments and John Cena in the main-event.

The two supposedly "biggest draws" according to some of their fans.


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



RAW1234 said:


> Oh you're that Rollins hater who keeps getting banned and making alt. accounts to post crap because you have an agenda. No point going back and forth with you.
> 
> A show focused around Rollins drew better than a show having two 20 minute Brock Lesnar segments and John Cena in the main-event.
> 
> That's all that matters.


Which show, May 18? You're wrong, as usual. I found the synopsis of that particular RAW:



> WWE pressed down the gas pedal and zoomed toward the next pay-per-view. A trio of title matches, a guest from the NXT ranks and *a lunatic being pushed into the spotlight made for a memorable show*.
> 
> Leaning on wrestling certainly helped. Ryback, Sheamus, Bray Wyatt and *Dean Ambrose provided battles in the ring that grabbed hold of the audience*.


http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...rs-grades-reaction-and-highlights-from-may-18

This was in the midst of Ambrose being thrust into the main event picture. That was literally the only time in this shitty reign when the ratings were respectable. Now that Ambrose is out of the picture, we're down to 3.4-3.6 million per episode.


----------



## Solf

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Anyone in his right mind knew it wasn't a matter of who is in the main event. The product is crap, that is all. Is it that mindblowing that people don't want to watch something that boring ?
Each week I'm watching RAW, I'm playing a videogame for 80% of the time. The only segments I watch are basically Ambrose's (when he's not in a stupid filler match because creative has seemingly NOTHING for him while the guy was in the ME picture three weeks ago), Rollins' and Cena/Owens.

That's like 50 minutes, AT MOST, out of 3 hours.

So yeah, Cena/Owens didn't do any better than the past weeks, and that's no surprise at all. You can't draw shit with that kind of pace/writing.

Ryback/Show/Miz is awful.
The diva division is in such a state that it's offensive to our intelligence as of now.
I've got no words to describe the Rusev/Lana/Ziggler fuckery.
Wyatt/Reigns is as bland as it gets : Really, have Wyatt interfere on EACH FUCKING REIGNS MATCH ?

The rest is filler, and bad one, at that. Even the New Day which had been quite the highlight during the Cesaro/Kidd feud is boring nowadays.


----------



## mattheel

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Well, no shit.

The ones that were blaming him for it simply didnt know what the fuck they were talking about. Became painfully apparent really quickly (most were trolls anyway. FACT)


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



mattheel said:


> Well, no shit.
> 
> The ones that were blaming him for it simply didnt know what the fuck they were talking about. Became painfully apparent really quickly (most were trolls anyway. FACT)


Of course. It's only a coincidence that all of the episodes centered around him draw much lower numbers than the ones that are not. Makes perfect sense.


----------



## gabrielcev

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Only ones blaming Rollins are the ones who never liked him anyway. They will say anything.


----------



## RAW1234

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> Which show, May 18? You're wrong, as usual. I found the synopsis of that particular RAW:
> 
> 
> 
> http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...rs-grades-reaction-and-highlights-from-may-18
> 
> This was in the midst of Ambrose being thrust into the main event picture. That was literally the only time in this shitty reign when the ratings were respectable. Now that Ambrose is out of the picture, we're down to 3.4-3.6 million per episode.


I know your gimmick is hating Rollins/being an Ambrose fanboy and bringing Ambrose up in every thread so stop trolling.

Dean Ambrose wrestled Wyatt that night and only interrupted the main-event segment in the last 2 minutes of the show. 

The whole show was filled with Seth Rollins and Authority segments. They were in the first segment of the show and they were in the last segment of the show.


----------



## Godway

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



RAW1234 said:


> Authority wasn't on the show this week except the 2 minute backstage skit.
> 
> The Authority heavy shows have actually done way better numbers than the one without them (especially after they advertised their return).
> 
> Kane wasn't on the show this week.
> 
> Just because you hate someone that doesn't make them any less of a draw and just because you like someone doesn't make them a bigger draw than they are.
> 
> Anway, stop trying to change the direction the thread. The show did poor numbers and consistently lost viewers with two 20 minute Brock Lesnar segments and John Cena in the main-event.
> 
> The two supposedly "biggest draws" according to some of their fans.


It's 2015. Drawing is significantly different now than it was 10+ years ago. Ratings mean jack shit, and pretty much stay the same within a few points every week no matter who main events. 

If you want to know why the show is so dead and lacking excitement, it is because of the Authority angle. Which absolutely impacts drawing.


----------



## mattheel

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> Of course. It's only a coincidence that all of the episodes centered around him draw much lower numbers than the ones that are not. Makes perfect sense.


Yes. We get it. You're dumb. You dont have to keep posting this stuff to prove it to us.

Do something else with your fuckin life, dude...


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



RAW1234 said:


> I know your gimmick is hating Rollins/being an Ambrose fanboy and bringing Ambrose up in every thread so stop trolling.
> 
> Dean Ambrose wrestled Wyatt that night and only interrupted the main-event segment in the last 2 minutes of the show.
> 
> The whole show was filled with Seth Rollins and Authority segments. They were in the first segment of the show and they were in the last segment of the show.


Rollins was not in the first segment. In fact, that was one of the few shows that had very few Rollins segments. It happened in the hour which drew the least amount of viewers, too.

If you're going to make an argument, use accurate facts, kiddo.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

people that blame it on one wrestler probably ride the short bus to school and wear bike helmets.

Its the entire product from top to bottom.


----------



## The Lion Tamer

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Personally i blame those three shitty matches that happened after that 

:banderas Heyman promo, but that's just me.


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



mattheel said:


> Yes. We get it. You're dumb. You dont have to keep posting this stuff to prove it to us.
> 
> Do something else with your fuckin life, dude...


It's really irritating you that your favorite is the worst drawing champion of the last couple of decades, huh? All of the data we have regarding house shows, merchandise, and TV ratings backs this up.

I don't expect you to acknowledge any of this, because Rollins fans are among the least intelligent segment of the population of wrestling fans and you guys don't do well with numbers, but anyone who has read the data and analysis knows this, little guy.


----------



## RAW1234

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> Rollins was not in the first segment. In fact, that was one of the few shows that had very few Rollins segments. It happened in the hour which drew the least amount of viewers, too.
> 
> If you're going to make an argument, use accurate facts, kiddo.





> WWE RAW - May 18, 2015
> 
> First segment -_ Triple H and Stephanie come out and brag about Seth Rollins being what they thought he would be, and HHH says he told them Rollins was the future. _
> 
> 2nd hour - _Seth Rollins walks into the Authority’s office and gloats about winning, and pours champagne for everyone_
> 
> Last segment -_ The Authority is in the ring for the ‘Architect of a Dream’ ceremony, and Seth Rollins is welcomed to the ring. HHH praises Rollins for his accomplishments, then Kane is asked to speak and he says he is glad Rollins is still champion._


Don't bother replying.


----------



## mattheel

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> *It's really irritating you that your favorite is the worst drawing champion of the last couple of decades, huh?* All of the data we have regarding house shows, merchandise, and TV ratings backs this up.
> 
> I don't expect you to acknowledge any of this, because Rollins fans are among the least intelligent segment of the population of wrestling fans and you guys don't do well with numbers, but anyone who has read the data and analysis knows this, little guy.


Not enough for me to make a few new alt accounts every day for the rest of my natural life to troll about it...

But like i said...you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to ratings. Thats pretty much clear as day. So im good with all this...


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



RAW1234 said:


> Don't bother replying.


Which is exactly what I said. He wasn't involved in the first segment. Thanks for proving my point.

But of course, arguing about single episodes as opposed to averages is kind of absurd. Should I bring up the episode which revolved around Rollins last week that drew 3.4 million on average, and the first hour where he had nearly 50% of the screen time drawing 3.3 million viewers (which is unheard of for the first hour.)

Stick to discussing something more on your intellectual level - like what your favorite flavor of ice cream is.


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



mattheel said:


> Not enough for me to make a few new alt accounts every day for the rest of my natural life to troll about it...
> 
> But like i said...you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to ratings. Thats pretty much clear as day. So im good with all this...


You are irritated. It's obvious based on your replies. It almost feels as if it is ruining your enjoyment of his first title reign. Why do you even care that your favorite is an anti-draw anyways (which is a fact)? Just enjoy that he was given this opportunity before people that are vastly more talented and entertaining than him and who actually have potential to be profitable for the company.


----------



## Solf

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

You really are an amateur. Using troll techniques from 15 years ago. Still kind of enjoyable, nevertheless.


----------



## RAW1234

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> Which is exactly what I said. He wasn't involved in the first segment. Thanks for proving my point.
> 
> But of course, arguing about single episodes as opposed to averages is kind of absurd. Should I bring up the episodes which revolved around Rollins last week that drew 3.4 million on average, and the first hour where he had nearly 50% of the screen time drawing 3.3 million viewers (which is unheard of for the first hour.)
> 
> Stick to discussing something more on your intellectual level - like what your favorite flavor of ice cream is.


You had no point troll. I was talking about Authority and Rollins not just Rollins alone. Read my post again.

Nobody knows who opens the first segment. The ratings *after that* segment reflect whether the people are interested in the show or not. With Rollins opening the show last week the viewership *increased consistently* for all 3 hours.

Even the *3rd hour* was up from the 2nd hour which rarely happens.

Compare that to the ratings this week with the Paul Heyman and Brock Lesnar 18 minute opening segment which saw the viewership falling for all 3 hours.


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Rollins is still boring as fuck


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



RAW1234 said:


> You had no point troll. I was talking about Authority and Rollins not just Rollins alone. Read my post again.
> 
> Nobody knows who opens the first segment. The ratings *after that* segment reflect whether the people are interested in the show or not. With Rollins opening the show last week the ratings *increased consistently* for all 3 hours.
> 
> Even the *3rd hour* was up from the 2nd hour which rarely happens.
> 
> Compare that to the ratings this week with the Paul Heyman and Brock Lesnar 18 minute opening segment which saw the viewership falling for all 3 hours.


Why would you change it from Rollins to the Authority? I don't doubt that HHH can draw. He certainly can, and it has been proven. We are discussing Rollins' drawing power. Pay attention.

The 1st hour usually starts off with a lengthy segment. If viewers get bored, they change the channel. Which appears to be what happened last week when Rollins drew 3.3 million in an hour where he had nearly 50% of the screen time. 

Average viewership increased this week from last week (which was a Rollins-centric show.) It actually stayed pretty consistent throughout. It was in the 3.6 million range in all 3 hours. The difference is so negligible that it almost certainly falls within the margin of error (in case you didn't know, those numbers are extrapolated based on a sample size, they aren't the actual number of viewers; and this produces a statistical error.) So they were virtually identical.

Still, less Rollins this week resulted in higher viewership.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

LOL This is bad


----------



## #Naomi'sButtIsLife

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



gabrielcev said:


> It's not Rollins. It's just the utter lack of interest in the product. So much filler. I don't find myself getting excited to watch wrestling anymore.


You make a point here. Why is there so much filler? It's like they're trying to hold off till something, but that something never comes.


----------



## Bl0ndie

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Any talk about ratings is fucking pointless anyway


----------



## BryanMark

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

he's the champion. he must shoulder atleast half of the blame

if it was Reigns as champ and declining ratings everyone would be on his throat


----------



## Armani

The ME scene is terrible, it's been proven already that people don't care about them (Rollins/Reigns/Kane/Ambrose). It's time for guys like Bray, Cesaro to step up and own the ME scene. Maybe Ambrose once he turns heel. Rollins should be an IC champ because that's his real place on the card and should always be that way. He isn't as good as some of the guys here think.


----------



## Ghost of Wrestling

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Just wondering...Doesn't the NBA Playoffs/Finals , NHL Stanley Cup Playoffs have a very big impact of ratings too.

I for one dont watch WWE Live when those times.

And when Brock Lesnar was champ n not show , he should still be blame for low ratings since he's the champ, right?


----------



## #Naomi'sButtIsLife

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



BryanMark said:


> he's the champion. he must shoulder atleast half of the blame
> 
> if it was Reigns as champ and declining ratings everyone would be on his throat


:tucky
Tis true.


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



BryanMark said:


> he's the champion. he must shoulder atleast half of the blame


Especially when it has been shown that he can't draw at house shows either and cannot sell merchandise.

It's obvious that Rollins fans don't like facts and numbers. They are probably Holocaust and global warming deniers as well.


----------



## BryanMark

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> Especially when it has been shown that he can't draw at house shows either and cannot sell merchandise.
> 
> It's obvious that Rollins fans don't like facts and numbers. They are probably Holocaust and global warming deniers as well.


also not helped by his stupid cowardly booking and then having all top faces like Ambrose and Reigns job to him clean.


----------



## Robbyfude

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Yep the product is just trash now, and its not going anywhere since they're making the most money they have ever had. Catering to the kids who eat up everything that they shit out works, so they can continue the mediocre scripts.


----------



## #Naomi'sButtIsLife

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> Especially when it has been shown that he can't draw at house shows either and cannot sell merchandise.
> 
> It's obvious that Rollins fans don't like facts and numbers. They are probably Holocaust and global warming deniers as well.


That's mostly because Rollins' character isn't set up for big merch sales. He gets his heat off of being annoying. You won't sell much like that. Heels like Wyatt & Owens will always sell more.


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



#Naomi'sButtIsLife said:


> That's mostly because Rollins' character isn't set up for big merch sales. He gets his heat off of being annoying. You won't sell much like that. Heels like Wyatt & Owens will always sell more.


CM Punk and Edge had no problem doing it.


----------



## Jupiter Jack Daniels

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> Especially when it has been shown that he can't draw at house shows either and cannot sell merchandise.
> 
> It's obvious that Rollins fans don't like facts and numbers. They are probably Holocaust and global warming deniers as well.


Why should a heel have to sell merchandise to be effective?







BryanMark said:


> also not helped by his stupid cowardly booking and then having all top faces like Ambrose and Reigns job to him clean.


Ambrose has jobbed "clean" once to Rollins and that was at MITB in a way that came down to the final spot with Ambrose selling the arm and losing possession of the belt.

Since winning the title, Rollins is yet to lose clean to Reigns in a televised match.

Only person he pinned "clean" is Orton.


----------



## Onyx

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> CM Punk and Edge had no problem doing it.


CM Punk and Edge were goat mic workers unlike Rollins.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

So, even putting Cena in the third hour wrestling a half hour main event match was the lowest rated hour of the three hours. Unreal. Not Cena's fault, though. The product overall sucks just like 99.9% of the people here have said.


----------



## TheRealFunkman

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Anybody who becomes champ gets the same stupid conversation.. I remember when it was about punk and now about Rollins... 


Honestly it takes the fun out of the show. Rollins is GOATin it up as champ chill and enjoy the show


But personally I feel the writers are the ones to blame for shit ratings.


----------



## TrainingCamp

ShowStopper said:


> So, even putting Cena in the third hour wrestling a half hour main event match was the lowest rated hour of the three hours. Unreal. Not Cena's fault, though. The product overall sucks just like 99.9% of the people here have said.


The ceiling is low right now due to a shitty champion and main event scene that no one cares about. But this week's average was higher than last week's Rollins-centric show. Don't forget about that.


----------



## Fandangohome

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



TrainingCamp said:


> CM Punk and Edge had no problem doing it.


They were very different types of heel to Rollins. Rollins is a straight up coward, Punk was a "rage against the machine" heel and Edge was an opportunistic narcissist.


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



skyman101 said:


> CM Punk and Edge were goat mic workers unlike Rollins.


They were definitely a lot better than him.

OF COURSE people are going to be pushed away from the product when you're giving one of the worst mic workers on the roster 20 minute segments.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Putting Cena in the main event and wrestling 30 minutes, and that third hour still dropped off. I wish I could say I was surprised that I am correct, but I am not. Good job by myself and the 99.9% of the other posters who got it right again. See ya'll later!


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



Fandangohome said:


> They were very different types of heel to Rollins. Rollins is a straight up coward, Punk was a "rage against the machine" heel and Edge was an opportunistic narcissist.


Punk was one of the most cowardly champions towards the end of his run. He sold his most merchandise in 2011, but he sold a lot towards the end of his 400+ day title run as well.


----------



## TrainingCamp

ShowStopper said:


> Putting Cena in the main event and wrestling 30 minutes, and that third hour still dropped off. I wish I could say I was surprised that I am correct, but I am not. Good job by myself and the 99.9% of the other posters who got it right again. See ya'll later!


Correct about what. I predicted this week's show would average a higher number than last week's Rollins-centric show and I was right yet again. You have yet to be right about anything, kiddo.

Looks like another Rollins fan who doesn't comprehend statistics and what statistical error is.


----------



## LOL-ins

Awful numbers again. I could seriously see a below 3 million hour at the end of the year which would show how bad WWE is currently doing in the ratings.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

We are right once again. Even putting Cena in the third hour did nothing for the ratings. And not only that, but the hour that Cena was in (and a very big part of, wrestling for 30 mins) was the lowest rated of the 3 hours. Interesting. Good job by the 99.9% in here. We were right again. Yawn. This is too easy. Next plz, next plz, next plz (Hey, like the old Pepsi commercial! :lmao) This is great.


----------



## TrainingCamp

ShowStopper said:


> We are right once again. Even putting Cena in the third hour did nothing for the ratings. And not only that, but the hour that Cena was in (and a very big part of, wrestling for 30 mins) was the lowest rated of the 3 hours. Interesting. Good job by the 99.9% in here. We were right again. Yawn. This is too easy. Next plz, next plz, next plz (Hey, like the old Pepsi commercial! :lmao) This is great.


A decrease of about 2%, which is within the margin of error, is what you are referring to? As opposed to the massive decreases we've seen with Rollins in the final hour in the last several months?

How much are you disappointed about the average number being higher than last week's Rollins-centric RAW?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I would say it feels so good to be right again, but this is nothing new for 99.9% of us. Even the thread in the General WWE section is pissing on rejoiner newbs. :lmao I love both of these threads right now! :mark: :mark: :mark:


----------



## TrainingCamp

ShowStopper said:


> I would say it feels so good to be right again, but this is nothing new for 99.9% of us. Even the thread in the General WWE section is pissing on rejoiner newbs. :lmao I love both of these threads right now! :mark: :mark: :mark:


True, you being mad and stomping your feet like a child when facts are presented to you is nothing new.

You must be a global warming denier.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Props to everyone on this thread AND the thread in the General WWE Section for being correct once again. This was too easy to predict. Moving along.

:dance :dance :dance :dance :dance :dance


----------



## TrainingCamp

ShowStopper said:


> Props to everyone on this thread AND the thread in the General WWE Section for being correct once again. This was too easy to predict. Moving along.
> 
> :dance :dance :dance :dance :dance :dance


How much does this quote hurt you?



CarDoor said:


> They made the right call.
> 
> *Rollins was not the focus of RAW tonight for the first time in quite a while*. He did not open the show, nor did he close it. He had a short promo, and that segment was saved by Brock coming out and destroying that car.
> 
> *The viewership number will be higher this week. I guarantee it.*


It's easy to predict these things when you know what you're talking about.


----------



## Chrome

"Cena didn't work either, quick someone get Rock on the line!!" :vince7


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> "Cena didn't work either, quick someone get Rock on the line!!" :vince7


Yup. They can go down the line, not going to matter, unfortunately. Thankfully, 99.9% of us here knew this because it was extremely obvious and simple to see. Right again. Ho-hum.


----------



## TrainingCamp

ShowStopper said:


> Yup. They can go down the line, not going to matter, unfortunately. Thankfully, 99.9% of us here knew this because it was extremely obvious and simple to see. Right again. Ho-hum.


It did matter. They aren't going to be drawing over 4 million because the product is absolute shit right now.

But this past episode still drew better than the Rollins-centric show from last week. Regardless of whether or not you want to acknowledge it. If they condition people to not expect to be bored by Rollins in all 3 hours by doing what they did last Monday, then it's likely we will see a slight upward trend (only slight, because other things will still need to change.)


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Chrome said:


> "Cena didn't work either, quick someone get Rock on the line!!" :vince7


They'll try to throw anything at the wall to see if it will stick. Now, if only,Vince would throw his dated booking playbook against the wall, shatter it, and come up with a new paradigm.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

For those of us that were once again correct, let's all celebrate with a coke, my favorite soft drink:










Well done ladies and gents!


----------



## Rick Sanchez

:maury

I usually just lurk this thread, but it has gotten ridiculously childish. They're just ratings, folks. Take it down a notch.


----------



## Chrome

IDONTSHIV said:


> They'll try to throw anything at the wall to see if it will stick. Now, if only,Vince would throw his dated booking playbook against the wall, shatter it, and come up with a new paradigm.


Or Vince just steps down completely. That'd be the better option imo. :draper2

Oh, I also like how I read your post quoting mine and I get the Eva tickling pic in the Leanna rotating sig. I love when things align like that. :lol


----------



## JonMoxleyReborn

I bet a lot of people didn't even know Cena was gonna be main-eventing this raw. They probably tuned into the second hour which he has been in since Wrestlemania now right? Maybe that's why it got the highest numbers. I legit thought Rollins and Brock was gonna end the show, and I'm sure a lot of you thought so too.


----------



## ChrisMartinBadass

As long as Rollins is champion, there's a certain futility about this thread that really just kind of renders it 'trivial'. Because as long as Rollins is champion, the ratings will never improve significantly because the company's allotted representative is a boring twat with minimal charisma and below average promo skills. He's an absolute joke and failure as a main-eventer... but you already know that  Whether or not, of course, you want to admit that to yourself... well that's a different story. Give Ambrose the belt and watch ratings increase significantly.

It's pretty ironic that Seth's main defender here is named "Showstopper", seeing as Seth is very much the antithesis of that of a showstopper.

Get the belt of Rollins, he's fucking garbage.


----------



## LOL-ins

Under 3 million by the end of the year I say.


----------



## Empress

It's a lackluster increase, but at least the viewership was consistent throughout the night. Cena may not have the same drawing power as in year's past but he's still better than anyone else on the roster.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Losing to SHARK WEEK on the DISCOVERY CHANNEL has to be a new low for the WWE.


----------



## dougfisher_05

Randy Lahey said:


> Losing to SHARK WEEK on the DISCOVERY CHANNEL has to be a new low for the WWE.


Just in terms of the 18-49 rating. They had more total viewership than discovery Channel did overall.


----------



## Hodan

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

I never blame Wrestlers for the low rating they get during their title reign. It is just people around here like to talk about how this "guy is draw give him the title or that guy is the draw"...like one person can save this clusterfuck. The show needs storylines more than matches. A consistent storylines that actually have some movement. Not the same shit all the fucking time.


----------



## tboneangle

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Thanks god someone posted this. People have been blaming Rollins. When it's the entire state of the WWE that's the reason for low numbers. And pro wrestling in general.


----------



## TrainingCamp

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



tboneangle said:


> Thanks god someone posted this. People have been blaming Rollins. When it's the entire state of the WWE that's the reason for low numbers. And pro wrestling in general.


Too bad the OP's absurd claims were easily refuted and debunked.


----------



## RKing85

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

I long ago stopped caring about who the WWE blamed for ratings and gave credit to for ratings.


----------



## GillbergReturns

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Lost in all of this is cable viewership is seeing double digit declines on a monthly basis. Wrestling doesn't operate in a vacuum. If people are ditching their cable subscriptions at record rates needless to say that's going to effect WWE's viewership #'s as well. You really just have to accept that numbers will be decreasing in any scenario. Wrestling isn't popular enough to buck this and draw despite a sh*tty environment and it hasn't been hot for some 13 years now. Trends die we may never see a boom period again.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

I get the impression that most of you Rollins or Ambrose or Reigns marks were not even old enough to appreciate how good Raw used to be in the Attitude Era. I don't understand the pissing contests every week about which guy sucks worst? Nobody on this roster can draw and the ratings are terrible. Then you get these Pollyanna that say ratings don't matter. 

If most of you that still watch the show had a reference point for when Raw was must see TV back in 1998-2000, none of you would be watching now. You would have tuned out like the rest of us have. But since this is all you know, you think it's ok. It's not. The product sucks, and it sucks the worst for people who actually remember when Raw was awesome and see the show for what it is today. 

It's be like comparing SNL in its prime when they had some of the biggest stars in comedy to what that show is today. There's no comparison. its the same thing with WWE.


----------



## NapperX

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

I blame Stephanie, HHH, Rollins, Vince McMahon. You have the boss insulting his own wrestlers by saying they won't reach for the "brass ring", then you have HHH trying to do damage control only to make things worse and then you have Stephanie who sounds drunk half the time. At the end of the day, is this a product you want to see when HHH makes McMahon's comments worse, Stephanie saying charity is the marketing of the future while sounding drunk half the time she speaks, and Rollins being an annoying heel?


----------



## Evolution

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*

Keep it in the ratings thread thanks. It's there for a reason.

You people caring about numbers so much :ti


----------



## Brodus Clay

Oh boy, people love to shit on ADR reigns but at least those were transitional as fuck, Seth as been holding the belt and that spot in the main event for a long ass time already, fuck it at this point I would prefer Cena gets the WWE belt without explanation tomorrow making his feud with Owens a bigger deal, Rollins peaked and ended being trash.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

I would be able to give WWE the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the ratings, it is Summer after all and the days are longer now. Except the show airs on a fucking _Monday_. I'd love to see what kind of numbers RAW would be doing if it were on a Friday or Saturday night. That would be some Smackdown level shit.

It's not fair to place the blame on one or two wrestlers. Viewers can't predict who will be on and when, they don't advertise every single segment in advance. 

I don't know if the main event was promoted as I didn't watch the show, but if it was then I guess that's the exception. A John Cena main event should have done better than that. 

Also, we don't get the breakdowns anymore. Do you really think those numbers would have stayed exactly the same throughout each hour? Obviously fucking not. They would fluctuate. For all we know, a Seth Rollins segment could have risen them a bit, or the John Cena match could have seen a slight boost. 

Some real immature bullshit in this thread.

Ultimately, it comes down to a complete lack of interest in the way the shows are booked. Blame those fuckers behind the scenes.


----------



## D.M.N.

With quarter two (April to June) finished for 2015, here are how things are compare percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q2 2015):

- the previous quarter (Q1 2015)
- one year earlier (Q2 2014)
- two years earlier (Q2 2013)

The most successful quarter two's in recent years were:

-2.5% = 2014
-5.1% = 2012
-9.1% = 2015
-11.9% = 2013

From a year perspective:

Q2 2010 = 4.62 million
Q2 2011 = 5.01 million (up 8.4%)
Q2 2012 = 4.47 million (down 10.7%)
Q2 2013 = 4.13 million (down 7.6%)
Q2 2014 = 4.24 million (up 2.6%)
Q2 2015 = 3.78 million (down 10.8%)

The average of 3,779,538 for Q2 2015 is lower than the 3,782,487 for Q4 2014, meaning that Q2 2015 is the lowest quarter since at least the mid 1990s for WWE Raw.

Looking at the year-on-year comparisons, the percentage comparisons started to turn south around mid-October 2014, and plunged completely in mid-December. Since then, they've never properly recovered, which suggests that the TV that WWE were putting out in the time period mentioned above turned some fans off from watching Raw regularly week-in, week-out.


----------



## Chrome

D.M.N. said:


> Looking at the year-on-year comparisons, the percentage comparisons started to turn south around *mid-October 2014*, and plunged completely in mid-December. Since then, they've never properly recovered, which suggests that the TV that WWE were putting out in the time period mentioned above turned some fans off from watching Raw regularly week-in, week-out.


Makes sense, as the product was absolutely abysmal around that time, and really hasn't gotten much better since.


----------



## dougfisher_05

D.M.N. said:


> With quarter two (April to June) finished for 2015, here are how things are compare percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q2 2015):
> 
> - the previous quarter (Q1 2015)
> - one year earlier (Q2 2014)
> - two years earlier (Q2 2013)
> 
> The most successful quarter two's in recent years were:
> 
> -2.5% = 2014
> -5.1% = 2012
> -9.1% = 2015
> -11.9% = 2013
> 
> From a year perspective:
> 
> Q2 2010 = 4.62 million
> Q2 2011 = 5.01 million (up 8.4%)
> Q2 2012 = 4.47 million (down 10.7%)
> Q2 2013 = 4.13 million (down 7.6%)
> Q2 2014 = 4.24 million (up 2.6%)
> Q2 2015 = 3.78 million (down 10.8%)
> 
> The average of 3,779,538 for Q2 2015 is lower than the 3,782,487 for Q4 2014, meaning that Q2 2015 is the lowest quarter since at least the mid 1990s for WWE Raw.
> 
> Looking at the year-on-year comparisons, the percentage comparisons started to turn south around mid-October 2014, and plunged completely in mid-December. Since then, they've never properly recovered, which suggests that the TV that WWE were putting out in the time period mentioned above turned some fans off from watching Raw regularly week-in, week-out.


Yet this week RAW was 2nd most watched program Monday night on cable, behind major crimes on tnt.

This is what everyone in this thread continues to misunderstand. And honestly it's going to take another million of viewers loss before vince and company take another approach. 

Despite being lower than in years past, RAW is still one of the most watched cable programs on Monday nights. 

If RAW was to drop to number five in viewership for the night there would be an immediate change. Unfortunately there are 3 million diehards that will tune in no matter what.


----------



## bigdog40

dougfisher_05 said:


> Yet this week RAW was 2nd most watched program Monday night on cable, behind major crimes on tnt.
> 
> This is what everyone in this thread continues to misunderstand. And honestly it's going to take another million of viewers loss before vince and company take another approach.
> 
> Despite being lower than in years past, RAW is still one of the most watched cable programs on Monday nights.
> 
> If RAW was to drop to number five in viewership for the night there would be an immediate change. Unfortunately there are 3 million diehards that will tune in no matter what.





Exactly, people act like this is 1996 when ratings met everything when in reality, ratings really don't mean shit. Nobody outside of people who come on forums or post wrestling related youtube videos care, they really don't. Wrestling is on every single day, and if you miss something on Raw when it happens, it's up on youtube 30 minutes later. When ratings "mattered" in reality they really didn't, just in the monday night war, there was no social media and it was the old fashion, "call your friends to see what's going on" way. Raw today would draw similar numbers even if they have Brock Lesnar, John Cena, The Undertaker, Stone Cold Steve Austin, Hulk Hogan, or the Rock on it. Unless the WWE promotes or markets the hell out of a particular episode of monday night raw. They don't do that any more.


----------



## murder

dougfisher_05 said:


> Yet this week RAW was 2nd most watched program Monday night on cable, behind major crimes on tnt.
> 
> This is what everyone in this thread continues to misunderstand. And honestly it's going to take another million of viewers loss before vince and company take another approach.
> 
> Despite being lower than in years past, RAW is still one of the most watched cable programs on Monday nights.
> 
> If RAW was to drop to number five in viewership for the night there would be an immediate change. Unfortunately there are 3 million diehards that will tune in no matter what.


Just switch Raw for Nitro, and you get everyone's thoughts of WCW in 2000/2001.


----------



## TheShieldSuck

Nitro was way way worse. Like not even close.


----------



## ZIGGYISMYKOOTIEPIE

ZIGGY IS BAE AND LEGEND!!! HE BRINGS THE RATINGS WITH HIS SPERM COVERED ASSS!!! I LOVE HIM!!!! :x :x


----------



## Empress

*‘Total Divas’ Ratings: 975,000 Viewers for “Diva Divide”*

Total Divas‘s move to Tuesday nights pulled in a slightly smaller crowd than usual, drawing 975,000 viewers according to TV by the Numbers.

This is down from the season three average, which regularly exceeded one million viewers. The move from Sunday to Tuesday night surely accounts for this dip.

The episode, titled “Diva Divide”, scored a 0.5 rating in the 18-49 demo, which was about the average for season three.

While it didn’t surpass the 8pm airing of Tough Enough in total number of viewers (1.2 million), it did beat its 0.4 rating in the 18-49 demo.
http://www.diva-dirt.com/112587/total-divas-ratings-97500-viewers-for-diva-divide/


----------



## Fandangohome

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



tboneangle said:


> Thanks god someone posted this. People have been blaming Rollins. When it's the entire state of the WWE that's the reason for low numbers. *And pro wrestling in general*.


I wouldn't say that. ROH and TNA's numbers are actually going up, they're still a long way from threatening WWE, but it's a good starting point. I just don't think it's fair to tar the other companies with the same brush, just because WWE's doing poorly and obviously have no interest in reversing the slide.


----------



## Fighter Daron

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



Fandangohome said:


> I wouldn't say that. ROH and TNA's numbers are actually going up, they're still a long way from threatening WWE, but it's a good starting point. I just don't think it's fair to tar the other companies with the same brush, just because WWE's doing poorly and obviously have no interest in reversing the slide.


TNA has been canceled. They don't have TV starting September.


----------



## Fandangohome

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



Fighter Daron said:


> TNA has been canceled. They don't have TV starting September.


Has it been officially confirmed yet? And if and when they get cancelled, i'd assume GFW would just slot right in there, most of their roster is TNA talent anyway, so it's likely just going to be a continuation, in some ways just a rebranding.


----------



## Fighter Daron

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



Fandangohome said:


> Has it been officially confirmed yet? And if and when they get cancelled, i'd assume GFW would just slot right in there, most of their roster is TNA talent anyway, so it's likely just going to be a continuation, in some ways just a rebranding.


They have not been renewed, so yeah, it's pretty official I would say.


----------



## M_D_Q_

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



Fighter Daron said:


> They have not been renewed, so yeah, it's pretty official I would say.



The contract is until the end of 2016, but they have a out coause for september. TNA isnt cancelled.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Fighter Daron

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



M_D_Q_ said:


> The contract is until the end of 2016, but they have a out coause for september. TNA isnt cancelled.
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


That's not what the Observer reported.


----------



## Empress

- Last night's WWE SmackDown drew 2.388 million viewers. This is up from last week's 2.265 million viewers.

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...lvr.it&utm_medium=twitter#2cD3k0AITsJvcg1Y.99


----------



## BrownianFanForever

Can't wait 'til The GOAT slaughters all you retarded Rollins fans tomorrow


----------



## Defei

*Re: Seth Rollins was being wrongfully blamed for RAW ratings*



Fandangohome said:


> I wouldn't say that. *ROH and TNA's numbers are actually going up*, they're still a long way from threatening WWE, but it's a good starting point. I just don't think it's fair to tar the other companies with the same brush, just because WWE's doing poorly and obviously have no interest in reversing the slide.


going up? lolwat?



> Wednesday's episode of Ring of Honor on Destination America drew 128,000 viewers. This is down 18% from last week's 157,000 viewers.
> TNA Impact Wrestling on Destination America at 9pm EST drew 353,000 viewers.
> 
> Source: Wrestlinginc.


They barely crack 350k viewers.


----------



## Goldusto

3.4
3.5
3.6

grew over time, but had a dreadful leadin of hour 1, well it was garbage naturally.

2 and 3 were very good, so it was a gradual increase, but still the overall product is lacking, so there weren't massive gains but next week should be a boost.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

The HR Derby doubled WWE in viewership. Very impressive for the Toddfather.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

Shit's boring and that's what it boils down to. Lame opening promos that go on and fucking on, boring as shit backstage segments and inconsequential matches featuring dumbed down characters. 

WWE isn't cool anymore. It's corny bullshit, man. 

What do you think a potential new viewer is gonna think when they switch over and see grown-ass men partaking in the fuckery that makes up the show we call _Monday Night RAW_ in 2015? They're turning right the fuck back over to whatever it is they were watching before. 

Now, if they happen to catch stuff like this...



















... then it's a different story. Nobody cares about the cornball shit they put on TV now.


----------



## Wynter

Wow...that..it didn't even get to 3.9...


Wow.

Yup. That is god awful :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Here's the chart:












Hour 3 had the most viewers and the highest demo, so that's something.at least.


----------



## Empress

RAW was actually solid too, but I think the WWE has reached a point of almost no return with these ratings. Something drastic has to happen. At least viewership increased as the night went on. That's one positive, I guess.


----------



## Sweettre15

So it's down a whopping 3% from last week and the viewership increased as some act like the Sky is falling?.....Wow


----------



## Empress

*How Did WWE RAW Viewership Do Against the MLB Home Run Derby?*

- Monday's episode of WWE RAW, featuring NXT Divas and the final Battleground hype, drew 3.531 million viewers. This is down from last week's 3.647 million viewers.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.432 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.514 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.647 million viewers.

Cable TV was dominated by MLB's coverage of the All-Star Game Home Run Derby last night. The Derby drew 7.126 million viewers on ESPN.
http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...by.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

*
Seth Rollins Says WWE Stars Aren't Cartoon Characters Anymore, RAW - Twitter Ratings, Lita Clip*
- Monday's RAW ranked #2 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings, behind The Bachelorette. RAW had a unique audience of 1.521 million, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This is down from the 1.373 million the show drew last week. RAW had total impressions of 9.613 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was up from last week's 8.968 million impressions.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...s-wwe-stars-arent-cartoon-characters-anymore/


----------



## Sweettre15

EminenceFront said:


> The ratings are already the lowest they've been outside of football season in about 2 decades. Yes, these are indeed VERY poor numbers.


Those numbers have been par for the WWE course for the last 3/4 years though and unlike previous Summers, WWE was much lazier with their booking, so it isn't time for the Sky to fall yet


----------



## Sweettre15

EminenceFront said:


> What part of lowest in 2 decades is difficult for you to grasp?


That's its a negative buzzword and 2 decades ago was...two decades


----------



## LOL-ins

Sweettre15 said:


> Those numbers have been par for the WWE course for the last 3/4 years though and unlike previous Summers, WWE was much lazier with their booking, so it isn't time for the Sky to fall yet


Don't shout out false facts because that user is right these numbers aren't normal numbers for now. This time last year RAW was getting 2.8 and 2.9's not 2.5's and 2.6's.


----------



## Sweettre15

EminenceFront said:


> Brilliant observation, Einstein.


Point being it was a different time plain and simple


----------



## Sweettre15

LOL-ins said:


> Don't shout out false facts because that user is right these numbers aren't normal numbers for now. This time last year RAW was getting 2.8 and 2.9's not 2.5's and 2.6's.


Ratings or viewership numbers?


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Last year they did well over 4 million viewers for each hour when they went up against the Home Run Derby -- that was WITHOUT Brock Lesnar. This was also without Daniel Bryan. The main storyline last year at this time was Cena defending the championship against Orton, Reigns and Kane. So how could last year do better numbers compared to this year when Brock Lesnar is there?


----------



## murder

Sweettre15 said:


> Point being it was a different time plain and simple


Right 97 was a different time in the sense that it was a lot more difficult to get these numbers with WCW on the other channel, while nowadays the WWE, in theory, can get every wrestling fan out there.


----------



## Sweettre15

murder said:


> Right 97 was a different time in the sense that it was a lot more difficult to get these numbers with WCW on the other channel, while nowadays the WWE, in theory, can get every wrestling fan out there.


Humorously enough though, wrestling in general had a bigger mainstream interest thanks to the Monday Night Wars as well as the product being "modern" for that time.

WWE now doesn't exactly feel "contemporary" and doesn't have the wrestling buzz on their side right now. Could they get people back interested? Possibly but they only seem to care about doing the exact same sh!!t because they can.


----------



## Sweettre15

EminenceFront said:


> Pretty simple actually.
> 
> Cena is a bigger draw than Brock, as has always been the case.


Don't forget that around this time last year there was a support network of The Red hot Shield just breaking up with the Rollins-Ambrose feud being hot, the Reigns/Orton feud being hot, the Swagger/Rusev feud being hot, a Wyatt/Chris Jericho feud, A Bella/Stephanie McMahon feud etc all there as well.


----------



## Shenroe

Sweettre15 said:


> Don't forget that around this time last year there was a support network of The Red hot Shield just breaking up with the Rollins-Ambrose feud being hot, the Reigns/Orton feud being hot, the Swagger/Rusev feud being hot, a Wyatt/Chris Jericho feud, A Bella/Stephanie McMahon feud etc all there as well.


Good times...


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

The Boy Wonder said:


> Last year they did well over 4 million viewers for each hour when they went up against the Home Run Derby -- that was WITHOUT Brock Lesnar. This was also without Daniel Bryan. The main storyline last year at this time was Cena defending the championship against Orton, Reigns and Kane. So how could last year do better numbers compared to this year when Brock Lesnar is there?


Because lesnar is not a draw and his feud with Rollins is boring n stale.


----------



## LilOlMe

From Meltzer:


> WWE news: Raw ratings
> 
> Tuesday, 14 July 2015 14:26
> 
> 
> Raw on Monday did 3.54 million viewers, the second lowest number in the last 17 years not on a holiday or during football season.
> 
> The number was expected to be down due to Home Run Derby, which did 7,126,000 viewers.
> 
> The Raw numbers did increase by the hour, so that was a good sign.
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.43 million viewers
> 
> 9 p.m. 3.51 million viewers
> 
> 10 p.m. 3.65 million viewers


http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-stories/96-wwe-news/43558-wwe-news-raw-ratings-

The last two weeks of RAW have been solid. Sometimes it takes a few weeks for things to start turning around. However, I think that the WWE may have turned so many people off, that they're gonna take a lot longer to come back.


----------



## Peerless

The moment Ambrose was taken out of the main event scene, ratings have been tanking. 

:ambrose


----------



## Armani

Bring back Punk/Bryan and watch the ratings get steady 4 million views. Clearly guys like Roman and Brock aren't doing it. It's not the 90s anymore. People are more drawn to the smaller guys like McGregor, GSP, Jon Jones, Mayweather, Manny, etc. it's the new trend because people can see that they are a lot faster and more fun to watch. If they treated Bryan and Punk like they been treating Cena and Roman, you would have seen a lot of buzz and interest back to WWE. Arguably the most two over guys in the roster are now retired.


----------



## TheGmGoken

Push Ambrose


----------



## ProxyEnablesMe

Shit ratings again? Of course the ratings are shit - Rollins is still champion - and once you're champion, you're the allotted representative of the company.

And to reiterated what a few others have already said: Push Ambrose.

I wonder how many fucktards on here thought the divas would have a positive effect on the ratings LMAO


----------



## The Tempest

Ful Stop said:


> Shit ratings again? Of course the ratings were shit - Rollins is still champion - and once you're champion, that makes you the allotted representative of the company.
> 
> To reiterate what a few others have said: Push Ambrose.
> 
> I wonder how many fucktards thought the divas would have a positive effect on ratings LMAO.


The only fucktard is you making multiple accounts every week because your life is boring, and you're not even entertaining :mj4


----------



## JTB33b

Ful Stop said:


> Shit ratings again? Of course the ratings were shit - Rollins is still champion - and once you're champion, that makes you the allotted representative of the company.
> 
> To reiterate what a few others have said: Push Ambrose.
> 
> I wonder how many fucktards thought the divas would have a positive effect on ratings LMAO.


Cena is to blame because he is the face of the company. He's the reason most hardcore fans stopped watching and why the ratings will never be good again no matter who the champion is.


----------



## TehMootahair

The Tempest said:


> The only fucktard is you making multiple accounts every week because your life is boring, and you're not even entertaining :mj4


I'm sure his goal is not to entertain, but merely to vent.


----------



## BreakTheWallsDown.

In a media saturated world where not only is there such a wide choice of content but an almost equally wide choice of how and when you watch said content, TV ratings just don't cut the mustard as an effective way of judging how successful a television programme is; let alone how successful one performer on that show is.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Redzero

Lol at Brock bringing the ratings.


----------



## A-C-P

Well Vince has been testing out how far he could take the "Oh they will all watch anyways" attitude, maybe that line has finally been crossed :draper2


----------



## Empress

I want a new main event scene but Ambrose being champion isn't going to automatically bring in 10 million viewers. Why do some of you expect Ambrose to do what John Cena and Brock Lesnar can't?


----------



## Fabregas

Sadly it will take a couple more years for RAW to drop below 2


----------



## VectorSpace

> July 13: Monday's WWE Raw fell back to historical-low territory with a 2.52 rating, down from a 2.65 rating last week. Raw two weeks ago scored a 2.51 rating.
> 
> Raw averaged 3.531 million viewers, down three percent from last week's average.
> 
> -PW Torch


Rollins' historic title reign continues.


----------



## VectorSpace

Crazy Eyes said:


> I want a new main event scene but Ambrose being champion isn't going to automatically bring in 10 million viewers. Why do some of you expect Ambrose to do what John Cena and Brock Lesnar can't?


There are no real numbers between 3.4 million and 10 million? Who said anything about 10 million?

It'll do better only marginally at the beginning and steadily increase over time (so long as they keep him in the main event and don't "CM Punk" him) but I doubt anyone is expecting anywhere near 10 million.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

JTB33b said:


> Cena is to blame because he is the face of the company. He's the reason most hardcore fans stopped watching and why the ratings will never be good again no matter who the champion is.


Cena is no longer the most important figure about a year ago, he has not blameless in this

The ratings are bad
WWE has to do something

Some people here remind me of Glee/Klaine fans when Glee was falling in the ratings and they were in denial, saying:

"People no longer watch TV, these numbers are not important"

"Glee makes a lot of money in music and other things"

Then they were shocked when the series ended in the TV worst schedule and the last season only have 13 episodes

WWE bets this past year were Rollins and Reigns, nobody else.
Ambrose, Orton, Kane and Cena were secondary.
The Divas has no obligation to make good ratings because WWE does not give them any time.
When WWE give more than 10 minutes in all RAW, then yes the Divas have to take some responsibility (and even there their guilt is always smaller)


----------



## Brodus Clay

Hope Vince one day awakes bitch slaps HHH and Steph and finally bury the fuck out of Rollins, make him feud Big Show for three years.


----------



## sarcasma

Bottom line, looking over the entire roster, I see only 2 people who have the ability to pop ratings right now with the proper booking.....and its AMBROSE or CENA. 

Cena obviously because he'll bring in the kids.....and I HATE to say that as I cant stand him.

Ambrose because he has the IT factor that makes people want to watch. He also can give a promo that wont make you change your channel. Ambrose (heel of face) with an interview segment ala Pipers Pit would draw. 

I say Reigns as a distant 3rd. Brock isnt there enough to warrant a mention and Bryan because I think he is badly injured. 

Also theres always the potential for a new stable....stables DO draw I believe. 

More backstage stuff, more skits, more on location, thats what I like to watch. More face to face INSULTING promos.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Total Divas> Tough Enough


I am interested in future weeks if this continues.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Being in the 2.5 range during the middle of summer is really bad. I'll be interested to see what the WWE Network number look like. With interest at all time lows in the product, there would have to be some carry over to the Network lagging too.

There aren't any easy solutions. They need to find a crossover star that can make wrestling cool to the casual fan. There's nobody on the roster that can do that. And they won't make the show more interesting or edgy or cater to young adults by going to at least TV14 so they are basically screwed.


----------



## Empress

*Tough Enough and Total Divas viewership numbers are in*

WWE had two programs airing on Tuesday night and the viewership for both shows are in.

Tough Enough at 8:00 pm EST did 997,000 million viewers, which is way down from last week’s episode that did 1.221 million viewers on the USA Network.

Total Divas did 1.031 viewers for E! at 9:00 pm EST, which is up from the 975,000 viewers the show delivered last week.
http://wrestlingnews.co/tough-enoug...ing_wp_cron=1436999767.8090989589691162109375

*RATINGS: WWE TOUGH ENOUGH HITS VIEWERSHIP LOW, “TOTAL DIVAS” ADDS TO AUDIENCE*

"Tough Enough" slips to a season low in total viewership. "Total Divas" falls in the A18-49 demo but rises in viewership.

While it avoided a low in adults 18-49, Tuesday’s “WWE Tough Enough” was the least-watched of the season’s four episodes.

Airing from 8-9PM, Tuesday’s edition of the USA Network reality competition series posted a 0.37 adults 18-49 rating with 977,000 viewers. Both numbers trail last week’s marks (a 0.41 with 1.221 million viewers); the viewership tally represents a season low.

— Like USA’s “Tough Enough,” E!’s WWE-themed reality series slipped in the adults 18-49 demographic this week.

Unlike “Tough Enough,” “Total Divas” added to its viewership total.

Tuesday’s “Total Divas,” which occupied the 9PM hour, drew a 0.45 adults 18-49 rating with 1.031 million viewers. Last week’s season premiere posted a 0.47 rating with 975,000 total viewers.

http://headlineplanet.com/home/2015...ugh-hits-season-low-total-divas-adds-viewers/


----------



## Randy Lahey

Sweettre15 said:


> So it's down a whopping 3% from last week and the viewership increased as some act like the Sky is falling?.....Wow


The sky has already fallen. This the lowest point in WWE history in terms of people watching the show. If it was a regular show it would be on the brink of cancellation by USA given how much USA pays them to make it.


----------



## Vyer

With NXT, I don't really see a need for Tough Enough.


----------



## Epic Faggot that needs Psychological help

Until Seth Rollins loses the belt, this thread should be locked. Nothing to discuss - ratings aren't changing with that turd as champ'.


----------



## Empress

Vyer said:


> With NXT, I don't really see a need for Tough Enough.


I agree. The appeal of Tough Enough has already worn off for me. Although, I do hope Tanner and ZZ get contracts. I feel like the WWE tried to mesh reality TV and wrestling and it's coming off bad. Last time I watch two weeks ago, the judges were still coming off as wallpaper. Tough Talk is better.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Chart for Smackdown. It's seen better days:


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Crazy Eyes said:


> I agree. The appeal of Tough Enough has already worn off for me. Although, I do hope Tanner and *ZZ* get contracts. I feel like the WWE tried to mesh reality TV and wrestling and it's coming off bad. Last time I watch two weeks ago, the judges were still coming off as wallpaper. Tough Talk is better.


This is what is wrong with wrestling today. A talentless fat shit with no charisma and a shit cardio and people want them to be WWE wrestlers. Very sad. The ratings were higher when they were steroid freaks. Now we have out of shape wrestlers like Daniel Bryan(He should have more muscle to be main eventing), Kevin Owens, and ZZ. Imagine if a UFC fighter were in the shape of these wrestlers. They would be called a joke and people won't want to watch that shit.

Now WWE fans want the everyday man who don't stand out from average fans. And you wonder why people are turned off by the product...


----------



## The Tempest

Spongebob doing better ratings than SmackDown? :Oooh Are fucking kidding me? :maisielol2 This is great :lmao


----------



## Choke2Death

Spongebob > Smackdown in 2015, so no surprise there.


----------



## Chrome

Poor :vince5 even jobbing to







these days.


----------



## boxing1836

is that the lowest viewership for non holiday smackdown in history? I honestly don't remember a viewership ever being that bad.


----------



## TheShieldSuck

I'm just shocked that its happening now. Smackdown has been pointless for 5-6 years now.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Most Watched Segments of 2015 - YouTube*
01 - 9.2 million views - Lana kisses Dolph Ziggler (Raw - May 18th)
02 - 6.8 million views - Seth Rollins vs Brock Lesnar - WWE World Heavyweight Championship Match (Raw - March 30th)
03 - 6.5 million views - Sting and the Viper clean house (Raw - March 16th)
04 - 3.3 million views - Rusev confronts John Cena before WWE Fastlane (Raw - February 16th)
05 - 3.2 million views - Roman Reigns confronts Brock Lesnar face to face (Raw - March 23rd)
06 - 3.2 million views - John Cena vs. Seth Rollins, Kane & Big Show - 3-on-1 Handicap Match (Raw - January 19th)
07 - 3.1 million views - John Cena vs. Seth Rollins - Lumberjack Match (Raw - January 12th)
08 - 2.7 million views - Sting kicks off Raw for the first time ever (Raw - March 23rd)
09 - 2.6 million views - Roman Reigns and Brock Lesnar meet face to face (Raw - January 26th)
10 - 2.6 million views - Brock Lesnar calls out Seth Rollins (Raw - January 19th)

And from this past Monday:

1.61m - WWE World Heavyweight Championship Contract Signing for WWE Battleground
805k - NXT Divas emerge to challenge Team Bella
755k - Cesaro vs. Kevin Owens vs. Rusev - Winner Faces John Cena for the U.S. Championship
732k - Dean Ambrose vs. Bray Wyatt
647k - John Cena vs. Rusev - United States Championship Match
452k - Randy Orton & Ryback vs. Big Show & Sheamus
421k - Seth Rollins vows to burn Suplex City to the ground
269k - Neville vs. Stardust
255k - Mark Henry & The Prime Time Players vs. The New Day
182k - R-Truth vs. King Barrett
145k - The cast of Tough Enough comes to Raw

A huge difference between the biggest and smallest numbers. If anything, WWE isn't becoming less popular, it is just that its audience is picking and choosing what it wants to watch.


----------



## Empress

I wonder if RAW cracked 4 million viewers last night. The post PPV shows usually do well, but last featured Taker and Brock. It was also a solid show.


----------



## Empress

*WWE RAW Twitter TV Ratings
*
– Monday’s RAW ranked #2 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen’s Twitter TV ratings, behind The Bachelorette. RAW had a unique audience of 1.542 million, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This is up from the 1.521 million the show drew last week. RAW had total impressions of 10.714 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was also up from last week’s 9.613 million impressions.

Read more: http://www.pwmania.com/batista-taki...gs-preview-for-new-the-wwe-list#ixzz3gYcLQa4A


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Crazy Eyes said:


> *WWE RAW Twitter TV Ratings
> *
> – Monday’s RAW ranked #2 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen’s Twitter TV ratings, behind The Bachelorette. RAW had a unique audience of 1.542 million, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This is up from the 1.521 million the show drew last week. RAW had total impressions of 10.714 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was also up from last week’s 9.613 million impressions.
> 
> Read more: http://www.pwmania.com/batista-taki...gs-preview-for-new-the-wwe-list#ixzz3gYcLQa4A


I dont know how to gauge twitter interest, but I would have thought Taker,coupled with the ppv fallout would have spiked tweets more.


TV viewership should be up because it always increases after a ppv. I wonder how this week will compare to other ppv fallout RAWs and just how much more interest Taker brought added onto the already heightened interest of curious visitors seeking to know who won the night before.


----------



## Empress

IDONTSHIV said:


> I dont know how to gauge twitter interest, but I would have thought Taker,coupled with the ppv fallout would have spiked tweets more.
> 
> 
> TV viewership should be up because it always increases after a ppv. I wonder how this week will compare to other ppv fallout RAWs and just how much more interest Taker brought added onto the already heightened interest of curious visitors seeking to know who won the night before.


The Undertaker started trending almost right away on Twitter after he appeared. Most people were happy to see him and others were making jokes about his voice. 

If last night's show didn't crack 4 million viewers, Vince just might have to bring back the entire AE roster to do the trick. :lmao


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Crazy Eyes said:


> The Undertaker started trending almost right away on Twitter after he appeared. Most people were happy to see him and others were making jokes about his voice.
> 
> If last night's show didn't crack 4 million viewers, Vince just might have to bring back the entire AE roster to do the trick. :lmao



Might be time to make some calls:


----------



## Wynter

> Monday's episode of WWE RAW, featuring the fallout from Battleground plus appearances by The Undertaker and Brock Lesnar, drew 3.804 million viewers. This is up from last week's 3.531 million viewers.
> 
> For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.840 million viewers, the second hour drew 4.030 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.542 million viewers.


Well...that's...idk?? :lol Nothing big. About the same for every post PPV Raw. That last hour dropped like a bitch though lol


----------



## StraightYesSociety

3.8 million on a show after a PPV where Taker and Brock had a face off...


----------



## A-C-P

Not even a 4 mil average, yep it looks like those fans that you said will just keep watching anyways have actually stopped watching Vince :quimby


----------



## Empress

Ramsay Bolton said:


> Well...that's...idk?? :lol Nothing big. About the same for every post PPV Raw. That last hour dropped like a bitch though lol


Of course that last hour dropped. There was no topping Brock/Undertaker. Once people realized the great stuff was over, they probably tuned out.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

This can't be! I thought if part timers were on Raw, AND going at it with one another, the rating would easily be over 4 million.

Oh, wait..

And the 2nd hour outdrew the first...:lmao


----------



## Wynter

Crazy Eyes said:


> Of course that last hour dropped. There was no topping Brock/Undertaker. Once people realized the great stuff was over, they probably tuned out.


Still, a face off between UNDERTAKER AND BROCK only just drew over 4 million?? That's it??? Hell, the regular roster draws that after a PPV.

That's fucking pitiful.

Welp, Cena will be getting the belt back. When Taker and Brock can't move shit, Vince will panic and go straight to the golden goose :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Damn. Chances are the promo with Taker and the Taker/Brock brawl kept those two hours from being in the 3.5 million range, so at the very least they may have had an impact in some regard.

Still, this shows that nothing short of The Rock coming back has a chance of popping over 4 million nowadays outside of Mania time. Even with The Rock, it's still not set in stone I think. They need like 3 big time feuds with big names so each hour has one going on to keep the whole show afloat. Doesn't help that they advertised that 6-man tag as the main event when there was really nothing to it.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> This can't be! I thought if part timers were on Raw, AND going at it with one another, the rating would easily be over 4 million.
> 
> Oh, wait..
> 
> And the 2nd hour outdrew the first...:lmao


It wasnt against the All Star Game this week and followed a ppv. The numbers were up, but I need someone in the know to compare this rating to other recent post ppv bounces. 2nd hour had the highest viewers and demo.

Awaiting the rejoiner to spin this as a commentary on how Seth is failing,any second now.


----------



## Empress

A-C-P said:


> Not even a 4 mil average, yep it looks like those fans that you said will just keep watching anyways have actually stopped watching Vince :quimby


The show has been crap for weeks, if not months now. Brock and Taker alone brought the most interest and hype last night. Folks missed out on a damn good brawl, but I can't blame those who have tuned out. Chickens seem to be coming home to roost. 

I think John Cena gets the belt back sooner than later to goose up the ratings as much as he can. Although, next week's rating might be better because of Brock/Taker but Brock isn't scheduled to show. I'm not sure Taker is showing up either.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

And didn't the Taker/Brock stuff take place in hour 1? And that wasn't even the highest rated hour of the show. Twilight Zone stuff right there, but it's :fact s


----------



## Wynter

WWE reaping what they sow and I'm just like



















Hey, Vince! You want to try and push the young talents now? You know, like that one kid named Kevin Owens who had all this momentum behind him?? No?? How about Cesaro?? He's getting over as fuck again. No?? Dean always has the crowd behind him. How about that gu--

Huh, you're just going to use Cena and throw the belt on him??



Oh.....


----------



## A-C-P

Crazy Eyes said:


> The show has been crap for weeks, if not months now. Brock and Taker alone brought the most interest and hype last night. Folks missed out on a damn good brawl, but I can't blame those who have tuned out. Chickens seem to be coming home to roost.
> 
> I think John Cena gets the belt back sooner than later to goose up the ratings as much as he can. Although, next week's rating might be better because of Brock/Taker but Brock isn't scheduled to show. I'm not sure Taker is showing up either.


Yep reign # 16 right around the corner :cena

But not even that is going to have much of an effect on things either IMO. Hopefully the more "same old" stuff that Vince tries to no (or very little) effect the closer Vince and Co get to realizing a complete overhaul is needed.


----------



## Erik.

ShowStopper said:


> And didn't the Taker/Brock stuff take place in hour 1? And that wasn't even the highest rated hour of the show. Twilight Zone stuff right there, but it's :fact s


I think Heymans promo started in Hour 2.

Could be wrong.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Erik. said:


> I think Heymans promo started in Hour 2.
> 
> Could be wrong.


I know Taker kicked off Raw.


----------



## Wynter

A-C-P said:


> Yep reign # 16 right around the corner :cena
> 
> But not even that is going to have much of an effect on things either IMO. Hopefully the more "same old" stuff that Vince tries to no (or very little) effect the closer Vince and Co get to realizing a complete overhaul is needed.


I just need things to hit near rock bottom. I want Vince to scramble trying to use his same old tricks, but they crash and burn. Because everyone is sick of the same ol bullshit.

Because when Vince is backed into a wall, he does some brilliant shit.

Too bad he can't receive constant pressure ala WCW breathing down his neck and kicking his ass. Because Vince gets complacent way too quickly now days. He books a good Raw and then the next 5 are complete shit.

siiiiigh


----------



## Empress

A-C-P said:


> Yep reign # 16 right around the corner :cena
> 
> But not even that is going to have much of an effect on things either IMO. Hopefully the more "same old" stuff that Vince tries to no (or very little) effect the closer Vince and Co get to realizing a complete overhaul is needed.


John Cena is the only golden goose left, even if his feathers are starting to fall off. I wonder just how bad the ratings would've gotten if Brock/Taker weren't there. I could watch that brawl over and over. They created a slight bump, but I'm sure the WWE wanted more of an impact. 

If Vince felt like putting his pride aside, he could call up CM Punk. How long is Punk's UFC contract for? A Punk return could create immediate buzz for the WWE.

Rock bottom might not be too bad from a quality standpoint though if it forces creative to do their jobs better.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

IDONTSHIV said:


> It wasnt against the All Star Game this week and followed a ppv. The numbers were up, but I need someone in the know to compare this rating to other recent post ppv bounces. 2nd hour had the highest viewers and demo.


Well here's what I got:

Post Battleground numbers:

8PM - 3.840 (+400k)
9PM - 4.030 (+500k)
10PM - 3.542 (-100k)

Post MITB Raw (Brock return):

8PM - 4095 (+400k)
9PM - 4249 (+650k)
10PM - 3997 (+350k) 

Post EC Raw:

8PM - 3946 (+150k)
9PM - 4113 (+550k)
10PM - 3862 (+440k) 

Post PB Raw:

8PM - 4.001 (+200k)
9PM - 4.001 (+150k)
10PM - 3.955 (+550k)

Post ER Raw:

8PM - 3.823 (-300k)
9PM - 3.855 (-300k)
10PM - 3.590 (-250k)



Taker kicked off the show, the Taker/Brock brawl started on the 2nd hour. Rollins promo started at the tail end of the 2nd hour and Cena came out right at the turn to the 3rd hour.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ramsay Bolton said:


> I just need things to hit near rock bottom. I want Vince to scramble trying to use his same old tricks, but they crash and burn. Because everyone is sick of the same ol bullshit.
> 
> Because when Vince is backed into a wall, he does some brilliant shit.
> 
> Too bad he can't receive constant pressure ala WCW breathing down his neck and kicking his ass. Because Vince gets complacent way too quickly now days. He books a good Raw and then the next 5 are complete shit.
> 
> siiiiigh


Yep. I mean, shit, Vince got complacent with Raw before Nitro even came around in late '95. WCW coming up with Nitro was the best thing that could happen to wrestling fans because it made Vince pick his game up. And WCW going out of business was the worst thing that could happen to wrestling fans. Because, predictably, Vince went right back to being complancent alittle while after that. And now look where they are.
@Crazy Eyes

Punk has a 3 year UFC contract, IIRC.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Something is missing here. :hmm This clearly proves that viewers hate Seth Rollins , even though he did a great job on the mic. Seth depressed Taker's return numbers and should be relegated to Superstars, an ironically named show for *him* to appear on, until his contract expires and he can return to the bingo hall from whence he came.


----------



## Wynter

IDONTSHIV said:


> Something is missing here. :hmm This clearly proves that viewers hate Seth Rollins , even though he did a great job on the mic. Seth depressed Taker's return numbers and should be relegated to Superstars, an ironically named show for *him* to appear on, until his contract expires and he can return to the bingo hall from whence he came.


Where's Brownian 

I need to see him blame Roman and Seth for these ratings. Not the same without him here :lol


----------



## Empress

Vince is shit out of luck then if CM Punk is in a three year contract with UFC. I honestly can't think of another name who is healthy and in their prime to give the WWE a quick shot that could have a lasting impact. Daniel Bryan is injured and we don't know when he's returning.

I know Punk wasn't a huge ratings draw, but he seemed to do better numbers than the current average and the controversy of his return would pay off.

It's just a shame that the WWE is so lazy and they only change creative direction due to low ratings. Just make a consistently good show.


----------



## Variance

Ramsay Bolton said:


> Where's Brownian
> 
> I need to see him blame Roman and Seth for these ratings. Not the same without him here :lol


Reigns hasn't been to blame for the ratings since the RTWM.

Rollins, on the other hand, has single-handedly killed the main event scene. So much so, that it will take a while to cleanse it of him and the stench he has left on it.

It's no surprise that the highest hour had the Taker/Lesnar brawl. As for the rest of the show, the audience has been conditioned to expect a 20 minute Rollins promo at virtually any point, so that explains the poor numbers outside of hour 2. Rollins was the lead in to hour 3 and his dull promo went into the 3rd hour. The large drop from 2 to 3 is no shock.

Thankfully, this means that Cena will likely take the belt off of this geek. Hopefully he buries him on the mic for the next month too, and then Rollins can become a worthless nobody like the rest of the guys Cena has buried. It'll be a treat to watch. 

FINALLY Cena will bury a guy I don't like.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*The way I see it: Undertaker drops promo, Twitter and Facebook blow up, 2nd hour viewers increased, brawl happens, Seth's boring promo happens, then the viewers leave.*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Updated my previous post with increase numbers from the previous week.

Also, it should be noted that for the first time ever in Raw history, The Undertaker and Damien Sandow were in the same ring during the 2nd hour. It's probably why the hour did over 4 million viewers. It was also Sandow's first Raw appearance since he cut that promo back in late April/May (he was always Macho Mandow following that if I'm not mistaken).

Just sayin'. 0


----------



## Wynter

Fuck Punk and WWE doing another "Let's bring back an established star to boost ratings temporarily."

HOW ABOUT BUILD SOME FUCKING STARS LIKE THEY MEAN SOMETHING. STOP PANICKING ANYTIME SOMEONE DARES AFFECTS CENA'S MERCH SALES. AND PUSH GUYS WHO, YOU KNOW, GET SUPPORT FROM THE CROWD?? GASP! I KNOW! FUCKING MAGIC!


I'm quite enjoying seeing Vince's usual schemes falling flat










AE stars no longer being super effective. Welp, time to push those young whippersnappers


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BAHAHAHAHAAHAHA. That was the weakest Brownian post ever. Dude is DEFEATED. The "like" he got is reflective of that, as well. Just flatout anger.


----------



## A-C-P

Crazy Eyes said:


> Vince is shit out of luck then if CM Punk is in a three year contract with UFC. I honestly can't think of another name who is healthy and in their prime to give the WWE a quick shot that could have a lasting impact. Daniel Bryan is injured and we don't know when he's returning.
> 
> I know Punk wasn't a huge ratings draw, but he seemed to do better numbers than the current average and the controversy of his return would pay off.
> 
> *It's just a shame that the WWE is so lazy and they only change creative direction due to low ratings.* Just make a consistently good show.


And I think it has gotten to the point where people have figured out when that happens it is only temporary and the creative changes when ratings get low are having less and less affect each time it happens.


----------



## Variance

ShowStopper said:


> BAHAHAHAHAAHAHA. That was the weakest Brownian post ever. Dude is DEFEATED. The "like" he got is reflective of that, as well. Just flatout anger.


Angry about what? We're getting exactly what we want. You thought Cena buried Rollins and his title reign last night? Just watch what Cena does over the next month, and more importantly, at SummerSlam.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Variance said:


> Angry about what? We're getting exactly what we want. You thought Cena buried Rollins and his title reign last night? Just watch what Cena does over the next month and more importantly at SummerSlam.


That's fine with me. :shrug All I wanted was Rollins to have a 5 month title reign, from WM to SS, and that's what it looks like I'm getting. I'm not greedy. And he'd be losing it to the most legit guy on the roster. :shrug

The anger at Cena on this site, and the internet in general is back already, anyway. This board has already had multiple angry Cena threads in less than 24 hours.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wade Keller ‏@thewadekeller 1m1 minute ago
So does return of Undertaker pop a rating? Depends on what u consider popping a rating. Raw increases from 2.5 last week to 2.8 this week.

:ti


----------



## Empress

Ramsay Bolton said:


> Fuck Punk and WWE doing another "Let's bring back an established star to boost ratings temporarily."
> 
> HOW ABOUT BUILD SOME FUCKING STARS LIKE THEY MEAN SOMETHING. STOP PANICKING ANYTIME SOMEONE DARES AFFECTS CENA'S MERCH SALES. AND PUSH GUYS WHO, YOU KNOW, GET SUPPORT FROM THE CROWD?? GASP! I KNOW! FUCKING MAGIC!
> 
> 
> I'm quite enjoying seeing Vince's usual schemes falling flat
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AE stars no longer being super effective. Welp, time to push those young whippersnappers



Stop making sense and #GiveJohnCenaAChance :cena5

But seriously, this roster has the Shield guys, Bray Wyatt, Rusev, Cesaro and Kevin Owens to name a few. These are all talents waiting for their chance to take it to the next level. It's not fair that they're not pushed to the best of their capabilities. 

Owens was getting a great push for a solid two months, but that's over because he might be selling more merch than Cena. It's so short sighted to pin everything on Cena. I'm not even sure how Cena feels carrying the company on his back after so many years. Maybe he's tired of it or gets off on it. Either way, it should be a shared load. Make some more stars that shine as bright as Cena. But I expect more panicking, putting the belt back on Cena and reaching out to part timers/old stars. 

RAW also needs to switch back to two hours.


----------



## Wynter

ShowStopper said:


> That's fine with me. :shrug All I wanted was Rollins to have a 5 month title reign, from WM to SS, and that's what it looks like I'm getting. I'm not greedy. And he'd be losing it to the most legit guy on the roster. :shrug
> 
> The anger at Cena on this site, and the internet in general is back already, anyway. This board has already had multiple angry Cena threads in less than 24 hours.


I'm just waiting for his face run :banderas

Then, that's when shit gets real.

Just waiting on that turn


----------



## Variance

Ramsay Bolton said:


> I'm just waiting for his face run :banderas
> 
> Then, that's when shit gets real.
> 
> Just waiting on that turn


I hope one of you saves the this quote from me. Take a screenshot of it or whatever.

_Rollins will flop even harder as a face than he did as a heel. I 100% guarantee this._


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Man, what a great day this was. :mark:


----------



## Empress

Ramsay Bolton said:


> I'm just waiting for his face run :banderas
> 
> Then, that's when shit gets real.
> 
> Just waiting on that turn


Seth will be next level once that turns happens. I don't think he'll flop. But HHH needs to put him over first. I'm torn over whether he will given WM 32 and possibly facing The Rock.


----------



## Wynter

Variance said:


> I hope one of you saves the this quote from me. Take a screenshot of it or whatever.
> 
> _Rollins will flop even harder as a face than he did as a heel. I 100% guarantee this._


Really? The dude has the perfect babyface moveset. The crowd will love him from the work he puts in the ring. An athletic high flying daredevil?? Easy money right there.

Plus, he is a natural face(even with my love for his smug ass brattiness heel). Near the end of the Shield run, the audience was all over Seth's dick because he was wowing them in the ring.

Hell, I still believe Seth turning so cowardly when he didn't start off that way had part to do with the fans starting to cheer him even though he was a heel. And that was largely due to the fact he was killing it in the ring at such events like RR triple threat.

You say he doesn't have mic skills. Let's say I agree. Jeff Hardy couldn't speak worth a lick but his presentation and the way he worked in the ring won the fans over. Yeah, he was no in ring technician, but he was a charismatic in the squared circle. Seth can do all what Jeff can and is actually an amazing wrestler.

Don't see how he can lose unless WWE makes it their mission to bury him :shrug:


----------



## RatedR10

I haven't kept up with this thread in ages but are people still pointing the finger at one superstar like it's fact? Or have they realized that it's a WWE-product thing and not a single superstar causing poor ratings? I mean, even WWE's short-term fix of Lesnar/Taker can barely pop the viewership above 3.8 million. It's a short-term, small bandaid for a deep cut that needs stitches and lots of them. This fear of pushing new guys will absolutely kill WWE when Football starts again.


----------



## Variance

Ramsay Bolton said:


> Really? The dude has the perfect babyface moveset. The crowd will love him from the work he puts in the ring. An athletic high flying daredevil?? Easy money right there.
> 
> Plus, he is a natural face(even with my love for his smug ass brattiness heel). Near the end of the Shield run, the audience was all over Seth's dick because he was wowing them in the ring.
> 
> Hell, I still believe Seth turning so cowardly when he didn't start off that way had to do with the fans starting to cheer him even though he was a heel. And that was largely due to the fact he was killing it in the ring at such events like RR triple threat.
> 
> You say he doesn't have mic skills. Let's say I agree. Jeff Hardy couldn't speak worth a lick but his presentation and the way he worked in the ring won the fans over. Yeah, he was no in ring technician, but he was a charismatic in the squared circle. Seth can do all what Jeff can and is actually an amazing wrestler.
> 
> Don't see how he can lose unless WWE makes it their mission to bury him :shrug:


Look back through WWE history. How many "athletic high flying daredevils" have gotten massively over or were able to become draws? Jeff Hardy got massively over, but he was never a draw. He also had significantly more charisma than Rollins does.

The thing about Jeff Hardy, in addition to his charisma, is that he was viewed as someone being held down by the company. Rollins will never have that benefit, because everyone knows they are behind him. Daniel Bryan was also viewed as being held down, much like Hardy. People underestimate the role that played in them getting massively over.


----------



## Rodzilla nWo4lyfe

ShowStopper said:


> And didn't the Taker/Brock stuff take place in hour 1? And that wasn't even the highest rated hour of the show. Twilight Zone stuff right there, but it's :fact s


No. Taker kicked off Raw, but the brawl happened in the 2nd hour.


----------



## SóniaPortugal

You guys are acting like they were good ratings
The ratings went up, but this happens after PPVs
The last hour is awful


----------



## Wynter

Variance said:


> Look back through WWE history. How many "athletic high flying daredevils" have gotten massively over or were able to become draws? Jeff Hardy got massively over, but he was never a draw. He also had significantly more charisma than Rollins does.
> 
> The thing about Jeff Hardy, in addition to his charisma, is that he was viewed as someone being held down by the company. Rollins will never have that benefit, because everyone knows they are behind him. Daniel Bryan was also viewed as being held down, much like Hardy. People underestimate the role that played in them getting massively over.


I'm not saying Seth will(or won't) become some huge mega star who pushes ratings consistently. I don't see him particularly flopping is my point. I think he will be received very well by the audience and will be a top babyface.

Will he become Bryan over? Who knows. I wouldn't count him out though.

Now the drawing thing? That's the wait and see game. Because as you can see, not even Taker and Brock would carry the weight of WWE's past fuckery to something worth bragging about ratings wise.

So, unless WWE gets their shit together as a whole. We will see a whole lot of failed draws.

Hell, like you, I see big money in Dean Ambrose. But let's say they decide to push him, but then bitch him out like Seth at the same time. I don't think he will draw as well as his potential.


----------



## Variance

Ramsay Bolton said:


> I'm not saying Seth will(or won't) become some huge mega star who pushes ratings consistently. I don't see him particularly flopping is my point. I think he will be received very well by the audience and will be a top babyface.
> 
> Will he become Bryan over? Who knows. I wouldn't count him out though.
> 
> Now the drawing thing? That's the wait and see game. Because as you can see, not even Taker and Brock would carry the weight of WWE's past fuckery to something worth bragging about ratings wise.
> 
> So, unless WWE gets their shit together as a whole. We will see a whole lot of failed draws.
> 
> Hell, like you, I see big money in Dean Ambrose. *But let's say they decide to push him, but then bitch him out like Seth at the same time*. I don't think he will draw as well as his potential.


As a heel or as a face?

If he played the same role, I would have no problem with it. Give Ambrose 20 minute segments and he wouldn't put anyone to sleep or make them change the channel. I guarantee you that.

I think Sandow would have been the best choice for that role though. Excellent mic skills. He is able to play a character with a superiority complex perfectly. He wouldn't have to be good in the ring since he would be getting his ass kicked for the majority of his matches. It would have been so much better than this boring motherfucker we got instead.


----------



## Wynter

Variance said:


> As a heel or as a face?
> 
> If he played the same role, I would have no problem with it. Give Ambrose 20 minute segments and he wouldn't put anyone to sleep or make them change the channel. I guarantee you that.
> 
> I think Sandow would have been the best choice for that role though. Excellent mic skills. He is able to play a character with a superiority complex perfectly. He wouldn't have to be good in the ring since he would be getting his ass kicked for the majority of his matches. It would have been so much better than this boring motherfucker we got instead.


You could very well be right. Dean could be handed the same fuckery and somehow turn the shit into gold. I can't really dispute without being able to see Dean in the exact situation. 

Very few can do that though. Sandow is definitely an example of a dude who is given dog shit, but turns it into a full course meal.

I'd much rather put my stock into Dean though. While Sandow is brilliant in his own right, Dean just looks like a walking dollar sign to me while Sandow doesn't give me much more than upper midcard.

I trust Dean more in the ring too lol I know some don't quite like his style, but when he's given a serious match(say a couple of his Raw matches with Seth.) he delivers.


I'm off topic.


Ratings/viewership were shit. The end :shrug


----------



## The Renegade

Ramsay Bolton said:


> I'm not saying Seth will(or won't) become some huge mega star who pushes ratings consistently. I don't see him particularly flopping is my point. I think he will be received very well by the audience and will be a top babyface.
> 
> Will he become Bryan over? Who knows. I wouldn't count him out though.
> 
> Now the drawing thing? That's the wait and see game. Because as you can see, not even Taker and Brock would carry the weight of WWE's past fuckery to something worth bragging about ratings wise.
> 
> So, unless WWE gets their shit together as a whole. We will see a whole lot of failed draws.
> 
> Hell, like you, I see big money in Dean Ambrose. But let's say they decide to push him, but then bitch him out like Seth at the same time. I don't think he will draw as well as his potential.


Do we even need Seth to be a huge draw? I've always viewed him as our modern day Shawn Michaels, and good ole HBK was never a big draw either. 

I might be in the minority, but as long as Seth gets good screen time and the opportunity to put on good matches, I'll be satisfied.


----------



## Louaja89

LOL I fucking knew nobody would give a fuck about this worthless Lesnar/Taker feud.


----------



## Chrome

ShowStopper said:


> Wade Keller ‏@thewadekeller 1m1 minute ago
> So does return of Undertaker pop a rating? Depends on what u consider popping a rating. Raw increases from 2.5 last week to 2.8 this week.
> 
> :ti


Maybe if they get The Rock back too they can get the rating to a *whole* 3.0!


----------



## Wynter

> Last year the battleground fallout did:
> 
> 4.25
> 4.52
> 4.52
> 
> That was when Brock Lesnar was being announced to face John Cena
> 
> The next week they stayed above 4 mill the entire time and mostly the week after, and then after Summerslam the ratings shot back up.
> 
> So relative to their position last year, this was a swing and a miss


from a cageside comment. 

As I said, this is a shit number. Brock and Taker may have "popped" the second hour, but even newcomer Kevin in his feud with Cena has did more than 4.0 in his segment.

We will see how the next Raw looks. Especially the first hour.


----------



## LilOlMe

The fact that they dropped 500,000 viewers after the hour with the Brock/Taker brawl (despite the last hour not dropping too much previously), indicates that Brock/Taker was indeed something of a draw in this era of bad ratings.

If the brawl created a positive buzz, we may see a positive uptick. However, that's hard to sustain when people quickly realize the two aren't going to be on shows together.

Plus, as someone said, Vince will give you five bad shows after one good one. That kills potential ratings rebounds.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

When will they learn that WWEPG has been garbage for years and no one will tune in until there is a consistent buzz and not the same fucking garbage. 1 return or 1 ok episode won't change shit.

Cena is still the guy, more than half (counting the viewers that left because they need them back for better ratings) of the viewers don't even like him.

They bury all the organically loved wrestlers just because they don't look like a male model.

They force shit down viewers' throats, cringe worthy characters and segments.

Why do they think quick band-aids are going to fix their garbage company? Change your shit WWE.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Just checking back in. 2.5 to a 2.8 from one week to the next with Brock AND Taker on the show. What a ratings bonanza it will be if they bring back the big name part timers.

:lmao


----------



## Tnmore

*Undertaker's return and Brock angle draws below average rating/viewership!*

_*July 20: Monday's WWE Raw scored a 2.80 rating following the Battleground PPV with the sudden re-introduction of The Undertaker opposite Brock Lesnar.

The post-PPV RAW was up from an historically-low 2.52 rating the week before, but was below the previous post-PPV episode. The June 15 Raw after Money in the Bank scored a 2.83 rating.

Raw averaged 3.804 million viewers. The week before RAW, Battleground PPV Go-home show averaged 3.531 million viewers. 

- In the demographic ratings, Raw was hurt by a sharp decline in the males 18-49. Raw scored a three-week low in m18-49 to put a dent in ratings increase for m18-34 and adults 18-49.*_


While RAW numbers did rise, the increase is underwhelming and below average, not even 4m viewers and outdrawn by post MITB episode.


----------



## Empress

Ramsay Bolton said:


> from a cageside comment.
> 
> As I said, this is a shit number. Brock and Taker may have "popped" the second hour, *but even newcomer Kevin in his feud with Cena has did more than 4.0 in his segment.*
> 
> We will see how the next Raw looks. Especially the first hour.


Was Kevin Owens in his own segments or paired with John Cena? It always seems to come back to Cena. Although, I thought the WWE was onto something special with Kevin. 

I think Taker/Brock did what they could with the ratings bump, even if it was a small one. I expected bigger since it was the fallout PPV and most expected a confrontation. I hate to think what the ratings might've been if they hadn't appeared.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Undertaker's return and Brock angle draws below average rating/viewership!*

The product is withering on the vine a bit. Taker and Brock didnt do a whole lot for the ratings. Makes you wonder what could?


----------



## Gretchen

*Re: Undertaker's return and Brock angle draws below average rating/viewership!*



Tnmore said:


> _*July 20: Monday's WWE Raw scored a 2.80 rating following the Battleground PPV with the sudden re-introduction of The Undertaker opposite Brock Lesnar.
> 
> The post-PPV RAW was up from an historically-low 2.52 rating the week before, but was below the previous post-PPV episode. The June 15 Raw after Money in the Bank scored a 2.83 rating.
> 
> Raw averaged 3.804 million viewers. The week before RAW, Battleground PPV Go-home show averaged 3.531 million viewers.
> 
> - In the demographic ratings, Raw was hurt by a sharp decline in the males 18-49. Raw scored a three-week low in m18-49 to put a dent in ratings increase for m18-34 and adults 18-49.*_
> 
> 
> While RAW numbers did rise, the increase is underwhelming and below average, not even 4m viewers and outdrawn by post MITB episode.


Top. fucking. lel.


----------



## Hawkke

*Re: Undertaker's return and Brock angle draws below average rating/viewership!*



IDONTSHIV said:


> The product is withering on the vine a bit. Taker and Brock didnt do a whole lot for the ratings. Makes you wonder what could?


I'm reminded of a Mythbusters duct tape episode.. They were testing patching a small hole in the hull of a boat with duct tape under various conditions. When it was dry and above water it worked swimmingly. However.. when it was already sinking and they tried to patch the same hole underwater it failed miserably.

It maybe a coincidence but man I can just feel the parallels there.


----------



## Empress

*Re: Undertaker's return and Brock angle draws below average rating/viewership!*



IDONTSHIV said:


> The product is withering on the vine a bit. Taker and Brock didnt do a whole lot for the ratings. Makes you wonder what could?


:austin4

The Texas Rattlesnake for GM of RAW!


----------



## Sweettre15

WWE needs to realize that using part-timers as a band-aid for the real problem with the product can only work so many times. They've relied on this several times and it's finally starting to not work.

They have to improve the booking of the product longterms and work to keep things fresh if they want a permanent increase in viewership.

Not to mention, [insert guy here] as Champion isn't a band-aid that works when crap booking comes with it either.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

Ramsay Bolton said:


> from a cageside comment.
> 
> As I said, this is a shit number. Brock and Taker may have "popped" the second hour, but even newcomer Kevin in his feud with Cena has did more than 4.0 in his segment.
> 
> We will see how the next Raw looks. Especially the first hour.


That comment from Cageside is weird if only because Lesnar winning the title last year resulted in a very unmemorable rating last year.

The fact is, and it has always remained, that WWE need a solid product, and interesting storylines to really gain momentum and get good viewership numbers. Lesnar isn't as big of a draw as everyone tries to make him out to be, and Undertaker has never been a big draw. It's not really a surprise that these two wouldn't do anything significant. They're just your average main eventers as it stands. The good thing Lesnar has going for him is that they've done a good job of keeping him looking strong, so against the right opponent like The Rock, they can use it for a big match. But even then, it's not a remedy for their current situation. Cena, as stale as he is, is a much bigger star than both of them.

WWE has this serious problem of trying to potray the wrong superstars as bigger than they actually are, and they do it to the detriment of their own product and long-term booking most times.

The biggest, and most significant issue WWE has right now is that they do not have a top heel, and they do not have a top face. I don't mean just labelling someone a top heel, but one who the crowd legitimately hates, and wants to be beaten. An established main eventer who has legacy. They also do not have a fresh face who can lead the charge, and are stuck between the old guard who can do nothing, and new guys who aren't established.

This is exactly why they should have used the Batista heat to their advantage in 2013, and used it to try and build up another big face. I said this back then several times. You need a big heel. The fans need to get behind a cause. The problem is fans are fucking that up nowadays, so when you have someone who had legitimate heat, you run to the moon with it. Had they done that, Roman Reigns would've been over and established right now as the WWE champion, instead of having the crowd turn on him. The simple reason being because he would've been taking down someone they hate a hell of a lot more. That was the angle they needed to go with.

Lesnar could've still destroyed Cena in a separate match, and they could've still built this monster, and ran his championship angle this year instead. Even if Lesnar broke the streak, I said it back then, it doesn't mean he's going to get hated. It doesn't mean eternal heat or whatever other bullshit delusional fans convinced themselves with their love for Undertaker. Lesnar was hardly getting reactions, and after killing Cena, he still wasn't. He now gets bigger reactions as a tweener/face than he did as a heel. The simple reason being that as a heel, they gave him the badass face booking pretty much. The same kind of thing that made Goldberg huge, the same kind of thing that made Batista huge. How the fuck is someone like that going to be hated by fans? It makes no sense.

What WWE needs to do now is simple.

Whether the crowd is behind Reigns or not (and they will never get fully behind him now with the way WWE sabotaged him already), it has to be Lesnar/Reigns at Wrestlemania 32, and you go all the way with Roman Reigns. It's time to use the Lesnar push to make one new main eventer at least. They need someone new at the top. They fucked up with Reigns so much, it's ridiculous. Sabotage him, turn the fans against him, and put him in there with someone like Lesnar who is being given great booking. All they had to build to was Batista/Reigns, and this wouldn't have been an issue.

And they need to start investing in Ambrose sooner rather than later, and send him right up there too. There's a big storyline waiting to happen between him and Reigns, so they should be thinking long-term how to get both these guys established.


----------



## Fandangohome

Wow i didn't realise that things were so bad that even a Taker/Brock brawl can't boost ratings. When those 2 can't move the needle, you know the whole damn company is in the shitter, and the only way things improve is to pretty much press the reset button, start over and change the formula.

However, with Vince being Vince, what he'll do is have Cena win the title at Summerslam, which will give a short ratings boost, but nothing significant to write home about, as Cena's last couple of reigns have hardly been noteworthy ratings wise. A few weeks after that, the ratings will be back to where they're at now, maybe worse. 

It's time to go back to 2 hours, fire Vince (as a publicly traded company it is possible for him to be ousted), put HHH in charge, and push some new guys, and i mean properly push, not half ass it like they've done with Rollins. Push whoever's over with the fans, so Cesaro, Ambrose, Owens, (begrudgingly) Reigns, Wyatt, and see if things improve then. If not, they're completely fucked. 

They can keep the PG rating, it's just they misuse it, they're veering closer to a G, and not the Certified kind...

How bad do the numbers have to be for USA to start getting a little anxious?


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

Absolutely called this shit perfectly after the PPV was done:



> Trying to pop ratings at the expense of your title match, making everyone involved look like shit. Desperation at its finest.
> 
> I bet only one hour of tomorrows show actually manages to go above the 4 million mark before plummeting again. Vince is out of his fucking mind.


http://www.wrestlingforum.com/battl...icial-discussion-thread-227.html#post50612929


----------



## Fabregas

:vince7:vince7:vince7:vince7


----------



## RatedR10

Hawkke said:


> I'm reminded of a Mythbusters duct tape episode.. They were testing patching a small hole in the hull of a boat with duct tape under various conditions. When it was dry and above water it worked swimmingly. However.. when it was already sinking and they tried to patch the same hole underwater it failed miserably.
> 
> It maybe a coincidence but man I can just feel the parallels there.


This is exactly that. They've been doing it for five years now and it's coming back to bite them in the ass now. It was just a matter of time. Everyone saw it coming except those in the company who want the quick buck rather than long-term financial gain.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Night after a PPV.
Brought back a legend in The Undertaker.
Brock Lesnar was there.
No competition

And still cant even beat Love & Hip Hop...lulz.

I'm beginning to think that the only people watching WWE these days are the most hardcore of hardcore fans. These ratings are terrible and it doesnt seem to matter what Vince tries, he has lost the casuals. Maybe he can still make money just being a niche show for the diehards though?


----------



## Mister Excitement

I tuned in to watch the segments with Undertaker and Brock this week and then I changed the channel. I imagine a lot of people did the same thing I did lol.


----------



## JTB33b

The ratings will never improve until Cena is gone.


----------



## Batz

Taker-Brock segments tuned me in. The Cena segment completely tuned me out. Glad to see the ratings reflected that.


----------



## Joe88

You can have the best actors in the world but if the script is terrible and the story is stale it won't matter. The product needs to evolve and become compelling. Hardcore fans can watch other wrestling to get their wrestling fix. Casual fans have plenty of quality shows to choose to watch and enjoy. UNtil they shake up the format and how they tell these stories they will stagnate in the ratings. I would rather binge watch Breaking Bad or the Walking Dead than watch RAW right now.


----------



## Dawnbreaker

Nobody can save RAW at this point. It seems every year the average viewership gets smaller and smaller. WWE has completely fallen out of sync with millions of fans who used to enjoy the product. No one talent is to blame for it, rather it is a combination of the Vince & Dunn connection, stagnant top face, PG rating attaching a negative stigma and absolutely no new stars to make the product seem fresh. 

It is even more concerning that these abysmal ratings have not even happened in the part of the year typically known for terrible ratings. That makes it all the more interesting to speculate just how bad things will be after Summerslam has passed and the part timers will likely have retreated back into seclusion.


----------



## Erik.

I was entertained by Raw. I tuned in. 

That's all I care about at the end of the day. What everyone else is watching doesn't bother me or make me particularly care. I'm not going to stop watching because thousands/millions weren't watching the previous week. I'll watch because I was entertained the previous week and to see the likes of Cesaro kill it, see what Owens is up to, the type of shit Ambrose is going to get up, what gold Rusev is going to conjure up etc. I don't even know what makes a good rating in modern day wrestling. In an era where you're filled with streaming websites, YouTube and the ability to record programmes and watch at a different time.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

The Renegade said:


> Do we even need Seth to be a huge draw? I've always viewed him as our modern day Shawn Michaels, and good ole HBK was never a big draw either.
> 
> I might be in the minority, but as long as Seth gets good screen time and the opportunity to put on good matches, I'll be satisfied.


*HBK in 97 was at least one of the greatest heels of all time. I don't get how some Michaels fans excuse Seth's mediocrity in that department when they make that comparison. The only thing they have that's near equal is ring work.*


----------



## The Renegade

Legit BOSS said:


> *HBK in 97 was at least one of the greatest heels of all time. I don't get how some Michaels fans excuse Seth's mediocrity in that department when they make that comparison. The only thing they have that's near equal is ring work.*


Because when Seth gets good promo material, he knocks it out of the park. I judge all of today's current stars relative to the restrictions that are in place. HBK's 97 raw output might have been better, but he was also given carte blanche in an era where being politically correct wasn't in vogue.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

The Renegade said:


> Because when Seth gets good promo material, he knocks it out of the park. I judge all of today's current stars relative to the restrictions that are in place. HBK's 97 raw output might have been better, but he was also given carte blanche in an era where being politically correct wasn't in vogue.


*
That's a valid argument, however, Christian heel Michaels in 2005 was VERY toned down, but still consistently delivered great promos.*


----------



## JonMoxleyReborn

Christian Heel Michaels in Canada is arguably the greatest heat a heel ever got. I do not see the comparisons with Shawn Michaels and Seth Rollins. HBK consistently gave great promos and was entertaining. A little off the ratings subject but it had to be said.


----------



## The Renegade

Legit BOSS said:


> *
> That's a valid argument, however, Christian heel Michaels in 2005 was VERY toned down, but still consistently delivered great promos.*


He certainly was, but its hard to hold Seth or anyone other than Cena to that standard yet. For a bit of perspective, Seth is as old as Michaels was back in 94, two years before his first WWF Title run. I say that puts him on the right track.



JonMoxleyReborn said:


> Christian Heel Michaels in Canada is arguably the greatest heat a heel ever got. I do not see the comparisons with Shawn Michaels and Seth Rollins. HBK consistently gave great promos and was entertaining. A little off the ratings subject but it had to be said.


The qualifier here is "when the material is good". Seth has done great when given interesting material, but in this current era of heavy restrictions, we often get him repeating the same message over and over. Only so many times you can rehash the same speal without it grinding on people.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

The Renegade said:


> He certainly was, but its hard to hold Seth or anyone other than Cena to that standard yet. For a bit of perspective, Seth is as old as Michaels was back in 94, two years before his first WWF Title run. I say that puts him on the right track.


*
And all I'm saying is if you make that comparison now, it leaves Seth open to harsher criticism. Lets wait until he's actually at his peak. For example, I think Reigns CAN BE the next Rock, but he isn't there yet.*


----------



## The Renegade

Legit BOSS said:


> *
> And all I'm saying is if you make that comparison now, it leaves Seth open to harsher criticism. Lets wait until he's actually at his peak. For example, I think Reigns CAN BE the next Rock, but he isn't there yet.*


Fair enough. Hopefully once he loses that belt the restrictions will come off a bit.


----------



## tboneangle

People blame Rollins. People blame cena. But then taker lesnar doesn't even get a big boost. The state of the wwe is the problem. Not the wrestlers.


----------



## wwefan123

I agree, I don't know one single person that likes Cena. All of my family and friends dislike him and find him stale and boring, no one at my work who I've talked about wrestling like him; they KNOW him, but don't LIKE him. 

Also, they need to make wrestling "cool" again, like I said everyone I know hates Cena, yet everyone I know loves Lesnar, he's cool and bad-ass and just gets people hyped. I have friends on Facebook who probably know nothing about wrestling, but they love Lesnar and are always sending each other videos of Lesnar doing stuff on Raw (like smashing a car, brawl with Taker, the Japan/New Day stuff); they are the ultimate casuals and they love Lesnar and most likely hate Cena, go figure.

I'd personally disband the Authority at Summerslam and have a legend come back as Raw GM (like Austin, Foley etc), would be different and may boost viewer-ship.


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

What is pushing young talent supposed to do? If ratings aren't up from bringing back one of the key figures in the most popular era in the business then what is pushing Cesaro/Rollings/Ambrose etc supposed to do?


----------



## SnapOrTap

Legit BOSS said:


> *
> And all I'm saying is if you make that comparison now, it leaves Seth open to harsher criticism. Lets wait until he's actually at his peak. For example, I think Reigns CAN BE the next Rock, but he isn't there yet.*


:vince6:taker:rockwut:booklel:justsayin


----------



## LilOlMe

From Meltzer:


> Raw on 7/20 was up to 2.79 rating and 3.79 million viewers (1.42 viewers per home). The expectation was the number would be way up, given all the buzz coming off Undertaker's return the night before. It was up seven percent from the week before, but that's from a bottoming out number and it was still the lowest audience for a show the day after a PPV so far in 2015.
> 
> The Undertaker-Lesnar brawl paced a strong second hour, but when they made it clear that Lesnar was arrested and neither would be back, they lost a lot of the audience in the third hour.
> 
> The first hour did 3.84 million viewers. The second hour did 4.03 million viewers. The third hour, which during the summer shouldn't have that much of a drop, did 3.54 million viewers.


It was said elsewhere that the third hour was lower than any hour during the past two RAWs (which had record low viewership). Really says something.


----------



## hopeful cubs fan

Legit BOSS said:


> *
> And all I'm saying is if you make that comparison now, it leaves Seth open to harsher criticism. Lets wait until he's actually at his peak. For example, I think Reigns CAN BE the next Rock, but he isn't there yet.*


The next Rock ? That's going a bit to far


----------



## Sweettre15

_- Last night's episode of WWE SmackDown with Cesaro vs. Seth Rollins in the main event drew *2.353* million viewers. This is up from last week's 2.153 million viewers._

So basically book the shows in a purposeful way that's not über repetitive and/or stale and viewership goes up...Nice


----------



## RebelArch86

TyAbbotSucks said:


> What is pushing young talent supposed to do? If ratings aren't up from bringing back one of the key figures in the most popular era in the business then what is pushing Cesaro/Rollings/Ambrose etc supposed to do?


The ratings are a direct result of WWES not cashing in on Bryan's momentum and going full steam ahead with Reigns. It was WWEs declaration that the fans would never get what they wanted. Regardless of what happened to Bryan's health the actions told fans you will never get the matches and storylines you want.

Ratings won't recover till Reigns is a jobber, and the NXT guys are consistently main eventing.

They have a faith promblem. Fans won't tune in bc they don't trust it will be worth their time. WWE has to restore that good faith with perfect booking for a long time.


----------



## Yuffie Kisaragi

Sweettre15 said:


> _- Last night's episode of WWE SmackDown with Cesaro vs. Seth Rollins in the main event drew *2.353* million viewers. This is up from last week's 2.153 million viewers._
> 
> So basically book the shows in a purposeful way that's not über repetitive and/or stale and viewership goes up...Nice


*Can't wait to see if the big move it is making also helps it in the ratings. I hope they continue to showcase matches with superstars we didn't get to see in the ring on RAW. Maybe they are finally realizing they are being assholes to the people who paid money and ended up seeing the same shit again. 

I seriously would never buy Smackdown tickets unless if it was a LIVE special or something or had a meet and greet package deal.*


----------



## Fighter Daron

RebelArch86 said:


> Ratings won't recover till Reigns is a jobber.


:mj2 

Are you serious?


----------



## CM punker

Who was in the second hour? Undertaker, Brock, Shield members, Wyatt family = ratings

Who was in the third hour? Orton, Cena, Owens, Rusev, Sheamus, ALL boring as fuck except for Cesaro


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

RebelArch86 said:


> The ratings are a direct result of WWES not cashing in on Bryan's momentum and going full steam ahead with Reigns. It was WWEs declaration that the fans would never get what they wanted. Regardless of what happened to Bryan's health the actions told fans you will never get the matches and storylines you want.
> 
> Ratings won't recover till Reigns is a jobber, and the NXT guys are consistently main eventing.
> 
> They have a faith promblem. Fans won't tune in bc they don't trust it will be worth their time. WWE has to restore that good faith with perfect booking for a long time.


 Your entire point is negated because he got hurt no matter how much you really want to say "regardless". They gave him the belt and let him beat Evolution in 1 night in the perfect storybook ending, i'd say they jumped on it while he still had it. Hindsight they made the right decision considering he got injured again, can't capitalize on him if he can't wrestle.  

Your NXT point is incredibly dumb if you want to include Shield/Bryan because Lesnar and Orton are the only 2 non NXT guys to even be in a main event on a PPV in 2015. 

Your Reigns point is even more laughable and it smells like butthurt so i'm just going to finish w/, I like turtles.


----------



## Empress

*RAW Twitter TV Ratings*

– Monday’s RAW ranked #2 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen’s Twitter TV ratings, behind The Bachelorette. RAW had a unique audience of 1.993 million, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This is up from the 1.542 million the show drew last week. RAW had total impressions of 11.443 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was also up from last week’s 10.714 million impressions.

Read more: http://www.pwmania.com/new-preview-...s-kevin-nash-baron-corbin-photo#ixzz3hDVUkyjQ


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Crazy Eyes said:


> *RAW Twitter TV Ratings*
> 
> – Monday’s RAW ranked #2 among non-sporting events for the night in Nielsen’s Twitter TV ratings, behind The Bachelorette. RAW had a unique audience of 1.993 million, which represents the number of Twitter accounts that commented on the show. This is up from the 1.542 million the show drew last week. RAW had total impressions of 11.443 million, which represents the number of times the show was tweeted about. This was also up from last week’s 10.714 million impressions.
> 
> Read more: http://www.pwmania.com/new-preview-...s-kevin-nash-baron-corbin-photo#ixzz3hDVUkyjQ



Go figure/ No Brock or Taker and the twitter activity goes up. I'm not sure how much they value that metric,but it does seem counter intuitive to me. Maybe people liked new matchups or people got engrossed in Cena's nasal massacre.


----------



## Empress

IDONTSHIV said:


> Go figure/ No Brock or Taker and the twitter activity goes up. I'm not sure how much they value that metric,but it does seem counter intuitive to me. Maybe people liked new matchups or people got engrossed in Cena's nasal massacre.


The WWE is social media obsessed. I'm sure they're happy about this. Maybe the ratings went up this week too.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Crazy Eyes said:


> The WWE is social media obsessed. I'm sure they're happy about this. Maybe the ratings went up this week too.


you tell me:










Seth in the most viewed and highest demo hour. Somebody wont be very happy!


----------



## A-C-P

That first hour # :ha


----------



## Starbuck

IDONTSHIV said:


> Go figure/ No Brock or Taker and the twitter activity goes up. I'm not sure how much they value that metric,but it does seem counter intuitive to me. Maybe people liked new matchups or people got engrossed in Cena's nasal massacre.


Twitter activity increase is obviously due to #HappyBirthdayHHH trending on and off all day. The WWE Universe was just paying its respects to the GOAT COO of all time best wrestler ever Paul McMahon Helmsley on his special day.


----------



## Empress

How Did Last Night's WWE RAW Viewership Do with Several "First-Ever" Matches?
By Marc Middleton
Jul 28, 2015 - 4:04:54 PM

- Monday's episode of WWE RAW, featuring a night of "first-ever" matches, drew 3.671 million viewers. This is down from last week's 3.805 million viewers.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.421 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.754 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.839 million viewers.

RAW was #2 for the night on cable behind Love & Hip-Hop in the 18-49 demographic and #2 for the night behind Major Crimes in viewership.
Read more at http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...l_First-Ever_Matches.html#JamRMqteIW3YXvMk.99


----------



## SnapOrTap

Lmao. Garbage Raw with garbage booking.

Thank god people tuned out for that shit. 

Just bring Mark Ratings Henry and Daniel Draw Bryan back.


----------



## e^x

What a surprise. Rollins opens the show with another boring segment and it draws a horrendous number. Cena is in the main event and the 3rd hour sees an increase.


----------



## Chrome

What a shock, Taker and Lesnar take the night off and ratings go down even more. So much of a bunch of "first-ever" matches. Maybe next week we can have "Tag Team Mania" where Teddy Long is the guest GM and every match is a tag team match playas!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:lmao at that first hour number.

Well, at least viewership went up throughout the night. 10PM being the highest is a good sign for those in favor of Cena being in the main event.


----------



## Starbuck

Chrome said:


> What a shock, Taker and Lesnar take the night off and ratings go down even more. So much of a bunch of "first-ever" matches. Maybe next week we can have "Tag Team Mania" where Teddy Long is the guest GM and every match is a tag team match playas!


They lost on average 200,000 viewers from last week. It's not really that much of a drop when you consider the missing names involved. The whole product is cold with an audience that has been conditioned to expect either the same shit they've seen before or nothing at all. Until that changes they won't be hitting 4 million averages again for a long time.


----------



## Wynter

It's amazing how Raw can increase every hour and i still go "meh" :no:


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> They lost on average 200,000 viewers from last week. It's not really that much of a drop when you consider the missing names involved. The whole product is cold with an audience that has been conditioned to expect either the same shit they've seen before or nothing at all. Until that changes they won't be hitting 4 million averages again for a long time.


Really wonder how long it is going to take Vince and Co to realize if they want to consistently increase ratings they need to make the entire roster seem like they matter with good storylines at all levels of the card. Instead of just hey throw this "legend" back on TV and the ratings will pop back up (for one hour)


----------



## Wynter

The first to second hour did increase quite considerably though.

I guess everyone skips all the Authority promo crap and then come in to see the rest :lol

Waiting for @ShowStopper :westbrook4


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Last night 3.67 million viewers and the week before did 3.80 million viewers.

That's not a big dip at all from last week's Raw, and last week had the advantage of being the night after a PPV (which always gets a bump in the ratings) AND an appearance and long ass brawl segment between two huge name part timers. :shrug


----------



## Chrome

A-C-P said:


> Really wonder how long it is going to take Vince and Co to realize if they want to consistently increase ratings they need to make the entire roster seem like they matter with good storylines at all levels of the card. Instead of just hey throw this "legend" back on TV and the ratings will pop back up (for one hour)


Whole show needs a format change, it's pretty much been the same since 2009 at least. What sucks though is even if they did change the format, the ratings likely wouldn't increase quickly and they'd panic and just throw Cena and more part-timers at the problem, instead of giving the revamped format 6 months to a year, maybe even longer.


----------



## Starbuck

Chrome said:


> Whole show needs a format change, it's pretty much been the same since 2009 at least. What sucks though is even if they did change the format, the ratings likely wouldn't increase quickly and they'd panic and just throw Cena and more part-timers at the problem, instead of giving the revamped format 6 months to a year, maybe even longer.


I'd love it if they changed the whole style and format of the show. They have an extra hour. Why does it have to be an hour of actual Raw? Why not fill it with pretapes or extended backstage interviews or something new and fresh? They took an already dated 2 hour show and added an extra hour lol. Not to beat this dead horse but if Kevin Dunn would just fuck off and they were _really _allowed to make some changes, I think it would be great. If you actually think about it, the WWE show formula hasn't changed in about 20 years. That's crazy. There's so many new and innovative things they could be doing, especially with that third hour, to freshen up the format and add depth to the characters. Instead they give us shit nobody wants to see on top of shit nobody wants to see. It's kind of mind boggling.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> I'd love it if they changed the whole style and format of the show. They have an extra hour. Why does it have to be an hour of actual Raw? Why not fill it with pretapes or extended backstage interviews or something new and fresh? They took an already dated 2 hour show and added an extra hour lol. Not to beat this dead horse but if Kevin Dunn would just fuck off and they were _really _allowed to make some changes, I think it would be great. If you actually think about it, the WWE show formula hasn't changed in about 20 years. That's crazy. There's so many new and innovative things they could be doing, especially with that third hour, to freshen up the format and add depth to the characters. Instead they give us shit nobody wants to see on top of shit nobody wants to see. It's kind of mind boggling.


Like all those promos and other backstage scenes they put on the APP or WWE.com could actually be shown on TV where more people would see them.

The promos on the App or on Raw Fallout are usually the best promos of the night.


----------



## Empress

Starbuck said:


> I'd love it if they changed the whole style and format of the show. They have an extra hour. Why does it have to be an hour of actual Raw? Why not fill it with pretapes or extended backstage interviews or something new and fresh? They took an already dated 2 hour show and added an extra hour lol. Not to beat this dead horse but if Kevin Dunn would just fuck off and they were _really _allowed to make some changes, I think it would be great. If you actually think about it, the WWE show formula hasn't changed in about 20 years. That's crazy. There's so many new and innovative things they could be doing, especially with that third hour, to freshen up the format and add depth to the characters. Instead they give us shit nobody wants to see on top of shit nobody wants to see. It's kind of mind boggling.


That's a good point about the WWE not altering their format in more than 20 years. They only went live and made Jerry Springer blush with their antics out of necessity rather than reinvention. 

Another great example is how the show was structured the night after the PPV where RAW was canceled due to the snow. Brock Lesnar, Roman Reigns, Seth Rollins and Heyman were great in those segments. It felt real. The aspect of reality TV shouldn't just be utilized for Total Divas and Tough Enough. 

The wrestlers should appear more as themselves and blur the lines. 

But the WWE, even with its bad ratings, still meets the bare minimum. The only drastic change I see in the next few months is John Cena getting the belt back. He's the only consistent draw. He was booked to be just that. It's too bad that others on the rosters haven't been booked similarly.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*At least the ratings increased throughout the night. The Divas are generating a lot of good buzz. It looks like I'm not alone in skipping the first 20 minute Seth/Authority promo. WWE is clearly aware that we're tired of the same old shit when they have to put that much emphasis on it being a night of firsts.*


----------



## LOL-ins

I knew the same old WWE apologists would defend the awful number. 3.4 million LOL. 

There is no defending that hour. 2.6 rating and it's Summerslam build. 3.1 rating last year.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

IDONTSHIV said:


> you tell me:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seth in the most viewed and highest demo hour. Somebody wont be very happy!


:rollins


On another note..
The part timerz are going to save Raw!1!1 No. No one is. There goes that theory.

:lmao


----------



## JTB33b

I am glad the ratings didn't improve because they would have just used that as an excuse to keep Cena in the main event. Cena is not a ratings draw, he's actually been a ratings killer because alot of fans stopped watching years ago because of him.Most of his fanbase are getting ready for bed the time raw comes on. He's a merch draw and that's it and he can sell house shows because kiddies get to stay up late for those occasions.


----------



## Fighter Daron

No Roman Reigns? Incredibly bad ratings? Uh.


----------



## hbgoo1975

JTB33b said:


> I am glad the ratings didn't improve because they would have just used that as an excuse to keep Cena in the main event. Cena is not a ratings draw, he's actually been a ratings killer because alot of fans stopped watching years ago because of him.Most of his fanbase are getting ready for bed the time raw comes on. He's a merch draw and that's it and he can sell house shows because kiddies get to stay up late for those occasions.


I'm getting sick of that politicking bastard.fpalm


----------



## Sweettre15

This should show Vice that relying on the same band-aids don't work when the issue is like a problem with the way everything is being handled.

It's like Vince thinks a band-aid would cure a damn virus and/or raby bite. When in order to work towards fixing it you gotta know to fix the main problem and that's how the shows are booked, how the characters are presented etc etc.


----------



## Stannis Baratheon.

GET RID OF KEVIN DUNN AND VINCE LOL


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

WWE feels too comfortable these days. Becoming a part of the furniture is not something a show should strive for, very little risk-taking has proven to be detrimental as fuck.

Some people will never understand just how big of a deal the shift in tone was back in the 90's. From New-Gen to Attitude was an insane transition and although it didn't happen overnight, you knew something big was about to happen and of course business exploded when they got into the full swing of things. It was fresh and new.

WWE needs to start shocking people again. It's that fucking simple. This bitch-ass era has had its time already.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

Tough Enough with that .4, under 1 million viewers.

I wonder how much USA is paying. Paige, Jerishill, and Daniel Bryan are no Steve Austin.


----------



## Empress

*Not even the Hulk Hogan racism scandal could help Tough Enough ratings*

When a racist rant from Hulk Hogan went public and he was fired by WWE, it created an opening on the judges panel on Tough Enough, where the Hulkster had been working alongside Daniel Bryan and Paige. WWE did not immediately reveal who would be replacing him, instead opting to wait until last night's episode to reveal that The Miz would vacate his post as host of Tough Talk to slide into the judge's seat.

The idea, of course, was that this would help pop a rating.

It didn't.

Indeed, Tough Enough drew just 980,000 viewers this week (and just a 0.4 in the coveted 18-49 demographic), down from the 1.11 million it drew for episode five last week and its lowest viewership number of the season. Here's how this season looks so far:

Ep. 1: 1.20 million
Ep. 2: 1.05 million
Ep. 3: 1.22 million
Ep. 4: 997,000
Ep. 5: 1.11 million
Ep. 6: 980,0000

It would seem nothing is going to save this show at this point.

Meanwhile, Total Divas saw its numbers go up to 1.08 million for episode four, up from 995,000 viewers for episode three.

http://www.cagesideseats.com/2015/7/29/9071161/hulk-hogan-racism-scandal-wwe-tough-enough-ratings


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Crazy Eyes said:


> *Not even the Hulk Hogan racism scandal could help Tough Enough ratings*
> 
> When a racist rant from Hulk Hogan went public and he was fired by WWE, it created an opening on the judges panel on Tough Enough, where the Hulkster had been working alongside Daniel Bryan and Paige. WWE did not immediately reveal who would be replacing him, instead opting to wait until last night's episode to reveal that The Miz would vacate his post as host of Tough Talk to slide into the judge's seat.
> 
> The idea, of course, was that this would help pop a rating.
> 
> It didn't.
> 
> Indeed, Tough Enough drew just 980,000 viewers this week (and just a 0.4 in the coveted 18-49 demographic), down from the 1.11 million it drew for episode five last week and its lowest viewership number of the season. Here's how this season looks so far:
> 
> Ep. 1: 1.20 million
> Ep. 2: 1.05 million
> Ep. 3: 1.22 million
> Ep. 4: 997,000
> Ep. 5: 1.11 million
> Ep. 6: 980,0000
> 
> It would seem nothing is going to save this show at this point.
> 
> Meanwhile, Total Divas saw its numbers go up to 1.08 million for episode four, up from 995,000 viewers for episode three.
> 
> http://www.cagesideseats.com/2015/7/29/9071161/hulk-hogan-racism-scandal-wwe-tough-enough-ratings


This show had already run its course long ago, but they brought it back due to the demands of no one and look at what has happened. Not very many people still care for it.Color me unsurprised.


----------



## Goldusto

IDONTSHIV said:


> This show had already run its course long ago, but they brought it back due to the demands of no one and look at what has happened. Not very many people still care for it.Color me unsurprised.


why do we need tough enough when we got NXT ? 

Divas already fills the 'drama' side of affairs, NXT does the training, why do we need a half assed version of both ?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Goldusto said:


> why do we need tough enough when we got NXT ?
> 
> Divas already fills the 'drama' side of affairs, NXT does the training, why do we need a half assed version of both ?


You are right. NXT is better and is their developmental organization. Tough Enough has probably breathed its last once this season concludes.


----------



## THANOS

The Patrick elimination killed the show for a lot of people it seems. That huge ratings drop from last week dictates it.


----------



## A-C-P

Still can't believe USA even wanted TE back to begin with :lol

The show flopped 3 years ago, why did they think it would work now?


----------



## Empress

A-C-P said:


> Still can't believe USA even wanted TE back to begin with :lol
> 
> The show flopped 3 years ago, why did they think it would work now?


I thought the version with Austin did better. Unless you're talking about a different one.

Either way, this version of Tough Enough is a bore. I gave up after the second episode because I realized the format wasn't changing. It's a hybrid of Total Divas and NXT; you can't serve two masters in this setting. And Bryan, Paige and that banned wrestler were wallpaper. Bryan should've been stretching out these wrestlers but yet they shoved him behind a table. Jericho is also a horrible host. Miz is better. 

There was also too many people on the show: the contestants, judges, trainers and random WWE wrestler appearances.


----------



## A-C-P

Crazy Eyes said:


> I thought the version with Austin did better. Unless you're talking about a different one.
> 
> Either way, this version of Tough Enough is a bore. I gave up after the second episode because I realized the format wasn't changing. It's a hybrid of Total Divas and NXT; you can't serve two masters in this setting. And Bryan, Paige and that banned wrestler were wallpaper. Bryan should've been stretching out these wrestlers but yet they shoved him behind a table. Jericho is also a horrible host. Miz is better.
> 
> There was also too many people on the show: the contestants, judges, trainers and random WWE wrestler appearances.


The version with Austin was a better show, a WAY better show, and may have done a little better in the ratings, do not really remember, but USA was not happy with it at that time, again from what I remember, which is why it was not renewed then.

You lasted longer than I did with the new TE, I lasted the first 30 minutes of the first episode :lol


----------

